OT Bush is getting scary.
 

I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is about our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct quote. Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters away from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president will be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself into any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is as close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C., airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to stand. When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but "rarely read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many of the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion, when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed that his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy the White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the world is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well as the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot. (again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"getting" scary? You just noticed? :-)

Paragraph 6 is interesting indeed.

"F330 GT" wrote in message
...
I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is about
our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct quote.
Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters away
from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president will
be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself into
any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is as
close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to stand.
When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser, Condoleezza
Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but "rarely
read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many of
the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion,
when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed that
his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy the
White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the world
is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well as
the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot. (again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

All presidents use their staff to present daily briefing papers to get an
overview of world events. The briefing papers combine the info that is in
the newspapers and info from the different cabinets and intelligence
communities.

What is amazing is that he bothered to tell anyone he does not read
newspapers, even if other presidents did not bother to read anymore than the
headlines to see what the media considers important, at least they didn't
tell everyone.


"F330 GT" wrote in message
...
I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is about
our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct quote.
Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters away
from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president will
be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself into
any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is as
close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to stand.
When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser, Condoleezza
Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but "rarely
read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many of
the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion,
when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed that
his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy the
White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the world
is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well as
the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot. (again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

As usual, the NY Times decided to truncate a little bit of what he said in
order to put their "slant" on things. See for yourself:

--------------------------------------------------------------
NY Times:
As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines"

Bush:
"I glance at the headlines just to kind of get a flavor for what's moving."
----------------------------------------------------------------

NY Times:
but "rarely read the stories." The people who brief him on current events
encounter many of the newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case
"probably read the news themselves."

Bush:
"I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably
reading the news themselves. But like Condoleezza, in her case, the national
security adviser is getting her news directly from the participants on the
world stage."
---------------------------------------------------------------

NY Times:
Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion,
when the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed
that his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

Bush:
I have great respect for the media. I mean, our society is a good, solid
democracy because of a good, solid media. But I also understand that a lot
of times there's opinions mixed in with news. And I...appreciate people's
opinions, but I'm more interested in news. And the best way to get the news
is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people
on my staff who tell me what's happening in the world.

(The NY Times chose not to quote the President's reason for not reading the
paper. Instead, they gave their own "spin" as to why he doesn't read the
paper.)
-----------------------------------------------------------

See, Barry? The NY Times article that you cite is a perfect example of
"opinions mixed in with news". Do you dispute the President's assertion
that the media mixes opinions in with news?

If you watched the Brit Hume interview or read the transcript
(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98111,00.html), you'd get a very
different picture than the one the NY Times is trying to paint.

Just remember...consider the source. The NY Times has been caught lying on
several occasions lately. Maureen Dowd has been publicly reprimanded for
truncating or distorting quotes to fit her argument. Apparently, the entire
editorial staff seems to have the same problem.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Paragraph 6 is a truncated version of the actual interview, with editorial
opinion and spin mixed into it...all perfect trademarks of the NY Times.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"getting" scary? You just noticed? :-)

Paragraph 6 is interesting indeed.

"F330 GT" wrote in message
...
I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is
about
our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct
quote.
Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this
week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters
away
from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president
will
be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself
into
any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is
as
close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move
a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to
stand.
When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser,
Condoleezza
Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but
"rarely
read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many
of
the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi
invasion,
when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed
that
his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy
the
White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the
world
is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well
as
the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot.
(again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

I have seen many events or lectures in person, than enjoy seeing the way the
newspaper slants the info to sell newspapers. Bush should have been smart
enough to understand that they would have used his comments to show how
"stupid" he is.

The reality of the situation is those that like Bush will continue to like
him, those who don't will still hate him. Most people don't want to allow
facts to distort they preconceived ideas.

Did you watch the California debate? Arnold seemed like he had a great
grasp for one liners, but not much of anything else.


"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
As usual, the NY Times decided to truncate a little bit of what he said in
order to put their "slant" on things. See for yourself:

--------------------------------------------------------------
NY Times:
As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines"

Bush:
"I glance at the headlines just to kind of get a flavor for what's
moving."
----------------------------------------------------------------

NY Times:
but "rarely read the stories." The people who brief him on current events
encounter many of the newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case
"probably read the news themselves."

Bush:
"I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably
reading the news themselves. But like Condoleezza, in her case, the
national
security adviser is getting her news directly from the participants on the
world stage."
---------------------------------------------------------------

NY Times:
Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion,
when the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed
that his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

Bush:
I have great respect for the media. I mean, our society is a good, solid
democracy because of a good, solid media. But I also understand that a lot
of times there's opinions mixed in with news. And I...appreciate people's
opinions, but I'm more interested in news. And the best way to get the
news
is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are
people
on my staff who tell me what's happening in the world.

(The NY Times chose not to quote the President's reason for not reading
the
paper. Instead, they gave their own "spin" as to why he doesn't read the
paper.)
-----------------------------------------------------------

See, Barry? The NY Times article that you cite is a perfect example of
"opinions mixed in with news". Do you dispute the President's assertion
that the media mixes opinions in with news?

If you watched the Brit Hume interview or read the transcript
(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98111,00.html), you'd get a very
different picture than the one the NY Times is trying to paint.

Just remember...consider the source. The NY Times has been caught lying
on
several occasions lately. Maureen Dowd has been publicly reprimanded for
truncating or distorting quotes to fit her argument. Apparently, the
entire
editorial staff seems to have the same problem.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Land of the Free???
You'd better ship that moniker north where it might have a better fit!

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

F330 GT wrote:

I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is about our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct quote. Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters away from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president will be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself into any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is as close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C., airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to stand. When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but "rarely read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many of the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion, when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed that his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy the White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the world is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well as the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot. (again)

Barry

Bush won't read a briefing paper more than a couple of paragraphs long.
He is a dunce.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Harry,
you might be intelligent, but you have a really bad case of fixation. You
either need mediation for obsessive compulsive disorder or one of similar
illnesses.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
F330 GT wrote:

I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is
about our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct
quote. Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this
week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters
away from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president
will be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself
into any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is
as close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move
a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to
stand. When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser,
Condoleezza Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but
"rarely read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many
of the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi
invasion, when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed
that his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy
the White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the
world is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well
as the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot.
(again)

Barry

Bush won't read a briefing paper more than a couple of paragraphs long.
He is a dunce.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
. net...
Harry,
you might be intelligent, but you have a really bad case of fixation. You
either need mediation for obsessive compulsive disorder or one of similar
illnesses.


I am surprised it took you so long to figure that out Bill. But I have to disagree
with the intelligent part though....Harry talks a good game but unfortunately no one is
home upstairs. Look up the definition of "village idiot" in the dictionary and Harry's
picture appears next to it.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Damn, the right wing twins. Together you might make 150 on the IQ scale.

"Jim -" wrote in message
et...

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
. net...
Harry,
you might be intelligent, but you have a really bad case of fixation.
You
either need mediation for obsessive compulsive disorder or one of
similar
illnesses.


I am surprised it took you so long to figure that out Bill. But I have to
disagree
with the intelligent part though....Harry talks a good game but
unfortunately no one is
home upstairs. Look up the definition of "village idiot" in the dictionary
and Harry's
picture appears next to it.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Beyond Bush's admission that he doesn't read the papers.......(he isn't
interested in any opionions except those of his cabinet, apparently).....the
article does point out a
serious breach of first amendment rights and lack of equal treatment under the
law.

Pro-Bush demonstrators, and pro-war demonstartors (usually the same crowd)
have the local cops out "informally" flagging traffic for them, etc. I have
seen a number of occassions where the cops shut down intersections, etc, to
allow a Pro-Bush, or pro-war demonstration to occur.

Just prior to the invasion of Iraq, the anti-war protestors in Seattle staged a
large rally in downtown Seattle. The crowd was enormous. The cops tried to herd
everybody onto a short stretch of sidewalk that was obviously far too small to
accomodate the group. Everytime more than 2 or 3 people would inhale at once,
some poor schumck would be pressed forward and would be forced to set a foot
over the curb and into the street. Dozens of these folks, from young kids to
little old ladies, were arrested the moment a foot touched the ground beyond
the curb.
The charge was blocking traffic!

Some of the anti-war protestors were thrown face down on the pavement and
handcuffed with zip-ties. For (allegedly) blocking taffic.

If you had to be a cop to vote for POTUS, there's no doubt that Bush would
carry all 50 states and about 90% of the popular vote. :-(

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

WaIIy wrote:
On 26 Sep 2003 04:40:01 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Some of the anti-war protestors were thrown face down on the pavement and
handcuffed with zip-ties. For (allegedly) blocking taffic.

Can't you stop this leftist bull**** for even ONE day?

You sometimes have something to say about boats, unfortunately, I cannot
sift through your socialist dogma anymore to find the boat postings.

Back in the K/F.

Oh, puh-lease, Wally, you're so dense, you couldn't tell socialist dogma
from a Pomeranian dogma. Woof. Really. And so unoriginal. Weren't you
voted numnutz of the newsgroup in 2002?



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:
On 26 Sep 2003 04:40:01 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Some of the anti-war protestors were thrown face down on the pavement
and
handcuffed with zip-ties. For (allegedly) blocking taffic.

Can't you stop this leftist bull**** for even ONE day?

You sometimes have something to say about boats, unfortunately, I cannot
sift through your socialist dogma anymore to find the boat postings.

Back in the K/F.

Oh, puh-lease, Wally, you're so dense, you couldn't tell socialist dogma
from a Pomeranian dogma. Woof. Really. And so unoriginal. Weren't you
voted numnutz of the newsgroup in 2002?


Wilbur's boat in on the hard and he's back to listening to Rush for
entertainment.

It's "leftist bull****" to talk about people being thrown down face first by
police for protesting peacefully.

It'd be an outrage if that were happening to Christians who were protesting
abortion.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Several times, when questioned on TV during his campaign about his reading
habits, he was unable to point to much of anything other than the occasional
newspaper. I don't expect the president to have a reading list I agree 100%
with, but newspapers do NOT inform ANYONE enough about politics and history.
The latter is especially important, if you want to avoid repeating the worst
parts of it. I wonder if Bush even read his dad's book.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
et...
All presidents use their staff to present daily briefing papers to get an
overview of world events. The briefing papers combine the info that is in
the newspapers and info from the different cabinets and intelligence
communities.

What is amazing is that he bothered to tell anyone he does not read
newspapers, even if other presidents did not bother to read anymore than
the
headlines to see what the media considers important, at least they didn't
tell everyone.


"F330 GT" wrote in message
...
I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is
about
our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct
quote.
Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this
week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters
away
from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president
will
be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself
into
any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is
as
close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move
a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to
stand.
When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser,
Condoleezza
Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but
"rarely
read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many
of
the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi
invasion,
when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed
that
his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy
the
White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the
world
is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well
as
the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot.
(again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

OK...so his people read the news and digest it for him. But unlike
journalists, the president's people somehow know how NOT to let their own
opinions affect how they interpret what they read.

I understand now.

And, it's OK if the guy never picks up a history book, like "From the
Shadows" by Robert Gates, or any of a hundred other books which detail the
inner workings of diplomacy in the 20 years which preceded his term in
office. No president needs insights into the workings of other governments
and cultures. He can get all that from his experts, many of whom graduated
from college just a few years earlier and have little or no overseas
experience (true of ANY president's people).

I understand.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Some of the anti-war protestors were thrown face down on the pavement and
handcuffed with zip-ties. For (allegedly) blocking taffic.

Can't you stop this leftist bull**** for even ONE day?

Widely observed, reported, and photographed fact. Hardly "leftist bull****."

You sometimes have something to say about boats, unfortunately, I cannot
sift through your socialist dogma anymore to find the boat postings.

Back in the K/F.



Well, Wally since you *never* have anything to say about boats I won't miss any
of your on-topic stuff, even without a kill file.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:
On 26 Sep 2003 04:40:01 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Some of the anti-war protestors were thrown face down on the pavement
and
handcuffed with zip-ties. For (allegedly) blocking taffic.

Can't you stop this leftist bull**** for even ONE day?

You sometimes have something to say about boats, unfortunately, I
cannot
sift through your socialist dogma anymore to find the boat postings.

Back in the K/F.

Oh, puh-lease, Wally, you're so dense, you couldn't tell socialist dogma
from a Pomeranian dogma. Woof. Really. And so unoriginal. Weren't you
voted numnutz of the newsgroup in 2002?


Wilbur's boat in on the hard and he's back to listening to Rush for
entertainment.

It's "leftist bull****" to talk about people being thrown down face first
by
police for protesting peacefully.

It'd be an outrage if that were happening to Christians who were
protesting
abortion.



High fiving Harry again. Was it not Hillary who had a person with a camera
arrested and jailed for taking her picture at a speech? Same as I think BC
did to some heckler in the midwest.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

It'd be an outrage if that were happening to Christians who
were protesting abortion.

High fiving Harry again. Was it not Hillary who had a person with a
camera
arrested and jailed for taking her picture at a speech? Same as I think
BC
did to some heckler in the midwest.

So, I cannot have a thought similar to Harry's without you silly RWers
claiming that I'm following my master?

The guy arrested was a known rabble-rouser who'd been a nuisance at the
school at which she was speaking (or maybe it was Gore) and this little
asshole was videotaping the speech, which was strictly forbidden and posted
outside the event.

Bush's bubble keeps rabble-rousers MILES away. They don't just prevent
people from taking pictures.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

It'd be an outrage if that were happening to Christians who
were protesting abortion.

High fiving Harry again. Was it not Hillary who had a person with a
camera
arrested and jailed for taking her picture at a speech? Same as I think
BC
did to some heckler in the midwest.

So, I cannot have a thought similar to Harry's without you silly RWers
claiming that I'm following my master?

The guy arrested was a known rabble-rouser who'd been a nuisance at the
school at which she was speaking (or maybe it was Gore) and this little
asshole was videotaping the speech, which was strictly forbidden and
posted
outside the event.

Bush's bubble keeps rabble-rousers MILES away. They don't just prevent
people from taking pictures.



I guess you can not be a gadfly / rabble rouser without crossing a public
Democrat politician? She was giving a speech at a public university. Screw
the rules on recording! IF she does not want it on the record, do open the
mouth.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

eh?


"jps" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

It'd be an outrage if that were happening to Christians who
were protesting abortion.

High fiving Harry again. Was it not Hillary who had a person with a
camera
arrested and jailed for taking her picture at a speech? Same as I think
BC
did to some heckler in the midwest.

So, I cannot have a thought similar to Harry's without you silly RWers
claiming that I'm following my master?

The guy arrested was a known rabble-rouser who'd been a nuisance at the
school at which she was speaking (or maybe it was Gore) and this little
asshole was videotaping the speech, which was strictly forbidden and
posted
outside the event.

Bush's bubble keeps rabble-rousers MILES away. They don't just prevent
people from taking pictures.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

I didn't see anything unusual about the twist the author used, typical
propaganda objective. If I was Bush, I wouldn't want these protestors near
me, saying something stupid like the war is about oil. Give your head a
shake, everyone knows the war has nothing to do with oil, but the U.S.
should take proceeds from the oil until all costs have been recaptured. Why
should the U.S. taxpayer pay for doing the biggest favor to that country.







"F330 GT" wrote in message
...
I usually try to stay out of the poltical bashing that goes on here but
paragraphs 6 of this article blows my mind. Hard to believe this is about
our
president. Is he a freaking idiot or just stupid. This is a direct quote.
Why
would he admit to this?


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

The Presidential Bubble

Published: September 25, 2003



Four progressive political groups sued the Bush administration this week,
charging that the Secret Service is systematically keeping protesters away
from
the president's public appearances. They make a serious point about free
speech
rights, but they also point out a disturbing aspect of the Bush White
House:
the country has a chief executive who seems to embrace the presidential
bubble.

Security concerns make it inevitable that a modern American president will
be
somewhat cut off from the country he leads. He cannot insert himself into
any
part of normal life without a phalanx of security guards.

Protesters cannot be permitted to get close enough to pose a threat, but
they
ought to be able to get close enough so the president can see that they
are
there. Sometimes seeing a glimpse of placard-wielding demonstrators is as
close
as the commander in chief can get to seeing the face of national
discontent.

At Mr. Bush's public appearances, his critics are routinely shunted into
"protest zones" as much as a half-mile away. At the Columbia, S.C.,
airport
last year, a protester with a "No War for Oil" sign was ordered to move a
half-mile from the area where Mr. Bush's supporters were allowed to stand.
When
the protester refused, he was arrested.

Mr. Bush and his aides also seem to go to great lengths to underline the
degree
to which the president closes himself off from the news media. In an
interview
with Fox News this week, the president said he learned most of what he
needs to
know from morning briefings by his national security adviser, Condoleezza
Rice,
and his chief of staff, Andrew Card.

As for newspapers, Mr. Bush said, "I glance at the headlines" but "rarely
read
the stories." The people who brief him on current events encounter many of
the
newsmakers personally, he said, and in any case "probably read the news
themselves."

Some of this may be a pose that is designed to tweak the media by making
the
news appear to be below the president's notice. During the Iraqi invasion,
when
the rest of the nation was glued to TV, Mr. Bush's spokesman claimed that
his
boss had barely glanced at the pictures of what was going on.

But it is worrisome when one of the most incurious men ever to occupy the
White
House takes pains to insist that he gets his information on what the world
is
saying only in predigested bits from his appointees.

Mr. Bush thinks of himself as a man of the people, but carefully staged
contacts with groups of supporters or small children does not constitute
getting in touch with the people. It is in Mr. Bush's interest, as well as
the
nation's, for him to burst the bubble he has been inhabiting, and take a
hard
look at the real world.



P.S. My last politcal post unless GWB shoots himself in the foot. (again)

Barry

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Give your head a
shake, everyone knows the war has nothing to do with oil,

Hmmm. Why then, did we pick Iraq?
We now know that the war had nothing to do with the weapons of mass destruction
that were supposed to present an imminent threat. We now know that the
administration claims of knowing specifically just where to look for these
weapons (but withholding that info from the UN inspectors as a sort of test)
were at least blustering errors and arguably worse.
Even Bush has admitted that his admnistration could have been better stewards
of the truth ("we should not have used that line in the SOTU speech").

If it was about freeing an oppressed people from a tyrranical dictator- we seem
to have accomplished that. But if oil had nothing to do with it, why Iraq?
There are dozens of hell holes on the planet where the people are worse off
than Iraq. In most of those places, we wouldn't be dealing with people
demanding the dictator's return in the aftermath, like the thousands of Iraqis
who
marched and chanted for the removal of the US troops and the return of Saddam
Hussein just two days ago.

There's an up side to the anti-US, pro Saddam demonstrations, however. We have
introduced freedom of speech and assembly in Iraq. It's embarrssing that so
many are assembling to speak against the US, though.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

Tuuk wrote:
I didn't see anything unusual about the twist the author used, typical
propaganda objective. If I was Bush, I wouldn't want these protestors near
me, saying something stupid like the war is about oil. Give your head a
shake, everyone knows the war has nothing to do with oil, but the U.S.
should take proceeds from the oil until all costs have been recaptured. Why
should the U.S. taxpayer pay for doing the biggest favor to that country.


It didn't have anything to do with the terrorists responsible for 9-11 -
if it did, we should have taken out Saudi Arabia.

It didn't have anything to do with chemical or biological weapons -
we didn't find any.
It didn't have anything to do with nuclear weapons-
we didn't find any.
It didn't have anything to do with the despot, Saddam Hussein-
we support despots all over the world.

Iraq has two products it exports - oil and dates.

Must have been the dates, eh, dum-dum?



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT Bush is getting scary.
 

" Tuuk" wrote in message
...
I didn't see anything unusual about the twist the author used, typical
propaganda objective. If I was Bush, I wouldn't want these protestors near
me, saying something stupid like the war is about oil. Give your head a
shake, everyone knows the war has nothing to do with oil,

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation