Bush interview with Brokaw

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
I thought that it was a good interview and Bush came off as candid, interesting, relaxed and funny. I especially liked when he was joking with Tom and called the Iraqi Misinformation Minister 'my man', and how he was ' a classic'. I think that really sums up how we all felt when we heard Baghdad Bob's comments.

His nonchalant manner toward the Dixie Chicks comments were also admirable. Really, who cares what some fat, self-impotant, incredibly lucky, no -talent hog belches when she is in England. Like he said, don't whine when people don't buy your records and radio stations boycott you at the behest of the listeners.

None of this surprised me though, because i've always thought of him as somebody I could have a beer with and have a good time.

Another thing that wasn't surprising is that as he was describing the events that led up to the initial, originally unplanned strike on Saddam personally on 3/19, he said that Rumsfeld entered the room and announced that 'the plans have changed'. Dubya then quickly changed that to ' I mean, he asked for permission to change the plans'.

Now, we all have known for a long time that Rummy, Cheney and Wolfowitz are designing our foreign policy (as scary as that is), but it's refreshing that our Commander In Chief can admit the same, if only for a moment.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Yes only for a moment. I thougth it was good not real good. But it seems everyone has became pussies when asking him questions.
I think Tom could have at least asked a few tough ones. Chit the guy is to be sharp and tough as hell to run this country. If you cant beat on him a little. Well we will turn him into a wall flower.
 

Megami

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 4, 2003
154
0
0
49
Movin back to Cali!
His nonchalant manner toward the Dixie Chicks comments were also admirable. Really, who cares what some fat, self-impotant, incredibly lucky, no -talent hog belches when she is in England. Like he said, don't whine when people don't buy your records and radio stations boycott you at the behest of the listeners.

1) Are you insane? Yeah, go and have a beer with Bush because 90% of the time, when he opens his mouth its pure babble. This man literally has zero public speaking skills. During the entire war, I was praying that he would limit his camera time and let Tony Blair do the talking.

2) The Dixie Chicks weren't exactly brain surgeons saying what they did, but Bush was correct in that they had the right to say it. They shouldn't whine that they are losing $$$ in record sales. But I agree with Natalie Maines that it's crossing the line when little kids are stomping on their cd's (come on... like little kids have any grasp on what's really happening? That's total parental influence) and there are death threats being sent to their houses. What kind of "great country" is this if you're not allowed to say what you want without fear of scary rednecks or tight-ass conservatives sending death threats to your home and to your family for just saying you don't agree with the President?

Fine, good, don't buy their "no talent" cd's (1 - she's not fat - i'd like to see you squeeze into designer clothing made for model size 2's, kosar - and 2 - they are extremely talented. They single-handedly brought the world's attention to the genre of bluegrass and country in a time of Britney Spears and Eminiem.... and they actually PLAY their own instruments and WRITE their OWN songs). But they do not deserve to be treated like traitors who are awaiting hanging at the gallows because they disagree with our President. Within seconds of Natalie Maines saying she was ashamed of Bush, one of the other Chicks said honestly and strongly that they support the troops 100%. You can disagree with the war but still support the troops, imho.

On the interview with the DC the other night, they said they didn't care if you dont agree with them and stop buying their music and if their fame all ends tomorrow... but leave their families alone. I think that if Pres. Bush wanted to take the high road, he could have said he disagreed with them, but that any threats or going overboard is unamerican and will not be tolerated. Instead, he looked like a smug bastard.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
I did not see the interview but I did see a clip where he smirked that the Dixie Chicks have to learn that freedom of speech goes two ways. I found it very disapointing that the President condones the use of our public airways to organize boycotts against people for their political expression.
If you don't wanna listen to Dixie Chicks because they say something that you don't agree with is fine but when the charge is being led by Fox News and Right Wing Radio something is very wrong here.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
Looks like you are as passionate about the Dixie Chicks as you are about that ghetto, Modesto, California.

I agree that Dubya would be fun to party with. I'll bet when he used to snort, that he was the life of the party.

I also agree that the Chicks aren't brain surgeons and that they have little talent compared to Britney and Slim Shady.

I don't agree that the prez has any responsibility to speak out against those speaking out against the trio.

Compared to tons of other country acts, the Chicks are talentless and classless. These are the same broads that called Toby Keith's great patriotic song, 'Angry American', "ignorant". He wrote that song in response to 9/11 and played it live for our troops all over the world. Yeah, that's ignorant.

Now they're on the cover of EW posing naked with comments written all over their unappealing bodies. They're a trip.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
StevieD said:
I did not see the interview but I did see a clip where he smirked that the Dixie Chicks have to learn that freedom of speech goes two ways. I found it very disapointing that the President condones the use of our public airways to organize boycotts against people for their political expression.
If you don't wanna listen to Dixie Chicks because they say something that you don't agree with is fine but when the charge is being led by Fox News and Right Wing Radio something is very wrong here.

I think his comment was an obvious response. He said they have the right to their opinions and people have the right to not buy the records. Don't really see anything wrong with that.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
it doesn't bother me that the president is not a great public speaker. a president should'nt be judged a good president because he is not a good "off the cuff" speaker.if a president is judged by his public speaking then i guess abe lincoln wouldn't be considered a good president, because from what i have read about him. public speaking wasn't his strenghth.

i personally don't care what a celebrity says about world issues. they probably know as much or less than the average person. the thing that bothers me is that they are given a public forum to express their views.they are entertainers let them entertain. their opinion is no more valuable than anyone else's.

the thing that upset people about the dixie chicks was that there criticism about bush was done in a another country. there are people who believe that during war, a public person should not criticize the our country on foreign soil, that we should put up an united front.

an entertainer criticizing our president or his policies, while in another country doesn't bother me. but what bothers me is if a politician or an ex-politician offers criticism from another country.
 

Megami

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 4, 2003
154
0
0
49
Movin back to Cali!
If you don't wanna listen to Dixie Chicks because they say something that you don't agree with is fine but when the charge is being led by Fox News and Right Wing Radio something is very wrong here.

Fox news literally makes me want to vomit. Rupert Murdoch uses his unending stash of cash to spin the news in his direction and spread his right-wing conservative bullshit around the world. Since when do we let some little Australian man dictate to OUR country what OUR news should be? Him and his entire media congomerate can go to hell with their web of lies.

A good book to read... I forgot the exact title, but I think it's called "Inventing the News Media". I read it a couple years ago and its very interesting to learn about the "behind the scenes" on Fox News and other "conservative" mass media that Murdoch controls.

i personally don't care what a celebrity says about world issues. they probably know as much or less than the average person

I agree... just because you're a celebrity does not make you an automatic contender for MENSA or the Nobel Peace Prize. It makes you visible, and that's about it. But what it shouldn't make you is a scapegoat for pistol-packin bigots and conservatives who feel that you don't have a right to say what you feel. I don't agree with what the DC did, but I want to know if I go to another country, I can say whatever the hell I want about my own country -- good or bad. That's my right. People who don't like it can kiss off and not buy records or whatever, but no one has the right to threaten other people's lives or families for their beliefs. It's like the freaking Redneck Gestapo or somtehing.

Kosar: I think the DC's posing nude with the labels written on them was ballsy. I would have done it. Too bad they're FAT and apparently TALENTLESS, right? :thefinger
 

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
By Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder
Published 4/25/2003 12:04:00 AM


If you were to say that President Bush will be recorded in history as one of America's greatest Presidents, three out of four people would either laugh, smirk, or break out in a sweat. Are you serious? they would say. Have you ever heard him talk? How could a fumbling talker be called a great President? They'd take your remark as a personal insult.

Somehow these easily insulted people never think of asking this simple question: Who ever proved that fluency in speech has anything to do with intelligence? Only a lack of intelligence would make someone believe there's a correlation. The "Bushisms" that characterize the president's mixed-up speech have exposed nothing about Bush. They've only exposed and revealed the ignorance of so many Americans. If it were true that a smooth talker is a better thinker, the IQ of a used-car salesman would be ten times higher than Albert Einstein's. Moreover, the guy on television selling tapes that will enable you to buy up a whole city of real estate even without 10 cents in your pocket would win a Pulitzer Prize in philosophy.

We have all heard the clich? about a man who is a talker not a doer. That is why personnel directors all know that you cannot judge a prospective worker simply by the impression he makes in an interview, because it is not unusual for people to "talk a good game" who can accomplish nothing. That is why the ability to talk is always referred to as the "gift of gab" because it is given freely to people who have achieved nothing to deserve it. If the ability to talk had any connection with the ability to think, why is it that the man on the street who is begging for help talks so much better than Bill Gates? Why does the host of a television show whose only accomplishment in life is the possession of a clear throat talk so much better than his guest who just wrote a best-seller that will cure every disease, except a Jewish woman's with a headache?

Almost every time you talk to a parent of two children, you hear the same story. He has one child who is a genius, but because he is self-conscious about his other child, who is not quite so bright, he will always try to save the situation with an emotional outburst about what a great talker this other kid is. Grasping for air he will start yelling, "He is not a great scholar (in other words he is still in high school at the age of 38) -- but what a talker he is! He could sell you anything whether you want to buy it or not." You could bet that this parent may even start to believe he's telling the truth, though in fact he's not. It is generally true that the better the thinker the worse the talker because he is too busy thinking to waste his time talking.

Watch the most brilliant minds on PBS and try to listen to them talk, you will find that you will not be awake for very long. By the time the first one finishes his first sentence, you will have lost any need for your sleeping pills. However, if you switch to Jerry Springer, you will find that when his guests are not punching each other, they are such great talkers that they make an unbelievable story sound like an epic drama (and they are doing it the hard way because they are also talking through a kilo of cocaine still clogged in their noses). Either way, we have here two more categories of people that are quick to judge a President according to the quickness of his tongue instead of the sharpness of his mind.

But the best category we've saved for last.

Ironically, we all know that it probably takes less intelligence to succeed as an actor than at any other profession. Nevertheless, actors have decided to become the chief critics and judges of the Bush presidency. If your mind is hardly working, there is no doubt that you can still succeed as an actor. If you compared the IQ rating of all the professions in the world, the acting professional would probably be identified with a lower number than the job of shoveling snow. At least shoveling snow requires the brains to handle a shovel whereas acting requires no ability to handle anything.

Shoveling snow also requires a man to work alone making his own decisions. An actor is not required to think at all. Before he says a word the director tells him how to say it and since it takes three months to shoot a movie an actor only has to learn how to say a total of one sentence a day and he doesn't even have to memorize it. A script girl is at his side to repeat the line to him every 90 seconds because the director does not have enough confidence in his ability to remember it. If he gets it wrong, he has an average of three days to correct it, and after spending a month with this kind of intellectual challenge he comes out an expert on foreign policy, the chief architect of what to do with the environment, how to handle North Korea, and, despite his never having read a book unless there was a part for him in the movie, he also becomes an authority on the subject of nuclear proliferation.

Moreover, he attacks the President everyday about the war in Iraq, even though if he were asked to look at a map and identify Iraq he would probably point to Pittsburgh. An actor is the living proof that talking has nothing to do with intelligence. And that a big mouth can work perfectly with a small mind.


Jackie Mason is a comedian. Raoul Felder is a lawyer.

Also-

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32223

:shrug:
 

Megami

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 4, 2003
154
0
0
49
Movin back to Cali!
Chanman: Interesting article. I don't agree with it, however. Bill Gates made his fortune sitting in front of a computer with a 6 pack of Tab and a whole lot of brains.

Einstein made himself known by his genius in front of a chalkboard, creating and deciphering formulas and mathematic equations that would make normal people like you and me want to vomit from its complexity.

These two people did not have the fate of the nation in their hands. They were not Commander in Chief of the most powerful armed forces in the world. Their job was not to be a good communicator, because their realm of knowledge allowed them to be sequestered from the world. Part of Bush's job IS to be a good talker... a representative for MILLIONS of people to other countries and express our views, opinions, and beliefs to various world leaders. I'm sorry, but you are not going to convince me that you don't need to be a good talker to do this job.

He may be brilliant (which is still up in the air for me, imho. I think he's ridden his family's coattails his entire life and his experience is who he knows rather than what he can accomplish for himself), and all that bubble-gum good stuff that conservatives like to say about Dubya, but his job is not to hole himself in the oval office and not communicate with the rest of the world while making monumental decisions. His intelligence is not up for debate... his ability to effectively excel in his position is.
 

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
Megami- Not trying to convince you. I think most people wouldn't care about his speaking skills if the economy was benefitting them. Clinton was a great orator, but I still think he is a snake in the grass and had nothing to do w/the stock market boom.
P.S.- I didn't like Jimmy Carter either, yet think he is a great Humanitarian- Just did not 'lead' the country during his 'Watch." Just my opinion and was looking for something to change my mind. I think the articles do make you think. :SIB
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
The fact that he could not avoid war and could not get some of our alleys to join him speaks volumes. Sure our military defeated some rag tag armies but the true test will be what happens after the fighting stops.
So far it looks about even in Iraq. Some contracts given that are surrounded with controversy. It will take a few years to see how smart this liberation was.
As for celebrities expressing themselves well...who is supposed to do it? Face it you and me ain't gonna be on the 6.00PM news saying we are for this or against that.
For that matter what makes Rush Limbeaugh and the rest of those right wing radio celebrites the right to speak any more than any other celebrity.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
"The fact that he could not avoid war and could not get some of our alleys to join him speaks volumes."


stevie,

which allies are you talking about ?

surely you can't mean:

france----if they were our true ally, why would they reveal private conversations, to iraq, between them & our country? if they were our true ally, then why would they violate un sanctions & sell iraq parts that they could use in military combat? if they were our true ally, then why would they break all un protocol, & go out of their way to block anything that the us & britain tried to pass to enforce un sanctions that iraq kept breaking ?

russia----if they were our true ally why would they send "advisors" to iraq, during the beginning stages of this war, to advise saddam & his crew ways that they can defeat the coalition of the willing?

germany----if they were our ally then why would they send memos to their diplomats that under all circumstances, vote against any us sanction? if they were our ally why would they send, against un sanctions, weaponry that could kill american soldiers during this war?

all reports that i have read indicate that france, russia, germany, china, & syria would all benefit with saddam staying in power.btw, these countries all have veto power on the un security council. it is obvious that these "allies" all had their mind made up well before anything was presented by either the us or britain.

i know people keep bringing up that bush & his people failed diplomatically prior to this war, but i don't think, even a democrat could have swayed these so called allies.
 
Last edited:

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
No one said it was going to be easy to sway them or shame them or even bribe them. The easy thing to do was to send the military in.
The fact is that all of our politicians failed us. Republicans and Democrats alike. Clinton and the Bushes. How far back do you want to go? Ronnie Reagan was no genius over in that part of the world either. Carter didn't accomplish anything over there.
It is not a Republican or Democrat thing. When we send our young off to war or drop bombs on peoples heads we don't ask if they are conservative or liberal.
Don't ask me to give up my right of free speech just because the guy in power is doing what you happen to agree with and I won't ask you to shut up when my guy is in power.
Just don't fill my airwaves with some Right Wing version of Iraqi Bob.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
turn your airwaves to public radio which you and I are paying for and you wont ever hear any conservatives on there....

at least the conservative radio pays for itself

as far as Fox News goes, i dont see any reason why conservatives can't own a news channel....CNN was the ONLY all news network we had for years....owned by a wacky liberal....

now we have a little more balance despite all three networks being left slanted
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
the point that i was making in my previous post was that some of the countries that are on the security council let their financial gains get in the way of world security. their potential for financial gain was so large, that any reasoning or bribing on the us or britain's part would not have succeeded.

i lump all of these middle east countries together in the same mix. carter, clinton, & other presidents have tried negotiating for peace in the middle east, & for one reason or another these peace talks never succeeded. so, with the "allies" minds made up & peace talks never succeeding, the bush administration did the only thing that these countries would understand, force. so, imo, this administration did not fail, but instead succeeded. because now the person most responsible for paying for suicidal bombings is no longer available.

stevie,

i'm confused,who is asking you to give up your right to free speech?

btw, i voted for gore, clinton before that, & i even voted for carter, but as i said before, 9/11 changed my thinking.
 

Megami

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 4, 2003
154
0
0
49
Movin back to Cali!
Chanman: Have you listened to Jackie Mason's other stuff? The dude is like a 200 year old Jewish relic. Swear to God. His stuff isn't even funny anymore. :)
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
73
Boston
AR182 The Right Wing Media Circus is demanding that only those that agree with them may speak. They have pushed this idea of a boycott of those celebrities who speak out and do not agree with them. When Clear Channel decides to boycott someone for their political ideas, no matter what they are, then it is time for the citizens to stand up to them. It would help if the President understood that freedom of speech only works when you can speak without fear of reprisal.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top