Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Why does the GOP spin machine hate America?

  1. #1
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Why does the GOP spin machine hate America?

    My favorite's are Hannity, Lugar and, of course, Dubya, who always knows a way of putting his foot squarely in his mouth. I love that guy...Maybe he was thinking about how "humans can coexist peacefully with fish".

    "You can support the troops but not the president"
    -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

    "[The] President…is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
    -Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

    "American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
    -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

    "If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
    -Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W. Bush

    "I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
    -Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

    "Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years"
    -Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

    "I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
    -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

    "Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
    -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
    -Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

    "This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."
    -Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

    "Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."
    -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

    These statements were all made in the context of the 1999 U.S. interventions to stop the genocide in Kosovo.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    574
    Post Thanks / Like

    The National Review hates America too...

    David Frum. I love him the way Bit loves Pat Robertson... :) at least i do here...

    [url]http://frum.nationalreview.com/archives/08232005.asp#073900[/url]

    AUG. 23, 2005: ANOTHER LOST OPPORTUNITY
    By now it should be clear that President Bush's words on the subject of Iraq have ceased connecting with the American public. His speech yesterday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars is the latest - and one of the most serious to date - manifestations of the problem. The polls tell us that the American public is losing heart. A substantial majority (56%) now say that the war is going either "very badly" or "moderately badly." More than 50% now regard the war as a mistake. One-third want an immediate and total withdrawal. Maybe most fatefully: a plurality now say that they believe that the president deliberately misled the country into war.

    Supporters of the war can argue that the public is mistaken, overly influenced by biased news reporting. Yes, yes. But mistaken public opinion is just as powerful as sound public opinion.

    Again, supporters of the war can do our bit to try to change minds. But the biggest megaphone in the country belongs to President Bush - and much depends on whether he uses it well or badly.

    He is using it very badly indeed.

    Let me mention just one single but maybe decisive problem. Again and again during the Bush presidency - and yesterday most recently - the president will agree to give what is advertised in advance as a major speech. An important venue will be chosen. A crowd of thousands will be gathered. The networks will all be invited. And after these elaborate preparations, the president says ... nothing that he has not said a hundred times before.

    If a president continues to do that, he is himself teaching the public and the media to ignore him - especially when the words seem (as his speech yesterday to the VFW seemed) utterly to ignore the past three months of real-world events.

    The president could have made news yesterday by itemizing the reasons to regard Iraq more positively than most journalists do. He could have ticked off some of the achievements daily posted on the centcom.mil site. (Here's the latest.) He could have teased details even out of the mainstream media. (Mickey Kaus the other day noted that the reliably dour Robin Wright of the Washington Post casually mentioned in the course of her latest down-beater that Iraq has gone on a car-buying boom that has put a million new cars on the road since liberation. Kaus: "A 'car-buying boom'--another shocking failure! Don't they know about global warming?")

    Or, alternatively, the president could have skipped the good news and delivered a blood, sweat, toils, and tears speech: Yes things are hard, harder in fact than expected, but the stakes remain enormous - and here is why we must win, and why I am determined to fight this thing through to victory. That would be powerful too.

    As it is, though, he says nothing, and is perceived to say nothing, and soon nobody will be listening at all, if anybody still is.

    I am not arguing that a president must always have something new to say. Repetition is a key part of the technique of modern communication. You have to repeat too - because the audience is so big, so fragmented, and so often inattentive. I am saying this:

    1) Presidential speeches cannot seem disconnected from reality as it is perceived by a majority of the American public.

    2) If the president's aides announce a major new campaign to rally public opinion - and then send the boss out to deliver a speech that contains nothing but old and disbelieved formulas - they fail him and the country.

    3) If a president has nothing new to say, he can add freshness and interest to his previously stated views by presenting them in a new way. He can give an interview or a press conference, supplementing familiar arguments with new facts and stories - and showcasing his own attention to and knowledge of the situation on the ground.

    4) Failing all that, he can say familiar things in an exciting and unfamiliar setting He could return to Iraq for example to talk to the troops.

    The smart people in the Bush White House can surely figure out a half dozen clever ideas. But what they are doing now - rerunning and rerunning old phrases - is failing badly at a time when this administration badly needs successes.

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=4th&Long]
    These statements were all made in the context of the 1999 U.S. interventions to stop the genocide in Kosovo.[/QUOTE]
    Since Kosovo '99 and Iraq '05 are two wholly different situations - then you're firing blanks. It would be like blaming Coslet for Brien's missed kick against Pittsburgh. Wait, that's dumb - and so is your cut and paste.

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    The libs b!tchin and whining today are the same ones who got on the floor of the senate in Nov '02 and shouted "war" then voted for it.....I don't agree with any of the above statements made yet no senator gave clinton authorzation for anything in Kosovo...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us