Proud of our Commander in Chief

[MisterMike]

I as most of us following the war saw that the President made a surprise visit to see the troops in Iraq for Thanksgiving. I just wanted to note that this was an awesome display of support, well deserved by our troops. What a fresh breath of air it must have felt like instead of the daily anti-war B.S.

I'm just glad that they now have a President who actually cares about our troops. The looks on their faces said it all.

 

[arnisador]

Yes, this was a neat idea.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Um...ah...has it ever occurred to you that a fair chunk of the problem is that we're constantly asked to be proud of a President rather than our country, our own actions, our history, our democracy?

I mean, there's a direct application of the adage, "bow to things, salute people," here.

I'll be proud of the President when he lays some of his prestige on the line to do something trivial like, say, make sure that every kid in this country gets to go to bed with a decent meal, their vaccinations, and health insurance. Something that might actually risk something with his supporters, as opposed to dealing out hundreds of billions to the extremely wealthy and their corporations. . .That's being a mensch, far as I'm concerned.

Eisenhower, Roosevelt, T.R......putting Bush in that line is as sad as following Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas.

Oh well. If you're wondering why I'm responding this way, it's because I'm pretty damn tired of being told I should bow every five minutes by these clowns. At least Bill Clinton--who blew all sorts of opportunities to show some guts in good causes--had the grace and sense to be embarassed by the way he avoided military service and ended up Commander-in-Chief.

 

[Touch Of Death]

The sad thing is is that any move he makes in that direction will only last until he is re-elected. The Panderer in Cheif has better things to do than try to solve any domestic issues.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Uh-oh...we're agreeing...it's the Apocalypse.

 

[ABN]

Come on! Enough already. You guys talk like none of these problems existed before Bush got into office. Clinton was no friend to the small farmer (as evidenced by his friendship with that small time poultry farmer Tyson). The domestic agendas of previous administrations don't really strike me as any great piece of social achievement either. Johnson's great society has required a twelve step recovery program. Nixon was more foreign policy oriented, Ford ummm well he did a great job of making sure our golf courses were maintained, Carter just got dealt a bad hand, and Reagan whether you want to admit it or not actually got things moving again. Your attacks on Bush are no better than those heaped upon Clinton when he was in office.

What steps are you taking to correct the problems that you see? Are you supporting grass roots programs in your neighborhoods to correct what you consider to be injustice? Are you backing good candidates who really want to see change and not keep the status quo? If you really want to start fixing the problems that you see start at your local level and work your way up. The problems we face start at the political machines on the ground floor. They aren't controlled by Bush who, like it or not, is in a temp job.

Those of you who blame him for the recession and/or his attempts to fix it should take a course in economics. Economics is cyclical. Things go up and things go down. Personally I think that his economic team is doing as a good a job as possible with the hand they were dealt.

Bottom line is this, if you are actually taking steps to enact change and improve the life of your fellow citizens in the best way that you can, more power to you. Even if I disagree with you I respect you for making the effort. If all you are doing is talking, complaining, and doing nothing, then get off of your fourth point of contact and put your hands to use doing something besides typing.

Sorry for the rant but I spent all day at a social justice seminar where everyone complained but no one had the testicular fortitude to do anything else. Then I read several threads in this forum that do nothing but bash, bash, bash, bash, and not once have I read a single suggestion as to how things could be improved beyond getting Bush out of office, getting someone else in, etc, etc. It doesn't matter who's in office unless you make sure they hear your voice.

So much for rugged individualism...

:soapbox:

Andy

As a professional soldier, I am damned proud of my President and my Country.

"My country in her intercourse with other nations may she always be in the right but, my country right or wrong"
-Stephen Decatur

 

[Ender]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Um...ah...has it ever occurred to you that a fair chunk of the problem is that we're constantly asked to be proud of a President rather than our country, our own actions, our history, our democracy?

crackin up here...um...who's asking???*LOL..the mysterious "THEY"???..*LOL

[QUOTE}
I'll be proud of the President when he lays some of his prestige on the line to do something trivial like, say, make sure that every kid in this country gets to go to bed with a decent meal, their vaccinations, and health insurance.
[/QUOTE]

rrright...isn't that the parents responsibility to provide those things???*LOL...oh yeah..the government is supposed to solve all of our problems!...people can have as many kids as they see fit and put it on the taxpayers bill!!..*shaking head...no sense of self reliance, self sufficiency, or self responsibilty....blame Bush!!

 

[MisterMike]

Yes! And not only was it a neat idea, it showed that the troops still had moral, and a true leader to follow. What an about-face to that impeached loser the troops and families didn't even want visiting them. (Not to mention his counterpart who tried to have their votes ignored)

At least a tear in President Bush's eye is sincere.

Bush in '04, for sure.

 

[MisterMike]

Oh, yes, one more thing I guess.

I'm firm on the belief that the government is here to govern, protect the Constitution, and manage the military. Not to put food on everyone's table.

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by MisterMike
At least a tear in President Bush's eye is sincere.

On a purely anecdotal note, I was in Normandy in June of 94 for the 50th anniversary of D-Day and there was nothing sincere on the part of the fmr Preisdent save for the sigh of relief when he was able to get on the plane and away from the contempt he was held in by every veteran there.

andy

 

[MisterMike]

Originally posted by ABN
On a purely anecdotal note, I was in Normandy in June of 94 for the 50th anniversary of D-Day and there was nothing sincere on the part of the fmr Preisdent save for the sigh of relief when he was able to get on the plane and away from the contempt he was held in by every veteran there.

andy

Ugh. That's just sooooo wrong. But I'll tack on the "LOL" for the anecdotal side of it

 

[Makalakumu]

"At least the tear in his eye is sincere"

Ha, tears from this AWOL coke head drunk driving daddies boy C student get into yale for a billion bucks jumped up drunk frat boy figurehead of big business. For all you know he could have been crying because he actually found his conscience amonst meeting people who were dying for this neo-con agenda!

And I didn't inhale. You guys have set a real precedent when it comes to ignoring history!

I'll be proud of the president when he knocks off the cronyism, cares about our kids futures, cares about the environment, and cares about other people who don't happen to have a dictator standing over mass quantities of oil.

:soapbox:

upnorthkyosa

PS - my friend was actually there. He went through 3 days of security checks before he was allowed to go into that rally. The media has lied to you. This was no surprise. The spin just keeps getting better and better.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, hey kids. I was in Normandy June 6, 1984, when they recreated the Debarquement, and Reagan spoke. The same trip, if I recollect aright, during which he asserted that he'd helped liberate a death camp in WWII. The trip before he laid a wreath on SS graves at Bitburg and maundered about forgiveness for the past. So if we want to discuss embarassing Presidential moments...


And remind me...what WAS Bush Jr.'s stellar record with the Texas Air National Guard? How exactly did he get the LAST slot in the state for that position, given his place at the very bottom of a LONG waiting list? Hm? His dad was the real deal. So was John McCain. So was Bob Dole. So were John Kerry and Bob Kerrey...hell, even Gore, son of the rich aand the powerful, spent seven months in Vietnam as a press officer.

I see that, again, nobody wants to deal with the questions I asked. Nor should some of you folks: they're fundamentally unanswerable, given your political philosophies.

Last I checked, gee, I though the President might have some interest in...you know...the health of American children. Certainly Himself has time for crap like the bogus, "No Child Left Behind," education bill, so gee, I guess Dubya can reach down to that individual level when it suits.

Reminds me of, "North Dallas Forty:" "Whenever we say it's a game, you say it's a business; whenever we say it's a business, you say it's a game."

 

[Arthur]

Its been an interesting week in the "study". With the arisal of this thread there have been two I have passionate thoughts about... the same people are posting... and yet I find who I agree with varies depending on which thread it is. I think this says a lot for martialtalk.... there are people here who are thinking... whether I agree or not, there positions are reasoned to some degree. Much more than we can say for most boards.

As to the specifics of the converstation.. I think ABN said most of what I think.

Just a few thoughts I'd like to express to be complete.

I think President Bush showing up in Iraq was couragous. Looking back on the history of the prsidency I haven't seen many similar acts. Iraq, and where president Bush landed and spoke in Iraq is probably the most insecure and dangerous location for a wartime presidential visit in history.

Regardless of any political rhetoric, the visit clearly lifted moral. It made the sacrificing soldiers life a little lighter for at least the day. I don't understand how anyone could complain about that. Had Clinton had the balls , gumption, compassion, or political savvy to show up in Haiti or Somalia I woul have applauded that too.

Bush and Gore were both members of the armed servcies during Vietnam. I have no problem with any Presdent who served, especially in war time regardless of mission orders, from wearing the paraphenalia of there service. Nor would I chastise any vetran for wearing such. I thank them for there service and the protection they have offered me.

As to laying it on the line... I think President Bush has more than done so. Reality is public perception of the state of affairs in Iraq, will likely decide the election. President Bush has enacted measures that he thinks appropriate... regardless of voter feedback. He is not making decisions based on polls, perhaps a far cry from what American citizens of the turn of this century are used to... and whether you agree or disagree with him... I think there is a legitimate reason to respect the actions he makes. He truly believes he is helping. More than I can say for some Presidents we've had.

Arthur

 

[rmcrobertson]

Uh...wow. Let me clear something up for you. Bush Jr. had strings pulled to AVOID going to Vietnam. His, "service," was a well-known sinecure in the Texas ANG, which his daddy's buddies got him by calling in favors, at a time when the US Army was dropping standards ( they took guys with IQs as low as 70, apparently) to get another 100, 000 men in the service and off to Vietnam. He got one of the last two spots in the Guard, though very low on the list. Please, if I'm wrong, show me the facts that prove that I'm wrong. I'll cheerfully (well, sullenly, but still...) apologize.

Read Molly Ivens' books, fer cryin' out loud.

 

[Arthur]

Uh...wow. Let me clear something up for you.

Interesting. ... I don't think I need anything cleared up. I didn't ask for the help. I started my post by giving sincere deference to people in another thread... you being one... though the name might not have been mentioned. Perhaps my intro discussing the wonderful detente acquired in these last few threads was greatly exagertated. Whoops.

Bush Jr. had strings pulled to AVOID going to Vietnam.

Really? I never would have thought that one from an elite family would have such special treatment. Its so rare among the elite.. its not like any other so of the elite had there military asignment manipulated by the contacts of their family!

Its not like Al Gore was assigned to the press rather than being a grunt... or like Bill Clinton... oh never mind... he ran... umm... who else... I mean come on.. that just isn't an arguement dem supporters really want to get into. ... okay I'l give the Jimmy Carter deferement... he was a legitimate service to the submarine corps.!

Please, if I'm wrong, show me the facts that prove that I'm wrong.

I'm not looking to show you are wrong...
Howwever, you are ignorant it would seem of the roles of other Commander in Chiefs.

The last Commander in Chief to show more positive military action is Eisenhower. Sure Kennedy gets credit for saving his crew... but thats only because he we almost killed them by disobeying basic orders.

Before that the last real war hero president was Teddy Roosevelt. All Republicans... interesting..

Arthur


I'll cheerfully (well, sullenly, but still...) apologize

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Ender
crackin up here...um...who's asking???*LOL..the mysterious "THEY"???..*LOL

[QUOTE}
I'll be proud of the President when he lays some of his prestige on the line to do something trivial like, say, make sure that every kid in this country gets to go to bed with a decent meal, their vaccinations, and health insurance.

rrright...isn't that the parents responsibility to provide those things???*LOL...oh yeah..the government is supposed to solve all of our problems!...people can have as many kids as they see fit and put it on the taxpayers bill!!..*shaking head...no sense of self reliance, self sufficiency, or self responsibilty....blame Bush!! [/QUOTE]
Parents should do a lot of things but they aren't; So, the ball is in the hands of leadership. If Leadership chooses not to lead, no fourteen year old parent is going to pick up the slack. Perhaps a better leader is in order.
Sean

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Parents should do a lot of things but they aren't; So, the ball is in the hands of leadership. If Leadership chooses not to lead, no fourteen year old parent is going to pick up the slack. Perhaps a better leader is in order.
Sean [/B]

What exactly are you advocating? Socialism? Bigger government?
Why do we always cite the extreme? The fourteen year old parent, the (insert disenfranchised here), the (insert latest political football here)?
What about the average American who is tired of seeing his or her tax dollars wasted? Why not take some of these causes that you're concerned about and take responsibility for them at the local level? That wonderful warm, fuzzy, liberal icon, Senator Disenfranchised herself Hillary Clinton said it best.

"It takes a village."

Damn right it does. What it doesn't take is the village council orThe Village Chief. It doesn't take the money taxed from all of the other villages. What happened to the villagers themselves?

I am for privatization of most things that you seem to think our government should be providing. What if local businesses were encouraged to "buy into" the schools of their areas. Providing training in addition to an education developing a pool of trained employees from those students who didn't want to go to college. What if local taxes were actually used (God forbid) locally to support the infrastructure (such as hospitals, fire, police, etc) of the area where those taxes came from.

Again the question is, what are you doing to help? What are you doing to enact change? Stop blaming and start doing. If leadership "chooses not to lead" then be a leader. Stop standing on the sidelines screaming, and start doing.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Oh, wow.

Rich families buy their sons out of military service, so it's OK that Bush did it.

Incidentally, FDR lost sons in WWII....to which he couldn't go. (So did Teddy, WWI) And died in office. Pity that Democrats have no guts.

Gore had pretty much the same kind of "combat," job that Dick Nixon had...look it up.

Everything'll be solved by privatization? The same kind that netted our current Prez 45K in profits on a $500 investment?

Guys like Bush and Cheney....sheesh.

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Everything'll be solved by privatization? The same kind that netted our current Prez 45K in profits on a $500 investment?
Guys like Bush and Cheney....sheesh.

Giving the Dems their due, Harry Truman was a National Guard Artillery officer who laid it on the line in the trenches of France during WWI, in addition to that he had to make a politico-military decision the magnitude of which, I don't think any other president in recent memory has had to contemplate.

No I am not suggesting privatizing everything. What I am suggesting is business getting more involved in a direct way with the communities in which they are based. After the failure of the Empowerment Zones of the 90's why not try working with the community from the private sector? Rather than automatically rushing to do a Bush Cheney comparison/slam how about considering the idea? That's the problem, we look for someone to blame. BUT, NO ONE HAS ANY BETTER IDEAS BEYOND BLAME, DIVIDE, COMPLAIN, AND DEMAND

The impression I am getting is that many of the Bush bashers don't want to hear solutions. they only want to scream about how mean and nasty the Bush administration is. how unfair it is, how wrong it is, how it's responsible for everything thats wrong with the country and with the world. If Bush gave in to every demand you made of him, how many Bush bashers would still complain about how he was stealing their ideas?

Like it or not, he is the president and you have to deal with it as a responsible citizen, not as a screaming sycophant. If you have a valid platform put it forth rationally. Show how it is better than the present administration. If the majority of the American people agree with you then you will come to power. (and don't start that whole recount thing, completed recounts showed that he actually did win Florida). If you rant and rave like Dennis Kucinich then you will have about as much of a chance of getting elected as he does.

As much as I diasgreed with him, Paul Wellstone was someone whom I respected because he was passionate on the issues and realized that it was America that was the real issue, Not who was in office. Until you Bush bashers deal with the real problems of this country and stop trying to blame the temporary caretaker of the Executive branch of government, for everything that you think is wrong, you will only marginalize yourselves as much as the ultra right wing did when it attcked Clinton rather than the issues back in 1996.

It's ideas that motivate Americans not hate filled vitrol. It was an idea that started this country. It was ideas the fostered the New Deal, Camelot, and even the Reagan revolution. It's ideas that create change. In other places and in other times vitrol and ranting caused change, not always for the better.

On this note, I am ending my participation in this thread. Anyone who would like to talk further with me, can do so by PM.


andy