Considering that their readers are the ones fighting and dying for this man’s policies, I thought the Stars & Stripes took it pretty easy on Bush. Others thought differently.
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE — President Bush has met hundreds of families of fallen soldiers, but he has yet to attend a servicemember’s funeral, he said Tuesday.“Because which funeral do you go to? In my judgment, I think if I go to one I should go to all. How do you honor one person but not another?” he said. The appropriate way to express his appreciation to the family members of fallen troops is to meet with them in private, he said. In an exclusive interview, Bush sat down with Stars and Stripes to answer questions solicited from U.S. troops now downrange, including the one asking whether he had ever attended a slain soldier’s funeral.
Do you think the article presented any new information? I think this “interview” could have been pulled from any random collection of press releases.
What specifically did he dodge, or is that another one of your sensationalistic-yet-full-of-crap headlines?
You don’t read the manual before you call tech support, either, do you, malren?
Bush said he did not have an answer.
“…And therefore … my answer to the troop is that really depends on what the leadership recommends.”
Bush called the question hypothetical and deferred comment to Gen. George Casey, commander of Multinational Force-Iraq.
Nice to see somebody willing to counter a sensationalistic, yet-full-of-crap headline with a sensationalistic, yet-full-of-crap comment.
“Bush said he did not have an answer.
“…And therefore … my answer to the troop is that really depends on what the leadership recommends.””
That’s dodging? It’s a question he is not qualified to answer. No president since Eisnehower has been.
“Bush called the question hypothetical and deferred comment to Gen. George Casey, commander of Multinational Force-Iraq.”
Because the question was hypothetical.
“In a question from Stripes, Bush was asked if a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would be acceptable in return for a cease-fire by insurgents.”
Looks hypothetical to me.
So there’s nothing new in this article, is there?
I really couldn’t say if there’s anything new in the article or not, smartalix, so I’ll defer the question to the Prez’nit, since he’d know better than me.
Good thing I don’t rely upon Dvorak for my political opinions! Enjoy the tech discussion but really don’t care about the political opinions… already way too many of those out there already!
Max,
You don’t know? You obviously know how to read, so you must know whether the information in the article was presented to you in the past or not.
Are you afraid to present an opinion? My position is this: I think the answers Bush gave in the article are the same non-answers he gives every time the press talks to him.
If you feel differently, why not tell us. In what way does this article demonstrate an honest attempt by Bush to use the vehicle of the soldier’s own newspaper to answer their very real questions? (They are the ones getting shot at for his policies, after all.)
(Actually, there was one piece of real information in that article, but Bush didn’t provide it.)
John,
You shouldn’t rely on anyone for your political opinion. Your position should come from listening to both sides and making up your mind for yourself.
Some here may disagree, but I feel I am open-minded (I can be convinced) as well as respectful of my interlocutors (unless they insult me egregiously/repeatedly, then the gloves come off).
I don’t want to listen to political opinions unless they are in line with my own. This video presents no information because it disagrees with my perceptions. This information is useless because it seems to contradict my information. Don’t you love free-thinkers?
Maybe he gives the same answers because it’s THE TRUTH? Think about it, it IS POSSILE, that THAt is what he thinks.
Day after day, you just have to wonder, how is it possible that this president has any support remaining at all. You read the news and you wonder… do people value party loyalty so much that they are willing to stand there and say they don’t see anything wrong with the lack of leadership, dodging, lack of commitment while calling it commitment, narrow thinking, stubborness and so many other characteristics that define the person currently defined as our national leader.
His explanation of why he has not attended a SINGLE military funeral:
a) I can’t figure out which one I would go to.
b) I haven’t been told to go to one by the military leadership.
c) I talk to the families in private, which is better than attending a funeral.
Really, come on… he hasn’t attended a SINGLE military funeral to honor the war dead… a single one? Not even for the symbolism, or as a show of understanding, commitment and respect? How about attending a funeral in public, talking to the families in public, and showing some ‘leader’ traits? Or is this man showing his true colors… fear that the family may embarass him publicly in some way.
This is not about Bush hatred… it is about patriotism, and the values and traits that we expect from our elected leaders. This so-called leader is an egocentric yet insecure man that thinks so highly of himself that he seeks no counsel, yet is so insecure of himself that he accepts no counsel when it is offered, and treats disagreement as a personal attack. (See arch-conservative Bruce Bartlett’s book “Impostor” for the truth about Bush).
Bush is a national shame… we deserve better… and Republicans should be shaking their heads in despair that they placed such a person in the White House in the first place. Just because you voted for him it doesn’t mean that he deserves your loyalty.
Off topic, but I’ve been hearing about this blog’s supposed political slant long enough that I figured it’d be worth finding out with certainty.
(Hopefully this hasn’t been done already, but I couldn’t find anything similar)
Thus, I invite you to participate in a survey of this blogs Political Compass. Where DOES the majority lie, anyhow?
Awake –
If Bush had attended all the funerals, you and your ilk would be complaining that he was neglecting his job in favor of mere ceremonial duties.
Don’t mind Frank, Awake.
Its hard to manage a real rebuttal when you’ve got your nose buried that deep in Bush’s ass to begin with.
Bush eats babies and caused AIDS.
It’s true. If you don’t believe it you’re blind, unwilling to accept reality, have your nose buried in Bush’s ass, a dirty neocon and a spawn of satan.
Just ask our “progressive” friends here.
Malren:
Naw. Just an illiterate, inbred, Jesus-freak, facist-wanna-be throwback with all the intellectual nuance and subtlety of a kindergarten recess and the depth a CD.
Its nice you wanna participate and all, but GIGO. When your best arguments consist of attempting to imply dissenting opinion is the product of fetal alcohol syndrome and putting the torch to Ray Bolger over and over again, you gotta expect folks are gonna get up in the nines with you. SOMEBODY’S gotta break up the monotony.
When did questions that are hypothetical become such a problem. “Would you kill a human baby and eat it?” is hypothetical. Would Bush refuse to answer that?
In point of fact hypothetical questions are the most important ones for a leader to answer.
Really these things happened? I though the camera’s are turned off during those periods! It amazing that the audience never reacted to the statements that they hear on their microphone!
Max, I don’t mind Frank… his response is as nonsensical and dimwitted as expected.
Let’s see… would I complain if Bush attended all the funerals? No, probably not, because he would have little time for anything else, and it might actually inject some humanity into the guy. But the fact is that he has not had the DECENCY of attending one single funeral, not even one. Think about it, he is the Commander in Chief, and he has not attended a single funeral of those that have died under his command. What a great man.
The reality of the Bush adminstration: he is turning the country into the enemy that we spent the last half century fighting. It feels like my years of miltary service have become a complete waste of my life. What did we abhor about the countries that we fought during the cold war? Things like Secret prisons, detention without trial, indiscriminate wiretapping and monitoring, restrictions on speech, secret records on it’s citizens, power only to those that agree and happen to be in his favor at the time, massive spin on the news, secrets, secrets, secrets, laws that do not apply to the leadership. Sound familiar? They are all realities that have come upon our country in the last 5 years.
To Awake
This is going to sound like I suport Bush, but well I dont. Anyway you try to make a good point but amarica was that way during the cold war too. We use to spy on our own people. Black List Celebirtys and the whole shebang. The only diffrence from then and now is a simple word chage. Communist = Terrorist. Bush tried to pull a page out of the McAruthor handbook but it realy didnt work that well.
And to the person who said that maybe This is what Bush beleives. Of course its what he beleives I mean the guy was on coacain half his life. The guys brian is probably so fried that he cant get any stright awnsers out of it.
Maybe he gives the same answers because it’s THE TRUTH? Think about it, it IS POSSILE, that THAt is what he thinks.
Comment by Locke — 7/5/2006 @ 7:00 pm
its his truth. he like you live in your own little world. Bus his taking this country on his own little ride down dumbass alley. I can not wait for a new president.
The Stars and Stripes always seemed to me to be little more than a DoD newsletter. Is the Overseas Weekly still being published?
Let’s say you’re right Dan, and this has “always” gone on. Does that mean we still have to put up with it now?
I do agree that abuses have always been around, but not in degree. Once upon a time the government at least was embarrased about it and stopped doing it when the public called bullshit on them. This imperialist adminstration just says, “eat shit” and continues on their merry way.
Don,
Overseas! was a monthly magazine for the military that died at the end of the Cold War. It was only one of many English-language publishing failures among the expats in Germany after the wall fell and all the soldiers left. I got started in the publishing business at Overseas! magazine in ’84 after I got out of the service in Germany and decided to stay a while (It wound up lasting 17 years).
That magazine is best known today (if it is known at all) for its comic strip, Stationed in Germany with Fred and Frank.
Shoppers Biweekly (known for its meat-market personal ads), Overseas Post (it was a weekly, and probably the one you’re thinking of), Family Magazine, they’re all gone. Some of the stateside books still exist, but in Germay I believe only R&R is still around, and that’s because a good bit of their publisher’s business is on the local economy.
I ran the magazine that Checkpoint turned into after Berlin became the once and future capital, and I still contribute to one of the last “consumer” miltary magazine, the Audio Video Photo Special Report, I was one of its first editors when it was founded back in the late 80’s.
So interestingly enough, I have very deep roots in the US military publishing industry from the height of the Cold War in the 80’s. That means when I read the scribblings of some mouth-breathing pussy like malren that has probably never served, knows little about the military, and doesn’t understand anything beyond what the Fox News’ sound bites provide, I get upset.
The guys brian is probably so fried that he cant get any stright awnsers out of it.
Is this post for real, “Dan”?
Just the headline alone is lame. “Wow, a politician avoids answering a question, I’m shocked.” Forget about it being true or not, why is it newsworthy?
A politician can commit political suicide by answering hypothetical questions. Bush has a very low approval rating already, so answering hypothetical questions just might cause more problems. A video posted earlier on Dvorak Uncensored gave some good examples of political figures being advise to side step certain questions so to keep public opinion positive about the political figure.
Since Bush can not run for President again, why not answer the questions and why not attend the funerals?
I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but I thought the President’s answer about not attending military funerals was thoughtful and made sense. Make no mistake, I strongly disagree with just about all of his policies and do not think he has been much of a leader. Having said that, he makes a good point on that question.
I didn’t read the rest of the article so I have no opinion on the rest of what he said. I’m not surprised that Stars and Stripes “took it pretty easy” on the President, however. This is a newspaper operated by soldiers. Soldiers are not allowed to show the disrespect and criticism of their Commander in Chief that civilians are (rightly) allowed.
Smartalix, thanks for the infor, but I was sure there was a tabloid named Overseas Weekly back when I was with the Third Division and, yup, I found it:
http://www.3ad.com/history/at.ease/overseas.weekly.htm
But, alas, no longer being published.
Wow, that went out of business even before it became fashionable to do so. I was in-country from ’80 to ’97, that died in ’75.