While I greatly respect the office of the President, I have zero respect for the person currently holding the office. That said, while I enjoy a dig or attack on the man as much as the next, I also don’t think it does any good to exaggerate his actions for political gain. He does enough on his own without needing to resort to such tactics.
That’s why I found the reporting on Bush’s speech when Admiral Mullen was nominated as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff interesting. Here is one of the items that was repeated by a number of sources:
AFP: Bush attacks ‘Hollywood values’
US President George W. Bush ripped into “Hollywood values” on Monday, in a surprise attack at the entertainment industry that overwhelmingly backs his Democratic foes.
Bush’s rhetorical broadside came as he paid tribute to the new chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, US Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, noting that his parents were well regarded behind-the-scenes players in the US movie industry.
“Many people are surprised when told about the admiral’s show business roots. After all, he is humble, well-grounded and filled with common sense. Not exactly what one thinks about when they think of Hollywood values,” said Bush.
Attacking Hollywood is an election-year staple for the president’s Republicans, many of whom are bitter about losing control of Congress in November 2006 and fear losing the White House in November 2008 elections.
Asked whether this was a veiled snub aimed at Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson, a former senator with a long career as an actor, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino incredulously replied: “No.”
“I don’t know how you’re drawing that connection,” she said.
Yet if you read the text of the speech found here, that ‘attack’ on Hollywood is only a tiny part of it, and an offhand (although admittedly carefully scripted) rip at that.
If those on the left want Fox News and others to actually be ‘fair and balanced’, the left needs to do the same. Or am I wrong in my analysis of this speech?
Looks like an offhand remark, but perhaps people thinking about the election read too much into it. Either way, I wouldn’t call it a biased hit on the President, like the Joe Wilson saga or the National Guard story, but like those it may be the media had a certain script and believed whatever seemed to fit that (in this case that Republicans hate Hollywood).
Well, that takes away any remaining thoughts that Bush has any respect for Ronald Reagan and his style of government. And a backhanded slap at Ahnold “Terminator” Schwarzenegger and the support that he has provided him.
Bush is supposed to be the President of the United States of America. That includes Hollywood. It behooves me to understand why this President wants to divide the country.
I’m sorry, but that whole ‘we should act the way we want them to act’ thing has gotten us precisely NOWHERE. They lie, distort (or outright omit) facts, lie, manipulate, lie, attack, etc…and are never ‘called’ on it. Ever.
I’m not suggesting that the Left should lie, but they should learn a little about marketing…the Neo-Cons are masters at it (emphasizing one thing to eliminate attention on another being their best trick)…and then apply those lessons. The Neo-Cons are the biggest hypocrites in the history of humanity, it’s time that somebody (ANYbody) starts getting nasty on them, the way they’ve been nasty to anyone with the ability to reason and ask questions…
#5 – but here’s a hint, that side’s on the rise in the whole American continent.
Fundamentalist Christians?
#6 – That kind of thinking just eliminates any credibility your views might have had in the eyes of moderate Americans. Lies on one’s own side of the spectrum need to be called out as much if not more than lies on the other side in order to maintain that credibility. You’ll never bring an ideologue from the other side to your point of view, ever. However, there are an enormous amount of moderate Americans who will lean left or right based on current events and the performance of the political parties. Making up lies about your opponents or skewing their words just purports the idea that your side is dishonest. Both the left and the right don’t seem to be able to grasp that concept.
if it walks like a lame duck and talks like a lame duck…
also
#6 — actually what conservatives do best is insinuate and/or infer something very nasty, but never come right out and say it, they then deny it and quietly chuckle and move on while the liberals freak out into a paralysis of hearings and endless whining
what liberals need to learn is how to take it, since what they dish out is pretty nasty.
#9 – I SPECIFICALLY stated that they should NOT LIE. Leave that to the Neo-Cons. I said they needed to work on the marketing…how they say things, which things they emphasize, which ‘transgressions’ to villify and which to ignore. At the very least, they could talk about the lies and provide quotes and such to support it (The Daily Show manages it quite well, they could take a few lessons from them).
Criminy, look at the state of things…people are FIGHTING to be treated like they live in East Germany, circa 1968…FIGHTING to remain blind and ignorant. Sheesh, that’s just depressing.
So now Uncle Dave has admitted that the media is left-wing.
screw what the prez thinks. he’s wrong. end of story, next item
I await comment from prominent Republicans Bo Derek and Mary Carey.