Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Read My Ears:
Specific: "... the only thing that Mr. Bush could do to change people's minds about him would be to travel across Europe and not say a single word - but just listen. If he did that, Mr. Bush would bowl the Europeans over. He would absolutely disarm and flummox people here - and improve his own image markedly. All it would take for him would be just a few words: 'Read my ears. I have come to Europe to listen, not to speak. I will give my Europe speech when I come home - after I've heard what you have to say.'"
Comment:
Logic and Reason - the words of Mr. Friedman sooth the soul by demonstrating Logic and Reason - two qualities that President Bush's passions (or fanaticism) destroy.
It is possible to integrate emotions with logic and reason. Mr. Friedman's suggestion is one of emotional intelligence. Mr. Bush's alcoholic past means that he cannot complete this integration.
Not because of a physical inability - simply because he was unable to control his drinking, means that he has difficulty integrating his feeling with reason. This is not partisan rhetoric. But it is reasoned.
The President cannot go to Europe and bite his tongue anymore than Terrell Owens can play all season and then sit out the Superbowl. It simply goes against their natures.
He won't do it - "He" being either one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Issue:CNN.com - Bush denounces paying commentators - Jan 26, 2005:
Specific:"Bush said, 'We didn't know about this in the White House.'"
Comment: And we believe this because......why?
Specific:"Bush said, 'We didn't know about this in the White House.'"
Comment: And we believe this because......why?
Issue:DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2005�:
Specific:"A FOXNEWS spokesperson responded: 'Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network and now his mind -- we wish him well.'
In 1996, Turner apologized to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for comments he made comparing FOX head Rupert Murdoch to Hitler. "
Comment: Matt Drudge does not acknowledge the President's payments to a pundit to push "no child left behind".
Is that transaction not the definition of propaganda?
Is not propaganda the tool Hitler used to get into office and maintain power?
Is Matt Drudge a part of the propaganda ministry for missing to note the transaction? The President commented on it today - why not Drudge?
Specific:"A FOXNEWS spokesperson responded: 'Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network and now his mind -- we wish him well.'
In 1996, Turner apologized to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for comments he made comparing FOX head Rupert Murdoch to Hitler. "
Comment: Matt Drudge does not acknowledge the President's payments to a pundit to push "no child left behind".
Is that transaction not the definition of propaganda?
Is not propaganda the tool Hitler used to get into office and maintain power?
Is Matt Drudge a part of the propaganda ministry for missing to note the transaction? The President commented on it today - why not Drudge?
Monday, January 24, 2005
Issue:The Salvador option:
Specific: "Faced with our inability to come to grips with a popular-based resistance that has grown exponentially over the past year, the best the American policy planners can come up with is to embrace our own form of terrorism, supporting death squads we cannot control and which will only further debase the moral foundation of our nation while slaughtering even more Iraqis.
As an American, I hope and pray that common sense and basic morality prevail in Washington DC, terminating the Salvador Option before it gets off the ground. "
Comment: Is the Bush Administration advocating Death Squads? Why is this not in Main stream Media? Did they work in El Salvador? Why is Scott Ritter writing for Aljazeera.net?
Specific: "Faced with our inability to come to grips with a popular-based resistance that has grown exponentially over the past year, the best the American policy planners can come up with is to embrace our own form of terrorism, supporting death squads we cannot control and which will only further debase the moral foundation of our nation while slaughtering even more Iraqis.
As an American, I hope and pray that common sense and basic morality prevail in Washington DC, terminating the Salvador Option before it gets off the ground. "
Comment: Is the Bush Administration advocating Death Squads? Why is this not in Main stream Media? Did they work in El Salvador? Why is Scott Ritter writing for Aljazeera.net?
Friday, January 21, 2005
Issue:OpinionJournal - Peggy Noonan on President Bush's speech:
Sepcific: "'We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.' 'Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government. . . . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.' 'It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.'
Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth."
Comment: A conservative is concerned about the President's comments. I've bolded a part that particularly troubles me. Logic tells me that American system and Liberty is based on the ability to vote and speak. So as long as there is a group that governs itself by allowing all to vote and speak, then liberty will survive. It is not dependent on external forces. Liberty is dependent on the "will of the people" - only.
This President just doesn't get it. He has great intentions, but he has missed the lesson that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
A concern is that his arrogance is going to draw non-terrorist fire. Because I am lost as to why this President's attitude about "freedom's march" is different that the spread of communism? We fought the cold war because a country with a different idea of governance was forcing that idea of other countries. Vietnam was fought to stop the domino effect.
I'm sorry if I'm missing something. I want to understand.
Sepcific: "'We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.' 'Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government. . . . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.' 'It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.'
Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth."
Comment: A conservative is concerned about the President's comments. I've bolded a part that particularly troubles me. Logic tells me that American system and Liberty is based on the ability to vote and speak. So as long as there is a group that governs itself by allowing all to vote and speak, then liberty will survive. It is not dependent on external forces. Liberty is dependent on the "will of the people" - only.
This President just doesn't get it. He has great intentions, but he has missed the lesson that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
A concern is that his arrogance is going to draw non-terrorist fire. Because I am lost as to why this President's attitude about "freedom's march" is different that the spread of communism? We fought the cold war because a country with a different idea of governance was forcing that idea of other countries. Vietnam was fought to stop the domino effect.
I'm sorry if I'm missing something. I want to understand.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Ballots and Boycotts:
Specific: "That civil war was started by the Sunni Baathists, and their Islamist fascist allies from around the region, the minute the U.S. toppled Saddam. And they started that war not because they felt the Iraqi elections were going to be rigged, but because they knew they weren't going to be rigged."
Comment: Tom Friedman speaks with logic and reason. Can the President?
Specific: "That civil war was started by the Sunni Baathists, and their Islamist fascist allies from around the region, the minute the U.S. toppled Saddam. And they started that war not because they felt the Iraqi elections were going to be rigged, but because they knew they weren't going to be rigged."
Comment: Tom Friedman speaks with logic and reason. Can the President?
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Issue:President outlines role of his faith - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - January 12, 2005:
Specific: " 'I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person,' Mr. Bush said. 'I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is. "
Comment: BINGO!!! The more truly dishonest part is that he is unaware that while he may not say it, his media members DO! And this says nothing of rank and file of the party.
This administration has paid columnists to push agenda items, whether it is education policy or applying pressure to people who are related to spies (I'm referring to the Novak/Plame affair).
It is the swift boat ads. It is the connection between 9-11/Iraq and WMD. It's that he never made a mistake.
What is troubling is the notion of reality for this President. While I might grant that the President is a decent human being and means well. I believe he is genuine in his feelings. But he clearly does not have a concept for "emotional intelligence"
The President is making a statement about how he thinks about the relationship between the office and the people. He does not believe his power comes from the people.
The President is stating that he is unaware of the less scrupulous or less genuine are using his personal religious position of faith as cover for political and governmental power.
- That was my being kind version.
- My not so kind version:
The not so kind take is that he is a holy warrior on a crusade...
The concern is not that he will not leave after 4 years.
Prediction: Before next Presidential election season cranks up - A serious challenge to the Presidential term limit will be initiated in Congress. It is a logical next step in a pattern of a pursuit for power and control over and above a less than genuine faith.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific: " 'I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person,' Mr. Bush said. 'I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is. "
Comment: BINGO!!! The more truly dishonest part is that he is unaware that while he may not say it, his media members DO! And this says nothing of rank and file of the party.
This administration has paid columnists to push agenda items, whether it is education policy or applying pressure to people who are related to spies (I'm referring to the Novak/Plame affair).
It is the swift boat ads. It is the connection between 9-11/Iraq and WMD. It's that he never made a mistake.
What is troubling is the notion of reality for this President. While I might grant that the President is a decent human being and means well. I believe he is genuine in his feelings. But he clearly does not have a concept for "emotional intelligence"
The President is making a statement about how he thinks about the relationship between the office and the people. He does not believe his power comes from the people.
The President is stating that he is unaware of the less scrupulous or less genuine are using his personal religious position of faith as cover for political and governmental power.
- That was my being kind version.
- My not so kind version:
The not so kind take is that he is a holy warrior on a crusade...
The concern is not that he will not leave after 4 years.
Prediction: Before next Presidential election season cranks up - A serious challenge to the Presidential term limit will be initiated in Congress. It is a logical next step in a pattern of a pursuit for power and control over and above a less than genuine faith.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, January 07, 2005
Issue:USATODAY.com - Education Dept. paid commentator to promote law:
Specific: " the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same."
My Comment: This is wrong. It is consistent with FOX news arm of the administration.
Specific: " the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same."
My Comment: This is wrong. It is consistent with FOX news arm of the administration.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Issue:The New York Times > Business > Media & Advertising > CNN Will Cancel 'Crossfire' and Cut Ties to Commentator:
Specific: "CNN is a different animal,' Mr. Klein said. 'We report the news. Fox talks about the news. They're very good at what they do and we're very good at what we do.'"
Comment: Bravo and congratulations to Mr. Klein and CNN for noting that journalism is not only opinion!
On NPR it was reported that the Capital Gang was also get the axe. The other commentator that deserves to have cut ties is to Robert Novak. Remember, he had a significant role in the Valerie Plame/CIA operative incident.
Well, without Crossfire and without the Capitol Gang - Robert Novak may find it a good time to retire.
Specific: "CNN is a different animal,' Mr. Klein said. 'We report the news. Fox talks about the news. They're very good at what they do and we're very good at what we do.'"
Comment: Bravo and congratulations to Mr. Klein and CNN for noting that journalism is not only opinion!
On NPR it was reported that the Capital Gang was also get the axe. The other commentator that deserves to have cut ties is to Robert Novak. Remember, he had a significant role in the Valerie Plame/CIA operative incident.
Well, without Crossfire and without the Capitol Gang - Robert Novak may find it a good time to retire.
Issue: CNN.com - GOP finds way out of�ethics�spat - Jan 4, 2005:
Specific:"the House adopted a separate change that will make it harder to pursue ethics probes of members of Congress."
Comment: Did I not call this earlier?
Specific:"the House adopted a separate change that will make it harder to pursue ethics probes of members of Congress."
Comment: Did I not call this earlier?
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: A Tale of 2 Systems:
Specific: "The question is: Will we leave our children a system as flexible, dynamic and productive as the one that was, fortunately, left to us? Or, by doing nothing, will we succumb to the same ineluctable pressures that now afflict Europe, and find that we are immobilized at the exact moment China and India are passing us by? "
Comment:I read this piece and saw that it was informed and presents some decent logic and reason - enough to make me thinking.
Then the tag line - the final summarization - "the exact moment China and India are passing us by" - I'm now confused - passing us by in what? Their cultures have always had more respect for their elders and seniors than do American. And those models operate under communist systems and a social cast system.
Am I to understand that Mr Brooks is advocating that our national economic output is more important than the standards of living for the people? Is he advocating Communism for taking care of retirees?
The lack of a mention of China and India in this preceeding logic, leads to the notion that economic output is the thing, Mr Brooks feels that US is lacking.
So can it be said that reaching the global finish line first in terms of economic output is more important than support our retirees? It is better to be ahead of China and India than to have a lower economic output and also taking care of folks who need to be caring.
So then why donate to Tsunami Relief?
Specific: "The question is: Will we leave our children a system as flexible, dynamic and productive as the one that was, fortunately, left to us? Or, by doing nothing, will we succumb to the same ineluctable pressures that now afflict Europe, and find that we are immobilized at the exact moment China and India are passing us by? "
Comment:I read this piece and saw that it was informed and presents some decent logic and reason - enough to make me thinking.
Then the tag line - the final summarization - "the exact moment China and India are passing us by" - I'm now confused - passing us by in what? Their cultures have always had more respect for their elders and seniors than do American. And those models operate under communist systems and a social cast system.
Am I to understand that Mr Brooks is advocating that our national economic output is more important than the standards of living for the people? Is he advocating Communism for taking care of retirees?
The lack of a mention of China and India in this preceeding logic, leads to the notion that economic output is the thing, Mr Brooks feels that US is lacking.
So can it be said that reaching the global finish line first in terms of economic output is more important than support our retirees? It is better to be ahead of China and India than to have a lower economic output and also taking care of folks who need to be caring.
So then why donate to Tsunami Relief?
Issue: ABC News: Poll: Outlook for 2005 Is Less Bright
Specific: "Optimism for the Year Ahead
Personal Optimism Global Optimism
Dec. 2004 66%54%
Dec. 2003 85 69
Dec. 2002 63 43
Dec. 2001 80 62"
Comment: Note the drop from 85 to 65 percent. Does this indicate a failure in the sampling methodology to take into account the "Red States"? Are they only polling Dems or people in the "Blue" states.
Specific: "Optimism for the Year Ahead
Personal Optimism Global Optimism
Dec. 2004 66%54%
Dec. 2003 85 69
Dec. 2002 63 43
Dec. 2001 80 62"
Comment: Note the drop from 85 to 65 percent. Does this indicate a failure in the sampling methodology to take into account the "Red States"? Are they only polling Dems or people in the "Blue" states.
Issue of the Day:ABC News: House GOP Giving Ground on Ethics Rules
Specific: "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay ponders a question during a press conference in Houston in this Oct. 22, 2004 file photo. House Republicans suddenly reversed course Monday, Jan. 3, 2005 deciding to retain a tough standard for lawmaker discipline and reinstating a rule that would force Majority Leader Tom DeLay to step aside if indicted by a Texas grand jury. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)"
Comment: What do you believe? Does this mean that the Republicans had an "oops"? Does this mean the party mentality has changed? Is this a shift away from a power only focus?
I suspect that it means that Delay has found another way to dodge the bullet and does not believe he will be indicted. Tom Delay does not feel that he did anything wrong - afterall this is standard for Washington Hardball politics - so he is entitled.
Republican do not seek out good ideas and good governance, they have to "react" after the case. The President's leadership on the Tsunami relief is supports this notion.
Specific: "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay ponders a question during a press conference in Houston in this Oct. 22, 2004 file photo. House Republicans suddenly reversed course Monday, Jan. 3, 2005 deciding to retain a tough standard for lawmaker discipline and reinstating a rule that would force Majority Leader Tom DeLay to step aside if indicted by a Texas grand jury. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)"
Comment: What do you believe? Does this mean that the Republicans had an "oops"? Does this mean the party mentality has changed? Is this a shift away from a power only focus?
I suspect that it means that Delay has found another way to dodge the bullet and does not believe he will be indicted. Tom Delay does not feel that he did anything wrong - afterall this is standard for Washington Hardball politics - so he is entitled.
Republican do not seek out good ideas and good governance, they have to "react" after the case. The President's leadership on the Tsunami relief is supports this notion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)