The true class of a president...

[highfigh]

The problem about whether someone is a great public speaker is that it's not a gauge for how they handle extreme situations. It's less about decision making than what is said and at times like those, sometimes not saying what people are thinking is best.

 

[emorphien]

I don't know what the chances are of another September 11th happening but I have to say that unarming pilots if a questionable move. I'd rather there not be guns on a plane but with the lack of a better alternative that is as effective what are you gonna do? There are maniacs who want to get on and crash planes, everyone else needs to be protected. Of course if Obama were to also relook at the notion of airport/airplane security I'd be interested in seeing what he'd propose. The whole system as it is now is just ludicrous and I don't think any of the nonsense of the past eight years have made us determinably safer in airports.

I agree that a war can't be micromanaged. I would think that while leadership and review of actions is needed by governing bodies, the micromanaging should be left to those in the thick of it. Unfortunately some of that micromanaging has gone on throughout the war be it a Republican or Democratically controlled congress.

Bush isn't always a great speaker but he has had some good moments. I thought he handled the post 9-11 speaches very well and was well composed (not all, but generally). I hope we don't have to find out how Obama would deal with this kind of thing but now that he ended the program with pilots carrying on flights, we just might.

I agree he had moments of clarity and came across well but overwhelmingly I felt he was a poor public speaker that did not do him or his political office any favors. Certainly I know this is not an opinion I am alone on. Bush's public speaking has been criticised by many, including for educational purposes specifically toward helping people improve their own public speaking.

Additionally regardless of how smart he may or may not actually be, his public speaking and demeanor did not do a particularly fantastic job of representing his intelligence.

The problem about whether someone is a great public speaker is that it's not a gauge for how they handle extreme situations. It's less about decision making than what is said and at times like those, sometimes not saying what people are thinking is best.

Of course, but how he is perceived as a result of his public speeches and behavior contributes to perception and in many ways perception is reality. That certainly contributes to a lack of confidence in decision making. Granted aside from that I still was not fond of his decision making, nor am I hugely fond of many decisions Obama is making. That's another story though.

 

[highfigh]

I don't know what the chances are of another September 11th happening but I have to say that unarming pilots if a questionable move. I'd rather there not be guns on a plane but with the lack of a better alternative that is as effective what are you gonna do? There are maniacs who want to get on and crash planes, everyone else needs to be protected. Of course if Obama were to also relook at the notion of airport/airplane security I'd be interested in seeing what he'd propose. The whole system as it is now is just ludicrous and I don't think any of the nonsense of the past eight years have made us determinably safer in airports.

I agree that a war can't be micromanaged. I would think that while leadership and review of actions is needed by governing bodies, the micromanaging should be left to those in the thick of it. Unfortunately some of that micromanaging has gone on throughout the war be it a Republican or Democratically controlled congress.

I agree he had moments of clarity and came across well but overwhelmingly I felt he was a poor public speaker that did not do him or his political office any favors. Certainly I know this is not an opinion I am alone on. Bush's public speaking has been criticised by many, including for educational purposes specifically toward helping people improve their own public speaking.

Additionally regardless of how smart he may or may not actually be, his public speaking and demeanor did not do a particularly fantastic job of representing his intelligence.

Of course, but how he is perceived as a result of his public speeches and behavior contributes to perception and in many ways perception is reality. That certainly contributes to a lack of confidence in decision making. Granted aside from that I still was not fond of his decision making, nor am I hugely fond of many decisions Obama is making. That's another story though.

Public speaking is far from the most important thing a President needs to do. I understand the function but a great speaker who makes all bad decisions would be far worse, IMO. I can't stand to hear most of his speeches either, but we all know that public speaking isn't easy and when that little voice says something about a 100 million person audience, most people will just go blank.

Re: airport security- If people could be trusted to not mail it in at work, we wouldn't have a lot of the problems we're facing now but I think someone has to realize that airport security is a position of responsibility and $9/hr isn't going to get anyone good. On planes, actual law enforcement personnel should be in place, armed and ready to take down anyone who might try to hijack a flight. Military personnel flying from one place to another would work for me, too. Even one would be better than what Obama is doing- he's hiring more supervisors.

This administration is going to bloat government to the point that only those in government will be secure in their jobs.

 

[Matt34]

The media does a great job of going on about everything, be it Bush's bad speeches or approval ratings or Clinton's infidelity (and subsequent lying which is bad), or Howard Dean's "yell."

That was one of the best Dave Chapelle skits!!

 

[emorphien]

Public speaking is far from the most important thing a President needs to do. I understand the function but a great speaker who makes all bad decisions would be far worse, IMO. I can't stand to hear most of his speeches either, but we all know that public speaking isn't easy and when that little voice says something about a 100 million person audience, most people will just go blank.

I'm not saying it's the most important thing, several people have tried to combine the several topics being discussed in this thread in to one thing as though they all imply or mean the same thing. Quality of public speaking does not necessarily correlate with ability to govern, but what I said was it does contribute to some people's opinion of performance in office.

Re: airport security- If people could be trusted to not mail it in at work, we wouldn't have a lot of the problems we're facing now but I think someone has to realize that airport security is a position of responsibility and $9/hr isn't going to get anyone good. On planes, actual law enforcement personnel should be in place, armed and ready to take down anyone who might try to hijack a flight. Military personnel flying from one place to another would work for me, too. Even one would be better than what Obama is doing- he's hiring more supervisors.

Agreed that's not going to work. Security at airports is a joke and probably just succeeds at making more people want to crash the damn airplanes.

This administration is going to bloat government to the point that only those in government will be secure in their jobs.

Defends on your definition of bloating government. I don't disagree, but many will argue (myself included) that the previous administration saw significant bloating of the government.

 

[highfigh]

I'm not saying it's the most important thing, several people have tried to combine the several topics being discussed in this thread in to one thing as though they all imply or mean the same thing. Quality of public speaking does not necessarily correlate with ability to govern, but what I said was it does contribute to some people's opinion of performance in office.


Agreed that's not going to work. Security at airports is a joke and probably just succeeds at making more people want to crash the damn airplanes.


Defends on your definition of bloating government. I don't disagree, but many will argue (myself included) that the previous administration saw significant bloating of the government.

People not knowing what the important qualities should be is dangerous.

If the last admin bloated government, this one is bloated squared.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... "I'm not going to spend my time criticizing him. There are plenty of critics in the arena," ....er.

I wonder what he really meant by that?

 

[emorphien]

People not knowing what the important qualities should be is dangerous.

Generally people know very little, that's just the way things are.

If the last admin bloated government, this one is bloated squared.

Again, matter of perspective. Depending on your particular beliefs, agenda or political leanings you might find the bloating of the previous administration to be severe. Things like the patriot act, department of homeland security, wiretapping, etc all expanded the governments functions, capabilities, presence, cost, power and/or more in various ways.

 

[highfigh]

Generally people know very little, that's just the way things are.

Again, matter of perspective. Depending on your particular beliefs, agenda or political leanings you might find the bloating of the previous administration to be severe. Things like the patriot act, department of homeland security, wiretapping, etc all expanded the governments functions, capabilities, presence, cost, power and/or more in various ways.

OK, but nobody has ever claimed that a bloated government is efficient, and we're paying far too much to run a government that couldn't be efficient if it tried. Also, by taking control of financial institutions and edging into manufacturing, we're just getting that much closer to Socialism.

 

[emorphien]

OK, but nobody has ever claimed that a bloated government is efficient, and we're paying far too much to run a government that couldn't be efficient if it tried. Also, by taking control of financial institutions and edging into manufacturing, we're just getting that much closer to Socialism.

Well obviously it's not terribly efficient. It wasn't efficient before and it certainly isn't now.

Regarding the current situation and taking control of financial institutions some of that is inherited and Obama is certainly driving other aspects of that. Whether we can fix the problems that way or not (or whether we can or should do anything directly) is a messy topic. It's a whole mix of things with various factors going back a ways and people on all sides holding some responsibilities for what has gone wrong. The problems I think are deeper than what just went wrong on Wall St. but that's the most immediate problem. I think there are a lot of factors in corporate culture outside of Wall St. that are having a corrosive effect as well.

 

[darien87]

This is where you I go wrong.

how can you admire Bush looking like a moron every time he opened his mouth?!?!

The difference between you and I is that regardless of my dislike for someone, or my disagreement with someone, I do my very best not to make silly blanket statements like that. You may disagree with Bush and you're one of the haters... I get all that. Calling our President a moron or suggesting he's a moron, or saying he's always looking like a moron... is that left style rhetoric which just reeks of false pompus arrogance as if you (not you specifically) are somehow privy to some higher understanding and that anyone who disagrees "just doesn't get it" somehow.

Sorry Chris, you can dislike my political stance all you want, but it doesn't change the fact other than his post-9/11 speech, I can't think of a single speech Bush made where he portrayed the polished, well-spoken, intelligent leader of the free world that he was supposed to be. Granted, I didn't watch every single speech Bush made, but EVERY ONE I saw, he came across, as smug, pig-headed, or just plain oafish. Does that mean Bush is stupid, not necessarily. But that is definitely the image he projected. I'm sorry, but public image is part of the job description of a politician, and Bush failed at this miserably. What upset me, is that, as my President, he was representing me, and I don't want to be portrayed as a stupid, arrogant American.

Also, don't try to just chalk this up to my "anti-Republican" bias. I never had a problem with Bush's dad, or Reagan. They were both good public speakers. I even liked McCain, (up until the last few months of the campaign).

As for W, you know what they say, "If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck....", well you know the rest.

 

[krzywica]

That was one of the best Dave Chapelle skits!!

OMG I forgot all about that....thanks for the instant chuckle Matt.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

Bush declined to critique the Obama administration in his first speech since leaving office in January. "I'm not going to spend my time criticizing him. There are plenty of critics in the arena," Bush said. "He deserves my silence."

Bush said he wants Obama to succeed and said it's important that he has that support. "I love my country a lot more than I love politics," Bush said. "I think it is essential that he be helped in office."

Stark contrast to some former Presidents, I'd say. Very much the difference between the love of your country vs the love of the power you have over her.

There has been a long standing gentleman agreement between current/former commander in chiefs. No former president ever criticizes a sitting president.

That agreement has stood the test of time until only just recently. The only two lacking the honor to comply just so happened to be a couple of classless hicks named Jimmy & Billy. They are the only two former C.I.C's classless enough to have ever traveled down that low road.

 

[highfigh]

Well obviously it's not terribly efficient. It wasn't efficient before and it certainly isn't now.

Regarding the current situation and taking control of financial institutions some of that is inherited and Obama is certainly driving other aspects of that. Whether we can fix the problems that way or not (or whether we can or should do anything directly) is a messy topic. It's a whole mix of things with various factors going back a ways and people on all sides holding some responsibilities for what has gone wrong. The problems I think are deeper than what just went wrong on Wall St. but that's the most immediate problem. I think there are a lot of factors in corporate culture outside of Wall St. that are having a corrosive effect as well.

I think it has to do with regulations that were placed on those sectors and if a government writes rules without considering how they can be abused, this kind of thing happens. The excuse is usually "Well, YOU wrote the regulations and we're just playing along". He inherited it chronologically- I'm not absolutely sure who is directly to blame but I'm positive it's a bit from column A and column B.

A Democratic Congress wants to regulate as much as possible and regardless of who writes and enacts the regulations, if they want to regulate, they need to pay attention to what's happening. Congress has been asleep at the wheel for far too long but this all can't be blamed on Bush. As a lame duck, he sure as hell couldn't get much credit for anything so, by the same token, he shouldn't get all of the blame, either.

 

[emorphien]

A Democratic Congress wants to regulate as much as possible and regardless of who writes and enacts the regulations, if they want to regulate, they need to pay attention to what's happening. Congress has been asleep at the wheel for far too long but this all can't be blamed on Bush. As a lame duck, he sure as hell couldn't get much credit for anything so, by the same token, he shouldn't get all of the blame, either.

Obviously not all Bush's fault at all, unfortunately Congress has not been doing its job well for many years and it isn't changing now. The overall combination of an unknown president and the defective congress certainly doesn't put me at ease.

Democratic regulation or Republican regulation though, they all have their projects that end up distracting from or confusing the real issues.

 

[highfigh]

Obviously not all Bush's fault at all, unfortunately Congress has not been doing its job well for many years and it isn't changing now. The overall combination of an unknown president and the defective congress certainly doesn't put me at ease.

Democratic regulation or Republican regulation though, they all have their projects that end up distracting from or confusing the real issues.

And this all is the basis for me wondering why people aren't clamoring for Congress to yank their collective head out and get do this right. It's not as if this is the first Congress, they have been doing it by the same basic rules for over 200 years but never has it been this out of control. They act like they're above the law, coated with Teflon and perfect. They work for us, not the other way around. They need a big boot in the azz, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Matt34]

OMG I forgot all about that....thanks for the instant chuckle Matt.

Crappy quality but here it is for people that don't know what we're talking about.


NSFW!!