I wonder if the networks are really going to be such lapdogs for Bush that they allow him to use their airtime, without balance, to stand on the 9/11 corpses to hold on to the Republican majority?
President Bush will make a prime-time address from the Oval Office on Monday to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration had requested network time for the address at 9:01 p.m. ET. The address is expected to run 16 to 18 minutes, he said.
For the Bush administration, 9/11 has never been more than a backdrop.
For a rebuttal, simply show him reading his little kiddy book about a goat while several thousand Americans are being murdered on 9-11.
Democrats: Standing against Freedom of Speech since 2001.
After all, who does he think he is: the President or something?
I can just see it. Bush makes no speech. OW Headline: Bush dishonors 9/11 victims!!! Ignores victims of terrorism. Vote for any Demmcorat!
Uh- Oliver? Would you not expect the President of the United States to address the nation on the 5th Anniversary of such an event?
Not just this president- ANY President?
I think you’re losing it.
By the way- it’s not THEIR airtime. It’s OUR airtime (all of us.) But I know how worried you are about their profits.
I think it’s important that the President (no matter who he is) be able to request and receive airtime on the national networks whenever he wants it. He is, after all, the President, and we should all pay attention to what he has to say.
Now, the corollary of that is the President should only request airtime when he truly has something important to say. Commemmorating the 5th anniversary of 9/11 in what “just happens” to be an election year (and less than two months from election day) only just barely qualifies. I think the Democratic leadership has a duty to point this out, emphasize that we ALL feel strongly about 9/11, and point out too that the President has failed miserably in his efforts to protect Americans while getting us bogged down in a totally unrelated adventure in Iraq. Talk about dishonoring the 9/11 victims!
So Rob- You’ve already read teh speech?
Hmm- The President of the United States of America making a live national address on the 5th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is “dishonoring the 9/11 victims.”
I guess you wish we could move the 5th anniversary to another year. WTF are you people afraid of?
Wouldn’t the speech preempt part of the ABC mockumentary?
I wonder if the chimperor will mention Osama? I know he doesn’t think about him much but still…
Whatyou talkin’ bout Willis?
Is it the fact that recent polls show that even though most Americans think Bush has messed up in Iraq, they believe Democrats are not the answer to fight terrorism. Is that why you are afraid of the President talking to America about terrorism.
“Is it the fact that recent polls show that even though most Americans think Bush has messed up in Iraq, they believe Democrats are not the answer to fight terrorism.”
Opt-in polls at Newsmax don’t count, Prez.
6. Which political party, the (Democrats) or the (Republicans), do you trust to do a better job handling (ITEM)?
b. The U.S. campaign against terrorism:
Democrats: 46
Republicans: 38
Link.
Read ‘em weep.
I think a more appropriate time for a national memorial led by the president would be 12 hours earlier. Prime time seems more like political grandstanding.
He could lead the country in a reading of My Pet Goat
Bush Defends Record, Cites Progress in Iraq
President Bush defends his administration’s response to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The president
See, if the President DIDN’T ask for Sep 11 airtime to make a speech, this post would read – “Bush hates America – won’t talk to the nation on Sep 11″
Oliver – always good for some laughs.
OW – Dugger and SaveFarris are right. It is indeed appropriate for the President to address the nation at this time. I think you are trying to equate this with the Reagan funeral. That was a partisan stunt designed to increase poll numbers and serve as a campaign ad.
Now, that being said. Wouldn’t it be interesting if the ABC disclaimer ran during his speech as opposed to during their miniseries?
Give me a break. When has this administration EVER done anything that wasn’t a political stunt? At 16-18 minutes (estimated, mind you), what’s he going to do, read all the names of everyone killed? Why doesn’t he just lead the nation in a moment of silence to commemorate those lost? My guess is his speech will run something like this:
1.)Greet Americans and briefly recall the events of 9/11 five years ago.
2.)Make a note of how America, undaunted by those who hate our freedoms, moved quickly into Afghanistan and defeated the Taliban and replaced oppression with a beaming new icon of democracy.
3.)Oh, but wait, the long fight against Islamofascism is a long and hard road, which is why we invaded Iraq and dethroned Saddam Hussein. We are liberators bringing democracy to the oppressed. Al Qaeda hopes to weaken our resolve, but we are winning and MUST stay the course.
4.)Just look at all the major plots that we have foiled. Thanks to me the Brooklyn Bridge will never be felled by blowtorch, nor will any plane be felled by Coke and Mentos.
5.)There are those who would have us turn our backs on this fight, but to them I say we must persevere. Appeasing the enemy has never been a path to victory.
6.)Oh, and don’t forget Hezbollah and Israel and Hamas…ehhh…ummm…9-11…9-11…terrorism
…terrorism…God loves me…I mean us…God loves us. thank you, good night, God bless, and enjoy the kool aid.
Maybe he’ll have the brains to play it straight and try to pass himself off as genuinly sympathetic to the victims of 9-11. I have a hard time seeing that though, given the abuse of 9-11 as a political crutch by this crew. We’ll see, I guess.
Hey, farris, who said Bush shouldn’t be allowed to speak?
One wonders how come Bush gave no speech on the other anniversaries, when his approval numbers weren’t sub-40.
It may well be far more subtle than a simple campaign ad. If W plans his address for 9pm on 9/11, then the ABC “Path to 9/11″ crockumentary will have run its entire first episode the previous night (which would be the part where Clinton didn’t push the button to fire the anti-Osama missile because he was too busy getting blown), and most of the second half (the part where Vince Foster is giving Mohammed Atta flying lessons). Thus ABC would have to break into the broadcast conveniently right around the part where Bush was deciding clearing brush was more fun than listening to boring reports about “Bin Laden determined to strike inside the US”.
I’m sure the President’s address would be over just in time for the scene of him standing in the rubble with the bullhorn saying “they’ll hear all of us soon!” though.
O’Dub, is there anything the President can’t do that isn’t a campaign speech?
Ugh.
“One wonders how come Bush gave no speech on the other anniversaries, when his approval numbers weren’t sub-40.”
Oliver, you’ve obviously led a very sheltered life and don’t get out much, so I’ll let you in on a little secret: Anniversaries that end in either a 5 or an 0 tend to be more significant than the ones that end in other numbers. It’s the reason people go to five year and ten year high school reunions rather than 4 or 6 year reunions.
Cripes, even i admit that Bush has politicized 9-11 on occasion, and I don’t wanna say that was the dumbest thing Oliver ever said because it has so much competition, but what an idiotic statement.
I say let him speak. Everytime this man tries to “lead” or speak, he falls flat on his face. Could it be a political stunt? Sure, but the Republicans rhetoric is soo hollow, that only people who worship the man like a golden calf(Most of the cons on this page.) believe his message. I think if he was smart he would NOT talk. This man is the antithesis of having the Midas Touch. Of course, is there a cabinet member that doesn’t put thier foot in thier mouth when speaking?
O’Dub, is there anything the President can’t do that isn’t a campaign speech?
Ian: See photo, two posts down.
Jeez you’re touchy, Marty. I said he should be allowed to speak whenever he wants to; it’s simply his responsibility to ensure that he does so for truly national purposes, and not for purely partisan ones. As things stand, it’s going to be very hard for him to avoid being seen as using this as a publicity stunt. Not that it’s impossible, but I doubt he can or will do it right.
Looks like it’s time for a reality check, from the brilliant intellect of John Forbes Kerry:
For the record, the Pentagon was struck 34 minutes (9:37 AM) after the second WTC tower (9:03 AM).
So Kerry, Boxer, Reid, and Daschle sat in Daschle’s office FOR OVER HALF AN HOUR and “nobody could think.”
And President Bush is a moron because he read to children for ten minutes, and didn’t jump up and run out of the room screaming orders?
Boy, I’m just chomping at the bit to have this bunch of geniuses at the helm of government again.
Past American presidents have understood the role of National Leader versus Party Leader and that the two are not the same thing – this includes people as diverse as Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and FDR.
I missed the point where Sens. Kerry, Boxer, Reid or Daschle had the executive power of the White House.
“And President Bush is a moron because he read to children for ten minutes, and didn’t jump up and run out of the room screaming orders?”
Yes.
He failed to react immediately and vigorously. He failed to show leadership in a time of crisis. He is being paid to be a strong leader and to take charge when our country is threatened. He didn’t do that. He should have stood up immediately, said “I’m sorry kids, but something terrible has happened and I have to go be President now,” and left for AF One. He didn’t do that. He should not have remained incomunicado for 12 hours or however long it was that he was orbiting in AF One while the military verified there were no further threats to his life; that may have been their procedure, but as President he is their boss and he is expected to be visibly in charge; he needed to be making statements from the air within the hour, or at least be shown by the media (who were undoubtedly present or should have been) taking briefings and giving orders. If he’s this strong leader, why wasn’t he LEADING?
I don’t know if you’re aware of this but KERRY REID BOXER AND DASCHLE WERE AND ARE NOT THE GODDAMNED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNLIKE THE OTHER GUY YOU MENTIONED
“So Kerry, Boxer, Reid, and Daschle sat in Daschle’s office FOR OVER HALF AN HOUR and “nobody could think.”
And President Bush is a moron because he read to children for ten minutes, and didn’t jump up and run out of the room screaming orders?”
To whom would any Senator be in a position to scream orders at? Naybe they could have roused up a posse of pages to make paper airplanes to intercept the other 2 planes still out there looking for targets.
Let Bush speak. A lot of people I know get really annoyed when their favorite show is pre-empted by the stammering faux-boy.
His poll numbers go down as a result, and the 2/3 of the country who know they’ve been scammed will watch the Antique Road Show or something else that is not political.
Bush still thinks 5 years later that he hit the trifecta because of 9/11. Those of us stuck with the losing tickets know exactly what he meant. Check please!
Jeez Mike, you make it too easy.
How long is “shortly thereafter” Mike? Two minutes? Ten minutes? Thirty?
Truth is, we don’t know. Now if somebody had videotape of Kerry just sitting there all that time, doing nothing, biting his lip, waiting…waiting…for something….
Well, that would be embarrassing, wouldn’t it?
Oliver,
Maybe you missed the entire 2004 presidential election cycle. The Democrat nominee for President was John F. Kerry. He was the intellectual, remember? He had a secret plan to fix everything. Intellectuals and brilliant combat leaders (Kerry served in Vietnam, just in case you didn’t know) aren’t supposed to be dumbstruck during crises.
And Quaker, are you suggesting that Kerry et. al. mysteriously stopped thinking only after they sat down? What do they make those Capitol building tables out of? Kryptonite? For logical deduction, that is pretty pathetic.
And President Bush is a moron because he read to children for ten minutes, and didn’t jump up and run out of the room screaming orders?
Nice framing. Why should the issuing of orders require screaming? Are you saying that Mr. Bush is incapable issuing orders without screaming? Why would you say that about him?
He was so casual that he had time to stop outside the school and pose for some photos. Help me here. How did the pause for a photo-op figure into the response to an attack on the United States?
No, he is a moron because he didn’t rise from his chair, stride purposefully from the room to the nearest secure communication (HIS CAR) and start talking the the JCS.
He is a moron because the videotape shows him looking confused, scared and disoriented, and reading a kid’s book instead of acting like a leader.
He is a moron because he did stuff only a moron would do.
Everytime I think we’ve found the stupidest troll in the world, up pops another dead ender. Hi Mike!
” are you suggesting that Kerry et. al. mysteriously stopped thinking only after they sat down?”
No, I’m not.
Read the statement you posted once more:
What happened first, Mike?
Kerry, Daschle, Boxer, and Reid go into a meeting, yes?
Next, they see the second plane hit the tower on TV.
Sometime later (we’re not sure how much later) they all sit down.
Why? They’re having a meeting!
Then what happens? They realize they can’t think about the meeting. Do you suppose they were all there thinking about nothing at all? About the Red Sox’ chances in the playoffs? About what to have for lunch?
My guess is they were thinking about the crash. Wild speculation, I’ll grant you.
Then what happened? Another plane crash.
Now somehow out of this, you find justification for Mr. Bush to hang out in a classroom full of third graders reading about a goat, stopping off to shake a few hands and pose for a few pics.
Maybe that makes sense to you. It doesn’t to me.
This is an unserious criticism of Bush.
Of course, the worst thing the President could have done was to panic or to act before he had a more comprehensive picture of what was going on. Be realistic. He has numerous professional advisors there whose number one job is to advise him on what to do in in a crisis. I imagine one consideration was: is it really safe for AF1 to go in the air. Another would be to decide whre to go. Back to Washington, Barksdale, whatever. Another would be to carry on and reassure the American people. A presdient running off in panic, as progressives seem to suggest Bush should have done, sends the country the wrong message.
Doctors don’t panic in an emergency. They just get busy doing what they have to do. And that’s Bush’s failure. He did NOTHING at all..not address the country, not pick up a phone, not even turn on the television set to find out what the news was saying. And he had an obligation to leave as soon as he found out: after all, nobody then knew the full paramaters of the plot or whether or not it was really over. He should have recognized that he was indeed a target, if not of terrorists , of the press following him with cameras. He could have endangered those kids by his presence. Nor was it a moment of panic, followed by determination to find out what was going on or what was being done. Any other President would have immediately gone back to his limo to make some phone calls and watch the portable tv. I bet Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Daddy One, or Clinton would have been addressing the nation by noon at the lastest, even if the only thing they could have said was that they were working on the problem, and that they sympathised with those who had lost loved ones.
Bush ran to Nebraska and hid, leaving America to wonder where their President was on one of the darkest days since 11/22/63.
There were other options available to him. He didn’t have to choose between running away in panic or staying to finish the goat book. It would have been okay if after Card had told him we were under attack he simply told the class something had happened that required his immediate attention, thanked them, and started acting like the Commander-in-Chief. Bottom line; without someone to tell him what to do he froze.
“… or to act before he had a more comprehensive picture of what was going on.”
Dugger, for seven minutes Bush neither ran out nor received any kind of information. He just sat there. Indeed, the only information he had for seven minutes was “America is under attack.” And yet for seven minutes he made no decision, he took no action, he did nothing. Then he did run off in a panic.
He was nowhere to be seen or heard from for hours after the incident. He made a brief announcement at 9:30am from the school then nothing until 8:30 that night. He disappeared for the rest of the day. It’s unserious not to ask question about Bush’s performance that day. The man froze.
Putting aside the ridiculous comparison of 3 senators stunned by events but remaining in Washington and struggling to think of a plan of action and “President” Bush’s failure to so much as show his face for 12+ hours, why the hell didn’t the Secret Service grab Bush and shuffle him out of that school the second it was clear major trouble was afoot? Bush’s itinerary was public knowledge. Shouldn’t proper procedure have dictated he be shuffled to a secure location until the all clear was given? Don’t we have an entire facility built underground for just such emergencies where presidents can hunker down and continue to lead the nation in safety? WTF? It would be nice to have a commission with some teeth do some investigating instead of the neutered 9-11 commission that seemed more intent on spreading the blame so thin that no one would be held accountable while avoiding many troubling and still unresolved issues.
“Oliver, you’ve obviously led a very sheltered life and don’t get out much, so I’ll let you in on a little secret: Anniversaries that end in either a 5 or an 0 tend to be more significant than the ones that end in other numbers. It’s the reason people go to five year and ten year high school reunions rather than 4 or 6 year reunions.” Cyrus
My pick for biggest bs comment on this post.
Hasn’t 9/11 been Patriot Day since 2003? Since it’s an official day of observance, there is no such thing as a milestone year.
A presdient running off in panic, as progressives seem to suggest Bush should have done, sends the country the wrong message.
Rats.
Off.
Off.
Out, damned tag.
Yes, the 5-year anniversary of 9/11 is indeed worthy of presidential comment. It will neither make nor break the Bush presidency or the GOP mid-term campaign.
Damn right there’s politics mixed up in all of this. As it should be.
Well, Bush made his speech and, surprise surprise, quickly moved on to Iraq and made his usual “stay the course” pitch.
As predicted.
What do I win?
Do Bush humpers ever tire of being so relentlessly wrong?
Bush made speech No. 4, his stay the course speech in Iraq, while cutting and running in Afghanistan.
He used a solemn occasion to piss on the grave of the 9/11 dead who STILL haven’t seen their killers brought to justice.
Amen.
Hmmm….just as I thought. Phrases such as “stand on the corpses” and “piss on the grave” might appeal to the hardcore Left, but rhetoric of this low comical calibre certainly doesn’t win elections. Democrats still insist on preaching to the choir and not the congregation. So be it. Your loss, our gain.