argh.

[timepiececlock]

I fell asleep during Bush's press conference.

It was a comfy couch! And he's a lousy speaker.

Before I fell asleep (I was only out for about 10 minutes), the second question from the reporter had been asked, inquiring into why Bush thinks that there is so much opinion against the war around the world. It was very similar to part of the question before him, about why so many of the UN countries disagree with Bush on Iraq, considering that they share all the intelligence information.

Bush, in response, blather on about how "nobody wants war", and how this is the way Iraq chose to make it by not disarming, etc.

Me: He's not answering this guy's question. It's the same as the last guy's, about the other countries opposing, and he still didn't answer it.

'rent: He doesn't know why they don't.

Me: Then why doesn't he say that?

'rent: He can't say that.

Me: Yes he can. He should-- nevermind.

Comments

[caille.livejournal.com]

It's just that it's so much more complicated than Bush would have us believe. I have no problem at all with the concept of sending Saddam Hussein on a one-way trip to some hell dimension. But I don't think we should bully everyone into backing us. That's not the way. Also, I don't think Bush is up to the task of a post-war nation-building committment. We're talking 40 - 50 years. We've already burned Iraqui dissenters after the last war, when we just kind of left them hanging.

Meanwhile, he's so fixated on clearing his daddy's name in the middle east that he all but ignores North Korea (whose leader is insane)as it's busily gearing up to start making nuclear weapons, some for its own use, and some to cheerfully sell to the highest bin Laden, umm, bidder.

I understand the references to appeasement and Chamberlain. It's one of the reasons I have a hard time with the idea of joining a mass demonstration. It seems like the collective voice of those demonstrators doesn't have much of me in it. I'm more pragmatic than pacifistic. Why is it too much to ask for simple pragmatism in our elected leaders?

The states are suffering terribly. He wants to eliminate taxes on dividends, which will save me like $1.50 per year (and all of his friends - millions). We've abandoned human services agencies all around the world. I am all but priced out of both the health insurance market and the prescription drug market. I don't think Bush hates me, I just think he doesn't feel it necessary to think about people like me, not to mention people far less well off than I am. That's willful cluelessness.

About him not answering questions in his speech...this is from a Slate article
http://slate.msn.com/id/2079763/

"....But sometimes, things aren't black and white. Sometimes they're gray. When the governments of France, China, or Mexico don't see things your way, you have to start the process of persuasion by understanding where they're coming from. That's where Clinton was at his best and Bush is at his worst. Four times at his press conference, Bush was asked why other countries weren't seeing things our way. Four times, he had no idea....." (details follow).

I have to go lie down.

Re:

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

"Four times at his press conference, Bush was asked why other countries weren't seeing things our way. Four times, he had no idea....."

I knew I wasn't misinterpreting his response!

Thanks for the link, and I agree with a lot of your comments. I also would say I'm far more pragmatic than pacifistic, and my disagreement with current events is less of saying "war is bad" than a deep need to know why and what the hell we're doing before we commit ourselves to it.