Let Me Paraphrase President Bush's speech tonight:

[PoBoy321]

I didn't get a chance to watch the speech, but how many times did he say "We're working hard and making progress"?

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't get a chance to watch the speech, but how many times did he say "We're working hard and making progress"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I searched the transcripts. He didn't say it(I was surprised too). FWIW he did mention 911 once.

Stu

[sweetjazz]

I am a pretty big critic of Bush's timing of the Iraq war and his handling of the situation there after the invasion. And I think many of his domestic policies are seriously flawed.

In spite of that, I think it is a shame that your summary is all you took out of Bush's speech, or at least that is the attitude you chose to convey. While I think there are legitimate criticisms of Bush's speech, it also had some valid points and was a move toward improving the quality of the debate about Iraq and trying to build a consensus. This is something Bush has been pretty poor at in the past and something he still struggles with -- but this speech was something that his critics can work with if they choose to.

It is unfortunate that you, just as Bush has done many times, have chosen to hear and see only what you want to.

[ QUOTE ]
I am a pretty big critic of Bush's timing of the Iraq war and his handling of the situation there after the invasion. And I think many of his domestic policies are seriously flawed.

In spite of that, I think it is a shame that your summary is all you took out of Bush's speech, or at least that is the attitude you chose to convey. While I think there are legitimate criticisms of Bush's speech, it also had some valid points and was a move toward improving the quality of the debate about Iraq and trying to build a consensus. This is something Bush has been pretty poor at in the past and something he still struggles with -- but this speech was something that his critics can work with if they choose to.

It is unfortunate that you, just as Bush has done many times, have chosen to hear and see only what you want to.

[/ QUOTE ]
Improving the quality of debate about Iraq? Seems to me there wasn't any room for debate according to Bush(You're either with us or against us). But now that his ratings have fallen off a cliff he wants to build a consensus. Give me a break.

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
Improving the quality of debate about Iraq? Seems to me there wasn't any room for debate according to Bush(You're either with us or against us). But now that his ratings have fallen off a cliff he wants to build a consensus.


[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY! Bush was wrong initially. He was deservedly criticized by many people. This led to political pressure which has forced him to change his position and accept that there is more subtlety to the matter and that a consensus approach to Iraq is better than listening to only half of the ideas out there. It's a shame that he took so long to get to this point, but at least he's finally willing to listen (or at least getting there).

[ QUOTE ]

Give me a break.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't about Bush and whether he's a good person or not. It's about having the chief executive make the best decisions for America. He has not, in my opinion, succeeded at this when it comes to Iraq (and I don't really care to dwell on why any more than is necessary). He is now showing a willingness to change his tune and I think his policies are getting better, but are still flawed. Rather than dwell on his past mistakes to try to let out my frustration or feel smug about myself, I want to acknowledge what I think is right and explain what I think is still wrong.

But that's just me, and one of the main reasons I am becoming as disillusioned with the "left" in this country as I am with the "right." The world is a lot more complex and policy decisions are a lot harder than moveon.org and powerlineblog.com would have you believe.

[ QUOTE ]
It's about having the chief executive make the best decisions for America.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wake me up when he starts doing this.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
In spite of that, I think it is a shame that your summary is all you took out of Bush's speech, or at least that is the attitude you chose to convey. While I think there are legitimate criticisms of Bush's speech, it also had some valid points and was a move toward improving the quality of the debate about Iraq and trying to build a consensus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, consensus building typically revolves around taking your critics out to the woodshed and calling them defeatists.

The quality of debate has clearly improven if you're a strident right-winger, as the President said exactly what you wanted to hear: vocal critics are mere dishonest defeatists, who criticize for their own sheer 'partisan uses' in a way that 'is not justified by the facts'.

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In spite of that, I think it is a shame that your summary is all you took out of Bush's speech, or at least that is the attitude you chose to convey. While I think there are legitimate criticisms of Bush's speech, it also had some valid points and was a move toward improving the quality of the debate about Iraq and trying to build a consensus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, consensus building typically revolves around taking your critics out to the woodshed and calling them defeatists.

The quality of debate has clearly improven if you're a strident right-winger, as the President said exactly what you wanted to hear: vocal critics are mere dishonest defeatists, who criticize for their own sheer 'partisan uses' in a way that 'is not justified by the facts'.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've mastered one of Bush's (and moveon.org's) common techniques: taking quotes out of context and trying to suggest that they say something other than what they did.

He did not say that all vocal critics are defeatists, but said that some are. I believe he hides behind this criticism too much, but unfortunately the hardcore prominent leftists keeps strengthening his case here by making criticisms that are so over the top that they have lost credibility to moderates.

He dismisses the extreme leftwing criticisms of the war, and he is right to do so. Unfortunately, he does try to use that as a rhetorical tool to downplay the legitimate criticisms of people who take the time to try in good faith to understand his perspective and still find it flawed.

Still, you have selectively quoting only what you wanted to hear and see. The reality is that while the Bush speech still had some serious flaws, it was better than previous ones and was the most significant concession of error he has made to this point. He made a limited and perhaps begrudging move toward opening the door for well-developed criticisms that accept what the situation in Iraq is, regardless of whether they agree we should have been there in the first place.

I am a Bush critic. I just care about developing better policies and convincing others to support them, and I find it both intellectually lazy and practically counterproductive to dwell on my personal feelings toward Bush. Your hatred and fervor toward Bush is no less irrational than that of conservatives towrards people like the Clintons.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
The reality

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently 'reality' is now just synonymous with 'my opinion'; I suppose we can forgive the occasional human tendency to disregard the distinctions between the two, but keep in mind that 'reality' probably has a narrower definition than your use of it here.

[ QUOTE ]
I just care about developing better policies and convincing others to support them, and I find it both intellectually lazy and practically counterproductive to dwell on my personal feelings toward Bush.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Your hatred and fervor toward Bush is no less irrational than that of conservatives towrards people like the Clintons.

[/ QUOTE ]

So I'm engaged in dishonest tactics by 'taking quotes out of context' -- and yet you're debating 'honestly' by levying the charge of me having an irrational hatred of President Bush, despite the fact that no where in this thread (or any thread) have I said anything that could legitimately be construed as demonstrating a 'hatred' for the President.

1) I don't hate President Bush. On a personal level, he seems like a rather decent person for whom I have absolutely no qualms with.

2) You claim to find 'developing better policies and convincing others to support them' intellectually stimulating and highly productive; and yet your conduct throughout this thread has has been to lament about the disingenuous debating tactics of others by engaging in your own brand of unfounded demagoguery (yes, making exaggerated claims about your opponents over-emotional irrationality is an act that needlessly adds emotion to a debate). So it seems as though you find hypocrisy to be intellectually stiumlating and highly productive as well.

Again, to answer your concerns: I have absolutely no emotional disagreements with President Bush - I think he's a fine person, I just disagree with his policies. I too find dwelling on my own personal feelings to be intellectually lazy and practically counterproductive, which is why I haven't bothered (up until now) discussing any of my personal feelings.

May I suggest ending the moral posturing, as lame faux-intellectual moralizing is tedious, and come join the rest of us in the mud. It's not all that shameful. Truth be told, you're already here, as you've shown absolutely no hesitation to levy unfounded criticisms against those you disagree with; so just do fairness a favor and end the hypocrisy.

Respectfully, DVaut1 (I noticed the abrupt end to the 'respectfully' signatures you were ending your posts with; what happened?)

[sweetjazz]

DV,

You are absolutely right re my commment about irrational hatred of Bush. I was projecting onto you what I believe to have observed of other people who argue passionately about Bush. That is not fair to you, and it was a result of my being too passionate about what I believe in that I made an implicit claim that turned out not to be true.

Respectfully,
Mike

PS - I don't know why I put 'respectfully' signatures on any of my replies, but you deserve it as well. Sorry for the omission.