[Harold Mayo]

Here is an article from my local paper concerning Dubya. I have not named the paper or the name of the writer because I am not certain of copyright stuff but here's the text:

BUSH'S IMAGE IS BASED ON HYPE


I recently stumbled across a publication that labeled President George W. Bush as a great leader. With my interest being piqued by such a statement, I read the article in its entirety, desperately searching for characteristics that would convince me of his greatness.
Needless to say, I wasn't convinced. Apparently my idea of a "great leader" is a bit different from that of the author's.
Granted that Bush is "the leader of the free world", he does not have any accomplishments or possess any qualities of a great leader.
Let's take a look at his record at this point:

1. After barely squeezing through the outdated loophole of the electoral college, the man who is considered the best candidate for the position by less than half of the voters is inaugurated as the 43rd president of the United States of America.
2. Under his administration, the economic boom of the Clinton/Gore years comes to an abrupt halt.
3. After the events of 9/11, the president declares vengeance on all of those responsible, creates a posse in true Texan fashion and begins the Middle Eastern witch hunt. After the dust settles, Bush has little to show for his parading around the desert, and oh-so-gracefully directs his anger toward the primary target in the "axis of evil"-Iraq.
4. Once again, Bush has nothing to show for his endeavors in Iraq. His administration continues to assert that "we will find weapons of mass destruction". All the while, intelligence sources have yet to confirm that there was enough evidence to even suspect, much less be convinced, that biological or chemical weapons were held within the nation.
The one statement that I hear the most in support of George W. Bush is that he held the nation together after catastrophe. If "held the nation together" equals "acted quickly and illogically", then yes, he did a beautiful job. Mr. Potato Head could not have done any better himself. Our president did nothing to uplift, encourage or inspire the people. He hasn't expanded our country's definition of reality or changed our beliefs. He doesn't have a dream or a vision. He just has a vendetta.
Great leaders increase morale. They challenge the people to think toward the future, not dwell on events of the past. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi and Adolf Hitler were all great leaders. They developed, changed and inspired. King took his meager beginnings and paved the way for the quality of an entire race. Hitler convinced an entire nation under economic turmoil that he had the answers. He instilled pride, courage, identity and a willingness to follow his direction within the German people. Bush has merely implemented paranoia, fear, distrust and confusion.
Kudos to President Bush for winning the election and maintaining such a high percentage of support. Apparently, it doesn't take a great leader to please the American people.

[Harold Mayo]

And my response/letter to the editor...

[Harold Mayo]

Hmm...not very neat when converted to a text file but, when cutting and pasting from MS Word to THR, the formatting was weird. Oh, well...the text of the letter is there. Forgive me for my cutting and pasting ignorance...

[rrader]

You wrote a great response to that letter.

Only a complete idiot would say Hitler was a "great leader." World's foremost necrophile is more like it.

[SIGarmed]

The writer brings up hitler. :confused:
He totally discredited himself.

[dinosaur]

Considering the author is not comparing Bush to Hitler, he negated his own point.

He must be a fan of Alzheimer Molly Ivans. His piece made about as much sense as her ramblings.:cuss:

[Tamara]

1. After barely squeezing through the outdated loophole of the electoral college,

All the rest of the article aside, does anyone care to wager that if it had been a Democrat that had squeaked in via an electoral college majority, we'd be hearing the praises of this valuable counter to the tyranny of the big, rich states?

[Waitone]

Your thread would have had a greater impact if you included the URL and a copy of the article. As it stands now it is a disembodied screed coming from anywhere written by anyone. There is no problem with posting an article as long as full references are cited.

[Partisan Ranger]

That 'outdated loophole' prevents the fine citizens of LA, NYC, and Chicago from deciding for the entire nation who our president will be.

The electoral college is what prevents us from being a, God forbid, direct democracy.

But I'm not surprised this nimrod blasts the college. Most leftists lack the intellectual horsepower to understand why it's a good thing.

[Harold Mayo]

Waitone, there is no URL for the article itself. It is a piece out of the local paper.

THEIR site:

www.paragoulddailypress.com

[AJ Dual]

I love it when liberals set themselves up like this, it's almost too easy...

. After barely squeezing through the outdated loophole of the electoral college, the man who is considered the best candidate for the position by less than half of the voters is inaugurated as the 43rd president of the United States of America.

Okay then, if it's so outdated lobby your representatives to call a constitutional convention and pass an ammendment, have at it. Also, I might point out that Clinton/Gore had less than 50% of the popular vote in both elections prior to 2000, so arguably had less of a "mandate" than Bush ever did.

Under his administration, the economic boom of the Clinton/Gore years comes to an abrupt halt.

That should read, "Under his administration, the economic boom of the Clinton/Gore years comes to an abrupt halt after 8 years of every thinkable attack and tax levied apon it possible, and luckily is already showing signs of reversing itself, inconveniently far from the 2004 elections for the Democrats, no doubt. And even taking the overly simplistic view of which president is at the helm when the economy goes south at face value, it also inconveniently started under Clinton's watch, and the liberal pundits only excuse at the time was that President Bush, not yet even in office was "talking down the economy". Please. :rolleyes:

After the events of 9/11, the president declares vengeance on all of those responsible, creates a posse in true Texan fashion and begins the Middle Eastern witch hunt. After the dust settles, Bush has little to show for his parading around the desert, and oh-so-gracefully directs his anger toward the primary target in the "axis of evil"-Iraq.

Uh, little to show for it? Afghanistan liberated, the majority of AlQueida's infrastructure disrupted, and the middle east reminded we do indeed mean business, and perhaps they'd better clean up thier own affairs before we do it for them?

Once again, Bush has nothing to show for his endeavors in Iraq.... Mahatma Gandhi...

Okay, this rambling is a bit long so I'm only picking out a few highlights. By "nothing to show for his endeavors" I suppose that even if we never find a WMD, the Iraqi people didn't deserve liberation, and that mass graves and torture rooms are only important when a Democrat is in the white house. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I forgot that only liberals could be concerned about human rights. Silly me.

And even Mahatma Gandhi said that when the only choice is cowardice or violence, even he would choose violence.

Do I think Bush is a 'great' leader? No, probably not. I have a great deal of issues that I am dissapointed in the president with. Frankly we have the first nominally conservative majority in both houses of Congress and a Republican in the White Hosue, and this potentially brief opportunity should be seized to undo as much of the last 60 years of Faustian socialisim that has been foisted upon us, and that he is in fact giving too much away trying to be "reasonable", and attempting to build "consensus".

But I do think he's a good leader and a damn sight better than the alternatives. Frankly all this bluster about Bush is really nothing more than sour grapes that history decided to start again while a Republican was in the White House.

[mjydrafter]

The origianal letter isn't worthy of lining a birdcage, typical lieberal drivel.

The response is absolutely great.

Only a complete idiot would say Hitler was a "great leader."

I will state first and foremost that I am no fan of Adolf Hitler. But I would'nt go so far to say he wasn't a great leader. Not great in the traditional sense, (like Ghandi or King), but he he was able to effectively lead people. I would also just like to highlight the fact that I in no way endorse Hitler or his idealogies. I think some historians would argue that he had a greater impact on the world than Ghandi, King, or The Great Bill Clintoon...I don't think Hitlers dubious "greatness" takes anything away from the other leaders greatness, he was just great in another way (evil). Sorry to get so off topic here.

[Ol' Badger]

Just like to say "Great Article" man. I was unable to go poop for two days and that cleaned me right out. Thanks!

[DRC]

"Also, I might point out that Clinton/Gore had less than 50% of the popular vote in both elections prior to 2000, so arguably had less of a "mandate" than Bush ever did."

Actually they won by getting less than 50% of the 1/4 of registered voters that turned out to vote in '92. To simplify it even more they didn't even get 1/2 the votes from the 25% that turned out to vote and only a fraction more in '96. I liked the fact that they use to say that "America has spoken" and wanted what they had to offer. In reality the minority was speaking for the rest of us unfortunately. Shame on those that won't exercise their right to vote.

Take care, just thought you might find that intresting

DRC

[Monkeyleg]

After campaigning heavily for years, Bill Clinton received roughly 44 million votes in 1992. By point of contrast, Oprah Winfrey has 26 million viewers in one week.

Using the writer's logic, Winfrey should be president.

And if I hear one more Bush-basher say that he has wrecked the "Clinton economy" and cost us millions of jobs, I'll wring the little twit's turkey neck.