Never mind on the video link, I found the audio on NPR.
Ugh, I couldn’t listen to more than a few minutes of his speech, and skipped to the questions/answers (if you can actually call them answers)…I couldn’t listen to all of that either, I just finished up by reading the transcript.
repeats the mantra “November is coming, November is coming, vote the bastard out, vote the bastard out”
The you really are fucked, but I’m just going to let other Americans respond to you, if they wish, as you’re probably pretty sure us old-worlders are jealous of your freedoms and Constitution and are just plain jealous.
Ftr, the man isn’t intellectually competent to be regional manager of a pizza chain, let alone a politician – in fact, he’s no politicain at all by any standard I recognise.
Hey hold on there an minute I’m as jealous as the next European of their freedoms but some of us do have a written constitution 
Then again, most Americans are probably not jealous of a system which guarantees that they cannot directly elect a leader.
Yeah, but your Constitution isn’t a 240-year old sitting duck. It’s an 80-year old sitting duck . . .
Quack!
Imagine being in a job interview and asked a question like this! Umm, I’m sure something will pop into my head.
Thank you. WE’LL call you…
This is actually a standard job interview tactic - “What do you feel your greatest weakness is?” And then you have to come up with something that only makes you look good - “I work too hard sometimes to maximize the company’s profits. I have to remember to take vacations every few years, just to keep fresh.” :rolleyes:
I’m not interested in turning this into a cock waving competition. My point – take it or leave it – is this (and I make it because it affects the entire world):
Any system that:
. . . and I suppose much more . . . is, imho, deeply flawed by default.
And I make that point because people in the thread are blaming Bush; Bush is doing exactly what he wants to do. And what the system allows him to do.
I’d urge people to recognise the President is a symptom.
I guess this sort of obsessive focus on America helps distract attention from Britons’ domestic problems.
Like wondering whether the home side will ever match the talents of the Pakistani and Indian cricketers. 
I begin to wonder what the 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate could get away with if Bush wins this election. Massive tax rises? Kyoto implementation? Universal healthcare? Abolition of the death penalty or the UNSC veto?
Four more years of having to show this aphasic gibbon off as their leader might ultimately bring the US electorate to vote a little more like the rest of the industrialised democratic world, perhaps for evermore.
It might even be worth it!
I think the estates of Howard, Howard, and Fine should sue Bush for copyright infringement. What a pathetic news conference this was. About the only way for him to display more shortcomings would be to pull down his pants.
Don’t forget that Most people voted against GWB. He wasn’t really elected. The system worked fine and Gore was the rightful winner. The problem is that the system was corrupted by the Bush family. Bush cheated his way into office. He went outside the system. Hopefully, the public will be more vigilent this time and not allow that to happen again. The system works fine when it’s actually followed.
Yes, its embarrassing that we have a chimp in the White House, and a dangerous chimp at that…but hey, what does it say about your system that your PM is a lap dog for a chimp?
As I said, if you want to wave your cock, start a thread and we can discuss Blair (again), or compare the UK lap dog with the US chimp. Or whatever.
My point in this thread is people are blaming Bush when, imho, Bush is a symptom.
Discus, or not.
And you can drag your seething xenophobic resentments into a thread on the Bush press conference as you choose. But you risk being laughed at for the blatant hypocrisy involved.
Fulminating about a lack of liberty in the U.S. looks rather silly coming from a resident of a nation where the prime source for news, the respected (or at least once so) BBC undergoes a shakeup due to a government investigation and denunciation. And where trial coverage is severely limited by sub judice rules.
And, as mentioned, where you can’t even hope to ever directly elect your leader, and wind up with that shining example of intellectual and professional political competence, Tony Blair.
It may be news to certain non-U.S. Dopers, but there are relatively few American voters who will select a President based on a desperate longing for approval by critics of America. The vast majority will pick a leader based on what they think is best for them and their country.
Not unlike Spain.
I will be the first to admit that our system has its problems, but my point is that Bush is not, at least in the way you are describing it, a symptom of that. Most people over here still approve of and suppot him. In the last poll I saw he was ahead of Kerry. If people want him to be the leader and he becomes the leader then the system is working rather well. I personally think people are stupid to want him to lead, but that is different point.
This is one of the things we hold most dear. Anyone (theoretically) can become president.
If they are transparent then everyone knows about them, if they still vote for the guy then this is what they want and deserve.
Governements change. If the people decide they no longer want certain freedoms, or are willing to trade them for security, that is their right. I will either work to oppose it, or worst case scenario move.
Your suggestions are that there is an oversight on who can be elected. Any time we have a body that arbitrarily determines who can and cannot be president based on their political views you are begging for corruption far beyond the scale we currently have. The electoral congress is bad enough. We have a government of, by, and for the people, sometimes those people are stupid. We have checks and balances (the supreme court for example) to slow the effects of poor decisions, but if the people make up their mind that they want someone like Bush and stick with it election after election then his policies will become law. It is not inherently wrong just because I disagree with the outcome.
Well for one the Gilligans story was basically correct it was just sloppy presentation in a live segment that caused all the fuss. The BBC management fucked up by blindly supporting their man without actually checking their facts.
They also unlike the government decided to admit they fucked up and put in corrective actions to not let it happen again.
Oh and just in case you think the BBC is the only car in the race.
http://news.independent.co.uk/
and that’s just for starters I could go on.
The ITV news is very popular in the UK.
Actually, though I am quite proud of the system we have, I think there is a lot we could adopt from European government styles. Just because it is good, even if it is the best (which I am not saying), it could always be better.
I agree on the the man’s quaifications, but just because he is a lousy politician does not mean he is not a politician.
I think it was Mark Twain who said, “In America anyone can become president, and that is just a risk we have to take.”
Why all the shit given to L_C for a relatively (or should be) obvious statement? We have an inarticulate, morally entrenched and ideologically calcified slow-thinker in the nation’s highest office. How’d he get there? And what better place to ask that question than in a thread dealing with the PoTUS’ latest display of ineptitude?
L_C’s right that GWB is a symptom of some larger civic malady in the US. Where I strongly disagree with our British pal is that he appears to think (correct me if I’m wrong, Werewolf) the malady is the US political system. I think that the systemic failure which led to the Man Who Fell Up* coming to power has little to do with what’s installed into our system of government, and much to do with what is missing. I think we’ve simply failed to respond constitutionally to the technological advances that allow plutocratic forces a major advantage in the forging of public opinion. Before electronic media, it would’ve taken major collusion among all of the press outlets of the country for one candidate or party’s message to overwhelm the others’. Now, all it takes is money. Politics is no longer a competition of ideas, it’s a battle for primetime attention. That’s a purchased commodity.
IMHO, YMMV and all that jazz.
*[sub]Thanks, 'luce.[/sub]
Bush is so robotically “on message” these days, I imagine a conversation around the White House going something like this:
Laura Bush: George, can you please put your dirty socks in the hamper next time instead of leaving them on the floor?
GW: I understand the socks and the hamper. We’ve had many discussions about that with our top advisers. What you have to understand is that Saddam Hussein was a bad character. He gassed his own folks.
Laura: What? I just need you to put your socks in the hamper.
GW: Believe me, if I had known the socks were going to end up on the floor, I would have done everything in my power to pick them up. But before 9/11, we were not on a war footing. 9/11 changed the calculation. We’re going to take the fight to the terrorists and stay the course. We cannot waver, or else the evil ones will be embona…embolda…emboldened.
Laura: These days it’s really difficult to talk to you about anything.
GW (serious voice): You have to understand one thing. A few things. There are people out there who think it’s OK to leave socks on the floor. That’s OK, it’s a free country, everyone’s entitled to express their viewpoint. But it’s my responsibility as President to protect the American people. Did you know that they dug up 500 pounds of mustard gas on a turkey farm in Libya? That’s why we have to deal with these gathering threats before there’s a mushroom cloud.
Laura: Can you please just pick up your socks?
GW: Stay the course, don’t waver. We appreciate the help we get from our coalition partners. Those who belittle the sacrifices made by our good friends from Upper Volta, they should be grateful. Some people think Saddam was doing a good job, that we should have left him in power. Some people think that Muslims aren’t suited for freedom. Well, I disagree. We’re changing the world for the better.
Laura: I’m sending $2000 to John Kerry’s campaign
GW: If the intelligence was bad, I want to get to the bottom of it. We’ll smoke 'em out. We will take the fight to the bad guys. What was the original question? Yes, I am wearing socks.
Hyper, that was classic. And I think London_Calling has raised an important point. Sure, GWB is a stooge. But it’s our system that made him possible.