Here you go, Manson: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/30/AR2006123000941.html
Why do people always have a confused look on their face when I think I have said something simply and clearly? I have to really work on my clarity in communication.
I said:
[QUOTE=Me]
It is not the end of the world for the man to sit there, his mind racing for a few moments before he decided how to proceed.
[/QUOTE]
To which you responded that if you are the president of the U.S., it just may be.
I countered that, no; In real life, the president of the U.S. does NOT cause the end of the world by waiting a few moments before deciding how to proceed.
Now, perhaps you were just indulging in a bit of hyperbole with your statement, which is fine. But please don’t blink at me confused, brow furrowed when I call out your hyperbole for the obvious snappy little sound bite that it is. Come on.
And I’m done defending Bush’s goofy ass. If you all want to believe that presidents who are NOT caught on camera don’t burn all kinds of ‘precious minutes’ before springing into action (I can just imagine how many spend time praying before making a move) then knock yourselves out. I have simply decided to stop biting my tongue about this particular slam on Bush. I hear people say it all the time, and it’s silly. He does soooo much dumb stuff to pick on. Why make up shit. That’s dumb.
It may not be a big deal in the scheme of things, but I find it a fascinating detail. From the Pet Goat wiki article:
This speaks volumes how about how divorced from reality the world of politics can frequently be (regardless of whether the explanation is true or not, it’s presented as a credible explanation). Projecting an image becomes more important than actually dealing with the problem. If your house is on fire, you need to investigate and find a way of putting it out.
If that’s accurate, I find it telling that Bush would be taking a lead from his press secretary in that situation. Stage management is king. He was supposed to be the Commander in Chief. Within seconds of the first plane hitting I was thinking “accident or terrorism, probably terrorism as it’s such a prominent target”. After the second hit, terrorism was a certainty. There had already been two attacks, who knew what other attacks were in progress. His job was to get out of there, and put himself in a situation where he could be briefed as reports came in, to at least give himself the possibility of taking action.
It’s possible that Bush simply made a bad call under stress, if so then fair enough.
I think the vast majority of presidents spent their entire term of office without ever encountering a situation anywhere like 9/11. Really, other than Pearl Harbor, has there ever been a comparable situation, at least in an age where telecommunication made instant response possible?
I IMPLY nothing. I’m using the language that he understands BECAUSE he is a loon and mentally ill. More rational discussion has never worked with him before from any poster on any subject at any time. Someone that crazy invites all kinds of abuse; I’m accepting the invitation. 
The assassination of John F. Kennedy.
I’m late to the thread and didn’t read everything, so forgive me if I’m plowing already furrowed ground…I am no fan of GWB at all, and blame him for many of the post-9/11 ills we’ve been suffering, along with many other things, but I can’t work up any vitriol over this. I think he had to stay cool in front of the kids, and he did. There wasn’t really anything to be helped by him reacting any differently at that moment, though there certainly were things that shoulda coulda woulda been done as things progressed.
I understood it. I just disagree with it.
Why not?
He has the capability to do so. Moreover, he would have the obligation to do so in certain situations - I seems to recall the idea of mutual destruction. Plus, it seems reasonable to me that such situations might well come about with no planning or warning beforehand, lending great power to the ability to be a few moments ahead. I’m not indulging in hyperbole; I don’t expect such a situation to come up often, or that it will even be guaranteed to come up during a President’s term, but that said, by and large that’s also a matter on which I think erring on the side of caution would be a good idea.
I personally believe your explanation is correct; Bush was simply gathering his thoughts. My opinion is that that simply isn’t a particularly impressive moment for him. An understandable moment? Sure. I suspect that I, in that position, would be utterly flummoxed. But then, i’m not the President, and I tend to hold Presidents to a higher standard.
If there’s anyone in the entire world who should be able to handle a sudden, high stress problem, it’s the President of the United States. Name one position in the entire world that has a higher requirement of being able to be on the ball during a crisis.
The Cold War is over but the world still under a very real threat of nuclear war - those weapons haven’t dissapeared - and the idea of having a president who freezes up under pressure - and this is ok, because normal people might do it too - is abhorrent.
“Poor George Bush, he’s just a regular guy who doesn’t know what to do in a stressful situation” is not an excuse, it’s a condemnation. An absurdly strong one from which there can be no defense.
Doesn’t really seem comparable. It was a horrifying and sudden event, but it’s not like the moment LBJ heard about it there were ongoing time-critical at-that-very-moment events still unfolding with thousands of American lives at stake, the way there were on 9/11.
And I have to agree with this. And SenorBeef’s return to this thread reminds me of his initial great post, and with that, I bow out of the thread with grace.
Say “Goodnight”, Grace.
Bush froze. It’s really that simple. I understand it because it’s my natural response to crisis as well; when I used to run codes on a regular basis I found that when I had no idea what to do I tended to just sort of shut down. My brain isn’t exactly disengaged; it just settles on the most passive possible course of action and finds reasons to justify it. I had to learn to recognize this tendency and fight it.
So I don’t doubt that Bush really thought sitting there and doing nothing so as not to scare the kids was the right thing to do. But it really, really wasn’t. After that second plane hit they needed to get Bush up to a real-time understanding of the situation ASAP. If there had still been a plane up there that needed to be shot down, the two minutes that it would take to get Bush up to speed on the situation might have been the difference between shooting it down over a cornfield or a suburb.
And part of being President is that you’re occasionally going to have to be an asshole. You’ll have an appearance planned at a grade school where the kids have been preparing for weeks to make it extra special for you, and you’re going to have to cancel because some tinpot dictator is having a bad day and aiming missiles at the country next door. You’re going to have to excuse yourself from the classroom you’re visiting because PEOPLE ARE FLYING FUCKING AIRPLANES INTO LARGE BUILDINGS. He needs to have a plan for a graceful exit when he needs to make one.
So I don’t blame Bush so much for the way he acted on 9/11, at least not as much as I blame his staff for not dragging him out. But trying to justify it now is just ridiculous.
Yes, this is already plowed ground, both in this thread and elsewhere, but once more with feeling - the dilemma was never the choice between “sit passively with a dumb and panicky look on his face” OR “run screaming from the room telling the children that there is a good chance they will never see mommy and daddy again”.
The president simply must have the social capacity to exit gracefully from a room full of children. Perhaps “I’ve very much enjoyed my time with you, boys and girls, but something has come up and I have to go help to sort it out. I’m very sorry that I have to leave early.”
I can’t imagine the children erupting in terrified screams as a result of that.
And, again, there were many things that could have been helped by a more proactive response from Bush. Whether they would have been is of course a different discussion.
blink
blink
Nope. Consider me wooshed.