TenuredVulture wrote:

Werthless wrote:TV, speaking past the issue is something that 70% of the population doesn't pick up on. And sometimes I get the feeling that Bush's speeches aren't designed to be respect by you or me, but by those 70%, who will miss this rhetorical technique.

Maybe. I'm not sure. I do think there is something about Bush's political success befuddles me. How did people ever like this guy is something I don't get--and it isn't ideological--Huckabee and Reagan have an appeal that is obvious to me. I mean, there's a lot I do like about Huckabee.

All this came up in the context of the way the "did you make any mistakes" question was handled. I actually think Bush sincerely doesn't recognize any errors. It's not that he denies making any mistakes, but he simply doesn't hold himself accountable to himself.

Sometimes, I even wonder if he enjoyed the Presidency, the way Clinton and Reagan so obviously did. He mentioned the burdens of the office, which I'm sure are tremendous. But he had very little positive to say.

philliesphhan wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

Werthless wrote:TV, speaking past the issue is something that 70% of the population doesn't pick up on. And sometimes I get the feeling that Bush's speeches aren't designed to be respect by you or me, but by those 70%, who will miss this rhetorical technique.

Maybe. I'm not sure. I do think there is something about Bush's political success befuddles me. How did people ever like this guy is something I don't get--and it isn't ideological--Huckabee and Reagan have an appeal that is obvious to me. I mean, there's a lot I do like about Huckabee.

All this came up in the context of the way the "did you make any mistakes" question was handled. I actually think Bush sincerely doesn't recognize any errors. It's not that he denies making any mistakes, but he simply doesn't hold himself accountable to himself.

Sometimes, I even wonder if he enjoyed the Presidency, the way Clinton and Reagan so obviously did. He mentioned the burdens of the office, which I'm sure are tremendous. But he had very little positive to say.

I liked Bush over Gore in 2000. I can't say for sure why though.

After telling the Associated Press last year that Obama’s middle name was among the reasons Islamic terrorists would rejoice over his election, King says he’s since been careful to avoid using it. Thus he found Obama’s decision to allow it be mentioned on the steps of the Capitol “bizarre” and “a double-standard.”

“Is that reserved just for him, not his critics?” King asked.

The congressman says he doubts Obama’s sincerity when he explained that he chose to use his middle name so as to be historically consistent with past inaugurations, when America has heard the full names of its presidents echo from the inaugural stand.

“Whatever his reasons are,” King said, “the one he gave us could not be the reason.”

He continued: “The society is a little strange about this. If you’re speaking the truth and in an effort to be objective, there should be nothing off limits in a free society, [but] there are many biases building and clearly a double-standard.”

jerseyhoya wrote:Epic lines to get in to bars in Adams Morgan tonight.

Get out of my city, hippies and minorities. Out! I'm trying to get a beer.

I'm not leaving U Street until Tuesday, and not getting on Metro again till everyone is gone, but I'm terrified of Tuesday. It's going to be a $#@! show and a half.

uncle milt wrote:i'm planning on watching the game at a bar in foggy bottom (it's an eagles bar). i may leave pentagon city at about 1 just to be safe.

kruker wrote:$150 million is the estimated cost for the inauguration. Party on.

Bakestar wrote:One of the best Comments threads ever on NJ.com