Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 669 times:
Clinton didn't have to go through this crisis, so we don't know, nor will we ever know how he would have handled it, and it's a moot point to even wonder about it.
And what great "crisis" did Reagan and Ike get us through? Ike had one of the quietest 8 years ever in office. The biggest "crisis" that Reagan had to deal with was Challenger, Greneda (puhleeez), and the bombing of the marines in Lebanon.
The ultimate crisis were handled by Lincoln and FDR. They're the ones that the comparisons should be made with, not with a president who never had to face such a crisis.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 667 times:
L-188, Carter's Administration, for all it's bungling of the Hostange Crisis, did all the ground work to get the hostages released. Not much credit, in my view, to Reagan, on that one, because Iran just wanted to rub salt in Carter's wounds by releasing them the instant Reagan took the Oath of Office.
As for the Civil Wars, we didn't exactly come out smelling like roses in all of those, did we? And you'd have thought, based on the response of some people back then, that Greneda was the second coming of Normandy or something.
Maybe Reagan had some issues to deal with, but they pale greatly in comparison with this, and it's not fair comparing Reagan or Bush the 2nd.
KROC From United States of America, joined May 2000, 19737 posts, RR: 76 Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 652 times:
Even a staunch Bush supporter like myself is rolling his eyes and this crap. There is no way to tell how anyone would deal with a situation, unless they are the ones affected. Give me a break. I got some thanks for ya...
"Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking again"
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 647 times:
There is an excellent article in todays NTIMES.COM talking about how staunch Democrats and Gore supporters have nothing but praise for Dubya. Some are even relieved it's him and not Gore who is running things.
As someone who leans Democrat, I neither voted for nor was particularly impressed with Bush. But I think he's made some excellent decisions since the event of early September. I stand behind my President, whether I voted for him or not.
That having been said, I idly wonder how patriotic staunch conservatives would be in rallying around Al Gore at this awful time in our nation's history had the Supreme Court decided in the other direction....considering there is an entire billion dollar industry of pundit-tv, talkradio, journals, magazines and websites that built itself around Clinton-hating, a whining, chestbeating media animal in constant need of feeding. I dare say a President Gore would already have the snivellers second guessing everything he does and weakening us all in the process.
RealHigh From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1022 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 644 times:
Pam Am747, are you just trying to start a flame war for the hell of it?
I mean that poll is full of $hit if you ask me. We mine as well compare every US President to Bush (part II) in this conflict.
FRD is a revered Prez, how would he handle this?
Hmmm, round up all the Arab-Americans like he did the Japanese?
This just goes to show how much in love the media is with the little prick in the White House.
And some of you call the media liberal?, Give me a break!
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 637 times:
Oh you all just like Bush because he was quick to retaliate. Anyway, you may as well say that you love his advisers, because it is they who are making all of the decisions. GWB just gets in front of the camera, and reads the teleprompter like a good little puppet.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 636 times:
Here's one I always ask my conservative friends who are convinced the "media" is liberal..
If a doctor were conservative..if he were a registered Republican, a Bush campaign worker, hell, the county GOP chairman...... would he operate on a liberal patient? A Democrat?
Of course. Why? Because in his capacity as a doctor, he's putting his skills to work, not his politics.
Why can't the same be true of a journalist who happens to vote Democrat? Or has a liberal worldview? Or...goes to a DNC fundraiser?
This may come as a shock to you, but as a product of a journalism school deep in the heart of a "liberal" northeastern city, I can assure everyone that we did not get "How To Report The News-Left Wing Style" pamphlets in our orientation kits the first day of freshman year. We were instructed in the journalism basics...who, what, when, where, why. Checking sources. Defining what a "fact" was from an unambiguous point of view.
To prove that, wander over to the aforementioned article at NYTIMES.COM, a positively stellar assessment of the President's performance by the newspaper that together with the Washington Post (which has also glowed about Dubya's last month) was cited by the Dittoheads for years as the case study in liberal media elite. If they're such liberal liars, are they lying now!?
A line in the play "Inherit The Wind", which itself does a remarkable job in looking at liberal and conservative from outside of the box, pretty much sums up, in my opinion, the problems that conservatives have with the "liberal" media....
"It's the job of a journalist to comfort the afflicted...and afflict the comfortable."
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 10 Reply 20, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 629 times:
The doctor has nothing to do with politics, but a journalist reports on politics everyday, that's his job. How can he distinguish the two, on one hand support the Democratic party with his money etc., and on the other hand report the news fairly? And everyone knows what a super weapon the media can be in politics.
>>"liberal" northeastern city<<
Is there a such thing called a conservative northeastern city?
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
RealHigh From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1022 posts, RR: 17 Reply 21, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 628 times:
Some say the media was liberal because they loved Bill Clinton.
Hmmmm, Bill Clinton was NOT a liberal!
He was a moderate to conservative Democrat.
They certainly didn't like Al Gore either. The Gore campaign didn't even get much attention until he picked Joseph Leibermann as his running mate. The Bush/McCain show dominated the political headlines in the early part of 2000. I bet half the people here in forums don't remember who Gore's opponent was during the primaries.
Gore won all 50 primaries and cauces unlike GW. Hell he did't even win the popular vote! But I won't get into that
And if the meadia was liberal, my guy Ralph Nader would have got a lot more attention.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 613 times:
PanAm...Manchester New Hampshire comes to mind...and I wouldn't advise libs to hold a peace rally in South Boston, Mass anytime soon.
But in response to your point about the doctor, there's actually no difference. A doctor uses the skills he has learned on his patient, regardless of the doctors politics. A journalist learns a skill called accurate reporting, and should use that skill on his patient, the events of the day.
Notice I did not say "FAIR and accurate" reporting, because frequently accurate reporting is NOT fair.....is there a FAIR side to accurately report a 767 flying into a sky-scraper? No. The same model can be placed on a Presidential scandal or bad arms trade....you just might not like the answers. And THAT is when things get labelled "liberal".
But all this is kind of moot...you conservatives now have your Rush, your Fox and your Washington Times to present the news in a way you see fair...you'll allow me the opinion that I think if you want blatantly filtered news, you'll get it on the outlets I just mentioned, but to each his own. I think it'll be interesting to see though, now that conservatives truly to have their own brand of news reporting, and can't use the 'mainstream media' as an excuse anymore....how often you'll find yourselves back on the old "liberal" networks like CNN (Clinton-News-Network...is that right??)
25 JetService: I'm confident if Gore had won, the GOP would be behind him just like the Dems are behind GW. I wouldn't be so concerned with Gore himself, but his app
26 L-1011-500: All I can say is I agree. Clinton sucked. He was immoral, full of himself, and the media was his bitch. I may get backlash, cause this is the truth. B