The Incredibly, Unbelievably, Stupendously, Incurious George Bush
READ MORE: 9/11, Iraq, 2006, CIA, Andy Card, Hurricane, Hurricane Katrina, George W. Bush
Never has there been a public official more unequipped to be President of the United States of America than George W. Bush. The man is simply not up to the job. Even if he really wanted to be or cared to be an effective president, he ... could ... not ... do ... it.
He can't do it on a boat, he can't do it with a (pet) goat. He can't do it in the Green Zone, he can't do it back at home. This man cannot be a good president, Sam-I-Am.
He flat out does not have the intellectual capacity to carry out the requirements of the job. This is not some mean-spirited speculation as to the level of his intelligence. The facts are in. There is nothing left to speculate on. And today we have yet another example of his sheer inability to form a cognitive thought.
Lawrence Eagleburger is a Republican. He was the Secretary of State under George H.W. Bush and was a prominent figure in the Reagan administration. He is a party stalwart and one of the bastions of the Republican establishment. This man obviously wants George W. Bush to succeed. When he met with President Bush, along with all of the members of the Iraq Study Group, he said that after they presented their findings - Bush asked no questions.
Eagleburger remarked, "I don't recall, seriously, that he asked any questions."
Stop. Think about that for a second. There are 79 recommendations made by the group. They took nine months and talked to everyone involved about the situation in Iraq. They have interesting, sometimes controversial positions, some of which Bush theoretically agrees and disagrees with - and he asked absolutely no questions. Not one.
That is beyond unbelievable. You would have to be stupendously stupid, mentally stultified and intellectually inoperative not to be able to come up with one question to this group who has presented the most important report of your presidency to you.
No one can be that callous. Forget his legacy, there are people dying on the ground every day. Even if you don't care at all about your own presidency and you don't care about the thousands of Iraqis dying every month, you have to care about the American servicemen and women you sent in to die in Iraq.
September 11, 2001 marked a tragic day in the history of the United States; a terrorist attack had left the country shaken. It did not take long to determine those who were behind the attack and a call for retribution swept through the nation. Citizens in a wave of patriotism signed up for military service and the United States found resounding international support for their efforts in the war on terror. Little opposition was raised at the removal of the Taliban regime and there was much support for bringing Osama Bin Laden and the leaders of al-Qaeda to justice. Approval abroad diminished approximately a year and a half later when Afghanistan became a stepping stone to the administration’s larger ambition, the invasion of Iraq. The administration would invent several stories and in some cases remain silent of the truth where would prove positive for the Iraqi invasion. It seems they were willing to say anything to promote the largely unpopular and unnecessary war they were resolved on engaging in.
The letter from George Bush to Saddam Hussein was littered with aspects of Pathos, due to perpetual use of fear. Throughout the letter, Bush seems to make threats to not only Hussein, but also to the entire country of Iraq. This is exhibited when Bush writes, “it will be a far greater tragedy for you and your country” (par. 5). Furthermore, the use of threats amplified the aspect of fear from the Pathos ideology, that is, Bush perpetually utilizes threats in order to convince Hussein to leave Kuwait or else Iraq will face major consequences: “What is the issue here is not the future of Kuwait –it will be free, its government restored – but rather the future of Iraq” (par. 4). However, Bush also
Page, S., & Kelly, J. (2013, September 9). Uphill battle for Obama: Where Congress stands on Syria. Retrieved March 20, 2014
... By making use of diction, Precedent Bush is again trying to make an appealing argument and strong support based on invalid assumptions and biased viewpoints. Since we are supposed to analyze his argument by using logic, it is hard to distinguish the logic from the issue because they are closely related. Nevertheless, I found out that the issue is that because of his personal values, assumptions, and illogical reasoning, he deceives American citizens to push a Middle East strategy we otherwise would not have. Six years after the 9/11 attacks, Americans are still looking for reasons to keep the troops in Iraq.
...e people of his country can characterize him as a poor leader for the electorate of his country. Although he claims to be fighting for the betterment of the nation and its stability, what can he possibly know about its condition if he fails to recognize the struggles and problems of the underclass majority of the population?
The president has a significant amount of power; however, this power is not unlimited, as it is kept in check by both the judicial and legislative branches. The president is held responsible for passing legislation that will improve the lives of everyday Americans, even though he shares his legislative powers with Congress. The sharing of power acts as an impediment to the president’s ability to pass legislation quickly and in the form it was originally conceived. However, Americans do not take this into account when judging a president, as they fully expect him to fulfill all of the promises he makes during his campaign. By making promises to pass monumental legislation once elected without mentioning that Congress stands as an obstacle that must be hurdled first, the president creates unrealistic expectations of what he can fulfill during his time in office (Jenkins-Smith, Silva, and Waterman, 2005). A president is expected to have the characteristics that will allow him to efficiently and effectively lead the nation and to accomplish the goals he set during his campaign (Jenkins-Smith et al., 2005). There have been a handful of presidents that have been immortalized as the ideal person to lead the United States and if a president does not live up to these lofty expectations the American public will inevitably be disappointed. Since every president is expected to accomplish great things during his presidency, he is forced to created and project a favorable image through unrealistic promises. The combination of preconceived ideas of the perfect president and the various promises made by presidential candidates during their campaign create unrealistic expectations of the president by the American public.
Every president has his own way of dealing with the problems he faces. Some succeed by saving the country from its problems, while others fail by digging the country deeper in its hole. What is important, though, is that they do their best. Not all will succeed since there are some cases in which the country is helpless and must wallow in its problems for a short while.
It is perhaps easy to remember George Bush as a poor orator, someone who finished bottom of his class at Yale, basically a unremarkable man who should never have been president. In a time when the incumbent president is being forgotten in favour of the election race of the century it is simple to remember Bush as a thouroghly unpopular president who has stained America for the worse. However unintelligent, uneloquent George W Bush united a nation in the days following the 11th september 2001.His rousing sentiments spoken from the rubble of the world trade centre with the brave firefighters by his side showed a strong leader who loved his country. His reaction to 9/11 is essential in determining his legacy because it is an event that will be talked and learnt about in years to come. It is etched onto american’s hearts and minds and therefore for many so is George Bush. Once the war in Iraq is over the image of the falling towers will remain and the president will be remembered for handling this crisis. It is likely the atrocities in Iraq will seem distant to Americans as the ones still affecting the vietnamese every day do. Bush appeared strong capable and resolute after 9/11 and this I predict will have more staying power than the unpopularity regarding a middle- eastern war. When the president speaks about the terrorist attacks he appears to be deeply affected by them which speaks to Americans, it gives them solidarity and unity. As his press secretary recently said "The president thinks about 9/11 every single day when he wakes up and before he goes to bed.
Because Donald Trump wanted to become a Presidential Candidate to shake up America and our way of choosing a Commander in Chief he has taken the focus off of other candidates. To me, he has done just that. In turn, he has also showcased a lot of his ignorant behavior and poor attitudes towards others. Eventually, this will affect how America votes; against Donald Trump. Furthermore, Donald Trump lacks a Presidential form of social interaction. This candidate appears to be impatient when others challenge his position on facts versus his opinions. When he dislikes someone politically or personally, Trump uses his popular attack-mode tactics to make his point. Repeatedly Donald Trump fails to be intellectually stimulating as a Presidential Candidate. Often he has a habit of stating his offensive
The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be addressed by the government, when it comes to the presidency, one person, although checked by various other divisions of the same government, has the power and responsibility to literally, as history has proven, change the world. The American people, "like all people everywhere, want to have our (political) cake and eat it too. We want a lot of leadership, but we are notoriously lousy followers" (Genovese). In other words the expectations the public has of the executive office are ever-changing since we demand that our leaders keep up with the evolving world around us and them. Throughout the past seventy eventful years alone, the American people's views, perceptions and demands of the Executive Office of American government have evolved simultaneously with the political and social events of that same time period.
Examining Trump’s rhetoric and past actions, it becomes clear that Trump’s ability to be the leader of America, especially in today’s already heated world climate, becomes questionable. When even the members of his own party refuse to endorse him and claim that he is not qualified to run a country, the general public needs to sit back and question his integrity. In Trump’s past, he has proven to be an insensitive, racist, greedy business man. Why would he prove to be any different once elected to office?
Emily Bazelon brought up a controversial point, “Republicans in Congress denounced the Obama administration for going soft” (9). Although this statement w...
Watching President Obama change over the years, during his terms, is heartbreaking. Having so many people watching every move that you’re making is stressful. But he did an amazing job of not showing if he was worried about something, or if he was really tired. He kept everything “under control” and didn’t let everybody see that side of
Throughout George W. Bush's political career he has implored the use of Aristotle's tripod, which we like to call it. This tripod is a rhetoric which implies that persuasion relies on three things, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos is devoted solely to logic and reason. While on the other hand, pathos deals with attitudes and beliefs. Perhaps the most important one which pertains to George W. Bush is something called ethos, that is to say the branch of the tripod which deals with the personal strengths of the speaker and most importantly his character. Throughout his political journey he has showed the use of pathos, logos, and ethos time and time again, but the one of which he is commonly known for is ethos. The instances in which he has demonstrated them are countless, but I will recall but three. The first event took place on the day of September 14, 2001 at 'Ground Zero', three days after the attack of the World Trade Centers. The third instance was on September 20, 2001 during his Address to a Joint Session of Congress. Lastly, was the State of the Union Address in Washington D.C. Which was held on January 29, 2002.
Donald Trump’s announcement that he was running for the presidency shocked many people. When he released his announcement speech I knew I would not be voting for him because I do not agree with any of his ideas or beliefs. His speech in general is flawed and all over the place and he doesn’t seem to know what his point is or how to get to it. I believe that he uses his fame and wealth to try to win the people over and claims that he is the best there is for this position therefore earning their trust.