Bush's real debate style cause? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 11, 2024, 09:01:58 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  Bush's real debate style cause? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Bush's real debate style cause?  (Read 2645 times)
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« on: October 08, 2004, 09:09:04 AM »

It's not a worthless article. Don't judge it by my reading and remarks on it. Read it and judge for yourself; and explain why.

Forgot the link to the letter. Here's the last paragraph of the letter. The whole letter is "subscribers' only."

"Not being a professional medical researcher and clinician, Fallows cannot be faulted for not putting two and two together. But he was 100 percent correct in suggesting that Bush's problem cannot be "a learning disability, a reading problem, [or] dyslexia," because patients with those problems have always had them. Slowly developing cognitive deficits, as demonstrated so clearly by the President, can represent only one diagnosis, and that is "presenile dementia"! Presenile dementia is best described to nonmedical persons as a fairly typical Alzheimer's situation that develops significantly earlier in life, well before what is usually considered old age. It runs about the same course as typical senile dementias, such as classical Alzheimer's—to incapacitation and, eventually, death, as with President Ronald Reagan, but at a relatively earlier age. President Bush's "mangled" words are a demonstration of what physicians call "confabulation," and are almost specific to the diagnosis of a true dementia. Bush should immediately be given the advantage of a considered professional diagnosis, and started on drugs that offer the possibility of retarding the slow but inexorable course of the disease.

Joseph M. Price, M.D.
Carsonville, Mich."


What if this were actually true and the Bush people were trying to cover it up. Much like people covered up FDRs disability and Reagans Alzheimers. Though pretty far fetched wouldn't that just be shocking?
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2004, 10:04:16 AM »

It's not a worthless article. Don't judge it by my reading and remarks on it. Read it and judge for yourself; and explain why.

I don't need to read any article to understand Bush's problem, for I can explain it in a simple and ironclad fashion, so pay attention and see if you can keep up:

Point 1) Bush has never been a good speaker, last Thursday night was no different, thus no assumption can be made that his health is deteriorating.

Point 2) Bush simply forgot his audience.  That is either a sign of being preoccupied with other more important matters (like having had a fight with his wife or an illness in the family) or it is a sign of INCOMPETENCE.

Now, if you disagree with either one of those two simple points, then state your[/t] objections.



Why don't you just throw your vote behind Kerry and get it over with already.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2004, 10:34:29 AM »

Why don't you just throw your vote behind Kerry and get it over with already.

Stop trying to label me as a Kerry supporter simply because you have nothing better to say.

I am still voting for Bush, due to the lack of any better alternative, but that doesn't hide the fact that Bush didn't understand the purpose of Thursday night's debate.



The problem with what you're doing is that you're just giving the anti-Bush folks and the communists on the left more ammunition to use against Bush. I wil admit he is NOT the best of speakers but I also realize that some of our greatest historical figures have lacked a clear ability to give a good speech. You are nitpicking him on something that is very minor and you give him no credit whatsoever for his other accomplishments. I am so sick of the negativity of these Republicans. I have never spoke before millions and neither have you. We do not know how WE would be before a crowd of millions, do we?
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2004, 12:25:43 PM »

I agree with you JMF. Bush let himself get pushed around to easily. He should have attacked Kerry like an attack dog on the past lies the Democrats have thrown out to the media. For 3 years we have been hearing how Bush is a nazi and Hitler Jr. Bush should have destroyed Kerry like LBJ did to Goldwater in 1964. Bush needs to run a Daisy Girl style ad against Kerry.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2004, 02:29:29 PM »

I agree with you JMF. Bush let himself get pushed around to easily. He should have attacked Kerry like an attack dog on the past lies the Democrats have thrown out to the media. For 3 years we have been hearing how Bush is a nazi and Hitler Jr. Bush should have destroyed Kerry like LBJ did to Goldwater in 1964. Bush needs to run a Daisy Girl style ad against Kerry.

Again, you seem to be missing my point, so let me give you another example using Bush’s famous remarks while standing on the rubble of the WTC:

Voice of the People: “We can’t hear you!”

Bush:  “You can’t hear me, but I hear you.  And the people who tore down these building will soon hear from all of us.”

Why were Bush remarks so perfect?  Because he remembered who he was leading:

“You can’t hear me, but I hear you”…. TRANSLATION – “It’s not my voice that is important, rather it is your voice that is important”.

“And the people that tore down these building will soon hear from all of us.”….TRANSLATION – “We will speak as one, not as individuals.”

Bush’s remarks earned him the admiration of the People because Bush lowered himself and fully communicate that he was only a servant and would speak, not for himself, but for the American people. Bush was articulate on the rubble of the WTC because he was fully focused on the American people and his role as their leader.

Last Thursday night, Bush was just the opposite.  He was too busy to talk to the American people, and spoke only as an individual, instead of as a leader.  He wasn’t focused on his role as a servant, thus his thoughts were unfocused because his attitude contradicted with the role of a leader.



I think he'll do well tonight. The town hall is the kind of enviroment he thrives in.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2004, 11:30:22 AM »

I agree with you JMF. Bush let himself get pushed around to easily. He should have attacked Kerry like an attack dog on the past lies the Democrats have thrown out to the media. For 3 years we have been hearing how Bush is a nazi and Hitler Jr. Bush should have destroyed Kerry like LBJ did to Goldwater in 1964. Bush needs to run a Daisy Girl style ad against Kerry.

Bush needs to run an anti-militarism ad?

He needs to attack Kerry on Iraq and show the US how Kerry will turn Iraq into Vietnam 2.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.032 seconds with 12 queries.