Tom's Feeling Cranky About Dubya's Debate Avoidance

[filkertom]

I know this is news from Monday, but I was still on the road, and I thought I'd mention it again, because it shows what a cowardly chickenshit our alleged leader is.

Dubya's trying to duck out on one of the debates. The one with the "town meeting" format. Longtime Bush hatchet man and general scum-of-the-earth James Baker is in charge of the negotiations for this, and knowing him he'll probably get his way.

And I love this statement:

A presidential adviser said campaign officials were concerned that people could pose as undecided when they actually are partisans.

"It's not a fear of the format," said the adviser, who refused to be identified to avoid annoying Bush.

Well, goodness knows we wouldn't want Bush annoyed.

Dubya doesn't want to face anybody, take responsibility for anything, or basically do anything except have his way. His unthinking, blindly partisan, helps-only-his-friends way. And his entire political party has become like that. They are supposed to aid and protect the country, the Constitution, and all the people, as much as possible. And they are supposed to answer to the people.

And he can't even handle unscripted questions.

"Undecideds" who might actually be "partisan".

Coward.

Comments

[holzman.livejournal.com]

Get it right. The word for discussing the cowardice of anyone named Bush is

George Wimp Bush

[shadowcat48li.livejournal.com]

whats the point of having a debate when all the questions are scripted?
all the debates should he open format, and there needs to be a limit on how many questions they can pass on. the candidates arent always cowards, but their keepers in the party leadership sure are.
this crap about having control over what gets asked is garbage. I know this is insane to expect our political parties to give a darn about giving real answers

[skipjim.livejournal.com]

Concidering the number of times this man screws up his speeches, if I were one of his handlers I wouldn't let him have a microphone let alone face unscripted, potentially hostile questioners.

Still it would be nice if someone would get up there, dump the preplanned question and ask him to name someone he served with while he was supposedly training with the Alabama Air National Guard. Or even brings up the name Osama (who probably will be caught 11/1/04).

I don't know if you heard about what happened here

[aylinn.livejournal.com]

a gentleman who worked for a local frederick design company received a ticket to one of Dubya's staged rally thingies in West va. it was from a customer of the company.

he went.

he stood up and asked a question. a NEGATIVE question. dubya tried to finesse it saying isn't it great we live in a country where questions like that can be asked? the guy persisted. he was eventually hauled out of the meeting.

wait for it -

as if THAT wasn't bad enough, (he wasn't really charged with anything just detained, IIRC) the customer complained about his behavior to the owner of company they gave the ticket to. Guy went to work that monday and was FIRED for making the company look bad. please note - I'm paraphrasing.

Frederick news post website. http://www.fredericknewspost.com/ you have to register to see their archives. search for octavo designs.

interestingly enough - the guy is NOT going after the company - he's actually fairly cool about it - to the point of asking a sympathy protest to move their location away from the company's office to a neutral location. he understands why his boss did it. (political hassle from large client & small company living/dying by large client) doesn't like it but does understand it. BOSS otoh, is getting serious fire from local community. company is in hiding. still playing out.

here's my kicker. Octavo did some work for our small press company Mystic Station Designs via a small business admin grant from MD. Not gonna go back there. not a big loss to their customer base - we haven't had any dealings with them in over 2 years - but principles are principles.

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

My nightmare du jour is how Cheney is telling us all that a Kerry win in November would precipitate devestatating new terrorist acts. Remind me who was in office on 9/11/01 again?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/07/cheney.terror/index.html

Oh, and don't forget to vote in AOL's Straw Poll, those states are all marked RED at the moment. Better dead... you know.

[drzarron.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I just LOVED that comment. Geez! I used to have a great deal of respect for Dick Cheney.

But to come out in public and state, in essence, "Vote for us or the Terrorists will get you" is insane.

This whole campaign is based on playground tactics. Almost everything that's being sad boils down to "He Has Cooties"

"Do We Really NEED A President?"

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I think we do, if for no other reason than the very rational governmental structure of civilian authority over the military. Problem is, what we really need is a government that is truly responsive to the needs of the people and the country, rather than to the need for one side or the other to win. Both sides are supposed to be our side, and the Dems to a large extent and the Repubs to an almost exclusive extent have apparently forgotten that.

[poltr1]

Roger that, Tom. Partisan politics are dividing America, and not by geography. All beacause politicians who are part of the Big Two put party loyalty above everything else.

If I knew that a third-party candidate would have a decent shot at winning, I'd vote for one of them, because I've had it with this two-party duopoly that's conspired into keeping everyone else out.

But I wouldn't vote for Michael Peroutka. I'd vote for Vladimir Zhirinovsky or Lyndon LaRouche before I would vote for Peroutka.

[armb.livejournal.com]

We don't have a President in the UK, and the military is still answerable to the civilian government as much as it is in the US, as far as I can see.
But a Republican government with Bush as its Prime Minister is just as scary or scarier than Bush as President, at least from my European liberal viewpoint.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

Oh, but his comment -- that if we don't vote for the "right" ticket in November, when the next hit comes it will be disastrous for the country -- was exactly correct, IFF the right ticket is Kerry-Edwards.

Can't blame the man for telling the truth. Even if, as with all the other lies told by this faux Administration, what was said applies to the other party from the one they meant.

[specificocean.livejournal.com]

He's AFRAID! Can't have anyone throwing unscripted questions at him, no sirree. Why, he'd have to EXPLAIN his actions (or lack thereof....)...

[ororo.livejournal.com]

"You know, I really wish you had submitted that question earlier . . ."

[infinitemorning.livejournal.com]

If you ask me, candidates for public should be legally compelled to actually face, oh, I dunno, THE PUBLIC. I am so sick of Bush's bullshit in this regard - the loyalty oaths, the "Ask the President" events open only to people the Bush campaign has BUSSED in...is anyone else starting to recall that Sliders episode where Arturo's double was the Sheriff of San Francisco? All the "opinions of the people" were scripted, watered-down love taps? Honestly, this is simply ridiculous.

I don't want Bush to be my President, nor do I want him even to be in the running. I never did. But as long as he is a public figure, I want to know that I as a law-abiding, dissenting citizen have access to him. Apparently, however, the entire Bush campaign will be one long closed-door meeting.

[crwilley.livejournal.com]

Imagine if our President were subject to something like Britain's "Question Hour", where once a week, the Prime Minister has to go before Parliament and answer anything they ask him...

[vixyish.livejournal.com]

I wish I wish I wish. Not just Bush. Every President. I wish this were a US tradition.

The riotous nature of the Parliament sessions in general would be a plus, too, but that'd just be icing. :)

[drzarron.livejournal.com]

Yes yes yes! That would be wonderful to watch. But alas, it would end up being scripted slow ball questions from his party and vicious showboating tirates from the opposition.

[(Anonymous)]

"And what, Mr Prime Minister, is the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow?"

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

I'd be satisfied if the President had to go before the press once a week, and actually *answer* the questions the reporters ask, instead of either repeating some line from his stump speech or changing the subject altogether.

No, I'm Not Kidding

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I agree completely. But I'm willing to take it to The Next Level.

I want a jester in motley, whose sole job was to stand next to Scott McClellan at the daily press gaggle and whap him in the head with a rubber chicken every time he restated the same thing he'd said earlier to avoid answering a question. Two whaps if he uses the same phrasing.

I am perfectly serious.

You could simultaneously humiliate the White House on a daily basis, get unbelievable ratings for a frickin' White House press briefing, and (assuming he avoids jail) set McClellan up for a post-Bush career on Spike TV. At the very least, you could find out if Scottie is a masochist.

Re: No, I'm Not Kidding

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

I got the outfit, with extra hats and a gross of jinglebells. And the rubber chicken.

Do you know what kind of a look you get when you go into a joke shop and ask for a dozen rubber chickens? I do.

[arensb.livejournal.com]

But there are questions that the president can legitimately refuse to answer, e.g., for reasons of national security. So "Question Hour" could be a bad idea.

Let's go for "Truth or Dare" instead.

[armb.livejournal.com]

The UK Prime Minister is allowed to refuse to answer questions for resons of National Security. He's allowed to answer them with "that information isn't centrally collected and no appropriate numbers are available". He's allowed to answer them with a prepared speech that doesn't really address the question.
It's just that he looks bad if he overdoes any of them.

[arensb.livejournal.com]

Oh, I figured as much. But the current US administration seems to have no problem lying its fool head off, so "he looks bad" doesn't seem like much of an incentive to be honest.

I just thought that something like "Mr. President, every time you dodge a question, you have to remove an article of clothing" or "You can say that that's classified for security reasons, but then you'll have to eat a slug. Surely, if this information is so sensitive, you'd be willing to eat a slug to protect it?" might be a better incentive.

It might get more people to watch C-SPAN. Aren't reality shows all the rage these days?