A regular correspondent name of Phillip observed in a comment on this post (it’s the fourth comment) that "the President’s comments to the UN get my vote for the most encouraging words I’ve heard from his mouth since he took office."
What I’d like to do here is pose this question to Phillip and others: What did you think of his speech last night from Jackson Square?
Of course, I’d like to know anyway, but I will sheepishly admit that I have an additional motive this time for seeking your input: Unbelievably, I forgot about the speech, and therefore missed it — I didn’t get home and start eating dinner until after 9, and started reading a book while I was eating, so it kind of got away from me. Now I’ll have to go back and read it, and watch it via streaming video on C-SPAN or something — which I haven’t had time to do yet, but will get to later.
(This is particularly vexing because this is one of the two things I have a TV for. I don’t watch TV "news," but I do watch speeches and debates and other live, newsmaking events in which I want to pick up on nuances not available from reading the text. And I watch movies. Oh, yeah, I recently picked up a third reason to turn on the boob tube — my wife and I like to watch "House." Now there’s a guy who would make a perfect blogger — rapid-fire, cutting opinions, without the slightest worry about pleasing anybody.)
Anyway, a colleague who is no fan of the president was telling me the speech was a good one. I’m curious what others think. If this is one of those moments when partisans agree on something, I’d like to cherish the moment. If it isn’t — well, there would be nothing new about that, would there?
Related Posts
It was good. It didn’t seem sincere, though. But possibly I was “projecting” my own mistrust onto the speech. But it was good enough that you could tell he put a lot of prep into it, which I appreciate.
If we’re being totally honest, the bar’s a lot lower right now. For Clinton, that would have been considered a bad speech. But with Bush, subject-verb agreement is as close to great oratory as we’re going to get. Let’s just be glad there wasn’t a banner behind him that said “Is That All You’ve Got?”
Bush sounded like a disgruntled cheerleader.
To answer your question—I was in the middle of a 24-hour travel day back to Columbia from Italy, waiting for my (aargh…) delayed flight at LaGuardia, so only heard the first ten minutes or so in the din of the Delta terminal. Liked what I heard, and reading the text now—well, he said all the right things.
His comments to the UN this week still stand out for me…Bush had obvious domestic political repair work to do in making last evening’s fairly eloquent Katrina speech, and he made huge strides in that regard. (Just because that speech was politically essential doesn’t mean I’m questioning his sincerity in making it.) But his UN comments about the Millenium Goals and so forth, were of such an unusual tone for this administration that they made (I think) much of the world sit up and take notice, and there was no obvious domestic political gain for him to be so explicit about America’s international commitments.
“House” is one of my favorites – just a notch below “24”, the absolutely greatest show on TV. I thought the speech was very well done and with that being W’s fourth trip and stay in the Big EZ it will be hard for his distractors to accuse him of insensitivity. As for paying for all of the rebuild, I see that a huge money grab is well underway. Not surprising. One associate of mine kiddingly said, When do we (SC) get our next big one? Like its hitting the lottery or something.
What does become laughable is to hear the repeated refrains of pundits like Chris Matthews, David Gregory, Schiefer, and others about Bush is really hurt now, approvals down, and all that. The man will never run for office again so who cares? Meanwhile, in the real world, we get some conservative sanity on the USSC, Al Qaeda is getting blown to bits, Tony Blair just put the final dagger into the heart of the Kyoto Treaty nonsense, and all in all things are looking up, even in New Orleans. I also just read where the Japanese government has just committed $10 billion into the US Star Wars missile defense system. Yes, rational people are running most of the world.
As I recall, Hugo provided a pretty big boost to the S.C. economy, in the long run.
Which reminds me: We need to do what we need to do to get an economic engine like New Orleans back up and running. But the federal government needs to keep firm control of how money is disbursed. Turning billions over to a state, and a city, with such an established reputation for corruption — and such a recently confirmed excess of incompetence — would be nuts. (Not that the Feds were Johnny-on-the-spot in this one, but if anybody performed worse than the Feds, it was the state and local governments.) Speaking of Hugo — and yes — I know it wasn’t as bad as this one — contrast the competent, confident responses before and after the storm in South Carolina and Charleston to the outrageous ineptness and political despair demonstrated in Louisiana and the Big Easy.
Blame Yourself,You Voted for Bush
I liked the speech — form, content, and presentation — and the fact that the details are going to cause a stir in the Congress.
As for the speech’s aftermath, you might enjoy ABC’s post-speech live interviews with NO evacuees outside the Astrodome. You can find a brief (50 second) video excerpt that’s priceless (in either RealPlayer or Windows Media formats) as well as a transcript covering more of the interview here.
And I do blame myself because I voted for Bush.
But the federal government needs to keep firm control of how money is disbursed. Turning billions over to a state, and a city, with such an established reputation for corruption — and such a recently confirmed excess of incompetence — would be nuts
Good Lord. Apparently you are unfamiliar with this administration’s established reputation for corruption and incompetence, as symbolized by the $8 billion that was “lost” in Iraq.
Now we’re about to see the same thing happen on our own Gulf coast – Bush cronies and campaign donors, fresh out of government, steering lucrative federal contracts to bidnesses headed up by more Bush cronies and campaign donors.
But don’t worry – Bush and the GOP have vowed to proceed with tax cuts that will benefit billionaire trust funders. So in the end, who’s gonna get stuck with the tab for all this? Your children.
What does become laughable is to hear the repeated refrains of pundits like Chris Matthews, David Gregory, Schiefer, and others about Bush is really hurt now, approvals down, and all that. The man will never run for office again so who cares?
This drives me crazy–I care and a lot of people care. He has three years left and we are his employers, not the other way around. Polls are,in their own way, his annual job performance review. I will give him credit for his continuing statements that he doesn’t govern by polls as being the truth, since his behavior proves that’s patently obvious.
Topic? I got nothing.
KC –
You and Mary have repeatedly brought up the missing $8 billion, an amount that was turned over to the Iraqi government. The fact that it’s missing was disclosed by — drum roll and trumpet ta-da — the US gummint. You and Mary have charged that neocans who volunteered to serve during the transition made off with the loot, without evidence.
Kindly provide any evidence you may have.
Hey, Mike, what’s a “neocan?” For some reason, as I read that word, my mind flashed on this really unappealing picture of Paul Wolfowitz and Dick Cheney’s faces on dancers from a Toulouse-Lautrec poster, doing the “neocan-can.”
You are usually so precise in your postings and comments that I can’t resist poking fun at such an anomaly. I mean, you spelled “gummint” right. You and kc obviously both took extra care to consult the Way Folks Talk Down Home Dictionary, since kc was equally accurate in spelling “bidnesses.”
Actually, it just hit me that maybe even “neocan” wasn’t a mistake. Is that a pun I just didn’t get? Is it a popular bastardization that everyone knows but me? It does pop up in a few places on Google, such as on this blog by someone usurping my name: http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001214.htm
Phyllis – This drives me crazy–I care and a lot of people care. He has three years left and we are his employers, not the other way around. Polls are,in their own way, his annual job performance review. I will give him credit for his continuing statements that he doesn’t govern by polls as being the truth, since his behavior proves that’s patently obvious.
The point I was making is that the left is so obsessed with W personally that they ignore facts and accomplishments that show positive results and progress and focus instead on how to get rid of W. Quick recap – record setting home ownership growth, low inflation, amazing job growth, deficit going down, GOP hasn’t thrown elderly off of social security (I add that since it has been expounded over and over by the left), and the USA remains the nation of choice for immigrants, which is real proof we are the envy of the world. Lastly, we ARE safer in this nation having elected W. So, the question is, with all of these positive results, why would W’s ratings be low?
You and Mary have charged that neocans who volunteered to serve during the transition made off with the loot, without evidence.
No, sir, I haven’t charged that. I don’t know what happened to the money. Maybe someone “made off with it.” Maybe some people made off with some of it and some of got doled out as bribes and some of it just got, uh, lost.
All I know is, it’s missing. Now if you wanna defend a government that managed to lose track of $8 billion – be my guest. Personally, I always thought conservatives were supposed to be opposed to wasting vast quantities of taxpayer’s money, but I guess those days are over for good.
Mike, your own total lack of integrity prevents you from facing up squarely to evidence of misconduct by anyone whose views you support. It is clear to everyone (including you) that the $9 billion in Iraqi money was stolen by the persons who were placed in charge of it, and under whose supervision it “vanished.” You know it. I know it.
As to the evidence, I would simply point to Mark Twain’s “Huckleberry Finn,” in which Mrs. Hotchkiss says the following:
“You may well say it, Brer Hightower! It’s jist as I was a-sayin’ to Brer Phelps, his own self. S’e, what do you think of it, Sister Hotchkiss, s’e? Think o’ what, Brer Phelps, s’I? Think o’ that bed-leg sawed off that a way, s’e? Think of it, s’I? I lay it never sawed itself off, s’I — somebody sawed it, s’I; that’s my opinion, take it or leave it, it mayn’t be no ‘count, s’I, but sich as ‘t is, it’s my opinion, s’I, ‘n’ if any body k’n start a better one, s’I, let him do it, s’I, that’s all.”
Similarly, it is my opinion that that $9 billion never stole itself. Somebody stole it.
You make much of the fact that Bush’s cronies “volunteered” to go to Iraq to “help” nonwhite people manage their affairs. As, you, Warthen, and all other “White Man’s Burden” racists know (but won’t say), white people who go over to a country of nonwhite people to “help” the nonwhite people typically wind up helping themselves – to everything they can get their hands on.
kc:
I misread your $8B post — it brought up visions of Mary — and that’s not fair to either one of you.
Mary:
Wow, that’s the kind of logic neither I nor anyone I know when sober can argue with. (Warning: ambiguous placement of clause intended). Thanks for the clarification.
You misunderstand what I’ve written, said, and hollered – I want the thieves caught and punished, preferably shot. The IG and criminal investigations are taking time, but will (I hope) find the guilty and the money. But I object to your identifying as crooks those folks who bravely volunteered to assist in the reconstruction of a country. Sheesh. You guys throw around the Chickhawk label all the time, so it’s ironic to see you call those who went thieves. But I do suffer from a logic problem.
You bring up an interesting notion when you mention “the White Man’s Burden,” but first I’ll digress. Although moderns despise Kipling, among the great gifts my dad gave me was an appreciation for that Nobel laureate. His work embodies manliness — strength, vigor, duty, honor — while recognizing what a hard and unappreciated task it is to defend one’s culture. Come to think of it, this is not a digression.
A misunderstood point about the Anglosphere is that it’s a white guy’s thing because, it appears to many, including you, that most in the Anglosphere are white. And there’s that icky part of the name, “Anglo.” But as I explain here:
All that said, Mary, here’s a foreign non-white leader of a pretty durn big country who agrees that the Anglosphere left behind valuable structure and values. Read that – it’s important.
But I know you are honking my goose. The left – progressive, liberals, socialists, dirty commies – have always claimed to want to free the oppressed, but always had excuses not to do it. When you charge that the Bushies and racists like Brad and I went to war to loot non-whites, I know that you’re projecting your approach to economic growth – take from others because you know no way to create wealth, just how to redistribute it, with you and yours taking a larger slice because you care, just like Zimbabwe Bob Mugabe and Hugo Chavez. (I don’t lump all progressives and liberals into the kleptocracy, only those that project thievery onto those that decide to act.) Think about it – if we really wanted to loot, we’d attack Monaco and Liechtenstein, knowing that the Swiss are well armed.
Brad –
As for “neocan,” it was an inadvertent neologism meant to convey a positive attitude tinged with a foreboding of what the future holds. Like this. A neocan can…
After Kofi Annan and a few hundred other UN officials have been sent to Iraq for trial along with the dictator who bribed them, then the US might consider giving some money to the UN.
Kofi Annan and a few hundred other UN officials have been sent to Iraq for trial along with the dictator who bribed them
Kofi Annan wasn’t bribed by Hussein, Lee. Nor were “a few hundred other UN officials.”