Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from whatnow4. Show whatnow4's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    He has already explained it many times. 

    You would rather him jump up yell and scream, scare the crap out of the kids and run away with his "bunnypants" on fire.

    To argue that Bush's response during 9-11 was sub par is absurd.

    He was amazing thru all of that.  He made this country feel safe during that period.

    And the Dem revisionist history will not chnage that.  His approvals during that time were thru the roof.  And if you talk to a Dem with a shred of honor they will agree.

    Carville is one.  He still openly applaudes Bush's handling of 9-11.  Of course up til a point in Carvilles eyes. 
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    Is that the only two responses you whacko wingnuts expect to see from the POTUS?

    Either run screaming like a freightened child
    or
    Sit in stunned silence while the country is under attack.

    I guess if those are the only two choices you wingnuts can come up with I think I'll have to go with......

    Are ya sure there isn't a third or fourth choice?
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Well,..........what do you have?  Seriously,....what should the reaction have been?  This has been a big thing for the Left for many years.  It`s HUGE with the "Truthers".  What could/should have been done?
    Posted by jmel


    Ohhh, I'm sure if you thought about it for a bit you could come up with a couple more choices from which to pick.
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Actually,....I could 1. Stay calm, politely excuse himself, get up and go 2. Stand up, gather a bit more detail (other than a simple whisper in the ear), excuse yourself, and go. Seems the Left wanted him to jump out of his seat screaming HOLY SH....IT, and run out like his hair was on fire. Don`t know if that would have been a good idea.
    Posted by jmel


    Each of those are good answers.
    I'll choose either one.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from whatnow4. Show whatnow4's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    Thats what he did.

    12, are you claiming that Bush did not handle 9-11 correctly?  I thought all was good until Iraq.

    Even dems all agreed that afghanistan was the right action.  Even the current pres agrees.

    Do you recall Bush's approval after 9-11?  Thru the roof.  And the "we hear you" comment was one of the most presidential things I have seen.

    Up there with "tear down that wall".  Or "it depends on what the definition of is, is".

    Your revisionist history games will not work on this one.

    If you want to start a thread criticizing Bush for Iraq, go right ahead.  It will be redundant however.

    Otherwise, Bush was masterful in how he handled 9-11. 

    Yet for all the concerns, difficulties and doubts, resilience and fundamental optimism underscore public views. Americans give enormously positive ratings to the way the nation has responded to the attacks, reserving their highest marks — virtually unanimous ones — for the armed services and the people of New York City. Eight in 10 are optimistic about the country's future, and even more express optimism for their personal prospects.

    People clearly are healing. The number who report being depressed recently about the threat of terrorism has plummeted from 71 percent in a poll last Sept. 17 to 12 percent now. Sleeplessness is down from 33 percent then to four percent now.

    High-level fears of more attacks (those who express a "great deal" of concern) are down by 27 points since the night of last Sept. 11. Fear of flying because of the chance of terrorism declined sharply after the initial shock. And most of those who see a change in the nation, or in their own lives, say that change has been for the better.

    Two changes stand out, one very public, the other intensely private. Seven in 10 adults call themselves "extremely" proud to be Americans — well up from pre-9/11 levels. And many are showing it publicly: A full year after the attacks galvanized national sentiment, 68 percent say they're still displaying the flag on a daily basis.


    ----

    And today we have more than half of dems claiming Bush knew of the attacks ahead of time.

    No wonder we are being torn apart. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from beKool. Show beKool's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11


    He ran to protect his candy a55 and those of the Saudi Royal family first .Bin Ladens relatives no less were more important to get out of the country before anything.He hid behind those children is what he did there. He could have always excused himself without scaring the kids. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from KittyDuke. Show KittyDuke's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    I'm sure the ghetto organizer would want to understand how the US hurt their feeeeelings to make them react like this first. Then he would wait for Congress to do something first.

    We need a MAN in the WH.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    Loved the way he let Bid Ladens family fly home the next day
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    Thats what he did. 12, are you claiming that Bush did not handle 9-11 correctly?  I thought all was good until Iraq. Even dems all agreed that afghanistan was the right action.  Even the current pres agrees. Do you recall Bush's approval after 9-11?  Thru the roof.  And the "we hear you" comment was one of the most presidential things I have seen. Up there with "tear down that wall".  Or "it depends on what the definition of is, is". Your revisionist history games will not work on this one. If you want to start a thread criticizing Bush for Iraq, go right ahead.  It will be redundant however. Otherwise, Bush was masterful in how he handled 9-11.  Yet for all the concerns, difficulties and doubts, resilience and fundamental optimism underscore public views. Americans give enormously positive ratings to the way the nation has responded to the attacks, reserving their highest marks — virtually unanimous ones — for the armed services and the people of New York City. Eight in 10 are optimistic about the country's future, and even more express optimism for their personal prospects. People clearly are healing. The number who report being depressed recently about the threat of terrorism has plummeted from 71 percent in a poll last Sept. 17 to 12 percent now. Sleeplessness is down from 33 percent then to four percent now. High-level fears of more attacks (those who express a "great deal" of concern) are down by 27 points since the night of last Sept. 11. Fear of flying because of the chance of terrorism declined sharply after the initial shock. And most of those who see a change in the nation, or in their own lives, say that change has been for the better. Two changes stand out, one very public, the other intensely private. Seven in 10 adults call themselves "extremely" proud to be Americans — well up from pre-9/11 levels. And many are showing it publicly: A full year after the attacks galvanized national sentiment, 68 percent say they're still displaying the flag on a daily basis. ---- And today we have more than half of dems claiming Bush knew of the attacks ahead of time. No wonder we are being torn apart. 
    Posted by whatnow4


    Ummm, I was responding to the very specific moment in the classroom which the thread is about. You seem to be getting a bit off the subject.

    But in response to your post:
    My posts were specifically aimed at the actions in the classroom while the attack was unfolding. jmel proposed two alternative actions that the president could have done that would have been better than what he did do.
    1. Stay calm, politely excuse himself, get up and go
    2. Stand up, gather a bit more detail (other than a simple whisper in the ear), excuse yourself, and go.

    His groundzero appearances after the attack were fine, well done.

    And I concur that Afghanistan was the correct move and I was all for it.
    I just wish that Dubya felt the same way.
    My criticism is that it was poorly planned and too soon forgotten in favor of Iraq. We have close to 100,000 troops in Afghanistan today, ten years later. If the president was serious about the threat that Afghanistan posed, then why did he only commit 10,000 troops for the whole country? He repeatedly said it was the most serious threat to our national security but he sure didn't prosecute the war like our national security depended on it.
    One of the reasons, surely not the only one, was to hunt down bin Laden yet only a few months later, Dubya had this to say:

    "Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox...  The key takeaway for Barnes was that “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”
    Bush’s priorities have always been skewed. Just months after declaring he wanted bin Laden “dead or alive,” Bush said, “I truly am not that concerned about him.” Turning his attention away from bin Laden, Bush trained his focus on Iraq — a country he now admits had “nothing” to do with 9/11
    ." 

    And as for knowing about the attacks, no serious person would argue that. Did he get a presidential briefing specifically about the hijacking threat? Yes.
    Could he have prevented it? Almost certainly not.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink. Show WhichOnesPink's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    Is that the only two responses you whacko wingnuts expect to see from the POTUS? Either run screaming like a freightened child or Sit in stunned silence while the country is under attack. I guess if those are the only two choices you wingnuts can come up with I think I'll have to go with...... Are ya sure there isn't a third or fourth choice?
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Here's another response:

    KERRY: I was in the Capitol. We'd just had a meeting -- we'd just come into a leadership meeting in Tom Daschle's office, looking out at the Capitol. And as I came in, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid were standing there, and we watched the second plane come in to the building. And we shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think, and then boom, right behind us, we saw the cloud of explosion at the Pentagon. And then word came from the White House, they were evacuating, and we were to evacuate, and so we immediately began the evacuation.

    + + Kerry: "Nobody Could Think"

    For the record, it was about 40 minutes between the when the second tower was hit and when the Pentagon was hit. For 40 minutes, Sen. John Kerry, a sitting member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, sat in a room with Senate Leader Tom Daschle.

     

    In Kerry's own words, "nobody could think."

    Sen. Kerry sat in a very vulnerable place on Capitol Hill for 40 minutes after the second tower was hit. What did he mean when he said, "nobody could think"? Perhaps the chaos and confusion of the moment meant that a group of top leaders in the Senate really did not know what to do! So they sat in a vulnerable Senate office, exposed to attack. Apparently, Kerry and others did not yet realize that America was at war.

    When did Kerry know America was at war?

    Again, in Sen. Kerry's own words:

    And as we went out of the building, my immediate feeling was, we're at war. I mean, that was the sense, that we are under attack. People are attacking the United States of America and we needed to respond.

    So, more than 45 minutes after the second tower was hit, as Sen. Kerry was evacuating the Capitol, his "immediate feeling" was that America was "at war." In his own words, it took Sen. Kerry 45 minutes to come to this conclusion.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from newman09. Show newman09's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    9-11 posts? Where am I? What year is this?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Here's another response: KERRY: I was in the Capitol. We'd just had a meeting -- we'd just come into a leadership meeting in Tom Daschle's office, looking out at the Capitol. And as I came in, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid were standing there, and we watched the second plane come in to the building. And we shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think, and then boom, right behind us, we saw the cloud of explosion at the Pentagon. And then word came from the White House, they were evacuating, and we were to evacuate, and so we immediately began the evacuation. + + Kerry: "Nobody Could Think" For the record, it was about 40 minutes between the when the second tower was hit and when the Pentagon was hit. For 40 minutes, Sen. John Kerry, a sitting member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, sat in a room with Senate Leader Tom Daschle.   In Kerry's own words, "nobody could think." Sen. Kerry sat in a very vulnerable place on Capitol Hill for 40 minutes after the second tower was hit. What did he mean when he said, "nobody could think"? Perhaps the chaos and confusion of the moment meant that a group of top leaders in the Senate really did not know what to do! So they sat in a vulnerable Senate office, exposed to attack. Apparently, Kerry and others did not yet realize that America was at war. When did Kerry know America was at war? Again, in Sen. Kerry's own words: And as we went out of the building, my immediate feeling was, we're at war. I mean, that was the sense, that we are under attack. People are attacking the United States of America and we needed to respond. So, more than 45 minutes after the second tower was hit, as Sen. Kerry was evacuating the Capitol, his "immediate feeling" was that America was "at war." In his own words, it took Sen. Kerry 45 minutes to come to this conclusion.  
    Posted by WhichOnesPink


    What the heck does your post about a senator who isn't even on the list of succession have have to do with anything in this thread?

    Talk about a non-sequiter.....
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : What the heck does your post about a senator who isn't even on the list of succession have have to do with anything in this thread? Talk about a non-sequiter.....
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Isn't the point of this thread the "slow response"?  No one could think for 40 minutes?  Slow response?  Are you really having trouble seeing the point of the post? 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Isn't the point of this thread the "slow response"?  No one could think for 40 minutes?  Slow response?  Are you really having trouble seeing the point of the post? 
    Posted by Rushfan2112


    Heck, why don't you use my grandma as an example.
    She was terrified too!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Isn't the point of this thread the "slow response"?  No one could think for 40 minutes?  Slow response?  Are you really having trouble seeing the point of the post? 
    Posted by Rushfan2112


    The point of this thread is that some people freeze and others don't.
    It doesn't make me feel any better that people, who aren't the president, had a 'slow' response.
    If it makes you feel better that you can point to other examples, knock yourself out.
    The most feeble and sad excuse ever offered for any argument is the 'He did it too..' cop out. It's immature and has no bearing on what YOU did. Unless of course you think a poor performance is something to emulate. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink. Show WhichOnesPink's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : What the heck does your post about a senator who isn't even on the list of succession have have to do with anything in this thread? Talk about a non-sequiter.....
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Psst....the thread is about slow response. 

    Wasn't Kerry a presidential candidate at one point? Goes to show you how "war hero" Kerry would have responded if he were president.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink. Show WhichOnesPink's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : The point of this thread is that some people freeze and others don't. It doesn't make me feel any better that people, who aren't the president, had a 'slow' response. If it makes you feel better that you can point to other examples, knock yourself out. The most feeble and sad excuse ever offered for any argument is the 'He did it too..' cop out. It's immature and has no bearing on what YOU did. Unless of course you think a poor performance is something to emulate. 
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Actually, what is feeble is Monday morning quarterbacks like yourself. You've never been in that similar situation yet you know better. Typical!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : The point of this thread is that some people freeze and others don't. It doesn't make me feel any better that people, who aren't the president, had a 'slow' response. If it makes you feel better that you can point to other examples, knock yourself out. The most feeble and sad excuse ever offered for any argument is the 'He did it too..' cop out. It's immature and has no bearing on what YOU did. Unless of course you think a poor performance is something to emulate. 
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Really?  Thanks for clarifying for me...I was really lost there.  I didn't point to the other examples, so you can drop me from that group thanks. 

    The post was a valid comparison of reactions to horrible news. I don't think it was intended as an excuse to say "he did it too..." Okay? 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rushfan2112. Show Rushfan2112's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Heck, why don't you use my grandma as an example. She was terrified too!
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men


    Okay, your grandma was so...   :)
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Psst....the thread is about slow response.  Wasn't Kerry a presidential candidate at one point? Goes to show you how "war hero" Kerry would have responded if he were president.
    Posted by WhichOnesPink


    Again, what the hell does that have to do with the post?
    He wasn't in that situation so it's a ridiculous comparison.

    The only person we actually saw, as POTUS, in that situation, was....
    Dubya. Trying to put any one else there is a pure fictionalization of what happened.
    You can't make an 'observation' of something that never happened and expect it to be a valid comparison of something that did happen. 
    Reality doesn't work that way.

    It'll just come down to you saying this and me saying that without any evidence from either side.

    If you want to engage in a fools errand, then knock yourselves out.
    And just to make it easier, I will capitulate to whomever you want to put in that position, John Wayne, John Wayne Gacy. Whoever you want, plug 'em in and make up your scenarios and outcomes. Whatever makes you feel better.  
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11

    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11:
    In Response to Re: Bunnypants Bush explains slow response to 9-11 : Really?  Thanks for clarifying for me...I was really lost there.  I didn't point to the other examples, so you can drop me from that group thanks.  The post was a valid comparison of reactions to horrible news. I don't think it was intended as an excuse to say "he did it too..." Okay? 
    Posted by Rushfan2112


    How can you make a 'valid comparison' between something that did happen and something that didn't happen?
    Where is there any 'validity' or any basis for 'comparison'?

    One was president, the other never has been.
    You're not even comparing two people that have held the same position, never mind at a particular time.
     
Sections
Shortcuts