So far no one noticed

I haven’t listened to Rush today, so I’m not cheating. Here are my thoughts.

The President spoke of an “ownership society” where everyone regardless of economic status can build something that can be passed on to their families. He pointed out that poor people have much more to gain from this than the wealthy who already have capital. In the current system when one spouse of a two wage earner family passes away, the survivor can only collect one payment, the other payment is lost.

Private accounts were OPTIONAL

I’ll take another whack at it.

The President put the democrats further on the defensive by referring to his party as the party of ideas, that it’s not enough just to appose things.

Was it the parts when he said “ummm” and “uhhh” a lot, smiled nervously, and blamed the mess our economy is in on rising gas prices?

Or was it the part when he mentioned Iraq again in conjunction with 9/11?

It’s the same mentality, by the way, that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001: we’ll just destroy innocent life and watch the great United States and their friends and allies crater in the face of hardship. It’s the exact same mentality. And Iraq is a part of the war on terror. I said it’s a central front, a new front in the war on terror, and that’s exactly what it is. And that’s why it’s important for us to be tough and strong and diligent.

I have to admit, that was pretty brilliant. A lot of people are buying it…

Where he pointed out they have nothing to offer but opposition and the tax on payroll will be 18-20% ?

Where he evaded reporters’ questions and nobody called him on it?

While I wouldn’t call this brilliant (more of a basic spin tactic) he repeated the phrase “voluntary personal accounts” in various different forms, in order to get the phrase “private accounts” off peoples mind as they recently discovered this phrase polls very poorly among the population. If anyone interpurated that as “brilliant” you need to read “All the Presidents Spin”, and you’ll find that pretty much anyone can spin this type of “brilliance”. Although I’ll bet you’re gonna tell me that’s not what you were referring, aren’t you?

“private accounts” that he’s been pushing for Social Security lately, he changed it to “voluntary personal accounts” NEWSFLASH TO PETER They were introduced as private voluntary accounts. Are you just now understanding that point?

Oh Peter… What you claimed to be the brilliance of the speech?

Isn’t.

Vinny, I think you misunderstood. I didn’t think any of the speech was brilliant, just rewording of the same programs that Bush been pushing since he got into power. To tell you the truth I don’t really have much of an opinioin at all on his Social Security package either way. I was just merely speculating on what the Bush crowd may have been impressed with.

I am however fascinated by the communications team that Bush works with, and to tell you the truth, how quickly Bush learns from them. Watching the presidential debates you could see a dramatic difference in how he presented himself from one to the next. I don’t think I’ve seen a politician learn those skills that quickly before. So there you have it, I’ve said something nice about Bush. His moment of brilliance from last night? Sorry Vinny, there just wasn’t one. But if a politician you supported/support is sticking to things that you want to hear, congratulations, you’ve picked some to represent what you believe in, which is more than most people can find a days.

Alright Vinny, it’s your site…but then again you said I made a ton of assumptions that are wrong, and failed to point out any of them. You wanna talk style? The only thing I see from you is insults and no proof. Those kind of arguments will fail you every time if you want to attempt to discuss politics. Maybe you should stick to your latest religous revalations if you want to be able to talk about things you don’t need facts to go along with.

Oh but one last question for you? (and then I swear I’ll leave you alone) What was that piece of brilliance that got you so excited in Bush’s speech?

See you round Vinny, sorry you feel that way.

Let it never be said that I won’t admit when I make a mistake…

The quote I inserted in my post in this thread was not from the President’s press conference from April 28, 2005. I did a Google search looking for a transcript of the conference, but I accidentally quoted from a 2003 press conference instead. I should have double-checked the date on the transcript, but I spaced it.

Pres. Bush did mention Iraq as part of the “War on Terror” that began in the wake of 9/11, but the statement I quoted was not from this particular press conference.

Pls disregard previous submission, now I see what the President did. Brilliant, and I think everyone will get it except the MSM, which wouldn’t acknowledge it even if they got it, but I think it went right over their dim heads.

I haven’t listened to Rush today, so I’m not cheating. Here are my thoughts.

The President spoke of an “ownership society” where everyone regardless of economic status can build something that can be passed on to their families. He pointed out that poor people have much more to gain from this than the wealthy who already have capital. In the current system when one spouse of a two wage earner family passes away, the survivor can only collect one payment, the other payment is lost.

Nope. Although that was good, too.

Private accounts were OPTIONAL

Nope. Although that was good, too

I’ll take another whack at it.

The President put the democrats further on the defensive by referring to his party as the party of ideas, that it’s not enough just to appose things.

Much closer but not quite it.

Was it the parts when he said “ummm” and “uhhh” a lot, smiled nervously, and blamed the mess our economy is in on rising gas prices?

Or was it the part when he mentioned Iraq again in conjunction with 9/11?

It’s the same mentality, by the way, that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001: we’ll just destroy innocent life and watch the great United States and their friends and allies crater in the face of hardship. It’s the exact same mentality. And Iraq is a part of the war on terror. I said it’s a central front, a new front in the war on terror, and that’s exactly what it is. And that’s why it’s important for us to be tough and strong and diligent.

I have to admit, that was pretty brilliant. A lot of people are buying it…

Nope

Where he evaded reporters’ questions and nobody called him on it?

While I wouldn’t call this brilliant (more of a basic spin tactic) he repeated the phrase “voluntary personal accounts” in various different forms, in order to get the phrase “private accounts” off peoples mind as they recently discovered this phrase polls very poorly among the population. If anyone interpurated that as “brilliant” you need to read “All the Presidents Spin”, and you’ll find that pretty much anyone can spin this type of “brilliance”. Although I’ll bet you’re gonna tell me that’s not what you were referring, aren’t you?

Now that’s strange, took a guess, and the comment seems to have disappeared completely. Hmmm, let’s try again:

So rather than referring to his “private accounts” that he’s been pushing for Social Security lately, he changed it to “voluntary personal accounts” (reworded a few times to keep it “dynamic” because his communications team found out the term polled better. This is not brilliance in action, this is basic spin tactics, anyone who’s read “All the President’s Spin” would have caught this the second or third time he used the phrase. But I’m sure that’s not what you’re referring to, right Vinny?

“private accounts” that he’s been pushing for Social Security lately, he changed it to “voluntary personal accounts” NEWSFLASH TO PETER They were introduced as private voluntary accounts. Are you just now understanding that point?

pam: thanks, that newsflash was my main point, the word “private” has been replaced with “personal” (because it polls better) Bush has one of the sharpest communication teams in the game and they knew altering the language would help sell the proposal. And, as I said before, all these sort of language tricks are explained really well in “All the Presidents Spin”, it’s not anit-American, or just stupid Bush bashing, it’s an analytical look at the language politicians use today when addressing their voters. Trust me, it makes watching public addresses much more interesting.

Oh Peter… What you claimed to be the brilliance of the speech?

Isn’t.

Was it all those times where he just stood there and didn’t say anything at all?

Vinny, I think you misunderstood. I didn’t think any of the speech was brilliant, just rewording of the same programs that Bush been pushing since he got into power. To tell you the truth I don’t really have much of an opinioin at all on his Social Security package either way. I was just merely speculating on what the Bush crowd may have been impressed with.

I am however fascinated by the communications team that Bush works with, and to tell you the truth, how quickly Bush learns from them. Watching the presidential debates you could see a dramatic difference in how he presented himself from one to the next. I don’t think I’ve seen a politician learn those skills that quickly before. So there you have it, I’ve said something nice about Bush. His moment of brilliance from last night? Sorry Vinny, there just wasn’t one. But if a politician you supported/support is sticking to things that you want to hear, congratulations, you’ve picked some to represent what you believe in, which is more than most people can find a days.

Peter, you’re not as smart as you think. You’ve made a ton of assumptions and were wrong on every one of them.

But then again, that’s your style.

Assume someone means something, argue it to death, then beat that straw man until it stops moving entirely. You argue best against arguments that aren’t made. That works better over on Stageleft.

Alright Vinny, it’s your site…but then again you said I made a ton of assumptions that are wrong, and failed to point out any of them. You wanna talk style? The only thing I see from you is insults and no proof. Those kind of arguments will fail you every time if you want to attempt to discuss politics. Maybe you should stick to your latest religous revalations if you want to be able to talk about things you don’t need facts to go along with.

Oh but one last question for you? (and then I swear I’ll leave you alone) What was that piece of brilliance that got you so excited in Bush’s speech?

It’s coming. I just don’t feel like writing about it tonight. I do have your permission don’t I?

Oh, and don’t come back. You’re not welcome here Petey. Stick to Stageleft where your arguments fit into the neat little circle jerk and self congratulatory clique that his comment section is.

Any comment you post from here on out will be immediately deleted.

In other words, don’t waste your breath.

I’m not.

God Bless.

Let it never be said that I won’t admit when I make a mistake…

The quote I inserted in my post in this thread was not from the President’s press conference from April 28, 2005. I did a Google search looking for a transcript of the conference, but I accidentally quoted from a 2003 press conference instead. I should have double-checked the date on the transcript, but I spaced it.

Pres. Bush did mention Iraq as part of the “War on Terror” that began in the wake of 9/11, but the statement I quoted was not from this particular press conference.

Pls disregard previous submission, now I see what the President did. Brilliant, and I think everyone will get it except the MSM, which wouldn’t acknowledge it even if they got it, but I think it went right over their dim heads.