Bush Was Brilliant at his Press Conference on Saddam’s Capture

newschannel5.com ^ | 12/15/2003 5:29:44 PM | NewsChannel5.com

[js1138]

I presume that you were not of age during the Eisenhower years.

I was of age in the Eisenhower years, at least old enough to read newspapers. My father got a rag named the Democratic Digest, and the stuff in it made FR's treatment of clinton look tame. Eisenhower, according to them, was the stupidest, laziest scum that ever held political office.

[carton253]

Destro, you can't be serious.

RightfromtheLeftCoast is correct when he says:

The man's delivered some of the most brilliant political speeches of the past century and that's not just my opinion. I don't know what this author is smoking, but I want some.

Especially the speech on 9/25/2001 - which he helped to write. I remember Karen Hughes showing us the outline and drafts... the President had his comments all over it.

Plus the two UN speeches...the Speech in Britain and in Australia... and the State the of the Union speech in Jan 2002 were brilliant.

[carton253]

So, tell me... how articulate were Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover?? LOL!

I think you've confused inarticulate with glib. The President isn't glib... but he is articulate.

[carton253]

Well... he did say "commiserate" when the appropriate word was "commensurate".

And he promptly corrected himself in the very next sentence.

[BenLurkin]

Perhaps I mis-spoke. What I meant to say is that President Bush responds to questions from the press as though he has a speech impediment, or perhaps is impaired in some way.

Still glad he's our Prez, though!

[OldPossum]

I misspoke. What I was trying to point out was that President Eisenhower had syntax problems when he spoke. He tended to jumble up words and phrases. This really has little to do with being "articulate."

I should defer to poster # 83 and agree that President Bush is indeed articulate. He is at times not "smooth" (like used car salesmen) but presents his ideas in a logical manner. His words sometimes do not flow as smoothly as one would wish but his statements are clear and comprehensible (at least to me). Ergo, I think he is articulate.

Comparing his speech to the syntax agonies of "Ike" is not a fair comparison. Sorry.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

All right, of "the past hundred years", is that better?

Jeesh.