Posted on 05/08/2003 1:23:20 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
At today's White House news briefing, WND asked presidential press secretary Ari Fleischer about comments Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., made yesterday lashing out at President Bush's use of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln for a speech last week.
Before WND queried Fleischer, other reporters asked questions about the president's time at sea and Democratic criticism of the event. The spokesman said Bush "is proud to have visited the Abraham Lincoln, to have flown onto it to say thank you in person to those who defend our country. That's the president's focus; that's why he did it. He's proud of the way he did it and he's proud he did it."
WND's question was cast in light of Bush's accuser's political legacy in West Virginia:
WND: Considering Sen. Byrd's charging the president with flamboyant showmanship on the Lincoln, what is the president's reaction to what an editor of West Virginia's Charleston Gazette noted this morning are so many dozens of buildings, roads, statues, bridges, locks, dams, hospitals and even a river named by Robert C. Byrd, that there have been signs posted, the Robert C. Byrd telephone poll and the Robert C. Byrd parking meter? And I have one follow-up.
FLEISCHER: Why don't you ask your follow-up first. (Laughter.)
WND: Doesn't the president – don't you have some reaction to this showmanship business?
FLEISCHER: I think we've exhausted that topic.
WND then asked about the public outcry in reaction to anti-Bush comments made by the lead singer of the Dixie Chicks.
WND: The Dixie Chicks, a country music trio, has suffered a decline in sales and radio playtime due to their lead singer's comment in London that she is ashamed the president is from Texas. And my question: Is the president equally ashamed that the Dixie Chicks are from Texas?
FLEISCHER: Lester, I would be ashamed if you were acknowledging that you did not watch the president's moving interview with Tom Brokaw in which he answered that question. So we'll be –
WND: Who's Tom Brokaw? (Laughter.)
FLEISCHER: So we'll be happy – (laughter) – be happy to provide you a tape.
The contrast between Bush's historic landing and Clinton's attempts at photo-ops "with the troops" could not be more stark, and it is the contrast between a leader and a scoundrel. A scoundrel that Byrd seems to have a spiritual kinship with.
I would love to see the Dems cling to this "attack" straight through to the election.
Couldn't agree with you more. This Democrat push is akin to a suicide mission.
Ah, that's it, they heard about the 72 virgins and now they're "suicide democrats." Finally, an explanation that makes sense.
LOL, thanks for the laugh!
FLEISCHER: Lester, I would be ashamed if you were acknowledging that you did not watch the president's moving interview with Tom Brokaw in which he answered that question.
I missed the Lockjaw interview - how did the President reply?
We heard a lifelong Democrat on Fresno's talk radio today say that he is appalled by Waxman and Byrd's position on this nonissue and is switching his registration and going to vote for Bush in the next election.
Please, Dims, keep it up!
I imagine they belong to the NAG gang, and if that's the case, they can have them. (1st one Byrd would meet is a Helen Thomas look-a-like...)
The Dems throw away vote of the military in the 2000 election sure did not help them at all with the military, and their refusal to vote for a bill that would have allowed the military to vote on bases overseas was the final nail into the coffin.
And they wonder why the military despises them?
Very good point!
Claim: Photographs show Presidents Clinton and Bush peering through binoculars with the lens caps still in place.
Status: Undetermined.
Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001]
The picture on the left is of Bill Clinton. The picture on the right is of George W. Bush. Both pictures were taken at the Korean DMZ. What is at issue is that one of the two didn't have enough sense to remove the lens caps from the binoculars before the photo opportunity. Perhaps one of them was more interested in posing and too clueless to ask why everything was black, while the other was simply interested in seeing.
Origins: The photographs above have been a favorite item of political humor on web sites since last year, and now they've been joined by a similar picture representing the opposite end of the spectrum: Whether real or manipulated, these photographs demonstrate nothing beyond the trivial. As much as we may enjoy poking fun at our politicians, they aren't so clueless that they don't know binoculars don't work with the lens caps in place, or would stand confusedly staring through capped binoculars at total blackness for several minutes at a time. Hardly anyone among us hasn't accidentally raised a capped pair of binoculars to his eyes for a few moments before realizing the problem; the difference is that most of us don't have a crowd of photographers hanging around us all day long just waiting to snap such a picture of the moment. Also, there are reasons why binoculars (especially types used by the military) shown in a photograph might appear to be capped when they really aren't: the lenses could be coated with a non-reflective material to cut down on glare and prevent gleams of light from reflecting off the lens and revealing one's position to the enemy, or the binoculars could be NVD (night vision devices) which also work in daylight (provided they have caps with small holes in place to block out most of the light). In these particular cases, a close-up examination of the photograph of President Clinton reveals blurriness around the putative lens caps indicative of digital manipulation:...
And another photograph of President Bush taken from the same sequence as the one above demonstrates that even if his binoculars did ini tially have their lens caps in place, they weren't there for long:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.