A Day in the Life of President Bush (photos) - July 23, 2003

Yahoo.com, Netscape.com, Whitehouse.gov | 7/23/03 | ohioWfan

[Fawnn]

My mom just sent me one of those HTML-style e-mails (complete with bg music). It has an awwwwwwwww, God-related message.

If anyone would like to see it, freepmail me your regular e-mail address and I'll forward it. (I'm not sure I'm up to trying to remember how to put one of those "here is where you click to turn off the music" hoochies in a post or I'd post it here. Also, with the colored text and pictures, it's probably more appropriate just to send it to those who want to see/read it.)

[joybelle]

Think they might be trying to take a page from Dubya's book and trying to be civil. I think Hillary will run, and that screech will have to be listened to for months. I'll use my earplugs, can still hear.

[joybelle]

Anyone interested in having a rollicking evening and liking "Mr. Bean" should see his new movie. It is much better than his last.

[joybelle]

Did you see that picture of Arnold and Maria (?) It appeared the important parts weren't covered.

[manna]

What about Crystal Lite? I sent him a package of that and some beef jerky today. (I know, the combination is not great, but if he can handle MRE's, he can handle that.)

[Fawnn]

Yesterday, I decided to include a liberal I know among the ones to whom I forwarded Mark Steyn's "Here's the Truth: BUSH DIDN'T LIE" from the Chicago-Sun Times | 07-20-03 |.

Today said liberal replied by sending me a link to "Lies, damned lies, and duplicity" By DENNIS DOYLE National Catholic Reporter.

This is my reply to her (I tried to leave it in the larger/different fonts so it retained the emphasis, but nobody's perfect; just remember that the authors words are in smaller italics and my "wisdom about his wisdom" is reflected in the larger font.):

Well, the article was good until his summary. I don't agree that the author necessarily knows that Rumsfeld meant "last choice" to be a non-answer or distortion of a "last resort" reply. (We lived through 8 years of "not a shred of evidence" and "it depends on what the meaning of the word is is" defense attorney-style splitting hairs after all. Sadly, non-answers isn't a new phenomena.) For what it's worth, I've put the author's words in TNR italics below and left my opinions of his words in this nice big font. ;)

In this case, though, their deceptions did not diffuse a crisis but exacerbated one. In the author's opinion; it certainly doesn't appear that way from my perspective. Their deceptions did not save lives but led to many deaths. Using a phrase intellectuals seem to enjoy bandying about: How can any sensible person look at the number of mass graves uncovered (130 according to the last count I read; source: Human Rights Watch, www.hrw.org) and claim that our action in Iraq did not save lives? The author is employing the Chaminade technique he mentioned earlier in the article by following that up with a "led to many deaths" assertion. Their deceptions were not in the face of a clear and present danger but were precisely about whether a clear and present danger existed. I don't view the statements being made by our president or those in the administration as "deceptions." I doubt the author and I would ever reach agreement on what we each believe defines -- or qualifies as -- clear and present danger.

And, in this case, the ones knocking on the door were not the Nazis but the American people. Anyone comparing the American people (or the American people leading this country) to Nazis is out of touch with reality and history, imo.

I believe that when one considers the manner in which the author set up the pace at the beginning of his opinion piece, "one" can only reach the conclusion that the author himself used those "masking his true intent" techniques he contends he abhors when used for political purpose to get his message across. That message appears to me to be that he doesn't respect our country. Perhaps the author thinks that saying (writing) demeaning things about our country by making unfair comparisons to one of the most ruthless regimes of the 20th Century puts him somewhere above the riff-raff who don't see or share (his version of) the truth. I think it makes him a willing party to the politics of distortion.

I know in my heart, as a Christian if I had been in the same position as our president, it wouldn't have been an easy decision to decide to go to war, but based on what I know I believe that decision to go to war would have been my decision as well. (The president in this case has far more information than do I. I trust that he made his decision based on the truthfulness of that additional information. And, I feel better having a president I believe I can trust.)

Pam

[MEG33]

You did a great job !

[Fawnn]

Thanks! (I try, so it's nice to hear -- and get validation -- that an attempt went well.)

[MEG33]

I really hated that article's implications!Nazi's indeed.!

[Fawnn]

I really hated that article's implications!Nazi's indeed.!

I really resented the duplicitous way he set up the article so he could (cleverly) do his GOTCHA!HAHAHA! at the end!

[MEG33]

Duplicitous...LOL

[ohioWfan]

Crystal Lite is great, manna! And Eric likes beef jerky a lot, so the combination is just fine!

They're getting one hot meal a day, and two MRE's, so anything to break up the monotony is wonderful!

Thanks so much for thinking of him!

[patriciaruth]

Sent package 5 weeks ago. :-(

[patriciaruth]

The Omega Man...could think of that title. Thanks for the post of Heston's movies!