UPDATE: Republican Assures The Public Bush Can Follow A Discussion

Published on June 9th, 2006

UPDATE: There has been some questioning about the interview I heard even to the point of suggesting I made it up. Well, NPR puts up audio podcasts of their shows and yesterday’s is now online. It’s from their show Day to Day and the interview was with House Majority Whip Roy Blunt. Go there and listen for yourself. It is right at the beginning of the interview about 15 seconds in.

The quote was, “”I think the President was very engaged in the meeting, he was interested in the reports from the various members…”

I know supporters will jump on me saying I’m reading too much into this. But, why would this even be mentioned at all or stated this way unless it was something unusual or unexpected. Especially notice that Blunt says “I think the President was very engaged…” Not that he was certain, that he thinks the President was.

Listening to NPR at lunchtime, I heard part of a short interview with a Republican Congressman who was in the meeting with Bush about what was happening in Iraq just before word came that Zarqawi was killed. What struck me was he made a point of mentioning that Bush was engaged and following what was being discussed.

Yes, a member of his party tried to reassure the public that Bush actually knew what was happening. For all his faults, could you ever imagine anyone saying that about Clinton? That the president has some comprehension of what was being said in a meeting, understood what was going on, that he wasn’t asleep, not brain dead, etc. What a guy we got in the White House that a comment like that has to be made at all. By a supporter.

43 users responded in " UPDATE: Republican Assures The Public Bush Can Follow A Discussion "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Joe Warpinski said, on June 8th, 2006 at 1:11 pm

No kidding.

How do you think clinton would have handled this whole situation in Iraq? Not only did we elect the worst public speaking president the nation has ever seen, we elected the guy who always seems to not know what the hell is going on (i.e. 9/11). If someone in the meeting had to actually tell the president what HIS OWN meeting was about, then there is more to be said about this administration.

# 2 Lou said, on June 8th, 2006 at 1:18 pm

You had to really dig hard for this hearsay, out of context, piece of crap. If you are going to bash Bush at least do it with a some creative flair!!

# 3 Gary Marks said, on June 8th, 2006 at 1:38 pm

I think this looks a lot better when you shift the emphasis a bit. For instance, everyone is aware that most of the accomplishments in Bush’s life have come either entirely due to, or at least facilitated by, his family connections. But by gosh, he’s developed the ability to follow a discussion ALL ON HIS OWN, baby! The liberals simply cannot admit what a great personal achievement this is, just because it’s Bush. They’d be all over this if it was a 12-year-old retarded black child who developed this ability because of some special education program they were pushing as part of their liberal agenda. Bush just never gets the credit he deserves because he’s never been clinically diagnosed as either black or retarded.

# 4 moss said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:04 pm

Well, no one says he’s Black.

# 5 American Soldier said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:12 pm

Wow Dvorak, you should become the Ann Coulter of the left instead of a technology journalist!

Stick to the tech as this kind of poop offends the nose and merely draws more flies.

# 6 Uncle Dave said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:43 pm

Lou. It wasn’t out of context. That was what the congressman said.

# 7 Todd said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:43 pm

Clinton always paid attention to those in the room – just ask Monica…

# 8 AB CD said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:49 pm

Perhaps it has to do with the media constantly saying Bush is dumb?
It’s why Tipper Gore had to emphasize how exciting Al Gore is, etc. Or maybe the Congressman himself was just so surprised by it.

>How do you think clinton would have handled Iraq?

Probably as a disaster. He evacuated Somalia in embarrassment. He bombed Iraq to distract from his scandals, saying there was WMD.

# 9 Uncle Dave said, on June 8th, 2006 at 2:51 pm

#5, John didn’t post the story.

# 10 RBG said, on June 8th, 2006 at 3:36 pm

9. Can you assure us he is engaged and following what is being discussed?

RBG

# 11 Tim Harris said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:02 pm

I LOVE PROPOGANDA ! MORE PLEASE ! I want my president braindead so all the elitists can run around and play pacman !

# 12 Anon said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:08 pm

“Who’s the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?”. Obi-Wan Kenobi.

# 13 Joe Warpinski said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:16 pm

>Probably as a disaster. He evacuated Somalia in embarrassment. He bombed Iraq to distract from his scandals, saying there was WMD.

Thats why he had a 3 billion dollar surplus on our economy, right?

And Tipper Gore emphasizing Al Gore’s “Brilliance” is more of a compliment from his WIFE, not a member of congress.

But that’s just my opinion.

# 14 MisterRustic said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:18 pm

Paying attention causes Global Warming

# 15 chris said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:46 pm

look the conseravtives can try to defend Bush.
“You had to really dig hard for this hearsay, out of context, piece of crap. If you are going to bash Bush at least do it with a some creative flair!! ”
gee Lou why didnt you say that uncle dave had cooties also?
I voted for Clinton and when he went stupid i was one of the first to say he was screwing up. Bush supporters know they have a puppet moron in office and they just cant take one for the team.
“yeah i know GW has his moments, but look at what he has done….”
O wait they cant say that….. what has he done????

# 16 Mr. H. Fusion said, on June 8th, 2006 at 4:58 pm

Paying attention causes Global Warming
Comment by MisterRustic — 6/8/2006 @ 4:18 pm

Hhmmm, wife caught you using her hair dryer again.

# 17 Mr. H. Fusion said, on June 8th, 2006 at 5:01 pm

Wow Dvorak, you should become the Ann Coulter of the left instead of a technology journalist!
Stick to the tech as this kind of poop offends the nose and merely draws more flies.
Comment by American Soldier — 6/8/2006 @ 2:12 pm

If your nose offends you then cut it off.

BTW, Dvorak didn’t post this, one of his esteemed editors, Uncle Dave, did.

# 18 Geoff said, on June 8th, 2006 at 5:02 pm

How would Clinton have handled Iraq. By staying out. By not sending 2400+ of our talented young men over there to die for “our freedom”. By not endangering the whole world by creating a whole new generation of terrorist. In short, he would not have had to. Iraq was already handled.

# 19 joshua said, on June 8th, 2006 at 5:07 pm

#13…joe…..no joe….he had a surplus because he had a Republican congress that kept him in check. And a huge technology bubble and Enron and World Com…..all unchecked because he was to busy being all things to all people and seducing interns and widows.

I find it interesting that his poll marks are high, and people say they would vote for him again(knowing full well they can’t and won’t actually have to), but one of the reasons given

by those against Hillary and even some who like her for not being in favor of her election is because they don’t want Bill back in the White House.

I don’t want to get into that who did what game….my point is only that we can make any President look bad or good with hind sight. Usually we can make them look bad.

Bush isn’t stupid, you don’t get to the White House just because of your name (think Ted Kennedy), you have to be smart, and willing to do whats needed to get elected in a fickle, unattentive country like ours.

# 20 Sounds The Alarm said, on June 8th, 2006 at 6:08 pm

Actually he would have finished the job in the ‘Stan and stayed away from Iraq.

But your god, George, just keeps on messin up. Now go pray to him & keep watching FOX!

# 21 Joe Warpinski said, on June 8th, 2006 at 6:16 pm

Good call josh, but Clinton still had a surplus. And, Bush has one of the most corrupt companys on his side in Halle-Burton.

I don’t care anymore. I just can’t wait for the next 3 years to get over with.

# 22 JHS said, on June 8th, 2006 at 7:13 pm

John can you focus when your getting a BJ?

# 23 Milo said, on June 8th, 2006 at 7:18 pm

“Bush isn’t stupid, you don’t get to the White House just because of your name(think Ted Kennedy),”

Ted Kennedy doesn’t have the same name as any President and Bush is stupid. Other than that…

# 24 American Solder said, on June 8th, 2006 at 7:22 pm

I’m so insecure that I have to post a title to identify myself as the hero I want to be rather than the weak, cheap, easily melted metal that I am.

# 25 Bogdon said, on June 8th, 2006 at 9:06 pm

Uncle Dave,
Do you have a transcript to support your claim, or it is mere hearsay?

# 26 Roc Rizzo said, on June 9th, 2006 at 5:51 am

Come on, give Dubya a break. He has all that brush to cut on his ranch in Crawford, and all. You don’t really expect him to concentrate on the nation’s concerns. Heck, wild animals may take over the ranch.

And he’s not stupid, he’s just cerebrally challenged. That’s why he wears that wireless device all the time. So that Cheney can tell him, in his own terms, what things mean. When it appears that he is not concentrating on the issue at hand, it’s really because he’s listening on his device to the explaination being given.

And you should know one other thing, Ann Coulter is a man. Women don’t have adam’s apples as big as her’s.

# 27 Gary Marks said, on June 9th, 2006 at 6:21 am

Thanks for the update, Uncle Dave, but I think you’re reading too much into this. Blunt was surprised at how engaged Bush seemed because he was also fiddling with his iPod at the time, searching for a particular song. Obviously Blunt has never attended a cabinet meeting, where the President is known to get really jiggy, even while paying careful attention to the reports. Bush is quite a multitasker, but few people give him credit.

# 28 jack said, on June 9th, 2006 at 6:29 am

Dave, how can you make such claims about the Fuhrer! (You must hate freedom.)

# 29 GCRaya said, on June 9th, 2006 at 8:11 am

Pres. Bush is like Hitler? I’m sorry but you must be thinking of a different Hitler than I know of. Pres. Bush is a huge contrast of the man who killed thousands of Jews and Poles. If you are going to compare Pres. Bush to somebody know your history about the person. Don’t try to rewrite history.

If Clinton was in power when we went into Iraq it would turn into WW3. If you look back during WW2 everybody was saying the samethings they were about Hitler as they were about Saddaam. “He is not a threat to us right now. If we just leave him alone, he won’t bother us.”

Thank God we had someone in office that decided to do something in offence rather than in defense.

# 30 Sounds The Alarm said, on June 9th, 2006 at 8:53 am

#29

I agree with you that in no way is Bush like Hitler.

Hitler was somewhat efficient and actually saw combat. Bush chased tail in Houston and did coke and booze. Hitler was also a great speech maker, where as Bush makes James Brown look totally articulate.

Now if you’re saying that Saddam was like Hitler then you obviously go to school on the small bus.

1) Germany’s population in 1935 was ~88million, Iraq like 5 or 6 million.
2) Germany’s industrial plant was in excess of all other countries in Europe with the exception of Russia. Iraq? No industry to speak of.
3) Germany was behind Hitler (at least in the beginning) to a man. Most of Iraq’s population (Shiite) hated Saddam and were looking for a way to whack the guy.

Besides even neocons now admit that there were more pressing threats from N Korea and Iran.

I have to observe that given your “facts” and that you spell Saddam, Saddaam; you must be an avid FOX news watcher and have a Bill O’Reilly blowup doll.

# 31 AB CD said, on June 9th, 2006 at 9:48 am

>By staying out.

Then why was Clinton bombing? Why did he have troops in Iraq? Why was he maintaining no-fly zones? Why was he keeping sanctions? Why didn’t he get out of Iraq? Why did he occupy it for 8 years(now 16 total)?

# 32 Bogdon said, on June 9th, 2006 at 10:02 am

Uncle Dave,
I appreciate that you included the audio link and actual text.

I think you are reading too much into it, but that’s your prerogative.

# 33 jeff said, on June 9th, 2006 at 10:13 am

Please folks, stopping bashing Bush. Do any of you really think he is or has ever been in charge? Come on, he was bought when he decided to run for President. Why else did he get 3-4 times as much in campaign contributions as McCain. Bush has never been in charge since he’s been President.

When you hear Republicans say they want less government, this is what they are talking about. Not anything else. Because someone in charge trying to make decisions just gets in the way of corporations.

# 34 Milo said, on June 9th, 2006 at 12:34 pm

The Bush administration is indeed Fascist. Key points:

War is good, so eternal war.

Militarizing the state.

Emotion over reason.

Action over talk.

Supreme leader, embodying the state.

Scapegoating. (This is not a belief but the crucial technique.)

Another technique that is difficult to describe succinctly is covert actions by others so that the supreme leader never has to look bad yet are obviously approved by him and work to his favour. The Swift Boat Vets etc.

Bush isn’t a Hitler, more of a Mussolini.

# 35 Roc Rizzo said, on June 9th, 2006 at 12:46 pm

Bush is NOT like Hitler…

Hitler was fairly elected, Bush got appointed by the Supreme Court.

# 36 Gary Marks said, on June 9th, 2006 at 4:38 pm

Also, Bush has way better hair than Hitler. Many historians privately agree that Hitler’s haircut was his downfall.

# 37 Mr. H. Fusion said, on June 9th, 2006 at 8:19 pm

If Clinton was in power when we went into Iraq it would turn into WW3.

If Clinton was in power, we wouldn’t have gone into Iraq.

# 38 Mr. H. Fusion said, on June 9th, 2006 at 8:24 pm

Get your history straight. Clinton did not have any troops stationed in Iraq. The terms of the cease fire after the Gulf War included the sanctions and no fly zones. The only Americans in Iraq during this time were members of the UN Atomic Energy Commission and Chemical and Biological Warfare Investigators. As part of the “No-Fly Zone”, Iraq was not allowed to use radar. Whenever they turned on their radar, the Americans and British would bomb the radar installation.

# 39 Sounds The Alarm said, on June 9th, 2006 at 11:53 pm

#31 & 38

AB CD’s history is a lot like the work of the “artist” christo. Its all bullshit, but you have to admire the balls of anyone who gets so much so wrong so often.

For those of you who don’t know who christo is, he became famous for painting all the rocks on a small Mediterranean island pink.

# 40 joshua said, on June 10th, 2006 at 4:48 am

# 23…Milo….I know it gets really cold up there in Canada, and it can make you forgetful….but if I’m not mistaken there was a President Kennedy in 1960 to 1963….oh, and guess what….he was the BROTHER of Ted Kennedy.

You might even have heard of another Kennedy, who was on his way to his party’s nomination when he was assasinated….Robert Kennedy…..also the older brother of little Ted Kennedy.

Ted even ran for President….but he didn’t make it to far, quit before the first primary.

# 41 Mr. H. Fusion said, on June 10th, 2006 at 7:08 am

“I mean, I read the newspaper. I mean, I can tell you what the headlines are. I must confess, if I think the story is, like, not a fair appraisal, I’ll move on. But I know what the story’s about.”

George Bush, Philadelphia, Dec. 12, 2005

# 42 Milo said, on June 10th, 2006 at 10:56 am

The last time I checked Ted was a different name from John.

# 43 AB CD said, on June 11th, 2006 at 6:44 am

So you admit Clinton was bombing Iraq, at least those radar stations. He bombed more occasionally, like the day his impeachment vote was scheduled. You need to check your history. The Kurds and Southern Iraq were both being protected by US and British forces. I would call that an occupation of Iraq, even if they weren’t in Baghdad.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!