TheHeretic
Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007 From: California, USA Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales I was watching Bill Mahr and an interest subject was raised. Directly after the destruction of the World Trade Center, there was a great coming together of the American people. I make a point of not endorsing people I find to be bigots by watching their television programs, Spinner, but the question you raise seems good. I wasn't so impressed by the "coming together" and "surge of patriotism" that the pundits found so moving. It struck me as shallow, materialistic and uninformed. By that standard, yes, I think President Obama would do just as well, if not a little better. It is certainly a time for great orators to step up, and God knows we didn't have that last time 'round. If the US response to an attack was military, Obama would probably maintain that surge of popularity and support far longer than the shrub did. Can I risk saying something unpopular, and suggest that conservatives are more willing to put national security ahead of politics than liberals are? Just my opinion. On the other hand, if Pres. Obama chose a non-military sort of response, if he trotted out the new phrase "man-made disaster," and suggested we just needed to accept our fate to get bombed once in a while, that support would likely evaporate, and my guess is he would lose a lot of Democrats as well. Of course, with 9/11, we had a Texan in the White House. There were certain assumptions we could make. We still don't know who this man is.
_____________________________
If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced. That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.
|