SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jlallen who wrote (203138)11/15/2001 4:32:14 PM
From: calgal  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
MUGGER





Bush Standing Firm

jewishworldreview.com -- PRESIDENT BUSH's speech in Atlanta last Thursday night, typically lampooned as a "pep rally" by much of the media, was a well-written, confidently delivered update on America's international and domestic war efforts. Those who expected a repeat of the rhetorically brilliant oration he gave to Congress on Sept. 21 were disappointed, perhaps, but that's missing the point. That mournful if resolute call-to-action was one-of-a-kind, cemented in a particular time, and will be remembered as the first historic political address of the 21st century.

Instead, last week Bush finally gave a coherent explanation of the "mixed message" of citizens' resuming "normal" lives while living with the administration's consistent warnings of further-even imminent-terrorist attacks on this nation. Go to work, shop, play soccer, dine out, celebrate the holidays, but be cognizant of suspicious activities within your own community.

Then Flight 587 crashes on takeoff from JFK Monday morning-Veteran's Day-and the city is shut down again. That's life post-9/11. Bush's alert makes sense, especially to New Yorkers who remember the crime-ridden years of the late 80s and early 90s: Back then, returning home from work after dark, I'd often walk in the middle of the street, especially in the alarmingly dimly-lit neighborhoods of Soho and Tribeca. Today's threats are obviously magnified but the principle's the same: Either give in to fear and diminish your lifestyle or make the best of a crummy situation.

I thought the conclusion to Bush's speech in Atlanta was poignant, although you could hear the groans in newsrooms from Boston to Washington, DC.

He said: "Courage and optimism led the passengers on Flight 93 to rush their murderers to save lives on the ground, led by a young man [Todd Beamer] whose last known words were the Lord's Prayer and, 'Let's roll.' He didn't know he had signed on for heroism when he boarded the plane that day... We will always remember the words of that brave man expressing the spirit of a great country. We will never forget all we have lost and all we are fighting for... We cannot know every turn this battle will take, yet we know our cause is just and our ultimate victory is assured. We will no doubt face new challenges, but we have our marching orders.

"My fellow Americans, let's roll."

One more jingoistic bit of cornpone from the callow president-select was undoubtedly the reaction from the elitists in the mainstream press, who worry more about Afghan casualties than they do their fellow Americans. One more reason to write and broadcast stories about how badly the war is going, even though the conflict is still in its very beginning stages, and in recent days has yielded swift progress in toppling the Taliban.

(I can't help thinking that reporters and editors involved in the absurd recounting of Florida's election last year were distracted, hoping a definitive victory for Al Gore would emerge. That didn't happen, as is clear by reports in Monday's New York Times (a grudging rehash), The Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post, among other organizations.)

By the way, I include the GOP hawks who believe the United States ought to be bombing Baghdad right now in the doubting-Bush category. But there's no way Bush will stop with the Taliban: What further bulletin do naysayers like Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan need than the following statement from the President's Atlanta speech? "We are at the beginning of our efforts in Afghanistan, and Afghanistan is only the beginning of our efforts in the world. No group or nation should mistake Americans' intentions. Where terrorist groups exist of global reach, the United States and our friends and allies will seek it out, and we will destroy it.")

In any case, I'm certain Bush's "let's roll" sign-off-blunt and concise-met with cheers from those citizens who are frightened but emboldened at the same time. Even those "flinty Vermonters." I was glad that Bush didn't say the country had lost its innocence because of the Sept. 11 massacre, but instead stated that Americans are "sadder and less innocent." That's an important distinction: As I've written before, how many times can an individual, especially one who's reached adulthood, lose his or her innocence?

But "sadder," at least down in my downtown neighborhood, is completely accurate. Last Friday afternoon, I took my sons for a walk down Broadway-our destination was the recently re-opened J&R Music World on Park Row-and it was one more sobering reminder of how brutally Lower Manhattan has changed. It's impossible to close your eyes to the wreckage: In contrast to the now-bustling shopping districts above 14th St., these streets are a swirl of confusion and devastation. Concrete blockades restricting vehicular access, Red Cross trucks, cops as ubiquitous as bums during the Dinkins mayoralty, storefronts boarded up, vendors selling patriotic paraphernalia, wilted flowers and faded posters of missing WTC victims at any number of makeshift shrines, pedestrians milling about with glazed-over faces and the omnipresent smell of death still in the air. As we walked farther downtown, I couldn't help looking west at every block: The smoke, painful noise of bulldozers and the mere sight of the blighted landscape was enough to demoralize even Will Rogers.

As we passed by Trinity Church-now a tourist destination-I had an impulse to go inside and pray for the countless victims of the WTC atrocity; the murdered and their families, the small businessmen now bankrupt, residents still uprooted from their homes and the hope that this vital, vibrant financial district might somehow be made whole in years to come. My sons, resilient kids under the age of 10, didn't want to linger on our march. I couldn't blame them for trying to block out the civic carnage:

After two months of abnormal living conditions, in which they've memorized the face of Osama bin Laden, seen their ballfield and local park destroyed, fastened American flags on their school blazer lapels, watched President Bush on television, they understandably want to resume their carefree pre-Sept. 11 lives.

newsandopinion.com



To: jlallen who wrote (203138)11/15/2001 4:32:25 PM
From: Mr. Whist  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
"The number of laid-off Americans collecting benefits (3.83 million) reached an 18-year high, the Labor Department reported today."

Yep. Sounds to me like "Happy Days Are Here Again."



To: jlallen who wrote (203138)11/15/2001 4:43:10 PM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
POLL ANALYSES
November 14, 2001
Latest Summary: American Public Opinion and the War on Terrorism
The war, leadership, the economy, anthrax, and our daily lives

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

The War

After more than a month of military action in Afghanistan, two things are clear. First, nothing appears to have made a fundamental change in Americans' support for the war. Second, there are signs that Americans are becoming somewhat more optimistic about the war’s progress.

From the beginning, the public has been resolute in its support for military action against those responsible for the terrorist attacks. In the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Nov. 2-4, 86% approved of the military action -- almost the same as the 88% recorded in Gallup's Oct. 19-21 poll. Additionally, in a Nov. 8-11 poll, only 9% of Americans said that it was a mistake for the United States to send military forces to Afghanistan. Gallup has been asking this question since the Korean conflict, and this is the lowest "mistake" reading that Gallup has found. Even at the height of the Persian Gulf War, about two out of 10 Americans said that U.S. involvement was a mistake.

Support for the war is at almost universal levels among Republicans nationwide -- 97%. Eighty percent of Democrats support the war, as do 79% of independents. There is very little difference between men and women in their support for the military action.

The vast majority of those who approve of military action say they approve strongly, while those who disapprove do so in varying degrees: 71% say they support military action strongly, 15% moderately, 5% disapprove moderately, and 6% disapprove strongly.

There is a clear connection between views on the war and views about President Bush. Those who tend to be the most likely to disapprove strongly are those who don't approve of Bush overall. But, there are relatively few Americans who disapprove of Bush at this stage. He gets 87% approval for his handling of the U.S. military action and 89% for his overall handling of the war on terrorism.

Other U.S. leaders -- including Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Attorney General John Ashcroft, and Vice President Dick Cheney -- also get generally strong marks for their handling of the war on terrorism. Fewer people have an opinion about Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge’s handling of the war on terrorism, but those who have an opinion are similarly positive.

An early November poll had shown that there were mixed levels of satisfaction with the "progress made by the U.S. military in the war." Also, a mid-October poll had shown that only 42% of Americans said the United States and its allies were winning the war against terrorism. In the Nov. 8-11 poll, however, that percentage was up to 53%. While this is still nowhere near the January 1991 percentage of Americans who thought that the United States was winning the Persian Gulf War, it most likely reflects the news reports of the Taliban’s retreat from key Afghan cities.

When Americans were asked in October about the use of ground troops in Afghanistan, 80% approved. In early November, the poll measured support for putting "large numbers of ground troops into combat," and found support somewhat lower, at about the two-thirds level. Other polling has found that support for ground troops remains well above the 50% level, even when it is specified that there will be significant numbers of American military casualties as a result.

Support for ground troops is weakest among Democrats, non-whites, Americans ages 65 and up, and those living in the East.

While a majority of Americans have a positive opinion of the Afghan people (as opposed to their Taliban leadership or Osama bin Laden), previous polling has shown that Americans generally accept that civilian casualties may be a necessary part of war. In similar fashion, there is no strong sentiment, at this time, that the United States and its allies should be doing more to offer humanitarian aid to Afghanistan.

gallup.com



To: jlallen who wrote (203138)11/15/2001 6:04:04 PM
From: Jumper  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
>>enenmies of the Republic like China....<<

hohoho - Banana Nut Cake