I Always Felt Contempt For The Left Wing View Of Bush Staying With The Kids on 9/11

Pages

I Always Felt Contempt For The Left Wing View Of Bush Staying With The Kids on 9/11

By Rightwingconspirator

Opinion • May 2011 • Views: 867

And I suspect I always will. Read the whole thing. Looks like the truth to me.

time.com

One thing they’d like to tell Bush’s critics — like liberal filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2004 documentary Fahrenheit 911 disparaged Bush for lingering almost 10 minutes with the Booker students after getting word that two planes had crashed into New York’s World Trade Center — is that they think the President did the right thing. “I think he was trying to keep everybody calm, starting with us,” says Guerrero. Dubrocq agrees: “I think he was trying to protect us.” Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose’-Rigell, who died in 2007, later insisted, “I don’t think anyone could have handled it better. What would it have served if [Bush] had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?”

9/11

Recent Pages by Rightwingconspirator:
What Result Will There Be From the Trump Trial? Russia's New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka Climate Scientist Michael Mann Wins Defamation Case Against Right Wing Hacks About That Flood Warning for Los Angeles? Coastal Serenity

Jump to bottom

31 comments

steve_davis Wed, May 4, 2011 8:00:20am

"I don't think anyone could have handled it better. What would it have served if [Bush] had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?"

Other than showing that the president had some clue what was going on, rather than sitting in a chair for several minutes with a stunned look on his face, I guess nothing.

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 8:03:58am

re: #1 steve_davis

So you support the conspiracy idea? You really need better evidence than body language...

elizajane Wed, May 4, 2011 8:34:54am

I read that Time article and agree completely. The self-control that it took for Bush to sit calmly in front of those children reading a book, when he knew that all H*** had broken loose in his country on his watch, was admirable and it was exactly the right thing (and the hard thing) for him to do. I've always found the people who criticized him for it totally petty. There are very, very few things Bush ever did that I respected, but that was one.

Winny Spencer Wed, May 4, 2011 8:35:39am

"I Always Felt Contempt For The Left Wing View Of Bush", period.

Prideful, Arrogant Marriage Equality Advocate Wed, May 4, 2011 8:47:37am

I didn't know there was a left wing contempt for Bush about this. But i completely agree that Bush did the right thing. What was he suppose to do?
But i have never been able to hate Bush like some other democrats -and apparently now, some right wingers- i don't know why, he always seemed like a sincere guy compared to other high profile Republicans around him, and i have always liked Laura.
Now Rove, him i could hate easily if i wanted to.

Sionainn Wed, May 4, 2011 9:05:26am

re: #3 elizajane

I read that Time article and agree completely. The self-control that it took for Bush to sit calmly in front of those children reading a book, when he knew that all H*** had broken loose in his country on his watch, was admirable and it was exactly the right thing (and the hard thing) for him to do. I've always found the people who criticized him for it totally petty. There are very, very few things Bush ever did that I respected, but that was one.

I feel the same way.

andres Wed, May 4, 2011 9:48:42am

There wasn't a right or wrong choice for Bush, only tough choices. And he did what he though was best. We should ask no more.

HappyWarrior Wed, May 4, 2011 9:50:39am

I was guilty at the time of criticizing him for this but thinking back on it with a more rational and adult mind (I was a teen during the Bush years), I realize I was probably wrong to fault him for it. I think there's a bit Bush deserves criticism for but this isn't one of those things.

Tigger2005 Wed, May 4, 2011 10:11:54am

Too many people, on the "right" and the "left" (oversimplistic classifications anyway) do NOT think and reflect, like adults have a responsibility to do. People on the "left" talk like Bush never, ever, ever did anything right. Some are trying to deny him ANY credit for bin Laden's death, just like people on the "right" are trying to deny Obama any credit. This is just absurd...certainly some of Bush's actions and decisions helped create the conditions in which this operation was possible.

I even saw some of the commenters at a site someone on LGF linked to the other day bringing up the 9/11 conspiracy theory again, in a sneaky, wink-wink manner...talking about a plan the "right" had to overthrow all enemy regimes, which just needed some sort of attack within the U.S. to trigger it. You could tell they were implying that 9/11 was a setup.

Our Precious Bodily Fluids Wed, May 4, 2011 10:15:04am

I don't know, but I suspect (and hope) Secret Service protocol forbids instantly jumping up and thundering off in a situation like that. It would be prudent to assume that a huge, expertly-planned and executed terrorist attack would include an assassination attempt. The President's exact location was public knowledge, and while I'm sure the SS scrutinizes exit all routes ahead of time, they probably had to take a minute to figure out the extent of the situation and how to react accordingly.

shecky Wed, May 4, 2011 10:40:50am

That's s nice puff piece aimed at repairing Dubya's reputation, told through the eyes of kids who happened to be present during a historic event. The reason those former second graders likely remember the event at all is because they found out after the fact that it was an historic event, and formed their memories of how it went down as a result.

Plenty of people felt completely justified criticizing his reaction, for the same reason they felt completely justified invading the wrong country as a result. Face it. Americans lost their shit when 9/11 happened. The kids saw his reaction and thought maybe they were in trouble. Had he excused himself, they would be remembering how noble it was that duty called the President. Had he shed a tear, they would be remembering the sensitivity he showed. But what the rest of the world saw looked like puzzlement, confusion, inaction. The reaction of a man in over his head, the man who would disasterously surrender judgment to his neocon advisers.

Sadly, the perception of GWB's puzzlement, confusion, inaction were not unique to 9/11, but were to be recurring themes to his presidency.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 12:41:49pm

re: #9 Tigger2005

Some are trying to deny him ANY credit for bin Laden's death, just like people on the "right" are trying to deny Obama any credit. This is just absurd...certainly some of Bush's actions and decisions helped create the conditions in which this operation was possible.

What is your theory that Bush should be given some "credit" for bin Laden's death?

It is possible that this incident is accruing too much credit to President Obama.

Yes, Bush's actions helped to create the conditions in with the "opera-ton" was possible, since rather than capturing or killing bin Laden in 2001, he attacked Iraq, took over Afghanistan, and wasn't concerned about bin Laden (his own consistent statements).

The attack of Iraq will go down as one of our Nation's greatest miscues.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 12:54:42pm

re: #2 Rightwingconspirator

So you support the conspiracy idea? You really need better evidence than body language...

"Conspiracy"? I don't know.
Evidence? You want "evidence"?

In the mid-90's, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was written by the Neo-cons (e.g., Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, Rumsfield, Paul Wolfovich, Douglas Feith), which reflected that the U.S. was the sole superpower.

It's initial plan was to promote the overthrow of Iraq by military means.
A letter was sent to President Bill Clinton in 1998 suggesting this action. Clinton declined the offer.
Simultaneously, they went to Congress and lobbied until they obtained a vote calling for a change in the leadership of Iraq.
THE AUTHORS OF THE PLAN, i.e., not an outside editorial, SUGGESTED THAT THEIR PLAN DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO GET OFF THE DRAWING BOARD UNLESS WE HAD A CATACLYSMIC EVENT.

When President Bush took Office in January 2001, almost the first thing discussed, according to Paul O'Neill (Bush's first Secretary of the Treasury), was Iraq.

Bush cut all ties with the Middle East peace negotiations between the Palestinians and Israeli's.
(Why was this done? Could it be that they knew that this might excite the radical Islamic faction?)

NOTE: Actions have consequences. Did we contemplate the possible consequences of our actions?

I don't know........................

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 3:08:05pm

re: #13 mikiesmoky2
Whatever led to Iraq has nothing to do with his calm reaction at the school. Your evidence has no relation to the topic at hand.
Bill Clinton did sign the policy of regime change in Iraq as a US policy goal. I feel confident that policy change was far more a result of Saddams behavior and violent history than a single letter from the PNAC.

So since this Page is all about Bush's reaction at the school on 9/11 and not Iraq I'll not debate your conclusions on that matter here. After all as you would say bringing up Iraq on this is a "convolution". As I would say it is unrelated. A deliberate distraction, a "red herring" as it were.

No matter what Bush had planned for Iraq he did not know to expect airliners to be crashed into NYC that morning. The oft cited PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing) was far too vague for anything like that. And BTW the 9/11 "Truthers" are full of crap. Bush had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. 19 men with Al Qaeda did.

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 3:17:55pm

re: #12 mikiesmoky2

Of course some credit should be given to GWB for the death of Bin Laden. Obviously. It's just a shame critics and partisans seek to distort it for selfish motives. Amusingly, enhanced interrogation did help turn some captured men around so they did give certain tidbits of information that ultimately led to his killing.

The idea that Bush backed off on finding Osama is just laughable. So many things point against it. Like the interrogations, black prisons, renditions, Gitmo itself, the early predator strikes, the deals with Musharraf, on and on and on.

If Bush could have grabbed him so easily it would not take Obama so long to do the same. Implication of traitorous behaviors (like deliberately not catching Osama) by Bush require more evidence than hearsay, circumstance and partisan bickering. His re election would have been helped by the capture or killing. Notice it was years later when our people finally got him.

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 3:23:38pm

re: #13 mikiesmoky2

When Bush cut ties to the lying cheating stealing and recalcitrant leader of the PLO (Yasser Arafat) he did exactly the right thing. All the PLO had to do was stop shooting to make a peace deal. The rest is convolution.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 6:25:21pm

re: #14 Rightwingconspirator

Whatever led to Iraq has nothing to do with his calm reaction at the school. Your evidence has no relation to the topic at hand.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 6:40:20pm

re: #17 mikiesmoky2

I MUST HAVE MADE AN ERROR, SINCE IT POSTED WITHOUT MY COMMENTS....THUS, WILL TRY AGAIN:

Responding to your #14 (rightwingconspirator)

Daniel, we have discuss your non-responsive answers ad nauseam.
I just don't understand what causes this malady.
Is it the "prism" within your mind.

What part of my comment (#13) did you think you responded?

Whew!!!

You know that I appreciate ANY and ALL responses, with particular emphasis and appreciation with those who disagree (offering the rationale for such disagreement) and those who offer incremental information.

Thank you,

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 6:44:26pm

re: #14 Rightwingconspirator

REGARDING: Bill Clinton did sign the policy of regime change in Iraq as a US policy goal. I feel confident that policy change was far more a result of Saddams behavior and violent history than a single letter from the PNAC.

RESPONSE: The legislation was not from a "single" letter, i.e., it was a concerted effort on the part of the Neo-cons. If I misled you to believe that the legislation came from that letter, I apologize.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 6:55:00pm

re: #14 Rightwingconspirator

REGARDING: So since this Page is all about Bush's reaction at the school on 9/11 and not Iraq I'll not debate your conclusions on that matter here. After all as you would say bringing up Iraq on this is a "convolution". As I would say it is unrelated. A deliberate distraction, a "red herring" as it were.

WOW!!!! x 4283 = 4,283 WOWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was RESPONDING to your comments as follows:

re: #2 Rightwingconspirator
So you support the conspiracy idea? You really need better evidence than body language...

Daniel...., get a grip!!!! LOL

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 7:11:29pm

re: #14 Rightwingconspirator

REGARDING: No matter what Bush had planned for Iraq he did not know to expect airliners to be crashed into NYC that morning.
RESPONSE: How do you KNOW what he expected? I am guessing that you are not omniscient. lol

REGARDING: And BTW the 9/11 "Truthers" are full of crap. Bush had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. 19 men with Al Qaeda did.
RESPONSE: Again..., how did you obtain "perfect" knowledge. It very well could be that the "Truthers" are misguided. Again..., I don't know.
But....., if, tomorrow, it were disclosed that Bush knew of the event, I would not be shocked. I would just be curious as to know how that information was disclosed and the veracity thereof.

mikiesmoky2 Wed, May 4, 2011 7:15:19pm

re: #15 Rightwingconspirator

Daniel, you may be a victim of "tending to believe what you want to believe".

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 7:29:00pm

re: #19 mikiesmoky2

Right, well I think it was about Saddams actions, rather than neocon actions.

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 7:29:30pm

re: #20 mikiesmoky2

Well that comment was a reply to someone else.

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 7:31:38pm

re: #21 mikiesmoky2

I claim no special omniscience. I claim that "I know"under the general reasonable use of the term. Synonymous with "I have come to conclude".

Whoops Dinner time

Daniel Ballard Wed, May 4, 2011 7:33:36pm

re: #22 mikiesmoky2

You may or may not be the best judge of that. LOL.

mikiesmoky2 Thu, May 5, 2011 10:53:14am

re: #23 Rightwingconspirator

Right, well I think it was about Saddams actions, rather than neocon actions.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The "push" for the legislation was the Neocons.
They had a purpose (motive), i.e., the stated PNAC desire to attack Iraq.

mikiesmoky2 Thu, May 5, 2011 10:59:39am

re: #25 Rightwingconspirator

I claim no special omniscience. I claim that "I know"under the general reasonable use of the term. Synonymous with "I have come to conclude".

Whoops Dinner time

You "concluded" that they had no idea that airliners could be used??
Interesting conclusion.
I remember seeing and listening to Connie Rice, as she was in front of the White House, exclaim the same thing, i.e., "we had no idea that they would use airliners as weapons". That, my friend, was and is a lie. They were aware, thus my "conclusion" that yours is a very "interesting conclusion".

Daniel Ballard Thu, May 5, 2011 1:41:43pm

re: #27 mikiesmoky2

Saddams actions very clearly predate the neocons very existence. That's no chicken and egg circumstance

Daniel Ballard Thu, May 5, 2011 1:43:34pm

re: #28 mikiesmoky2

You "concluded" that they had no idea that airliners could be used??
Interesting conclusion.
I remember seeing and listening to Connie Rice, as she was in front of the White House, exclaim the same thing, i.e., "we had no idea that they would use airliners as weapons". That, my friend, was and is a lie. They were aware, thus my "conclusion" that yours is a very "interesting conclusion".

mz

Glad my conclusion is interesting. What is your conclusion?

mikiesmoky2 Fri, May 6, 2011 5:30:20pm

re: #30 Rightwingconspirator