Me? Politics?

[jmfargo]

I was reading an article on Yahoo! News about President Bush today and there was a paragraph that really made me wonder about his reasoning skills. No, I'm not calling him dumb or making fun of him, I just really want to know how his logic circuits are wired.

Here is the paragraph with his direct quote:

Bush rejected criticism from Democrats that his administration had not paid enough attention to the brewing North Korean nuclear crisis. "The North Korean situation was serious for years," he said in a veiled swipe at former
President Clinton.

So there's what he said, and here's what I'm wondering:

What the hell does that have to do with the fact that there's no one paying attention to it now?! President Bush, just because someone else didn't do their job, that is not a good enough reason for you not to do yours!

I just don't understand politics and politicians sometimes, which is why I want to be President. I think I'd be pretty easy to understand. I try not to talk out of the side of my mouth like so many politicians seem to do, I am willing to take action when I think it's necessary and also willing to talk when I have to do that. Most importantly, I can take suggestions, handle criticism, and know that when something I mess something up, it's okay to fess up to it and try to fix it - I'm only human.

Comments

[karinablack.livejournal.com]

Diplomacy vs World Police

[kmg-365.livejournal.com]

Every time I hear "World Police," I think of the puppet movie. ;-)

Diplomacy worked really well post 1994 with NK, no? :-)

[karinablack.livejournal.com]

Hindsight is always 20/20. It's easy to be snarky, easier still to be defensive when the arguments are set up for you. I'd like to see a plan other than, "Find someone else to blame and QUICK!"

I'd like to see action with an outcome not leading to a reinstatement of the draft.

[kmg-365.livejournal.com]

Yes, hindsight is always 20/20, but that's how politicians operate. Reference politicians who say "if I knew then what I knew now, I would have voted against the war." A more meaningless statement could not be made.

I'm not sure that Bush was seeking out someone else to take the blame; he just wanted to make sure he wasn't unfairly saddled with all of the blame.

I don't think we have to worry about a reinstatement of a draft. It would never pass, and I have a feeling that the administration's position will be "hey, world, you didn't want us to act unilaterally in Iraq? Fine, we'll leave NK up to you."

A childish position to take, for certain. But at some point the world community needs to stop relying on the US to step in and do the dirty work for them. They need to get together, see a threat for what it is, and deal with it as a collective.

[karinablack.livejournal.com]

I'm hoping Japan will step up to deal with NK. Doubtful China will have much to say, but they might show a Little concern since they're in range as well, friend or no.

I think rather than worrying about blame shifting, he should be working on an actionable plan. Instead of spin-doctoring and issuing meaningless statements like yesterday's piece of crap, he could work on doing something constructive. Anything.

NK wants US English teachers, send 'em. Instead of sanctions, why not try bribery? Yeah a lot of it relies on NK being honest for a change, but we could require Proof and inspection access in exchange for what they need.

It just seems like there's more talk than planning, or actual action. The things Bush said yesterday- he was literally talking out both sides of his mouth. Saying one thing, then another that negated what he just said.

It's terribly frustrating as a citizen, and probably terrifying for other countries wondering if he's going to attack as well. A politician needs to be trusted.

I'm sure someone's already kicking it around. Doesn't do much good to talk about it on LJ. Just venting.

Frankly- I'd much rather a president who was too concerned with blowjobs to bomb things. I want my president getting laid, dammit! By any and all means necessary ;D
There's just not enough emphasis or proof Bush is getting any regularly.

[kmg-365.livejournal.com]

Doubtful China will have much to say, but they might show a Little concern since they're in range as well, friend or no.


Especially when there are rumors that China is sending them materials. ;-)

Instead of sanctions, why not try bribery?

Because that would set a terrible precedent.

Yeah a lot of it relies on NK being honest for a change, but we could require Proof and inspection access in exchange for what they need.

I believe this was part of the proposed agreement that was presented to NK, and Kim gave it a big thumbs down. No inspections. No sanctions. Blink at me the wrong way, and I'll see it as an act of war.

Frankly- I'd much rather a president who was too concerned with blowjobs to bomb things.

Except for moments where the President bombed things to distract from the fact that he was getting blowjobs. ;-)

[karinablack.livejournal.com]

We sent people materials who later used them against us. I don't think China's foolish enough not to consider them to still be a threat.

We've already done bribery, it Is a precedent.

He said Sanctions would be considered an act of war, and I can kinda see his point on this. I think he's insane, but I can see why he would consider this aggression. So why do it if he's nuclear capable?

Agreed- but I want to know my president is well-laid nonetheless.