Rep vs. Dem Differences

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Seriously, what is it that you think a President could have done? No one
knew whether it was a terrorist attack or just another airline accident. I
would be very interested in knowing what magical powers Presidents have.

Maybe he could have done what the rest of us did. Immediately
go and find a source of information as to what was happening.

Internet, TV, word of mouth, whatever.

And I'm not even an American in the US.

Paul

In article ,
"Paul Sengupta" wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Seriously, what is it that you think a President could have done? No one
knew whether it was a terrorist attack or just another airline accident. I
would be very interested in knowing what magical powers Presidents have.

Maybe he could have done what the rest of us did. Immediately
go and find a source of information as to what was happening.

Lets take this back to 9/11. If I had been on one of the hijacked
planes, I would have done nothing. I would have been wondering what
Cuba was going to be like

When I turned on the TV to CNBC, for financial stuff, they had pictures
of the burning WTC. No one had any idea of what had happened, they had
reports that a plane had hit the WTC but that was all. Then the second
tower was hit and it was apparent that it was a deliberate attack. I
believe it was about a 15 minute gap.

So we have Bush who spent 8 minutes continuing to talk to some kids
after the first attack, when nothing was known, before he went to
investigate.

Then we have Kerry who sat in a stupor for 40 minutes after he was
informed.

Pretty easy choice to me

LG


Internet, TV, word of mouth, whatever.

And I'm not even an American in the US.

Paul

Legrande Harris wrote:

When I turned on the TV to CNBC, for financial stuff, they had pictures
of the burning WTC. No one had any idea of what had happened, they had
reports that a plane had hit the WTC but that was all. Then the second
tower was hit and it was apparent that it was a deliberate attack. I
believe it was about a 15 minute gap.

So we have Bush who spent 8 minutes continuing to talk to some kids
after the first attack, when nothing was known, before he went to
investigate.

The problem with this line of logic is that the 8 minutes of inaction
was after he was told about the second plane. He had been told of the
first plane prior to entering the classroom. You need to rewrite your
conclusion.

The White House response to the criticism if GWB was that he wanted to
project an air of calm and being in control in the face of crisis, and
not immediately rush from the room.

I only brought this up to correct the facts. Personally, I probably
would have sat there just like GWB. I watched it live on TV, and it
took a bit of time after the second plane for me to figure out what was
going on. However, I'm not the President, and I don't have a direct
line to the FAA, who had a better idea of what was happening.

Then we have Kerry who sat in a stupor for 40 minutes after he was
informed.

Pretty easy choice to me

Maybe not as easy, with the correct sequence of events.

In article ,
James Robinson wrote:

Legrande Harris wrote:

When I turned on the TV to CNBC, for financial stuff, they had pictures
of the burning WTC. No one had any idea of what had happened, they had
reports that a plane had hit the WTC but that was all. Then the second
tower was hit and it was apparent that it was a deliberate attack. I
believe it was about a 15 minute gap.

So we have Bush who spent 8 minutes continuing to talk to some kids
after the first attack, when nothing was known, before he went to
investigate.

The problem with this line of logic is that the 8 minutes of inaction
was after he was told about the second plane. He had been told of the
first plane prior to entering the classroom. You need to rewrite your
conclusion.

The White House response to the criticism if GWB was that he wanted to
project an air of calm and being in control in the face of crisis, and
not immediately rush from the room.

I only brought this up to correct the facts. Personally, I probably
would have sat there just like GWB. I watched it live on TV, and it
took a bit of time after the second plane for me to figure out what was
going on. However, I'm not the President, and I don't have a direct
line to the FAA, who had a better idea of what was happening.

Then we have Kerry who sat in a stupor for 40 minutes after he was
informed.

Pretty easy choice to me

Maybe not as easy, with the correct sequence of events.

Lets see

8:45 First attack

8:46 Jets Scrambled

President told ?, Was Kerry told?

9:03 Second attack

President told, Kerry must have known by now, goes into 40 minute
stupor.

9:08 All flights in New York area banned,

9:11 President reads to kids until 9:11

9:24 FAA tells NORAD flight 77 possibly hijacked

9:25 FAA shuts down all airports nation wide

Kerry is coming out of his stupor, unless he was told later than 8:45,
then he would still be in a stupor.

9:31 Bush issues statement "apparent terrorist attack."

9:40 Flight 77 crashes into Pentagon.

If Kerry was told after the the second attack then he would be coming
out of the stupor now.

9:45 Cell phone call indicates that flight 93 is hijacked

9:45 FAA orders all aircraft to land

9:55 Scrambled Jets reach Washington, DC area

10:07 Flight 93 crashes

Just what could Bush realistically have done from 8:45 to 10:07 that
would have changed anything in the slightest?

Maybe Moore is the idiot here Sometimes emergencies demand more
thought than action.

Legrande Harris wrote:

In article ,
James Robinson wrote:

Legrande Harris wrote:

When I turned on the TV to CNBC, for financial stuff, they had pictures
of the burning WTC. No one had any idea of what had happened, they had
reports that a plane had hit the WTC but that was all. Then the second
tower was hit and it was apparent that it was a deliberate attack. I
believe it was about a 15 minute gap.

So we have Bush who spent 8 minutes continuing to talk to some kids
after the first attack, when nothing was known, before he went to
investigate.

The problem with this line of logic is that the 8 minutes of inaction
was after he was told about the second plane. He had been told of the
first plane prior to entering the classroom. You need to rewrite your
conclusion.

The White House response to the criticism if GWB was that he wanted to
project an air of calm and being in control in the face of crisis, and
not immediately rush from the room.

I only brought this up to correct the facts. Personally, I probably
would have sat there just like GWB. I watched it live on TV, and it
took a bit of time after the second plane for me to figure out what was
going on. However, I'm not the President, and I don't have a direct
line to the FAA, who had a better idea of what was happening.

Then we have Kerry who sat in a stupor for 40 minutes after he was
informed.

Pretty easy choice to me

Maybe not as easy, with the correct sequence of events.

Lets see

8:45 First attack

8:46 Jets Scrambled

President told ?, Was Kerry told?

9:03 Second attack

President told, Kerry must have known by now, goes into 40 minute
stupor.

9:08 All flights in New York area banned,

9:11 President reads to kids until 9:11

9:24 FAA tells NORAD flight 77 possibly hijacked

9:25 FAA shuts down all airports nation wide

Kerry is coming out of his stupor, unless he was told later than 8:45,
then he would still be in a stupor.

9:31 Bush issues statement "apparent terrorist attack."

9:40 Flight 77 crashes into Pentagon.

If Kerry was told after the the second attack then he would be coming
out of the stupor now.

9:45 Cell phone call indicates that flight 93 is hijacked

9:45 FAA orders all aircraft to land

9:55 Scrambled Jets reach Washington, DC area

10:07 Flight 93 crashes

Just what could Bush realistically have done from 8:45 to 10:07 that
would have changed anything in the slightest?

Maybe Moore is the idiot here Sometimes emergencies demand more
thought than action.

So it really doesn't matter what Bush or Kerry did, you would simply
find fault with Kerry no matter what the situation was, and adapt your
story to fit?

In article ,
James Robinson wrote:

So it really doesn't matter what Bush or Kerry did, you would simply
find fault with Kerry no matter what the situation was, and adapt your
story to fit?

Yes, nothing Kerry or Bush could have done would have made any
difference at all. Micheal Moore could have just as easily attacked
Kerry and made him look stupid. I can just see the cut backs with Kerry
sitting in a stupor and then seeing the planes hitting the buildings.
Its all propaganda

LG