A question for Americans everywhere...

[jjc]

Okay... a quick question for all you Americans out there...

Don't you find George W. a tad embarrassing?

Before anybody flames me, can I just explain where I’m coming from?

Bush is in Evian, France, for the G8 summit. He is a world leader, surrounded by world leaders – a meeting of the powerful, if you like.

How does he choose to mark this occasion??? Well, like any good guest, he thanks his host… or rather he tries to.

In front of the world’s press he opens his mouth and thanks ‘Jack’ Chirac!!!

Now, I know that there are differences between English and American English. You say tomato, I say …. (bear with me, this may not work when written down) …. tomato. But this isn’t a question of which side of the pond you happen to have learned to talk on.

The man’s name is Jacques. He has never, I would imagine, climbed a beanstalk. Nor does he distil whiskey in Tennessee. And I’m willing to bet that if you wind his handle he doesn’t pop up out of his box wearing a funny hat.

I know that Bush is your ‘elected’ representative to the world, but every time he gets let out on a day trip he seems to be suffering from some form of verbal diarrhoea (there are even books devoted entirely to his funny little phrases).

Still… not to worry… he’s safely on his way to a meeting with the leaders of the Arab world. What’s the worst that could happen????

[squidge]

jjc



All the problems in this workd and you are talking semantics????????????????

[jjc]

Seriously... it's okay.

Between G8 and his little trip to Egypt, Bush has pretty much got the world's problems wrapped up... it's all sorted....

[squidge]

Och phew

i feel so much better for knowing that sweetie

[2little2late]

George Bush is doing a very good job of alienating himself and his country from the rest of the super powers. I notice he is leaving these meetings rather quickly saying he has to be here and there, when as a matter of fact nobody is really interested in him.
Unless he can prove that there were weapons of mass destruction, then I am afraid he will have lost the confidence of the super powers. I myself don't believe there were WOMD. The Yanks are nothing but war mongers and if they can find an excuse to go to war they will do it. Lets hope that when it is proved there were no WOMD the U.K. will think twice about getting involved with the Yanks again.

[Anonymous]

other super powers? who are they then?

As the America is now the "Enemy" of the world, I would like to share with you an article printed in the Daily Mirror that bastion of left wing Britain, written by Tony Parsons:


London Daily Mirror
Tony Parsons

September 11, 2002

One year ago, the world witnessed a unique kind of broadcasting - the mass urder of thousands, live on television. As a lesson in the pitiless cruelty of the human race, September 11 was up there with Pol Pot's Mountain of Skulls in Cambodia, or the skeletal bodies stacked like garbage in the Nazi concentration camps. An unspeakable act so cruel, so calculated and so utterly merciless that surely the world could agree on one thing - nobody deserves this fate. Surely there could be consensus: The victims were truly innocent, the perpetrators truly evil. But to the world's eternal shame, 9/11 is increasingly seen as America's comeuppance. Incredibly, anti-Americanism has increased over the last year.
There has always been a simmering resentment to the USA in this country; too loud, too rich, too full of themselves, and so much happier than Europeans - but it has become an epidemic. And it seems incredible to me. More than that, it turns my stomach. America is this country's greatest friend and our staunchest ally. We are bonded to the US by culture, language and blood. A little over half a century ago, around half a million Americans died for our freedoms, as well as their own. Have we forgotten so soon? And exactly a year ago, thousands of ordinary men, women and children - not just Americans, but from dozens of countries, were butchered by a small group of religious fanatics. Are we so quick to betray them?

What touched the heart about those who died in the Twin Towers and on the planes, was that we recognized them. Young fathers and mothers, somebody's son and somebody's daughter, husbands, wives, and children, some unborn. And these people brought it on themselves? Their nation is to blame for their meticulously planned slaughter?

These days you don't have to be some dust-encrusted nut job in Kabul or Karachi or Finsbury Park to see America as the Great Satan. The anti-American alliance is made up of self-loathing liberals who blame the Americans for every ill in the Third World, and conservatives suffering from power-envy, bitter that the world's only superpower can do what it likes without having to ask permission. The truth is that America has behaved with enormous restraint since September 11.

Remember, remember - Remember the gut-wrenching tapes of weeping men phoning their wives to say, "I love you," before they were burned alive.

Remember those people leaping to their deaths from the top of burning skyscrapers. Remember the hundreds of firemen buried alive.

Remember the smiling face of that beautiful little girl who was on one of the planes with her mum. Remember, remember - And realize that America has never retaliated for 9/11 in anything like the way it could have.

So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked without a trial in Camp X-ray? Pass the Kleenex... So some Afghan wedding receptions were shot up after they merrily fired their semi-automatics in a sky full of American planes? A shame, but maybe next time they should stick to confetti.

AMERICA could have turned a large chunk of the world into a parking lot. That it didn't is a sign of strength. American voices are already being raised against attacking Iraq - that's what a democracy is for. How many in the Islamic world will have a minute's silence for the slaughtered innocents of 9/11? How many Islamic leaders will have the guts to say that the mass murder of 9/11 was an abomination?

When the news of 9/11 broke on the West Bank, those freedom-loving Palestinians were dancing in the street. America watched all of that - and didn't push the button. We should thank the stars that America is the most powerful nation in the world. I still find it incredible that 9/11 did not provoke all-out war. Not a "war on terrorism." A real war. The fundamentalist dudes are talking about "opening the gates of hell," if America attacks Iraq. Well, America could have opened the gates of hell like you wouldn't believe. The US is the most militarily powerful nation that ever strode the face of the earth. The campaign in Afghanistan may have been less than perfect and the planned war on Iraq may be misconceived. But don't blame America for not bringing peace and light to these wretched countries. How many democracies are there in the Middle East, or in the Muslim world? You can count them on the fingers of one hand - assuming you haven't had any chopped off for minor shoplifting.

I love America, yet America is hated. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle. But I would rather be a dog in New York City than a Prince in Riyadh. Above all, America is hated because it is what every country wants to be - rich, free, strong, open, optimistic. Not ground down by the past, or religion, or some caste system. America is the best friend this country ever had and we should start remembering that. Or do you really think the USA is the root of all evil? Tell it to the loved ones of the men and women who leaped to their death from the burning towers. Tell it to the nursing mothers whose husbands died on one of the hijacked planes, or were ripped apart in a collapsing skyscraper. And tell it to the hundreds of young widows whose husbands worked for the New York Fire Department.
To our shame, George Bush gets a worse press than Saddam Hussein. Once we were told that Saddam gassed the Kurds, tortured his own people and set up rape-camps in Kuwait. Now we are told he likes Quality Street. Save me the orange center, Oh Mighty One!

[rich]

It is with a heavy heart that I turn to the keyboard to correct the preceding correspondent
What a farrago of emotion! What a tear -drenched, resentful, self pitying diatribe. What a grotesque caricature of the anti-war movement!
And what a logical disconnect!
What did the attack on the World Trade Centre have to do with Sadam? The answer is a big fat zero.
Sadam was a creation of the USA courtesy of the CIA. He was the CIA's man against the Mullahs of Iran. This was one rogue state created by the USA.
Let us pass over in silence the issue of non-existant mass weapons of destruction.
Let us even pass over the absence of cheering millions of Iraquis welcoming their liberators.
Instead let us focus on the manipulation of the emotions caused by the Wrold Trade Tower attack by Rumsted et al. Let us admire the consimmate skill with which a cartoon image of Europe was created. One wonders if some clandestine department of psychiatric warfare was not employed to create the image of the resentful, envious, ingrates of Europe. An image that the preceding correspondent swallows holus bolus.
We have had a completely useless war with untold and uncounted slaughter.
There was a better way of getting rid of Sadam and the UN was on the right track.
But the USA of Bush will not be governed by world opinion or by the UN.
With the trigger happy maniacs currently in control of the US one fears for the future.

[rich]

This just in from today's New York Times:


Standard Operating Procedure
By PAUL KRUGMAN


The mystery of Iraq's missing weapons of mass destruction has become a lot less mysterious. Recent reports in major British newspapers and three major American news magazines, based on leaks from angry intelligence officials, back up the sources who told my colleague Nicholas Kristof that the Bush administration "grossly manipulated intelligence" about W.M.D.'s.

And anyone who talks about an "intelligence failure" is missing the point. The problem lay not with intelligence professionals, but with the Bush and Blair administrations. They wanted a war, so they demanded reports supporting their case, while dismissing contrary evidence.

In Britain, the news media have not been shy about drawing the obvious implications, and the outrage has not been limited to war opponents. The Times of London was ardently pro-war; nonetheless, it ran an analysis under the headline "Lie Another Day." The paper drew parallels between the selling of the war and other misleading claims: "The government is seen as having `spun' the threat from Saddam's weapons just as it spins everything else."

Yet few have made the same argument in this country, even though "spin" is far too mild a word for what the Bush administration does, all the time. Suggestions that the public was manipulated into supporting an Iraq war gain credibility from the fact that misrepresentation and deception are standard operating procedure for this administration, which — to an extent never before seen in U.S. history — systematically and brazenly distorts the facts.

Am I exaggerating? Even as George Bush stunned reporters by declaring that we have "found the weapons of mass destruction," the Republican National Committee declared that the latest tax cut benefits "everyone who pays taxes." That is simply a lie. You've heard about those eight million children denied any tax break by a last-minute switcheroo. In total, 50 million American households — including a majority of those with members over 65 — get nothing; another 20 million receive less than $100 each. And a great majority of those left behind do pay taxes.

And the bald-faced misrepresentation of an elitist tax cut offering little or nothing to most Americans is only the latest in a long string of blatant misstatements. Misleading the public has been a consistent strategy for the Bush team on issues ranging from tax policy and Social Security reform to energy and the environment. So why should we give the administration the benefit of the doubt on foreign policy?

It's long past time for this administration to be held accountable. Over the last two years we've become accustomed to the pattern. Each time the administration comes up with another whopper, partisan supporters — a group that includes a large segment of the news media — obediently insist that black is white and up is down. Meanwhile the "liberal" media report only that some people say that black is black and up is up. And some Democratic politicians offer the administration invaluable cover by making excuses and playing down the extent of the lies.

If this same lack of accountability extends to matters of war and peace, we're in very deep trouble. The British seem to understand this: Max Hastings, the veteran war correspondent — who supported Britain's participation in the war — writes that "the prime minister committed British troops and sacrificed British lives on the basis of a deceit, and it stinks."

It's no answer to say that Saddam was a murderous tyrant. I could point out that many of the neoconservatives who fomented this war were nonchalant, or worse, about mass murders by Central American death squads in the 1980's. But the important point is that this isn't about Saddam: it's about us. The public was told that Saddam posed an imminent threat. If that claim was fraudulent, the selling of the war is arguably the worst scandal in American political history — worse than Watergate, worse than Iran-contra. Indeed, the idea that we were deceived into war makes many commentators so uncomfortable that they refuse to admit the possibility.

But here's the thought that should make those commentators really uncomfortable. Suppose that this administration did con us into war. And suppose that it is not held accountable for its deceptions, so Mr. Bush can fight what Mr. Hastings calls a "khaki election" next year. In that case, our political system has become utterly, and perhaps irrevocably, corrupted.

[Anonymous]

The thread started by asking a questionof Americans if they find their president emabarasing - why was it not asking the British if they find their Prime Minister embarassing? Nowhere was the war on Iraq linked with the World Trade centre - the article was written by Tony Parsons, and you know what I agree with him - if you actually read the last paragraph or so it says that the war on Iraq was ill conceived. But the anti-American bile that is spouted is way out of order.

[Anonymous]

and before you come back on the anti-war tirade agian Rich, I was AGAINST the war. I also actually live in the Middle East so am far more likely to be effected by the fall-out as well, strange how the bombing of innocent people while they slept in compouds in Riyadh was blamed on frustration and anger agianst America for its action agianst Iraq - why then did these brave people bomb innocent people in their beds, when they could have gone a few miles up the road and had a real toe to toe. I never here condemnation of terrorist attrocities from the anti-war brigade, the victims always had it coming.

[jjc]

Sorry everyone... didn't mean for this to go back to the anti-war topic (had enough of that before). I was asking a genuine question... I am embarrassed by Bush and I'm not even American.

However, in answer to KW14... no, I don't find Blair embarrassing (he is intelligent and elequent) - I find him insulting and vaguely dictatorial, but that’s a different subject.

I was just amused by the whole ‘Jack’ thing…

[rich]

Tony Parsons says:To our shame, George Bush gets a worse press than Saddam Hussein

That's an outright lie. I read (or skim) a dozen newspapers a day in the course of my job and haven't come across one where Bush got a worse press.

I presume by posting this Parsons stuff you must agree with him. So let's have some examples to back up this unsubstantiated smear of European and North American media.

[Anonymous]

So you read (or skin ) a dozen or so papers a day then Rich - well I hope you do a better job than when reading (sorry skimming the posts) - the Parsons article was posted on Sept 11 2002, maybe you missed that. I also stated (youy must have missed that in the skimming as well) that I do agree with the sentiments in his post, and I am sure if you contact him he will be more than willing to justify his article.
I assume that your skimming of papers actually has something to do with your work, which makes it even more strange that you associate someone having "BAD PRESS" with only the written word Surely someone in PR or whatever form of employ you are involved can appreciate that press covers all media (or should I say mediums?).

I am no George Bush fan, but I still think America is a far better country than most.

[Anonymous]

JJC did you find Boris Yeltsin a tad embarassing when he was Russian President? Do you not find Prince Phillip totally embarassing? Are we really meant to take Silvio Berlisconi seriously?

What about Robert Mugabe? more disgusting than embarrassing
Idi Amin, wasn't he a cracker?(wasn't he the last King of Scotland? Self proclaimed of course) more than embarassing? yeah different kind of thing.
Saddam Hussain?

I reckon a society that can feel embarassed by its leader is okay, its the alternatives that scare me.

[jjc]

KW14, I did find Boris Yeltsin embarrassing when he was the Russian President, but then I was too young to have much of an opinion at the time. Prince Phillip embarrassing? No, I find him hysterical…. The list could indeed go on and on and on….

The difference between Bush and everybody else is, I think, obvious. Bush is the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Should it not be expected that he have at least some grasp of world affairs? After all, with Blair hanging onto his coat tails like a lost puppy it strikes me that in the eyes of many he represents the whole of western society and not just the USA.

[rich]

K. I cited newspapers because one can go back and check them looking for "anti-Bush" smears.
As far as tv is concerned it was the shameful perfomance by CNN that stood out - virtually no criticism at all of the Allies! So we couldn't go looking there for anti-US smears. The CBC did good, thoughtful coverage but I couldn't see any smears. And what constitutes a smear?
It seems to me that apologists for the Bush agenda are altogether too quick to pre-empt intelligent discussion with the cry that they are being smeared.
Now if you want a really good smear, the Parsons column is a beaut but he's smearing the "left." So-called left.
And why the need to rally round the US and say "it's not the worst country in the world."
Well, who's saying it is?
OK Noam Chomsky on an off-day. Robert Fisk? I think not. he's careful to distnguish between US foreign policy and the US people. Alexander Cockburn? Not really. - But look at all the names I'm giving you. Go and do some reading. And while you're reading check out Niall Ferguson who says the USA is an imperial power and doing a botched up job of it. Is that a smear? Colin Powell asked him to dinner. Ferguson turned him down. Is that a smear?
Can we please put an end to these sly innuendos and focus on policy?
Thanks...

[Anonymous]

Rich if I have used sly ineundo it was not intentional (not sure if that makes sense) - I actually agree with everything (almost everything) in your last post, I dont think Parsons was getting at the left, I actually think he was just giving his own opinion, something that I really wish others would do.
I dont reallt care what a lot of commentators say or think, and tend to base my views on experience, there is a lot that I do not like about America, its foreign policy (particulary its intransigence over environmental issues) but it is still a great country.
I can assure you I get a very broad view of the media from this particular part of the world from Al Jazeera to CNN, actually Robert Fisk is the darling of the middle east and is often printed in the local press.

JJC - do you think Bush does not have a grasp of world affairs because he pronounces Jacque as Jack? I'll tell you a wee story, I work with a wee guy from Texas and I was talking to him the other day as he was preparing to fly back to Houston (thats how I pronounced it, like the surname) - he corrected me and sad no, it is HYOOSTON. It isn't even semantics it is dialect. FOr the record, I think that America would have been a lot better off if Al Gore had "won" (sic) the Presiency.

[urchin]

Doesnt need to be America where they proouce Hyooston as hooston.

Ask anyone in Wick what eh name of the chippy is on the corner opposite the post office and thy will tell you it is

Hoostons

when it quite clearly is Hyoostons

[George Brims]

It's often callled Hoostyins in Week too. I think that's closer to the pronunciation of the Gaelic root name, which I can't spell but is the Gaelic version of Hugh.

[fionarich]

JJC,

Once again taking the opportunity to bash America & Bush! I live in the US, have dual citizenship and I am 100% beheind Bush, as are the majority of Americans. He has an overall approval rating of 69%, which makes him one of the most popular presidents of all times. He may not pronounce everything correctly and perhaps is not eloquent as Tony Blair is, but people here find him sincere and honest, no matter what your opinions are!

Part of his appeal here is the fact that he is not sophisticated, and as many Americans are not exactly what you would call cultured or worldly (as many Scots are not, either!), many people identify with him.

I might also point out that although they may not have found any WMD, most Americans indicate (via large online polls) that they are not terribly concerned with whether or not any are found. Most feel satisfied that the removal of Saddam Hussein's Regime has improved the plight of Iraqis and that the world is a better place overall, now that he has gone. His neighbors don't seem to miss him!

Besides, Jaques is the French version of Jack and as Bush was speaking to Jaques Chiraq in English, was it really incorrect? Perhaps you forget that Jacques Chirac both lived & studied in the US in his youth (at Yale University, was it) and he worked at a Brewery (if my memory serves me correctly). I am sure that he has been called Jack many times- you seem far more offended than he probably was.

If Jaques Chirac pronounces George Bush's name as Jorrrrrges Bush, rather than George (as he likely does, being French) then why aren't you asking the French is they are embarassed, as he would obviously be using the French pronounciation of George, instead of the English?!

The truth is that a majority of Americans see George W. Bush as a hero. Perhaps you jjc, aren't happy since you were so against the war, and it wasn't the "next Vietnam" that all of you anti-war protesters predicted. You may have noticed that you seem to hold many of the views that the left wing Democrats here in the US do- they are actually more the minority in America, rather than the majority. They also are furious that Bush is so popular and they can't stand the fact that he is so strongly supported here by most people. In recent days, many Democrats have publically stated that they will not run against President Bush as they have little chance of winning against someone who has such high approval ratings.

One indicator is the popularity of the Fox news channel here (and MSNBC, also). Fox news tends to be more conservative, leaning more towards the Right & the Republican (and conservative) point of view (although they do show both sides more equally than CNN). The the fact that Fox news has leaped far beyond CNN (liberal slant to the news- staffed mostly by Democratic & Leftist liberals) in the TV rankings is an indicator that the majority of Americans do support Bush, as Fox news is strongly pro-Bush. If you are getting any other message, then perhaps it would benefit you to get your news from other than Leftist, anti-American sources!!!! And make no mistake that there are plenty of Americans who are Anti-American.

And to address the tax issue that one of the previous postings mentioned:

Tax returns and rebates in America are for TAXPAYERS- those who actually pay taxes. America is not a Socialist economy & giving money to those who don't work, or who have not paid into the sytem is not supported here. For those of you in Britain who are not aware of this, the wealthiest 10% of Americans pay 90% of the taxes here. Why wouldn't they deserve a tax break, since the wealthiest are those that create the most jobs and employ the most people, giving others work, in addition to paying the highest percentage of their income for taxes.

Today, an ammedment to the tax bill was passed (thanks to a few Democratic Senators) so, those earning the minumum wage will be given a rebate also, which will essentially be welfare payments, since those making minimum wage actually pay the smallest percentage of their income towards taxes, compared to those in higher tax brackets and really don't even come close to paying enough in to justify a rebate (as they already benefit from tax credits and rebates that reduce the amount of tax they pay to almost nothing). If mimum wage workers want to be paid more, they should seek to better educate themselves, which in turn will bring more money. In America, there are unlimited opportunities to acquire an education and the government provides grants and low interest loans to anyone seeking an education, including those who earn the least, or earn nothing at all & collect welfare. Those below the poverty level even qualify for financial grants to pay their living costs (The Pell Grant is $5,000 per semester for FREE, to pay living expenses, courtesy of the US government, and is also available to non-citizen legal resident aliens, with a green card and students that are self-supporting).

So, JJC, the answer to your Question is NO- Americans are not embarassed that George Bush is our President. Americans are very Patriotic and believe in supporting their president, and they approve greatly of both him and his decisions. All- except for certain people in the Democratic party, green with envy that he is so popular.

This forum seems to be just another oppotunity for YOU to push YOUR views on an unsuspecting audience! Like it or not, Americans are extremely pro-Bush (and pro-Blair, by the way).

There is a reason that so many people want to come to America- it is a great country and every year, countless countries come to the US, asking for help: military, financial & political, etc. Americans send their troops and their dollars to help other nations and American Taxpayers foot the bill. What other country in the world provides as much help and support to other nations, and provides as many personal freedoms and opportunities for a better life, if one is willing to work hard?


JJC, no offense, but you seem to be a very negative person, always spewing venom against America & Bush. Perhaps both you and Rich should consider putting your time & energy towards something positive that will benefit you or others, rather than obsessing about how much you both hate America and President Bush. You can't change the behavior or actions of others, you can only change yourself!

Cheers,

Fiona Rich