Kerry's Cheat Sheet is irrelevant. America's new reality is...

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

...We have a president who:

1) Can't speak on his feet
2) Can't formulate a complete thought
3) Forgets who his audience is
4) Can't control his emotions for 90 minutes
5) Has not argued with himself
5) ...and obvious does not have advisors that remotely challenge his intellect.

The bible says "As iron sharpens iron, so does one man sharpen another"....Bush has not been sharpened, neither by the material he reads, nor the advisors surrounding him.

He seemed to be totally unaware of the purpose of Thursday's debate.

And Bush's mental absence had nothing to do with whom he was debating.  Nor did it have to do anything with how "tired" Bush was from visiting hurricane victims.

Bush simply acted as if he had something more important to do than to explain his policies to the American.

For a leader to forget who his audience is during such a setting - knowing beforehand how important the event was - is simply inexcusable

--Maybe Bush was too bothered to consider the aftermath of war prior to his decision to launch the invasion.

--Maybe Bush was too bothered to consider the ramifications of being shot-down at the UN prior to his boast “I want a vote, regardless of the whip-count.”

…that doesn’t necessarily mean his policies are wrong, it simply means he doesn’t think or plan ahead.   

I think the picture that George W. Bush is painting of himself is PRETTY SCARY!

[A18]

He spent too much time with hurricane victims in Florida

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

He spent too much time with hurricane victims in Florida

I don't care if he was awake for 72 hours straight, forgetting your audience inexcusable.  How does the leader of 300 million people forget his audience in that kind of a setting?

[angus]

…that doesn’t necessarily mean his policies are wrong, it simply means he doesn’t think or plan ahead.   

I agree with that, jmfcst.  And I think the post-40th birthday party hangover GWB may not be so different than the spoiled frat brat bush once was.  but, on balance, he's probably right more than wrong.  And a decent fellow.  Still, none of his decisiveness and conviction (his strong suits) shined through the fatigue.  Hell, maybe he is just a little tired.  But it's a tiresome job.  He knew that when he took it.  And if he isn't up to the task, people may just settle for the devil they don't know.

[khirkhib]

It was clear in the 2000 debates that Gore studied and changed and improved his performance everyweek.  It was somewhat incredulous that he could eliminate flaws  so quickly.  Clearly Bush will do better in the next debates but I don't except that he was tired from visiting Hurricane victims or that he didn't practice for the debate at all (which some are spinning - basically because he dind't think he needed to practice)  I really wonder though how much much will be able to improve his performance in a week.  Bush may have lowered expectations now but at the same time people will be looking for closely at the flaws.  What's your bet that he doesn't say "hard work" once.  I think that Kerry should have said in the debate.  "I understand that the Presidency is hard work but millions of Americans are working extremely hard everyday to make the American economy go and unfortunatly more than a million Americans are working hard looking for a job so they can support their  families and the very least that hard working Americans can expect is a President that works as hard as they do, a president that understands that issues and makes life better for all Americans."

Something like that.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

angus,

Again, I insist that no level of fatigue could explain such a performance.  If Bush was a poster on this forum, his posts would have about the same substance as Bandit's.

If Bush has to be rested in order to simply remember his audience, then this country is facing HUGE problems!  We take comfort while Iraq melts down because we beleive Bush will pull it out.  But if he can't remember his audience in front of 62 million people, then he probably doesn't have a plan for Iraq!!!!!!

I agree that turning to Kerry is the wrong choice and would only make matters worse.  Our best bet may be to hope that Bush is reelected and then drops dead on Jan 21 2005 because our Emperor has no clothes.

At this point, I'm willing to vote for a coup.

[A18]

Bush never said the presidency is hard work. He said Iraq is hard work. Fighting for your country is hard work. Dying is hard work. Voting for the $87 billion is not hard work.

Bush probably wouldn't be able to respond well to that, but anyone else could crush that argument into pieces.

[Mort from NewYawk]

For the voters who can still be swayed, presentation is everything. We're talking here about true "soft support" - the October deciders for whom facial expression, body language and tone of voice makes the case.

Kerry, who is known for acting on his belief that in an election, the end game is everything, did a stunning change in persona, and came across as much more decisive and forthright. It's likely that he'll hold on to that presentation going into the rest of the debates.

Bush better get some rest or do something to get that constrained look off his face and that angry tone out of his voice, or he runs the risk of being on the ropes during the final weeks of Kerry's "end game".

[A18]

Bush did excellent in the final minutes of the debate. He just needs to come prepared with a lot of lines beforehand.

[J. J.]

...We have a president who:

1) Can't speak on his feet

News flash!  GW Bush isn't articulate!  Jmfcst, you just figgured that out?  ;-)

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Bush did excellent in the final minutes of the debate. He just needs to come prepared with a lot of lines beforehand.

Look at what you just posted.  Was your post "prepared" or were you able to formulate your response off the top of your head? 

So if you and I can talk openly without prepared remarks, why can't the President of the United States?!

Life does not consist of an endless stream of prepared events.  To get through life, you have to be able to respond to events in REAL-TIME.

We have a president who can only semi-"function" in staged events where all the words of life are written down beforehand.

As someone who is articulate enough to be on this forum, that should really, really bother you.
 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

...We have a president who:

1) Can't speak on his feet

News flash!  GW Bush isn't articulate!  Jmfcst, you just figgured that out?  ;-)

Ok, that accounts for point number one of my post, but what about his other problems:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That goes WAY beyond simply not being articulate.  People will still listen to you if you stutter or mispronounce words, or are slow in speech...as long as you have something to say and can make a point.

The role of the President is to be the LEADER of the people.  And being a leader requires the ability to communicate.

[shankbear]

We are 29 days out from the election.  I cannot imagine that there are that many people who don't know for whom they will vote.  Is it stupidity?  Is it laziness?  Is it a great group of people who simply don't have a clue?
The Dems and GOP have their bases solidly in place but that mysterious "undecided" is still out there wandering in the wilderness.  What's up? Are these the doofases who think Kerry's performance in the debate was enough to sway them?  If so our republic is in a world of s**t.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

We are 29 days out from the election.  I cannot imagine that there are that many people who don't know for whom they will vote.  Is it stupidity?  Is it laziness?  Is it a great group of people who simply don't have a clue?
The Dems and GOP have their bases solidly in place but that mysterious "undecided" is still out there wandering in the wilderness.  What's up? Are these the doofases who think Kerry's performance in the debate was enough to sway them?  If so our republic is in a world of s**t.

Bud, we have much bigger problems than winning this election.  We have been led into some very deep water by someone who views talking to 62.5 million of his followers as a burdensome waste of time instead of an opportunity to lead. 

If Bush’s mental sharpness is any measure to go by, then we have been led by someone who is surrounded by a bunch of advisors who are unwilling to confront the president with different scenarios.

[A18]

You don't have to be articulate to be able to lead, though.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

You don't have to be articulate to be able to lead, though.

You are missing my point:  Bush forgot who his audience was from the very beginning of the debate. 

How on earth does that happen?!

That has NOTHING to do with not being articulate, rather it is a sign of total incompetence!

[??????????]

JMF,

Why don't you get yourself elected to office and then try and speak before millions? Don't be so quick to criticise the president. A great speaker does not a good president make. Lincoln was not known as a good speaker and look at his "great" speeches. I mean many admire him (not me) and he was a terrible speaker.

[opebo]

How can there be a 'cheat sheet'?  I thought both candidates had notes.

And it isn't news that Bush is of mediocre intelligence and speaking ability.  Everyone already knew that.

All the debate did was make the impression that Kerry is much more responsible, capable, presidential, etc.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

JMF,

Why don't you get yourself elected to office and then try and speak before millions?  Don't be so quick to criticise the president. A great speaker does not a good president make. Lincoln was not known as a good speaker and look at his "great" speeches. I mean many admire him (not me) and he was a terrible speaker.

You can be a terrible speaker and still get your point across, provided you have a point to make.

Bush has spoken to millions many times before. But regardless, stage fright does not explain showing frustration at Kerry's questions.  That simply demonstrated Bush forgot why he was there: a) to explain to the American people his policies, b) to explain to the American people why Kerry's policies are inferior and c) to refocus America's attention to what is necessary to achieve the goal of winning the war.

Bush is obviously not accustomed to thinking in real-time...which means his advisors are not doing their job.  In any case, Bush should have at least argued with himself enough to be able to explain his positions.

Bush knows facts; which means he has knowledge.  But he is not in command of the facts; meaning he is not able to put his knowledge into action.

---

It is the responsibility of George W Bush to make himself an effective communicator.  That requires the willingness to practice.

But is there any evidence that Bush practices the art of communication?  Does he write letters to individual Americans like Reagan did? Does he put in any time at all making himself sharper?  Does he challenge himself to become a better communicator?

One would think the very office he holds would involve enough deep thought and debate within meetings to grow a person's ability to communicate.

But I see no evidence of that.  Instead, I see a mere immature amateur who is unwilling and/or unable to consider his audience (a requirement of his job) and remain focused for 90 minutes.

W was much more that inarticulate Thursday night; he was incompetent.

[khirkhib]

You know I agree with you entirely jmfcst and a lot of people never had a problem with the republican party it has always been bush, bush and the neo-con coherts that surround him that i feel prevent him from becoming more than what he is.  I know we don't care what the world thinks but Bush has made us a laughing stock of the world and America really deserves better.  I think that Kerry can earn our respect as a nation.  Can anybody really say how Bush has gained your respect not as a party but as a person.  Bush is an individual.  He is the symbol of America.  How has he earned your respect.  The whole cowboy thing is a propaganda used to excuse or explain away Bush's faults and make them look like strengths.  Bush is not a cowboy though, he has no animals on his ranch.  Bush is middle management and no one can tell me that if Bush was born into an average Americans life that he would have ever risen above that.

[??????????]

You know I agree with you entirely jmfcst and a lot of people never had a problem with the republican party it has always been bush, bush and the neo-con coherts that surround him that i feel prevent him from becoming more than what he is.  I know we don't care what the world thinks but Bush has made us a laughing stock of the world and America really deserves better.  I think that Kerry can earn our respect as a nation.  Can anybody really say how Bush has gained your respect not as a party but as a person.  Bush is an individual.  He is the symbol of America.  How has he earned your respect.  The whole cowboy thing is a propaganda used to excuse or explain away Bush's faults and make them look like strengths.  Bush is not a cowboy though, he has no animals on his ranch.  Bush is middle management and no one can tell me that if Bush was born into an average Americans life that he would have ever risen above that.

yada yada yada the same garbage we've heard for four years.

[Nym90]

I think you hit the nail on the head, Jmfcst.

Even Republicans have to admit that Bush is out of touch. He was born into a wealthy, powerful, and influential family. The man has never worked a day in his life. He's a smart man, but his lack of an ability to communicate is due to his true lack of understanding of what the world is actually like.

This is what Edwards is talking about when he speaks of "two Americas". Those who are born into wealth really do live in a different country than those who were born into poverty or into middle class homes, and have absolutely no concept of what it is like to have to actually work for a living. They truly do live in an ivory tower, completely cut off and isolated from the "real" America.

It's no coincidence that politicians who had to work their way up from the bottom, like Reagan and Clinton, were far more charismatic, articulate, and understanding of the real world than people like Bush and Kerry who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

Face it, Bush got where he is from his family connections. If his name was George W. Smith, do you really think he'd be President? That's not to say that his family connections shouldn't be a plus in some respects...obivously having access to a good group of advisors is a definite plus, but as you say, a person has to be able to think on their feet, too. It's a critical aspect of character, especially for a leader, to be able to have good gut instincts and not rely on advisors, polls, and focus groups. This comes out in debates.

[Nation]

I think you hit the nail on the head, Jmfcst.

Even Republicans have to admit that Bush is out of touch. He was born into a wealthy, powerful, and influential family. The man has never worked a day in his life. He's a smart man, but his lack of an ability to communicate is due to his true lack of understanding of what the world is actually like.

This is what Edwards is talking about when he speaks of "two Americas". Those who are born into wealth really do live in a different country than those who were born into poverty or into middle class homes, and have absolutely no concept of what it is like to have to actually work for a living. They truly do live in an ivory tower, completely cut off and isolated from the "real" America.

It's no coincidence that politicians who had to work their way up from the bottom, like Reagan and Clinton, were far more charismatic, articulate, and understanding of the real world than people like Bush and Kerry who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

Face it, Bush got where he is from his family connections. If his name was George W. Smith, do you really think he'd be President? That's not to say that his family connections shouldn't be a plus in some respects...obivously having access to a good group of advisors is a definite plus, but as you say, a person has to be able to think on their feet, too. It's a critical aspect of character, especially for a leader, to be able to have good gut instincts and not rely on advisors, polls, and focus groups. This comes out in debates.

Very nice post, Eric.

[12th Doctor]

I think you hit the nail on the head, Jmfcst.

Even Republicans have to admit that Bush is out of touch. He was born into a wealthy, powerful, and influential family. The man has never worked a day in his life. He's a smart man, but his lack of an ability to communicate is due to his true lack of understanding of what the world is actually like.

This is what Edwards is talking about when he speaks of "two Americas". Those who are born into wealth really do live in a different country than those who were born into poverty or into middle class homes, and have absolutely no concept of what it is like to have to actually work for a living. They truly do live in an ivory tower, completely cut off and isolated from the "real" America.

It's no coincidence that politicians who had to work their way up from the bottom, like Reagan and Clinton, were far more charismatic, articulate, and understanding of the real world than people like Bush and Kerry who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

Face it, Bush got where he is from his family connections. If his name was George W. Smith, do you really think he'd be President? That's not to say that his family connections shouldn't be a plus in some respects...obivously having access to a good group of advisors is a definite plus, but as you say, a person has to be able to think on their feet, too. It's a critical aspect of character, especially for a leader, to be able to have good gut instincts and not rely on advisors, polls, and focus groups. This comes out in debates.

I agree with you, in part, Eric, but I also think that you and Jmf are taking this whole thing just a little too far.

So Bush had one bad debate.  So what?  I underpreform all of the time.  I just suck it up and work to do better next time.  Clearly, something went wrong on Thursday.  What, I don't know.  Maybe Bush was just having a really bad night.  Maybe there was more to it than we know.  Maybe this is all some highly calculated sceem from Rove & Co.  I'll wait until the next debate to make a judgment on this one, or this President.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

So Bush had one bad debate.  So what?  I underpreform all of the time. 

Forgetting your audience has nothing to do with having a bad debate.  Bush forgot about the 300 million people he was leading.

We, as followers,  have a right to ask Bush to demonstrate his competence to us.  Moses asked the One he was following, "Show me your glory", but all I asked of Bush Thursday night was "Show me how you have matured in office." 

Bush responded by forgetting not only about me and the other 300M Americans, he forgot about the Troops, he forgot who he was, he forgot his job.