NP? somebody has to say it

[jbor]

Apparently Adolf Hitler was very good as a public speaker.

What strikes me about the constant flow of pamphleteering here is that Bush
has been presented as *both* the stupidest man on the planet *and* a
criminal genius who masterminded Sept. 11. I guess that that sort of
inconsistency is what distinguishes "online journalism" from discussion.
Regardless of who it is, the President of the U.S. - the power and authority
of the office, at the very least - deserves respect. It's living in
cloud-cuckoo land (like bin Laden was) or just spitting sour grapes to
believe you can diminish the global pre-eminence of the American regime by
trying to sabotage "the system" from the outside.

As far as Pynchon goes, it's pretty clear to me that the doesn't buy into
the partisan politics game in the slightest. The very overt reference to one
of Clinton's most brazen lies in the opening chapter of _M&D_ (10.31-33)
makes a pretty strong comment about the hypocrisy and deceitfulness of his
tenure as president also:

http://www.crrh.org/hemptv/news_didntinhale.html

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,13588,00.html

http://www.zpub.com/un/billc-4.html

best


Michael wrote (re. the comparison of T Jefferson & GW Bush as orators)
> 
> I agree.  It's not a good comparison on my part.  Perhaps
> Truman or Eisenhower?  I believe both had reputations as
> poor public speakers.  They existed during a time of mass
> media.  Do you think they were good leaders?  If not, can
> you think of anyone who isn't well-spoken but is a smart
> person?  A good decision-maker?
> 
> My main argument is that it is possible to be a good leader
> without being a great speaker.  Similarly, Gore was
> criticized for being robotic, or for his shifting style of
> speaking in the three debates.  Chris Matthews pointed out
> he couldn't picture Al Gore's face to the sun.  He couldn't
> picture him speaking with charm and emotion to the workers
> at ground zero.  To him, these were important elements to
> being a leader.  Are they, though?  I don't think so.  Can
> Gore identify problems and set policies in place to solve
> them?  That was my standard for judging him.
> 
>> This is the age of
>> TV, and one of the president's main jobs is PR for his
>> policy choices. 
>> Shrub isn't very good at that job,
> 
> During the elections I had a fair idea of what Bush stood
> for.  As much as I did for Gore, who doesn't have the
> reputation for poor speaking Bush has.
> 
>> and I suspect its
>> because he's been
>> artificially elevated to the post by his father's old
>> cronies.
> 
> What is the evidence of that?
> 
> --Mike
> 
>> DM
>