BadEagle.com Header Image

 

Bad Eagle Journal

George Bush: Man of the Hour

by David Yeagley · January 23, 2007 · 31 Comments ·

Affairs of state are daily bread
on any lowly, simple street.
August names and places sore exotic
spice the dull conversations in the slum–

For many can read as well as drink their bitter coffee.
Racid grease, with flies and butter melted
alter not the words of language, nor the atmosphere of speech,
nor the senseless mummery of the News and their stale redundancies.

All can honor their own tongues
with the names of kings,
for there is no price on pronunciations.
The vagrant readily advises lords, in the empty air;
the self-conscious slave shall exorcise every imp of the state.
Anyone can triumph in a sentence over any Monarch…

Being spoken of–
This is the price of Princedom,

as the children spill the milk,
as the cat awaits an opened door,

Being spoken of–
by all,
by any,
from all points of view

as the builders hoist the bricks,
as the market bustles with advantage,
as the athletes compete in pain,

Being spoken of,
the king cleans his teeth.
Being spoken of,
God waters the wildflowers

from the epic, Jahan dideh, Poem the Seventh,
“Resurrection.” 1985, by David A. Yeagley (New Haven, CT)


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) applauds before U.S. President
George W. Bush delivers his annual State of the Union speech to a joint
session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol in Washington January 23, 2007

Tonight, January 23, 2007, President George W. Bush delivered his 6th State of the Union Address. He carried himself as the strong man he truly is. He has a steadfast character, and invites courage from others. He is a humble man. He is not a spectacular speaker. He is not charismatic. He is not entertaining. He is simply himself. What we see is real, not performed. He is a gentleman, and very fine one.

As we all learn how do disagree with respect, to oppose with dignity, George Bush has offered us one of the finest examples of our time. He does not belittle his enemies. He recognizes that he, as the president, cannot reduce himself to the level of conversation found in those who hate him, who are desperate to condemn him. They have their feelings, their motivations. He must patiently endure them, consider them, and not despise them.

Senator Jim Webb, Democrat, Virginia, offered one of the weakest responses in the history of mechanical “rebuttals.”

Posted by David Yeagley · January 23, 2007 · 9:35 pm CT · ·

Tags: Bad Eagle Journal




Read More Journal Posts »

31 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Mario // Jan 24, 2007 at 12:44 am   

    Well Dr, Yeagley, I think you are right and I believe that because of his dignity he has been excruciated by the lefties and their allies in the media to the point where his approval ratings are so low.

    Unfortunately, most of the americans have a Circus Maximus mentality who care more about their entertainment than anything else.

    I just hope this new strategy works when it comes to Iraq but with the constant “if it bleeds-it leads” from news media. the american public will be demanding more for the removal of our soldiers.

    I can only say is to wait and see and hope everything will turn out better.

  • 2 mussy // Jan 24, 2007 at 1:10 am   

    What is incredibly weak is our president, lower case, this “Bush” character who has led us down a path of death, stubborness, ignorance, and for better or worse Repulbicanness.

    Top achieve oil to exact revenge for his daddy to attempty to occupy and office that he is ill suited for and most definitely not qualified for, this is the ultimate treason. The world at large is worse off. We have been lead by a buffoon, voted for by larger buffoons.

    Thank god 08 will thrust sensability back into the spotlight. Thank god the American public has had their fill of death in the name of oil and haliburton. Thank god a new democratic president will emerge to get us out of this horrible mess that that idiot right of the country had lead us toward.

    I only pray that the rest of the world will still remember and forgive us.

  • 3 David Yeagley // Jan 24, 2007 at 10:11 am   

    Oklahoma Democrat coming through there!

    I notice you didn’t directly attack me. That’s unusual.

    The point of this article was not whether Bush has been right or wrong, but simply his personal behavior, as a man. I think it is exemplary.

    If he had different ideas, more like your ideas, you would be using different words. “Stubborn” would be strong, steadfast, unwavering, heroic. “Ignorance” would be brilliance, insight, and long range plans.

    Just depends on which way you’re looking. In such circumstances, we’re left with the man himself. What kind of a man is he? How does he conduct himself?

    Bush is a nobleman. When he went into the white house, he didn’t breath a word about the literal, juvenile mess purposely created and left by Stephanopolous and the Clinton gang of delinquents. Bush didn’t say a word. They just cleaned it up, and got down to business.

    This kind of thing. This is what I’m talking about, on all levels. Bush is a great man.

    He may have made some really wrong decisions, but he is a great man, personally. Humble, and faithful. Maybe he just makes some wrong decisions. That’s all.

  • 4 Nadine // Jan 24, 2007 at 11:04 am   

    Hmmm…mayhap you are right on this one…that is, he has always conducted himself as a gentleman throughout, no matter if one disagrees with him or not. I’ll give you that much, but then again so have many other political savvy politicians, otherwise they wouldn’t be where they are today. They know better. (;^)

    Just remember, whatever you say now will come back to haunt you one day, so it’s best to watch one’s words carefully.

    Thoughtfully, Nadine

  • 5 Nadine // Jan 24, 2007 at 11:06 am   

    P.S. Lol, case in point Sally Field upon accepting her Oscar several decades ago ~ “You like me, you really like me”.

    Laughing, Nadine

  • 6 ecology // Jan 24, 2007 at 11:23 am   

    You know doc I hang with some serious real deal conservatives (religious and not religious. Ex marines and non veterans. etc…) and we are all very dissapointed in the president. he is a Neo Liberal doc. he pushes neo liberal programs. Now sure in this day and age conservative means religious. However conservative does not truly include religion. In fact its illogical to say the least that religion defines conservative. Now I really dont care much about the popualrity contest or how he looks on paper. Whats being done that is going to help keep the titanic from hitting the bottom? Now believe you me I am radical and far more right wing than these supposed right wing conservatives. I want gallows and firing squads. bread and water to felons in wet cement cell. I want true CONSERVation. Bush is really just a liberal. We do know that there really is no other way now tho. Liberal amounts are our only choice now.

  • 7 ecology // Jan 24, 2007 at 11:25 am   

    But you are right! he is our president and WE do respect him for that. You wont ever see us frothing at the mouth and lashing out like spoiled rotten children.

  • 8 ecology // Jan 24, 2007 at 11:30 am   

    and god help us all if we get a hillary or some other king or queen in there. King Goerge we will scream to ahve back! Its sad that America is looking more and more like a fuedal system. Did we not fight a war of independence to get rid of the king and queen? Interesting.
    Nancy Pelosi? God help us all!

  • 9 Sioux // Jan 24, 2007 at 1:28 pm   

    Interesting that the Dems picked newly elected James Webb to deliver the “response.” I agree that his words were empty, weak and not worthy of the Loyal Opposition, but typical. Webb wants to show everyone how tough and independent he is – even rewrote the speech given to him by the Dem leaders. Did you hear how he acted at a private reception held at the White House for newly elected lawmakers – Bush asked Webb how his son, a Marine lance corporal serving in Iraq, was doing. Webb responded that he really wanted to see his son brought back home. “I didn’t ask you that, I asked how he’s doing,” Bush responded, according to the source. Webb confessed that he was so angered by this that he was tempted to slug the commander-in-chief, but of course didn’t. Webb May Test Senate’s Limits

    Haven’t heard any of the talking heads mention this encounter and how it speaks volumes as to why the Dems picked angry Webb to do the spewing.

  • 10 David Yeagley // Jan 24, 2007 at 2:20 pm   

    Perhaps it is a personal thing, on my part. I just know what it’s like to have low-down lying “enemies.” I admire the Bush has handled his. He has treated them with respect. On an infinitessimal scale down, I can only hope I have done the same.

    One hopes for worthy enemies, however.

  • 11 "Greetings, my son!" // Jan 24, 2007 at 3:12 pm   

    Just in case you missed it Doc:

    Microsoft Caught Trying to Change Wikipedia Entries

    I was going to say “off topic,” but maybe from this you can glean something about your enemies.

  • 12 "Greetings, my son!" // Jan 24, 2007 at 3:12 pm   

    Just in case you missed it Doc:

    Microsoft Caught Trying to Change Wikipedia Entries

    I was going to say “off topic,” but maybe from this you can glean something about your enemies.

  • 13 David Yeagley // Jan 24, 2007 at 3:35 pm   

    Yes, that article was noted on the Bad Eagle Forums just today. I wonder what Gates would think?

    There are facts, then there is character. We’d like to think these can be differentiated.

  • 14 ecology // Jan 24, 2007 at 4:52 pm   

    I agree with you on that as well! He has dealt with his opposition well. Much better than they have with him! For sure.

  • 15 ecology // Jan 24, 2007 at 4:57 pm   

    I just cant bring myself to spewing rage against the president. Yes many are not happy with him. Just wish they would uphold the constitution and let people be “on there own”. If this means they get weeded out of the gene pool so be it. Now we are just building up this historical disaster for my kid to inherit. ugh.

  • 16 mussy // Jan 25, 2007 at 12:49 am   

    It would weaken an already strong and obvious argument to attack the host of this website. There would be no point in that really.

    To admire, however, a man who has lead us down one of the more destructive paths in recent memory is asinine to me. It is perhaps the apex of ignorant partisan idealogy. One could admire Hitler for being true to his beliefs but wtf?

    The world is certinaly NOT better off because of this president directly and more precisely because of the last corrupt, heavily Repub, Tom Delay constructed congress.

    Again I reiterate, thank GOD there is parity and sensible Democratic sense to rescue us from corporate interests and otherwise, rich, old, white, man…money.

  • 17 mussy // Jan 25, 2007 at 1:38 am   

    The Administration has exhausted what was once an enormous stock of political capital by repeatedly insisting that it has uncovered the truth, and then being proved wrong. Right now, Iran, because of its size, wealth, military power, location, religious and civilian leadership, and ambitions, really is a serious threat — much more so than Iraq was four years ago. The United States’ ability to do anything about that threat has been severely degraded by the Iraq war. The damage is not so much military as epistemic: if nobody believes our accounts of threats, then we can’t assemble alliances to counteract them. The Libby trial reveals a White House that thought its problems were with people who could not be counted on to confirm its suspicions, like Ambassador Wilson. It should have worried less about those who would speak truth to power, and worried more that power is no longer trusted to speak truth.

  • 18 David Yeagley // Jan 25, 2007 at 10:13 am   

    So, if you see things solely in political party terms, then the conversation is hopeless.

    The point of this article was about behavior, about respectful conduct toward one’s political enemies. But this topic reveals your utter commitment to the Democrat Party. And then you make excuse yourself for not bothering to attack the host, which is your past wont.

    Okay. So, if we talk about Bush’s “good” behavior, you talk about his “bad” decisions and at the same to you avoid exhibiting your normal “bad” behavior toward the host.

    Let’s be clear about what’s happening here.

    I notice you say nothing about Saudi Arabia. Or Hamas in Palestine and Lebanon. You say nothing about Al-qaeda.

    You mention Iran’s strength, but nothing about its sponsorship of Muslim mass murderers–which cause the problems.

    Your focus seems to be wholly to condemn Bush policies. Okay. His focus has been on what he has called The War on Terror, on an enemy the like of which the world has never known–a cowardly, deceptive, humanless, animalistic passion for murder, mass murder, of non-combatants, on non-battle field situations.

    Your focus on the nation of Iran’s strength therefore seems a bit off target. It is not the nation of Iran who is attacking anyone.

  • 19 whitetrash // Jan 25, 2007 at 1:08 pm   

    Bush pursued a dubious course in the war on terror, and then defeated any merit in his course with unbelievable incompetence in the execution. He has presided over a loss of economic wealth for the working and middle classes and overseen the spectacle of the super rich becoming obscenely rich, while major corporations sell out our manufacturing base to countries like Communist China just to make their bottom line look good. He has allowed the invasion of our country by Mexico to provide cheap labor for his corporate benefactors, while raising interest rates on student loans. Now he wants to tax healthcare benefits on people who struggle to meet a deductible.

    George W. Bush is quite simply the worst, most divisive, least educated, least talented, most ignorant, and most destructive president in American History. It remains to be seen if America will survive his foolish leadership, and the revitalized Leftist movement he single handedly put back in power in Congress.

  • 20 David Yeagley // Jan 25, 2007 at 9:11 pm   

    WT, does it occur to you that your remarks are simply opinions? I know this is only a comment, and you’re stating conclusions, rather than facts, but, gee, the man would have been assassinated were he as bad as some people rave.

    How would you have handled the mass murderers (terrorists)? What would you have done after 9-11? I don’t think Bush did enough. I would have deported all Arab Muslims immediately!

  • 21 "Greetings, my son!" // Jan 25, 2007 at 9:15 pm   

    One could spend an hour debunking the talking points agitprops contained in whitetrash’s, and mussey’s statements. Well, I am not going to, but I will take two of them and point out the nonsense contained in them

    whitetrash said,

    “while (Bush) raising interest rates on student loans.”

    It is not that simple, unless you are an advocate of “cradle to grave” mindless, Marxist government guardianship.

    The Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 (HERA) was a 12 billion dollar deficit reduction plan. We need a lot more of these plans to stop the run away inflation in our centers of higher learning, caused by the easy of passing on run-away, unjustifiable costs to the federal government. It is a racket set up between Democrat politicians and Democrat educators (I use the term loosely).

    If the government was less involved in the financing of higher education, inflation rates that have effected tuition so negatively would be more in line with normal rates of inflation. Parents and students could not handle the out of control costs so the costs would not rise so fast–I better stop, I do not want to give the Marxists on this board a nervous break down trying to understand this simple tenant of economics.

    mussey said,

    “Iran, because of its size, wealth, military power, location, religious and civilian leadership, and ambitions, really is a serious threat”

    Iran mussey, is a nothing, and exists because we allow it to.

    A military power?

    Let them try to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, and thereby preventing 40% of the world’s oil from going where it needs to. You will witness what a powerful military has been planning for years now. Iran tried it during the final stages of the Iraq-Iran War, and we wiped out half their navy in three hours.

    religious and civilian leadership?

    The regime in Tehran is hated, and regime change would be welcomed. Iran has ethnic divisions and rivalries almost as fierce as those in Iraq. Almost half of Iran’s population is made up of Kurds, Baluchis, Azeris, Arabs, and Turkomans. Unlike the Persians, who are Shiites, most of these minorities are Sunni. A military action just like the one in Iraq could open the way for an entirely new Iran based on a constitution.

    My only problem with Bush, with regards to the GWOT is, he has not taken it to Syria and Iran, YET! It must be done, regime change their is a integral part of winning it.

  • 22 "Greetings, my son!" // Jan 25, 2007 at 9:15 pm   

    One could spend an hour debunking the talking points agitprops contained in whitetrash’s, and mussey’s statements. Well, I am not going to, but I will take two of them and point out the nonsense contained in them

    whitetrash said,

    “while (Bush) raising interest rates on student loans.”

    It is not that simple, unless you are an advocate of “cradle to grave” mindless, Marxist government guardianship.

    The Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 (HERA) was a 12 billion dollar deficit reduction plan. We need a lot more of these plans to stop the run away inflation in our centers of higher learning, caused by the easy of passing on run-away, unjustifiable costs to the federal government. It is a racket set up between Democrat politicians and Democrat educators (I use the term loosely).

    If the government was less involved in the financing of higher education, inflation rates that have effected tuition so negatively would be more in line with normal rates of inflation. Parents and students could not handle the out of control costs so the costs would not rise so fast–I better stop, I do not want to give the Marxists on this board a nervous break down trying to understand this simple tenant of economics.

    mussey said,

    “Iran, because of its size, wealth, military power, location, religious and civilian leadership, and ambitions, really is a serious threat”

    Iran mussey, is a nothing, and exists because we allow it to.

    A military power?

    Let them try to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, and thereby preventing 40% of the world’s oil from going where it needs to. You will witness what a powerful military has been planning for years now. Iran tried it during the final stages of the Iraq-Iran War, and we wiped out half their navy in three hours.

    religious and civilian leadership?

    The regime in Tehran is hated, and regime change would be welcomed. Iran has ethnic divisions and rivalries almost as fierce as those in Iraq. Almost half of Iran’s population is made up of Kurds, Baluchis, Azeris, Arabs, and Turkomans. Unlike the Persians, who are Shiites, most of these minorities are Sunni. A military action just like the one in Iraq could open the way for an entirely new Iran based on a constitution.

    My only problem with Bush, with regards to the GWOT is, he has not taken it to Syria and Iran, YET! It must be done, regime change their is a integral part of winning it.

  • 23 kuhnkat // Jan 25, 2007 at 11:45 pm   

    Whitetrash and mussy,

    you say your heros are Chamberlain and the Socialists in Europe, Australia, and Canada??

    You like the way South Africa has destroyed its economy and raised the crime rates??

    You agree with Putin murdering those who oppose him??

    You believe that China has the RIGHT STUFF???

    You think Ahmadinaheadjob should be allowed to nuke Israel??

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • 24 whitetrash // Jan 26, 2007 at 7:24 am   

    Doc

    I would argue that what I stated are facts.

    1) The strategy of invading Iraq to build a liberal democracy, was and remains, a dubious strategy in the face of the sectarian nature of Iraqi society, and given the history of the British in that region. This was widely known by anyone who bothered to read up on it before the invasion.

    2) Even if one agrees with the Neo Con approach to the war on Terror, it is impossible to ignore the series of blunders in executing this strategy. These blunders and the consequences cannot be ignored, and at the center of these blunders was how slowly the administration came to understand that they were engaged in a counter insurgency.

    3) It is a fact that we now have at least 15 million Mexicans in this country illegally, and that wages of working and middle class Americans have fallen as the riches of the so called “investor class” have grown.

    These are facts. My opinion, or conclusion that Bush is a disaster, is drawn from these and other facts.

    As for what I think we should have done after 9-11? Run the terrorists with Special OPs, anywhere in the world, and patiently find and kill them. I would also have created the “Whitetrash Doctrine”, a variant of the mutual annihilation doctrine in the cold war, informing N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, and other terror states that if any weapons of Mass Destruction are used against the U.S. or it’s people by terrorist groups funded by these states, we will nuke you until you glow. No exceptions.

    I don’t hate Mr. Bush. I just think he has been a disastrous president for the reasons cited in my previous post.

  • 25 whitetrash // Jan 26, 2007 at 7:42 am   

    Greeting My Son

    I can’t really take offence at being labeled a Marxist by someone who knows nothing about me… but I do find it comical.

  • 26 dc // Jan 26, 2007 at 8:33 am   

    Mussy said,: “Again I reiterate, thank GOD there is parity and sensible Democratic sense to rescue us from corporate interests and otherwise, rich, old, white, man…money.”

    John Kerry, Speaker Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Sen Rockefeller are examples of what color, and what money?

  • 27 David Yeagley // Jan 26, 2007 at 9:05 am   

    WT, so, it’s a Jewish thing you object to underneath all this? “Necon”?

    I do believe there was no sign of understanding of middle eastern people. But, such “understanding” would have meant DO NOTHING. America was attacked, on our own soil, in our biggest city. Murderously. Civilians!

    We had to do seomthing, and something serious. As I said, I would like to have seen MORE, and more that would have expressed the psychological element (“indignation”) in the true American people. The enemy was defined too loosely. The focus was blurred. The reaction to broad.

    Then again, WT, the situation is new. World murder gangs. Murderers who pretend to be like normal people, even Americans. Deceivers. Liars. Using natural human affection and human relations as camouflage. This was a new situation.

    I would have worked to define the enemy more clearly. I would have forced such identity. I would have created it. This is the only way to win. The enemy must be someone who can be destroyed.

  • 28 whitetrash // Jan 26, 2007 at 10:43 am   

    Hi Doc,

    Are you asking me if I am an anti-Semite? No.

    I used the term, Neo Con, to identify the strategy employed by the Bush administration on the war on terror, not to flame the people who conceived of it. I regarded the Neo Con strategy as reasonable in concept, but unrealistic in practice. This has proven to be true. I don’t take any satisfaction in that, but I refuse to ignore it.

    My beef is not with the Neo Cons, who might have been proven right had the political leaders who employed their strategy been competent. My beef is with the CIC.

  • 29 concha // Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05 am   

    Bush’s Real ID Act will be the death of the constitution and our right to privacy.
    Have a prior conviction? Made a few mistakes in your youth? Well guess what, your new ID card in 2008 will list all of your convictions on an rfid chip for any clerk, travel agent ot security guard to see. They will know who you are.
    Ever been on antidepressants? Have you been diagnosed as ‘bipolar,’ like one in ten people are these days? Wave bye-bye to keeping that a secret.
    Or maybe you have children who have been diagnosed as adhd, or any other learning disability. That diagnosis from that so-called ‘professional’ will haunt them for the rest of their lives, they will never shake it, it’s on the card.
    Thanks a lot George Bush.

  • 30 "Greetings, my son"" // Jan 26, 2007 at 3:06 pm   

    wt states,

    “I would also have created the “Whitetrash Doctrine”, a variant of the mutual annihilation doctrine in the cold war, informing N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, and other terror states that if any weapons of Mass Destruction are used against the U.S. or it’s people by terrorist groups funded by these states, we will nuke you until you glow. No exceptions.”

    In short I would stick my head in the sand and if the maniacs got “the bomb,” so what.

    He does not even consider the fact that these funding states do not control many of these maniacs and much of the money paid is extortion.

    The fear of what happened in Iraq to these funding states weighs heavy on the minds of all these terrorist funding states–Regime change pummelings is the only answer–Special Ops are not massive enough, they cannot win a war on their own.

    Every Islamic country must fear an US invasion as much, if not more, then the terrorists.

  • 31 "Greetings, my son"" // Jan 26, 2007 at 3:06 pm   

    wt states,

    “I would also have created the “Whitetrash Doctrine”, a variant of the mutual annihilation doctrine in the cold war, informing N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, and other terror states that if any weapons of Mass Destruction are used against the U.S. or it’s people by terrorist groups funded by these states, we will nuke you until you glow. No exceptions.”

    In short I would stick my head in the sand and if the maniacs got “the bomb,” so what.

    He does not even consider the fact that these funding states do not control many of these maniacs and much of the money paid is extortion.

    The fear of what happened in Iraq to these funding states weighs heavy on the minds of all these terrorist funding states–Regime change pummelings is the only answer–Special Ops are not massive enough, they cannot win a war on their own.

    Every Islamic country must fear an US invasion as much, if not more, then the terrorists.

You must log in to post a comment.