Log in

No account? Create an account

is there any other type?

Do you think that the New York Times intentionally chooses pictures of Bush with a dumb expression on his face?

... allowing the protesters to influence him would be "like saying I'm going to decide policy based upon a focus group."

I guess this isn't particularly surprising. He didn't seem to have trouble taking the job against the will of the majority, so why start now?


I guess this is just me being snarky. In the U.S., the majority probably supports war with Iraq, which clearly doesn't make it (or any other popular thing) necessarily correct.


do you realize how difficult it would be to take a picture of hime _without_ a dumb expression on his face? i've had to watch most of his speeches (in their entirety) for work and he really does look stupid (and constipated) most of the time.
I like that you put that in big text. The majority of Americans do seem to support a war, which is incredibly unfortunate, but you're so right the fact that the majority thinks something doesn't necessarily make it correct.

It's still incredibly disappointing to have the President of the United States compare citizens protesting the war to a focus group. Focus groups are for new kinds of Pepsi and new styles of cars.

html gone wild!

(it was supposed to be small text)
That's why we're not a pure democracy. I guess our founding fathers thought that The Public wasn't smart enough to make all the decisions for the government, but that we're at least smart enough to choose the people to make the decisions for us. Guess they were wrong.