Get those nooses ready. Up To The Challenge A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released after last night’s speech by President Bush shows a very positive response to his message. 74 percent had a “positive reaction” to Bush’s speech. 63 percent now feel Bush has a “clear path” for Iraq, compared to 56 percent before the speech.
Anyone with a brain in their head knows that his speech was nothing more than a pep talk [people from all over the political map said it before and after]. People needed to hear from the President to know that everything is A-OK. 7% (plus or minus) now feel just a bit better.
In related news, at least 80% of all people in america could just disappear, and I wouldn't give a rat's ass.
I think Bush has a clear path in Iraq. He wants to steal their oil, and he doesn't care how many people die along the way. Nothing, but nothing, about our Iraq policy makes a damn bit of sense without realizing that Bush and Cheney want to control Iraq's oil reserves. They want the honey, and they've conned the nation into sticking our hands in the hive.
Nothing, but nothing, said here about our Iraq policy has made more sense. If, in fact, Bush and Cheney want to control Iraq's oil reserves, then nearly EVERYTHING they've done makes sense.
Freaky. I can't find any other source to back up the information in the blog entry you posted. In fact, I found this: So, Ian, I call bvllsh!t.
You call bullsh!t on a CNN/Gallup poll, but then cite a poll from Zogby...the biggest loser in the 2004 election sweepstakes? I'm still awaiting the Kerry landslide that Zogby predicted THE DAY OF THE ELECTION.
You could back up your post, but you haven't. Until you cite another source I don't believe that such a poll exists.
Or you can just look up one post to the link I provided, showing that it was a flash poll of those who saw the speech, 50% of whom identifiy themselves as Republicans, and 23% of those who identify as Democrats. So yeah, it's a bullsh!t poll.
Barb said the poll didn't exist. It's not a bullsh!t poll, it's a poll of viewers of the president's speech. How are they supposed to do a poll on the president's speech...by asking non-viewers of it? The poll is what it is: 63% of those who heard Bush's speech feel he has a clear path for Iraq, and 74% of them feel good about the speech. That's not bullsh!t, that's the facts of the poll.
And while I'm here, let me debunk the rest of your post: Again, these are the people who watched the speech. 50% GOP, 23% Dem for those scoring at home. Among the public at large, it's a different story: http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.php?page=opinion&story_id=063005b4_edits So, on Tuesday morning, before the speech, 56% of the people who saw the speech thought Bush had a clear plan. Out of everybody, 61% thought he didn't. So, yeah, bullsh!t.
But you conveniently left out who was polled. What's the point of starting a thread saying "Kool-Aid Drinkers Still Think Bush is A-OK"? You intimated that Bush's support is considerably better than the liberals on here have claimed, hence the "get those nooses ready" quip. The poll is pointless, and so is this thread. It's called intellectual dishonesty Ian.
In other news, the majority of those polled outside the courthouse during the Michael Jackson trial believed that Jackson was innocent. Clearly, America believed in Jackson's innocence.
So, let me get this straight. To debunk my post, you cite an "opinion" piece from an obscure Tuscon newspaper?
It's an opinion piece that cited the poll results. I didn't want to make anyone register. Here you go. It's the Boston Globe, but it's a news piece: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...29/bush_urges_patience_long_view_on_iraq_war/ Perhaps the Globe is such a liberal rag that they make up the same numbers as the obscure paper in Tucson, who knows.
"Gallup: 63% feel Bush has clear path for Iraq" The article, from the National Review, BTW, does not denote that the 63% who felt Bush has a "clear path" all watched the speech. I apologize for calling you intellectually dishonest. You merely copied and pasted the National Review's intellectual dishonesty.
YEAH THOSE FVCKING 63% PROBABLY AREN'T AND HAVEN'T SERVED OVER THERE. THEY DIDN'T CHOKE ON ********ING KUWAITI AND IRAQI SAND FOR 6 ********ING MONTHS EITHER. LET THOSE CHICKENHAWK ********************S GO OVER THERE FOR HALF A ********ING YEAR AND THEN 'POLL' THEM IF THERE'S A ********ING CLEAR PATH!!!!!! MOTHER********ERS
First of all, don't post when you're f-cking drunk. Second, turn off the computer. For the sober folks, did I miss the Constitutional Amendment that allows for a President to serve more than two terms?