So, just throw money at the public schools and everything will magically improve? Sounds like the wonderful strategy we've been using for the last 40 years, and to no avail. School choice. Now that's a winner.
For many terrible, horrifying years, from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009, Josiah Bartlet was my President, and there are days even since January 20, 2009, when he becomes my president again, even if only for an afternoon.
I have more hope now than I did eight years ago, but there are days when we need a fictional President for inspiration. Thank you, Aaron Sorkin.
Although I agree with the message. We too need to be sure we're doing more than nearly enough oversight on HOW we spend more money on education. Wasted bureaucratic administration helps no child learn.
@younghoss No, don't be flippant, that really isn't what he is saying. He is saying that there will be always be people who hate America, there will always be people who are willing to stoop to such low levels as killing innocent people and that can't be changed, but what can be changed is education, healthcare and such and they should be changed. But yes, maybe if education was better, if we had more social equality, fewer people would feel disenfranchised and marginalised.
@RichardJosefMax There is will always be "great" nations willing to murder innocent people in far away countries as "collateral" for their own self interests too ... there is indeed great evil in this world!
@stringerboi youll love it and hate it at the same time. youll love it because its brilliant in both the writing and the acting, and it is without a doubt the best show i have ever heard of or seen. youll hate it, however, because since the show has ended, you will in fact one day run out of episodes. youll also notice that after watching it, every other show doesnt even seem to come close. so basically its amazing but the price you have to pay is it ruins tv for you forever. i should know
Sam "at the last minute " Seaborn joy comes in the morning but every time we think we have measured our capacity to meet a challenge, we look up and we're reminded that that capacity may well be limitless. This is a time for American heroes. We will do what is hard. We will achieve what is great. This is a time for American heroes and we reach for the stars.
decision to end the show to end the show was wrong , eight more year
I always find it funny. We can make the perfect president on the screen but how come we can't find the perfect on in real life? Is it really that hard to find a real american that cares about the people?
This whole show was an education in itself.. for the political process, how things got done, but also a beautiful presentation of the English language, with the emotive use of words and phrases and delivery techniques that hammered the point home, all without thinking the orator is a fool...
Obama & co would do well to hire Aaron Sorkin's screenwriters to his staff!
Not enough money? The Dept. of Education budget has been *hugely* increased every year or two since Clinton. Yes, even under GWB. How come is it that the federal education budget gets billions extra but our kids get less and less in the classroom and the cafeteria? There's something not right there, and it's in the government, not in the popular culture.
@kagasan2008 What the Federal government giveth, the states taketh away. I'm in CA, and the ONLY times that the state government has done anything with the education budget over the past 20 years is to CUT it. They have not ONCE increased the funding to education in that entire time. They have either left it alone, and let better economies bring more tax money from higher wages, or CUT it when the economy went sour. Now, one teacher is forced to teach 25, 35, or 45 kids per class.
If only it reflected the realities of the real-life Teachers Unions on which the real-life Democratic Party depends for votes and some funding--the unions oppose the dismissal of even the most incompetent teachers.
How can you have a good education when even those unfit to teach keep their jobs. How can you inspire good teachers when bad teachers get as much protection as the good ones.
The fact is that 50% of all new teachers, good and bad, leave the profession after only 5 years.
There are bad teachers, and they do get weaned out, but there are bad students and bad parents too. It's easy to blame teachers because there's fewer of them than those other groups but the fact is until we make education as glorified in this country as athletics kids are going to dream of being basketball stars and not mathematicians.
1 "Bad teachers get weaned out" contradicts the reality that Teachers Unions oppose the dismissal--even the retraining--of incompetent teachers.
2 It is not about blame--it is about the fact that even good students with good parents fail to get a good education under a bad teacher, and the fact that good teachers are even more needed to save all but the incorrigible ones among bad students cursed with bad parents.
I hate after watching an episode of The West Wing and you span into reality and realise that not only was President Bartlet never elected, he never really existed and Martin Sheen isn't nearly as insightful :(
Agree with you. Martin Sheen's full of lefty crap. Aaron Sorkin's scripts were actually well-balanced and when Republican characters articulated their values, they did so in a way that made them sound principled and well-meaning - and smart. Basically, all the politicians - left or right- depicted in the west wing are smarter and have greater integrity than the fuckwits we have to vote for in real-life. So I agree with Elensila, Sorkin for president!
@lucas27 OBAMA is a bit Bartlett like. He's not as old though. Bartlett's age gives him more gravitas... I'm happy to be living under OBAMA.... I feel he's the closest thing to Bartlett since Kennedy...
@lucas27 You need to pay more attention to Martin Sheen. He is extremely devoted to political activism and is a very eloquent speaker in his own right.
Again it is posted not where it is supposed to be I am saying that the line that is all bull is posted out of context for some reason as stated in the one I hope this posts next to
After President Bartlet said he'll just "talk for a little bit" he comes up with one of the most brilliant lines that could ever be said by a president. "They weren't born wanting to do this". After witnessing this speech, Bruno mentions that there is no way Bartlet is losing the election.
I hope this helps you guys appreciate this scene as much as I do.
President Bartlet is campaigning for his second term and the Kenniston bombing happened. Bruno and all the campaign headers were discussing whether they should talk about the bombing when the focus of the speech he was about to give was education. Some thought mentioning may not fit with the topic while others thought that the event could not go by unacknowledged by the president. This explain Bruno and Sam's fumbling around at the beginning of the clip.
Careful, FEROCIOUSMADMAN. Lest we be reminded why GW Bush won.
1 GW Bush won in 2000 because the offered alternative was so uninspiring that he could not even get his and his father's home state to support him. (Which would have made FL irrelevant and the SC decision unnecessary.)
2 GW Bush won by an overwhelming margin in 2004 because the offered alternative--in his words, conduct and reactions, from post-Vietnam, throughout his political career and during the campaign--was rightfully seen by the electorate as an even more alarming prospect than four more years of the incompetent incumbent.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There you go again with your imagined 'justifications'--any excuse to avoid facing the fact that
| Gore could not win even his home state--
| which would have made FL irrelevant
| and the Supreme Court decision unnecessary.
Tell me, what EXCUSE did you have for Carter's miserable loss against Reagan? And what EXCUSE did you have when Kerry lost by an overwhelming margin to the incompetent incumbent in 2004?
Yes, we should have known then what we were getting into when you put up a candidate like Carter after a disastrous first term, like Dukakis, like Mondale, like Bush Sr after an economically-disastrous first term, like Dole, like Gore, like Kerry.
Carter's loss was due to the fact that he was pressured conservatives into letting The Shah into this country which bought on the Hostage Crisis. Kerry lost because cowards who never served in Vietnam questioned the character one one who did(Kerry), came home and told the world the truth about that war and naive naive sheep believed the Swiftboat For Truth lies.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
2 Anything to avoid facing the fact that (i) from post-Vietnam, (ii) throughout his political career, and during the campaign Kerry did not inspire TRUST ... and that was displayed with CONSISTENCY (i) in his choices, positions and decisions, (ii) in the changes he frequentyly made in those choices, positions and decisions, (iii) in the reasons he gave for those changes, (iv) in his words, (v) in his actions, and (vi) in his reactions.
I neither know nor give a damn whose--not "who is"--talking points the following are:
1 "Carter's loss was due to the fact that he was pressured [sic] conservatives into letting The Shah into this country which bought on the Hostage Crisis."
and
2 "Kerry lost because cowards who never served in Vietnam questioned the character one one who did(Kerry), came home and told the world the truth about that war and naive naive sheep believed the Swiftboat For Truth lies."
the allowing of the Shah into this country did not bring on the Hostage Crisis. The Hostage Crisis was brought on by the US, Israel and England getting involved in overthrowing the Prime Minister of Iran starting in 1954! The lash back dates way back to that and has little to do with the Shah being allowed into this country. They already knew we were involved in his rise to power. That is why the US Embasy was known as the Den of Spys.
I think this is out of context for some reason. Don't remember what it was posted to or why I posted it. Sorry. As far as the statement above it, it would be iteresting but doubt that it will happen. As everyone has moved on. Sorry for the comment. Especiall since I don't know now why I posted it to begin with
Carter was is & will always be a coward. Clinton was a traitor & coward. Kerry was a traitor & Osama thinks we dont need security that we should hide & not be proud to be americans & he thinks that Life liberty & the pursuit of happiness means punishing hard work & rewarding lazy irresponsibly people who dont want to work & think happiness is to be given when it's suppose to be earned.Pursuit does not mean punish the hardworkers, that happiness is guaranteed or free let alone without some work.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
LOL that's the best you got? Your a facist commie & in for a huge let down when nothing your cult leader promised gets done and he spends more then bush did doubling the national debt and yet creates no jobs fixes no economy and is worse then bush was. 1459 days left till he's out.
1 Remember JF Kerry whenever he opened his mouth? (He's the reason why GW Bush won a second term.)
2 Remember BH Obama whenever he is without a teleprompter and he has to deal with a question which has not been relayed beforehand and which cannot be answered by a soundbite, a slogan or a chant?
3 Remember JD Quayle whenever he opened his mouth? (He provided comedians with abundant material.)
when I watched this show and heard Bartlet speak in complete and eloquent phrases of hope and destiny, I felt like crying when I compared him to the mean, crass, inarticulate thug currently in the White House.
I don't think I'd exactly agree he is a thug. Sort of, but not exactly. He does want to take away wealth from Americans that have earned it, but not with a gun, but through redistribution.
He is out-of touch certainly, but I strongly disagee with "inarticulate" . Obama is an excellent public speaker.
On closer look, I see you are right, adrian. Amazing. The post didn't name names, so I thought the "thug" robbing Americans referred to our current president, who wants to take away money from people that earned it.
@younghoss What do you mean robbing Americans? There was a THREE PERCENT tax increase on the wealthiest Americans from when Republicans had the White House. Where in that 3% does it suddenly become robbing Americans?
Is it the exposure to ideas that aren't exclusively based on the bible? Or just a lack of corporal punishment? Can you clarify your comment if it's not any of these things, and instead something completely different.
why don't we just go back to the pre-Guttenberg days... no books, no thinking, just conservative monks reminding us how worthless we were... liberalism shaped western civilization: the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the American Revolution, heck yeah, and Rock'n Roll... conservatism kept us in a 10-century cocoon called the Middle Ages... oh yes, and for the past 7.5 years, as well
Right or wrong and I do think they're wrong. It would probably be wise to recognize that the "terrorists" have specific complaints and an agenda. I suggest you see "Why do they hate us?" and "Mrs. Bartlet explains how it all began." Both posted by Sarakatheryn I believe. Everyone involved in posting these is great.
He's not curious George. Unfortunately, he was never very curious about anything. That is a major part of the problem. He has a 22 caliber mind in a 357 Magnum world. He wouldn't want anyone who could write like this and he wouldn't understand them if they did.
I just saw a documentary called "No End in Sight" about the lead up to the Iraq war. Shrubblegruber was given some one page summaries along with the reports, detailing why the Iraq army should not be disbanded. He didn't bother to read even the one page summaries. I'm not sure he reads anything more complex than "My Pet Goat."
Obama is probably the only candidate who could pull off this sort of rhetoric. Aaron Sorkin and Obama would be the kiss of death for any Republican candidate.
where exactly did you find that quite elementary definition, champ? Rhetoric is the use of language for means of persuasion. There is more intellectual life than dictionaries. Try it some time.
Can I say that one rhetoric doesn't have a negative connotation when your talking to me, but people unfamiliar with writing may feel that it does have a negative connotation.
Also Websters website produces this definition (others as well): 1: the art of speaking or writing effectively.
And before anyone calls someone names, I think it wonderful to meet people that are willing to engage in a discussion about rhetoric.
Obama + Sorkin should get together, though there would be a chance of coke use.
So, just throw money at the public schools and everything will magically improve? Sounds like the wonderful strategy we've been using for the last 40 years, and to no avail. School choice. Now that's a winner.
gotgame292 9 hours ago
I was crying the entire time. Such a wonderful show and brilliant acting. I had goosebumps.
ManUntdForever 2 weeks ago
For many terrible, horrifying years, from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009, Josiah Bartlet was my President, and there are days even since January 20, 2009, when he becomes my president again, even if only for an afternoon.
I have more hope now than I did eight years ago, but there are days when we need a fictional President for inspiration. Thank you, Aaron Sorkin.
Karthos1000 4 weeks ago
@Karthos1000 God dammit. Now I'm crying because of a YouTube comment? Fuck....
WillBraden 1 day ago
When school vouchers happen, then we will have positive change!
KelpStalker 1 month ago
when sam says that, oh, one of my favorite scenes in entire show
MatthewS8590 3 months ago
i wached this in its frist run thats my preident
1burnman 4 months ago
This is so American; so idealistic, so sweeping and with so much rhetoric.
adeafningsilence 4 months ago
Clearly 6 people don't understand outstanding writing and a fabulous acting performance when they see or hear it.
NeotericLefty 4 months ago
Although I agree with the message. We too need to be sure we're doing more than nearly enough oversight on HOW we spend more money on education. Wasted bureaucratic administration helps no child learn.
My message? More RESPONSIBLE money for education.
SamAndPatrick 4 months ago
Throughout all seven seasons of the West Wing, the first word that comes to mind when thinking about Martin Sheen's acting is PRESIDENTIAL.
He should've won the Golden Globe seven times in a row.
sumskater999 7 months ago
Gosh, if only we could throw more money into the schools, terrorism would stop.
According to Bartlett.
younghoss 8 months ago
@younghoss No, don't be flippant, that really isn't what he is saying. He is saying that there will be always be people who hate America, there will always be people who are willing to stoop to such low levels as killing innocent people and that can't be changed, but what can be changed is education, healthcare and such and they should be changed. But yes, maybe if education was better, if we had more social equality, fewer people would feel disenfranchised and marginalised.
RichardJosefMax 7 months ago
@RichardJosefMax There is will always be "great" nations willing to murder innocent people in far away countries as "collateral" for their own self interests too ... there is indeed great evil in this world!
pubuman 4 months ago
@younghoss why must everything be reduced to the lowest common denominator of idiocy?
rodwyer 4 days ago
this really reminded me about how we must treat Osama Bin Laden. the idea "he/they wasn't born wanting to do this..." Agree?
960506999517 9 months ago
i gotta watch this show
stringerboi 9 months ago
@stringerboi youll love it and hate it at the same time. youll love it because its brilliant in both the writing and the acting, and it is without a doubt the best show i have ever heard of or seen. youll hate it, however, because since the show has ended, you will in fact one day run out of episodes. youll also notice that after watching it, every other show doesnt even seem to come close. so basically its amazing but the price you have to pay is it ruins tv for you forever. i should know
lemonNlime1000 7 months ago 2
@lemonNlime1000 spot on. the day i ran out of episodes i felt like my life was over
adrianmichaelrook 7 months ago
who's the blonde at 1:02 ?
eltimo12 9 months ago
Comment removed
SunSurfer777 10 months ago
Sam "at the last minute " Seaborn joy comes in the morning but every time we think we have measured our capacity to meet a challenge, we look up and we're reminded that that capacity may well be limitless. This is a time for American heroes. We will do what is hard. We will achieve what is great. This is a time for American heroes and we reach for the stars.
decision to end the show to end the show was wrong , eight more year
1BigBen 11 months ago
Five people weren't born wanting to dislike this.
monkeytypist 11 months ago 6
I always find it funny. We can make the perfect president on the screen but how come we can't find the perfect on in real life? Is it really that hard to find a real american that cares about the people?
gunnerone 11 months ago
@gunnerone
More than 100,000,000 people vote, and not nearly enough put any thought into it.
NobleHam 10 months ago
@gunnerone Well, if only Obama had Sam, Toby, and Josh on his staff...
tyu3456 8 months ago 2
This whole show was an education in itself.. for the political process, how things got done, but also a beautiful presentation of the English language, with the emotive use of words and phrases and delivery techniques that hammered the point home, all without thinking the orator is a fool...
Obama & co would do well to hire Aaron Sorkin's screenwriters to his staff!
gtrmagic 1 year ago 4
BARTLETT FOR AMERICA!
Ovrkyl 1 year ago 2
Rest in peace Ron Silver!
DonaldMele 1 year ago
This has not nearly enough, not nearly enough, not nearly enough views
nyraider91 1 year ago 127
@nyraider91 Wow, that was very, very, good. Well done. +1
JoseJimeniz 1 month ago
Not enough money? The Dept. of Education budget has been *hugely* increased every year or two since Clinton. Yes, even under GWB. How come is it that the federal education budget gets billions extra but our kids get less and less in the classroom and the cafeteria? There's something not right there, and it's in the government, not in the popular culture.
kagasan2008 1 year ago
@kagasan2008 What the Federal government giveth, the states taketh away. I'm in CA, and the ONLY times that the state government has done anything with the education budget over the past 20 years is to CUT it. They have not ONCE increased the funding to education in that entire time. They have either left it alone, and let better economies bring more tax money from higher wages, or CUT it when the economy went sour. Now, one teacher is forced to teach 25, 35, or 45 kids per class.
Richcelt 1 year ago
Breathtaking.
nitaipoddar5 1 year ago 4
JOY COMETH IN THE MORNING
dbassplayer 1 year ago 3
Purposely uploaded on the day of Virginia Tech's tragedy?
JohnStamosIsLame 1 year ago
An impeccable speech.
If only it reflected the realities of the real-life Teachers Unions on which the real-life Democratic Party depends for votes and some funding--the unions oppose the dismissal of even the most incompetent teachers.
How can you have a good education when even those unfit to teach keep their jobs. How can you inspire good teachers when bad teachers get as much protection as the good ones.
gagothesith 1 year ago 6
The fact is that 50% of all new teachers, good and bad, leave the profession after only 5 years.
There are bad teachers, and they do get weaned out, but there are bad students and bad parents too. It's easy to blame teachers because there's fewer of them than those other groups but the fact is until we make education as glorified in this country as athletics kids are going to dream of being basketball stars and not mathematicians.
We can fix that.
joelfeig 1 year ago 3
1 "Bad teachers get weaned out" contradicts the reality that Teachers Unions oppose the dismissal--even the retraining--of incompetent teachers.
2 It is not about blame--it is about the fact that even good students with good parents fail to get a good education under a bad teacher, and the fact that good teachers are even more needed to save all but the incorrigible ones among bad students cursed with bad parents.
. . .
gagothesith 1 year ago
3 The need to dismiss incorrigibly incompetent teachers is a separate issue from the need to exclude incorrigibly bad students--feel free to do both.
gagothesith 1 year ago
i love the internet...
this part just popped into my mind and now im watching it...
gotta love sorkin
EnhancementSmoker 2 years ago 4
Amazing scene. How can one man hold so much charisma?
grumpytosnowwhite 2 years ago 6
With two hands and a heart as big as a wheelbarrow.
DeimosEclipse 2 years ago 6
Agreed! :)
grumpytosnowwhite 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I hate after watching an episode of The West Wing and you span into reality and realise that not only was President Bartlet never elected, he never really existed and Martin Sheen isn't nearly as insightful :(
lucas27 2 years ago 32
Indeed. If only Aaron Sorkin were president!
Elensila2718 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Agree with you. Martin Sheen's full of lefty crap. Aaron Sorkin's scripts were actually well-balanced and when Republican characters articulated their values, they did so in a way that made them sound principled and well-meaning - and smart. Basically, all the politicians - left or right- depicted in the west wing are smarter and have greater integrity than the fuckwits we have to vote for in real-life. So I agree with Elensila, Sorkin for president!
pregiscregis 2 years ago
genius
Craigipedia 2 years ago 4
Martin Sheen's not full of "lefty crap." He's a smart guy maybe a little soft and over diplomatic.
SJT9791 2 years ago 8
we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. his views are a little too close to the socialist bone for my liking but if you disagree, I respect that
pregiscregis 2 years ago
one wonders how sorkin would react to sarah palin
macspectrum 2 years ago
or Barack Obama even
pregiscregis 2 years ago 3
@macspectrum - See the Midterms dressing down Bartlett gives to a Dr. Laura wanna be.
kmyesq 1 year ago 2
Yeah, it's depressing...
LindwurParty 2 years ago
@lucas27 OBAMA is a bit Bartlett like. He's not as old though. Bartlett's age gives him more gravitas... I'm happy to be living under OBAMA.... I feel he's the closest thing to Bartlett since Kennedy...
DonaldMele 1 year ago
EXACTLY!!
natergator34 1 year ago
@lucas27 You need to pay more attention to Martin Sheen. He is extremely devoted to political activism and is a very eloquent speaker in his own right.
FrozenEMT 1 year ago 2
@lucas27 Well, that's the point, isn't it, to show us how it could (and should) be done in the real word!
WOI999 1 year ago
the camera work is just freakin' great
bumshka21 2 years ago 5
Again it is posted not where it is supposed to be I am saying that the line that is all bull is posted out of context for some reason as stated in the one I hope this posts next to
faceprecious 2 years ago
I love this show, wished they'd make a west wing movie with Santos as president.
marym499 2 years ago 2
Don't people already say that the character Santos was written with BH Obama in mind . . .
gagothesith 2 years ago
Gawd, I hope the person who gave my comment above a thumbs-up recognized the sarcasm.
gagothesith 1 year ago
PRESIDENT BARTLET= GENIUS.
scj16 2 years ago 16
(cont.)
After President Bartlet said he'll just "talk for a little bit" he comes up with one of the most brilliant lines that could ever be said by a president. "They weren't born wanting to do this". After witnessing this speech, Bruno mentions that there is no way Bartlet is losing the election.
I hope this helps you guys appreciate this scene as much as I do.
andreicmello 2 years ago 9
Just adding a few facts...
President Bartlet is campaigning for his second term and the Kenniston bombing happened. Bruno and all the campaign headers were discussing whether they should talk about the bombing when the focus of the speech he was about to give was education. Some thought mentioning may not fit with the topic while others thought that the event could not go by unacknowledged by the president. This explain Bruno and Sam's fumbling around at the beginning of the clip.
andreicmello 2 years ago 5
life affirming television
largetalons22 3 years ago 7
"They weren't born wanting to do this..."
One of my favorite lines from the whole series. I work w/ troubled kids, and that line comes to mind all the time.
tsefcik 3 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't want to p$a$y for an online dating site? meetyourfling(.Com) dupree
148829
kawtaldj 3 years ago
if only our leaders had the wisdom of script writers
RexAlban 3 years ago 4
By our leaders are you referring to President Bush? hehe I don't know if even the knowledge of a script writer could help him out! lol!
ferociousmadman 3 years ago 3
Bush is pretty good on script when he tries. Extemporaneously on the other hand....ehhh.
IraqVetNY 3 years ago
Careful, FEROCIOUSMADMAN. Lest we be reminded why GW Bush won.
1 GW Bush won in 2000 because the offered alternative was so uninspiring that he could not even get his and his father's home state to support him. (Which would have made FL irrelevant and the SC decision unnecessary.)
. . .
ermineermine 3 years ago
2 GW Bush won by an overwhelming margin in 2004 because the offered alternative--in his words, conduct and reactions, from post-Vietnam, throughout his political career and during the campaign--was rightfully seen by the electorate as an even more alarming prospect than four more years of the incompetent incumbent.
ermineermine 3 years ago
uh yes, I know WHY he won, I'm a political science major lol.. but I still don't have to like our president's speaking abilities.
ferociousmadman 3 years ago
Nobody does--that's one consensus across party lines.
ermineermine 3 years ago
he won in 2000 because he stole it. we should have known then what we were getting into.
auntbecky 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There you go again with your imagined 'justifications'--any excuse to avoid facing the fact that
| Gore could not win even his home state--
| which would have made FL irrelevant
| and the Supreme Court decision unnecessary.
Tell me, what EXCUSE did you have for Carter's miserable loss against Reagan? And what EXCUSE did you have when Kerry lost by an overwhelming margin to the incompetent incumbent in 2004?
ermineermine 3 years ago
II
AUNTBECKY:
> we should have known then
> what we were getting into
Yes, we should have known then what we were getting into when you put up a candidate like Carter after a disastrous first term, like Dukakis, like Mondale, like Bush Sr after an economically-disastrous first term, like Dole, like Gore, like Kerry.
Or--Heaven forbid--Quayle, Buchanan, Paul, Dean, Edwards, Sharpton, Jackson, ... .
. . .
ermineermine 3 years ago
LESSON LEARNED: It is not enough that the opponent is bad.
IF YOUR SIDE IS EVEN WORSE, then you lose--the other side WINS BY DEFAULT.
ermineermine 3 years ago 2
Carter's loss was due to the fact that he was pressured conservatives into letting The Shah into this country which bought on the Hostage Crisis. Kerry lost because cowards who never served in Vietnam questioned the character one one who did(Kerry), came home and told the world the truth about that war and naive naive sheep believed the Swiftboat For Truth lies.
airdriver 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There they go again--excuses and more excuses.
1 Anything to avoid facing the fact that
(i) Carter was a failure in every other area of foreign policy (Begin/Sadat at Camp David being a welcome exception);
(ii) Carter was as much a failure in domestic policy.
. . .
ermineermine 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ermineermine 3 years ago
Hey who's talking points are those? Limbaugh's, Coulter's or O'REALLY's?
airdriver 3 years ago
I neither know nor give a damn whose--not "who is"--talking points the following are:
1 "Carter's loss was due to the fact that he was pressured [sic] conservatives into letting The Shah into this country which bought on the Hostage Crisis."
and
2 "Kerry lost because cowards who never served in Vietnam questioned the character one one who did(Kerry), came home and told the world the truth about that war and naive naive sheep believed the Swiftboat For Truth lies."
. . .
ermineermine 3 years ago
For someone who mouths slogans, classic "stories" and epithets written in every standard Propagandist's Handbook
1 "____ loss was the fault of the Conservatives"
2 "Conservatives made the electorate do this and that"
3 "the truth about ____"
3 "sheep"
4 "lies"
you are remarkably bold in dismissing everything which does not fit your style as "mere talking points".
ermineermine 3 years ago
obama
17hands 3 years ago
the allowing of the Shah into this country did not bring on the Hostage Crisis. The Hostage Crisis was brought on by the US, Israel and England getting involved in overthrowing the Prime Minister of Iran starting in 1954! The lash back dates way back to that and has little to do with the Shah being allowed into this country. They already knew we were involved in his rise to power. That is why the US Embasy was known as the Den of Spys.
kmrs1959 3 years ago
THAT IS ALL BULL.
faceprecious 2 years ago
Learn a little history.
kmrs1959 2 years ago
I think this is out of context for some reason. Don't remember what it was posted to or why I posted it. Sorry. As far as the statement above it, it would be iteresting but doubt that it will happen. As everyone has moved on. Sorry for the comment. Especiall since I don't know now why I posted it to begin with
faceprecious 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Carter was is & will always be a coward. Clinton was a traitor & coward. Kerry was a traitor & Osama thinks we dont need security that we should hide & not be proud to be americans & he thinks that Life liberty & the pursuit of happiness means punishing hard work & rewarding lazy irresponsibly people who dont want to work & think happiness is to be given when it's suppose to be earned.Pursuit does not mean punish the hardworkers, that happiness is guaranteed or free let alone without some work.
bpeter3196 3 years ago
You are such a tool
Wolfe1798 3 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LOL that's the best you got? Your a facist commie & in for a huge let down when nothing your cult leader promised gets done and he spends more then bush did doubling the national debt and yet creates no jobs fixes no economy and is worse then bush was. 1459 days left till he's out.
bpeter3196 3 years ago
"I think I'm just going to talk for a little bit"
can you imagine what would come out of the mouths of our real-life politicians if they had to go off their scripts occasionally?
grabmygoblin 3 years ago 3
No need to imagine.
1 Remember JF Kerry whenever he opened his mouth? (He's the reason why GW Bush won a second term.)
2 Remember BH Obama whenever he is without a teleprompter and he has to deal with a question which has not been relayed beforehand and which cannot be answered by a soundbite, a slogan or a chant?
3 Remember JD Quayle whenever he opened his mouth? (He provided comedians with abundant material.)
. . .
ermineermine 3 years ago
4 Remember JE Carter? You can't figure out if it's scripted or not because every statement is as somnolent and as deludedly idealistic as the rest.
5 Remember AA Gore? Few of us do--we all dozed off soon after he started talking.
ermineermine 3 years ago
when I watched this show and heard Bartlet speak in complete and eloquent phrases of hope and destiny, I felt like crying when I compared him to the mean, crass, inarticulate thug currently in the White House.
a07002 3 years ago 48
@a07002 You don't even know the man personally, so how can you tell he's a thug?
teufelkim 10 months ago
I hated Bush too.
chrissline77 8 months ago
@a07002
I don't think I'd exactly agree he is a thug. Sort of, but not exactly. He does want to take away wealth from Americans that have earned it, but not with a gun, but through redistribution.
He is out-of touch certainly, but I strongly disagee with "inarticulate" . Obama is an excellent public speaker.
younghoss 7 months ago
@younghoss comment was posted 3 years ago, he was talking about George W Bush
adrianmichaelrook 7 months ago
@adrianmichaelrook
On closer look, I see you are right, adrian. Amazing. The post didn't name names, so I thought the "thug" robbing Americans referred to our current president, who wants to take away money from people that earned it.
My mistake- wrong thug!
younghoss 7 months ago
@younghoss one of them started a pretty expensive war that the other one had to work out how to pay for
adrianmichaelrook 7 months ago
@younghoss What do you mean robbing Americans? There was a THREE PERCENT tax increase on the wealthiest Americans from when Republicans had the White House. Where in that 3% does it suddenly become robbing Americans?
sumskater999 7 months ago 4
@younghoss He commented that 3 years ago, it was referring to Bush not Obama
Ry28952 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
too much liberal in our class rooms.
wuzzman 3 years ago
what exactly is too much liberal?
Is it the exposure to ideas that aren't exclusively based on the bible? Or just a lack of corporal punishment? Can you clarify your comment if it's not any of these things, and instead something completely different.
bouloux29 3 years ago
Don't feed the trolls.
London755 3 years ago
why don't we just go back to the pre-Guttenberg days... no books, no thinking, just conservative monks reminding us how worthless we were... liberalism shaped western civilization: the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the American Revolution, heck yeah, and Rock'n Roll... conservatism kept us in a 10-century cocoon called the Middle Ages... oh yes, and for the past 7.5 years, as well
kingwilson06ad 3 years ago
The best terrorists want nothing.
hallsirius 4 years ago 2
Right or wrong and I do think they're wrong. It would probably be wise to recognize that the "terrorists" have specific complaints and an agenda. I suggest you see "Why do they hate us?" and "Mrs. Bartlet explains how it all began." Both posted by Sarakatheryn I believe. Everyone involved in posting these is great.
jokr8790 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The best terrorists want ballz across their moms chin! :-)
noniggers001 3 years ago
He's not curious George. Unfortunately, he was never very curious about anything. That is a major part of the problem. He has a 22 caliber mind in a 357 Magnum world. He wouldn't want anyone who could write like this and he wouldn't understand them if they did.
jokr8790 4 years ago 5
My condolences to the people of Finland and especially the town of TUUSULA. This video seemed pertinent.
saulpaulus 4 years ago 2
BARTLETT IS GOD.
scj16 4 years ago 5
WOW! I LOVE IT! I ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT!
scj16 4 years ago 5
Why couldn't the current president hire some WW speech writers?
herodotus53 4 years ago 16
How painful would it be watching Curious George enunciate this magnificent writing?
mr3856a 4 years ago 11
Amen
baybuy14 4 years ago 6
I just saw a documentary called "No End in Sight" about the lead up to the Iraq war. Shrubblegruber was given some one page summaries along with the reports, detailing why the Iraq army should not be disbanded. He didn't bother to read even the one page summaries. I'm not sure he reads anything more complex than "My Pet Goat."
jokr8790 4 years ago
Obama is probably the only candidate who could pull off this sort of rhetoric. Aaron Sorkin and Obama would be the kiss of death for any Republican candidate.
stevetoy 4 years ago
you realize rhetoric has a negative connotation stevey?
timfox329 4 years ago 4
I'm sure he meant well, though rhetoric is a negative term.
psatm 3 years ago
nope, it is not. read a little before making statements
justin324925 3 years ago
rhet·o·ric - [ret-er-ik]
--noun
1. (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.
You may not call that negative, I do. Read a little before making statements.
psatm 3 years ago 2
where exactly did you find that quite elementary definition, champ? Rhetoric is the use of language for means of persuasion. There is more intellectual life than dictionaries. Try it some time.
justin324925 3 years ago
Websters. They know something about the English language, certainly more than a loser troll like you. Get a life.
psatm 3 years ago
Can I say that one rhetoric doesn't have a negative connotation when your talking to me, but people unfamiliar with writing may feel that it does have a negative connotation.
Also Websters website produces this definition (others as well): 1: the art of speaking or writing effectively.
And before anyone calls someone names, I think it wonderful to meet people that are willing to engage in a discussion about rhetoric.
Obama + Sorkin should get together, though there would be a chance of coke use.
Darkhawk1234 3 years ago
Oh man. Very appropriate. Thanks for posting.
filegirl 4 years ago 5