Basically, every one of these statements I read about W. sounds pretty much like:
Quote:
You know, a president should sound like a Shakspearean actor, or a duke or earl, or like one of those fine-sounding orators who you hear when you listen to parliamentary debates on CSPAN. In fact, that's what ALL democrats sound like, all the time, even when they're dead drunk all the time like Ted Kennedy, f**ked up on cocaine like Slick Clinton, and in fact even mentally retarded democrats sound like that, but this George Bush sounds like some sort of a hayseed bumpkin from Muskogee Oklahoma or something. How in hell's a guy like that supposed to be president?
The answer, of course, is that the dems had their shot at proving to the entire world that George W. Bush was a bumpkin unfit for the presidency.
There were three nationally televised debates between George W. Bush, the bumpkin, and Albert Gore, supposedly the epitome of couth, suavite, polish, refinement, erudition and all that sort of thing and in theory at least, so great an orator and so masterful an artist in debate, that people were referring to him as the "masterdebater" at the time.
And guess what happened? That's right: Algor came off in those debates as such a total bumbling oaf that the American people said no way and elected George W. Bush president.
And then four years later, we have three more debates between W and a guy who actually was some sort of a debate champion in college and is clearly a better speaker than W, and the general concensus is that after losing the first debate after having had a very difficult day prior to the debate itsself, W came back and won the final two.
Isn't that something?
