Why Didn't Bush Throw Mlb's Opening Pitch?

[Blue Midnight]

I ran across a story the other day that I thought was interesting. According to the Washington Post:

Except for when the world was at war, only two other presidents, Woodrow Wilson and Richard M. Nixon, missed Opening Day ceremonies two years in a row. And Wilson had suffered a stroke.What gives?

"Oh, yes, he was invited," said Bush spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore. She said the president, an avid baseball fan and former part owner of the Texas Rangers, would love to be there. But "it's not possible with his schedule. He's got various meetings during the day, a meeting earlier in the morning. . . . It just wasn't going to work out."

With Bush's approval ratings stuck below 40 percent in recent polls, Lawrimore was asked whether the president feared he'd get booed. "No," she replied. "Certainly not."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...07040101262.htm
l

No, certainly not she says. After all, it is tough being president. All those brush clearing trips to Texas can really cramp a guy's schedule.

Cheney threw out the first pitch last year and get the shit booed out of him, but at least he showed up.

So, what do you think? Was our "war president" simply not man enough to take a vociferous boo fest at his expense? Or is he just simply too busy with important meetings about how not to have a plan for Iraq?

On a more serious note, is it right to boo a president during war time, or simply disrespectful? Your comments, even if only to cheer on baseball's opening day, are greatly appreciated.

[james]

33% approval rating. I don't blame him.


On whether it's right to boo (free speech aside), the president works for me. If I don't approve of his job I can let him know about it. Will I look like an idiot doing it? Maybe. But I can still do it if I want. Just because he's a wartime president doesn't give him a free voucher for more respect.

[AngryApe]

i don't think hes too concerned about being booed at this point. its not his personality to back down because of that, and he is in his final two years, no more elections for him, so the publics view of him doesnt affect him or another congressional election during his terms.

[Blue Midnight]

i don't think hes too concerned about being booed at this point. its not his personality to back down because of that, and he is in his final two years, no more elections for him, so the publics view of him doesnt affect him or another congressional election during his terms.

But if he is not afraid of getting booed, why didn't he throw out the first pitch? Bush is not only an avid baseball fan, but he owned the Texas Rangers at one point. It is no secret when the opening day of baseball is held, and there are two teams located within spitting distance of the white house. If he wasn't afraid of getting booed, why didn't he show?

[Lakemonster]

Think further than risking getting booed.

A baseball stadium has some wonderful vantage points for snipers.

Throwing an opening pitch could result in getting hit by the ball.

Security.

[james]

Very possible that it could have been for security reasons.


I doubt he personally cared about getting booed. But, if an entire stadium booed him during an opening pitch, the press would jump on that in seconds. You'd see it on the news for days, and pundits would discuss whether he should be impeached or everyone at the stadium should be tried for treason. Even though he can retire his political career in 08, a mass booing isn't going to be politically helpful to any republicans right now.

[web250]

I'd boo loudly.

[Scalliwag]

I'd boo loudly as well. Once upon a time I believed a president should be given a certain level of respect. But with the way Clinton was done by republicans all bets are off. It did not change when we had the war in Bosnia.
Jesse Helms said if Clinton visited his state he better wear a bullet proof vest. So the last people I will take any advice from when it comes to criticising a president is republicans.

This president has lied about much more than a blowjob. He has gone out of the way to divide the country. Now he is criticising democrats for going to Syria and conveniently pretending no republicans went. So yes he needs to be booed early and often. If I was a republican I would hate his guts for what he did to the party. I would boo him even louder if I was a republican.

[Lakemonster]

If I was a republican I would hate his guts for what he did to the party.

+1

[tingjunkie]

If I was a republican I would hate his guts for what he did to the party.

+1

I agree that Bush has taken it to a whole new level of horridness, but after Nixon and Regan...they weren't exactly spotless going in to this Admin.

[AngryApe]

even withstanding his military blunders and poor leadership, bush's spending and stance on immigration distances him from most of the party.

[Scalliwag]

even withstanding his military blunders and poor leadership, bush's spending and stance on immigration distances him from most of the party.

Until his popularity dwindled he had full support at every move he made. The rest of the party helped him spend all that money. Immigration they have held their positions on.
I myself think that all those that went along with him all that time should not be allowed to distance themselves now that it is popular. A lot of them lost their primaries in the last election cycle and even more lost their congressional seats while trying to pretend they had been independent from Bush. The voters did not buy it.

You hear alot of talk about "elections have consenquences". Blind idiotic support of a moron like Bush has consenquences and that was what the elections showed.
I think the party as a whole should pay dearly for enabling the guy and ridiculing those that didn't. He did not do what he did without almost full support of the party and the country paid dearly. So they have nothing to bitch about now. It is one of those things that they really needed to think about before they enabled him.

[Scalliwag]

Also the repubs ave gotten away with "saying" they are against spendng a long time but their record is pretty dismal. Reagan's Star Wars program was a perfect example that they are not afraid of spending an awful lot of money that ends up in the pockets of their cronies just like Bush and Halliburton.
The closest thing a person could argue is that they definately do not pay as they go. At the same time they propose spending record amounts of "your money" they offer tax cuts and just let the national debt spiral out of control.
So the repubs have a history of being just like Bush on spending. Their claims and reality are worlds apart.
the track record of the Star Wars program is very amply explained here http://www.ncpa.org/bothside/krt/krt061799b.html