I received this picture today. The soldier in the photo was wounded when he stepped on a mine in Afghanistan. Bush visited Mike at Walter Reed and told Mike that when he was able, he would run a mile with him. Bush called once a month to see how Mike was coming along. Finally, when Mike was ready to run, Bush kept his word.
I’m not a fan of Bush but this picture provides a different perspective.
!(file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Kevin/My%20Documents/My%20Pictures/Mike%20and%20Bush.2.JPG)
bad link
.
Okay, the picture didn’t post. Any ideas on how I can get the picture to be visible. Thanks
Can’t see the pic on your post, but if it’s showing the President running with a soldier at Walter Reed whose leg was amputated, it did make the news. At least it made it into my edition of the Washington Times.
I will say that Bush appears to care about our military personnel on a deep personal level. The trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving was inspiring.
True Story, and the pic can be seen at this page: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/jogging.asp
I’m no fan of Bush, but this is certainly a nice gesture.
Thanks for covering my back. I didn’t realize that the photo was publicized. My cousing flies a C-130 and had to med-evac the soldier out of Rhino LZ in Afghanistan and has kept in touch with him.
Is that the run he did the face-plant into the pavement on?
When posting images, they have to be online for you to link them. You inserted local files into your post, so they show up on your machine, but nowhere else(right click the X, then select Properties, and you’ll see the local reference). If you post them on your web page(if you have one) or find them elsewhere online, then your links will show up properly.
Thanks.
Not to whip up another OT rant-fest, but why did you say in the original post that this photo provides a “different perspective.”
I’ve always felt he projected an image of being a pretty good, pretty genuine guy. I personally can’t stand his politics, values, administration, policies, etc. but my guess is that he’d be a lot more fun - on a personal level - to play a round of golf with then, for example, Kerry.
In fact, I think that is one of the maddening things about him. If he wasn’t so superficially likable I don’t think he would have become the poster child for “electability.” Memories are short but before 9/11 and the subsequent wars on terror/Afghanistan/Iraq criminalized dissent, I often heard even staunch conservative say they supported him because he was “electable” and not because they thought he was particularly qualified or effective.
I used to sit next to Mr. Bush at Ranger games back in the day. He had great seats, I had crummy ones or came in free after the sixth. I found him personable and a great guy. Regardless on your position on his politics, he is a really great guy. The man I see on the news seems to be the same guy from 1990. Not that it means anything but he could also probably out run or cycle many on this list! At least in his AG! Don’t slam me please, just an FYI from someone who has met him repeatedly.
“In fact, I think that is one of the maddening things about him. If he wasn’t so superficially likable I don’t think he would have become the poster child for “electability.” Memories are short but before 9/11 and the subsequent wars on terror/Afghanistan/Iraq criminalized dissent, I often heard even staunch conservative say they supported him because he was “electable” and not because they thought he was particularly qualified or effective.”
And this past spring, a lot of the talk about the democratic primary season was about finding a candidate that could be Bush, any candidate so long as he could beat Bush. That discussion and your comment is, in a nutshell, what is bad about our selection process for national leaders.