Anything else he's given up? Like eating?

What a guy!

I don't agree with people cracking on him for saying that. He didn't say it as though it were an enormous sacrifice. He just mentioned it in a little interview. And his reason for doing it was valid. He recognized, acknowledged, and changed a behavior that he felt people might look down on him for.

I realized it isn't a huge deal, but he isn't the one that made it into a huge deal. I would be ragging on him too if this was a topic mentioned in the State of the Union, but it was just mentioned in an interview that's going to air on the internet. Not a huge deal.

If he kept playing golf, people would either: A.) not give a crap, or B.) think it was disgraceful that the Commander-in-Chief was playing golf while soldiers were dying.

So why then, is bad for him to give it up? It was an internally-motivated positive action. I think it's commendable.

Don't get me wrong, I still think he's an idiot. But if you're gonna rag on the President, do it for something else. There are literally thousands of reasons to do it. This just isn't one.

My personal fav is that he says "nucular."

Couldn't agree more. It sounds to me like it's the right thing to do, but since many have so much disgust for him now they word it to make it sound negative.

And if I read the article correctly...HE DID THIS ALMOST 5 YEARS AGO.

This is the most twisted and perverted statement of "sacrifice" ever concieved. It is telling that something this trivial is what points to his guilt. It also says something about his sense of guilt. Obviously, the Commander in Chief shouldn't be luxuriating and entertaining himself in a time of war. Nor should WE (meaning all Americans) be buying Ipods and Cristal in a time where we should ALL be sacrificing. Golf is trvial, this is a gesture, and the most meaningless and petty gesture that could be imagined. The President could have given up golf because he is a crappy golfer, and chalked it up as "sacrifice" and "solidarity". If he wanted to make a TRUE gesture he wouldn't be throwing a celebrity wedding for his daughter, and his Son-in-Law would be in uniform rather than taking a job with Constellation Energy. That kind of sacrifice sends a real message of solidarity for the people who are sending their loved ones into the maw of his war which he considers SO serious that he gave up chasing little white balls across manicured lawns for.

I really hope he isn't suffering too much because of this massive sacrifice...

But in all honesty... can you expect anything close to a sincere gesture from this man? He's completely unrepentant.

He talks about sacrificing golf because of the war, then stands in front of the nation and grins... f**kING GRINS!! ... when he says the war started on his watch but someone else will have to finish it...

November cant get here soon enough, hell ... even McCain has got to be better than this...

No offense, but according to you I should just sit at home and do nothing because there is a war. Like this economy isn't hurting already.

Stop buying things, stop doing things and businesses close..jobs are lost..homes are foreclosed..and the country plummits into the worse depression of man-kind. Good Idea.

Even things that you might think are frivilous like iPods and Cristal still inolves jobs, lives, and our economy from the people producing it, to the people shipping it, to the people selling it, to the companies that provide services to all those people like electricity and phones. This economy has already been hurt by the war, why make it any worse because you feel bad for the soldiers.

What Bush did was a gesture because it didn't feel right to him. Good for him..I guess he _does_ have a heart.

Sorry...but gestures and showing support is all many of us can do. I'll donate to Iraq care packages, I'll feel remorse at the loss of a soldier's life, but I'm still buying a new granite countertop for my kitchen tonight.

This is stupid.....it's like saying, hey people!!! No more relaxing, people are dying!!!Y ou should not enjoy yourself. People die every day, and have for a long time, I don't think it matters to them if the man, who sent them to die is golfing or sleeping in an expensive bed.

I think especially if you are president you should be able to spend some time enjoying yourself and forgetting the many problems you have to deal with otherwise you will probably get way too stressed out to make rational decisions.

Although if I had control of what this president could do I would restrict him to playing with tiddly winks and getting us out of this stupid war. He wouldn't be allowed to live in the white house either... I'd probably restrict him to a closet.

Sorry fizz but you should examine what the homefront did during both world wars. Gas RATIONS, liberty gardens, war bonds. Curbing our spending on foreign goods would be a good step. This country is hamstringed by our individual AND governmental debt. We CAN'T make the BIG geopolitical moves we should be making and taking advantage of the opportunities we have in countries like Indonesia and Bangledesh as long as our debt (and balls) are held by countries like China. We can't make the enviromental decisions we need to make when we are being strangled by the oil cartels. The great depression was largely broken by putting people to work in government backed infastructure programs. This same thing could be done now, but not with dams and highways but solar and wind farms. If we cut our oil consumption by 20% per year, we could destroy OPEC. We would also have the moral authority to force countries like India and China to follow suit. We are already seeing the consequence and advantage of having a weak dollar, our trade deficit has shrunk for 3 months. I'm not saying we are going to put people back to work making socks, but if we put them to work assembling solar panels maybe we can start selling THEM to China. Your in an arguement with someone who live frugally as a mantra, and in this time of "economic downturn" and "credit crunch" I have 4x my mortgage payment in the bank, and little debt except for my mortgage. If everyone lived like me, sure some sectors of the economy would suffer, but our country could be mobilized and able to make the big changes that we need to make to survive in the world and ensure the world's survival.

You b*****d! I see what you're doing here! You want us to stop buying iPods and Cristal so prices go down and you can get them at a discount! Then what, you say they're cool again so we all want them? You get us hooked, and suddenly the price goes up and you get fat off of our relapse into iPod/Cristal addiction! No, sir! I'm going out immediately after work to buy a case of Cristal and at least four iPods! Maybe you'll get some of these other suckers, but not me. No, sir, not me.

/nonsensical rambling

See...Here's the problem... I agree with what you say, but forcing people to build solar panels has nothing to do with the war and not spending money still does not help any of the issue you mention. If you want to argue that the war is all about oil then THAT is your beef.... ..and I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that statement either. But we're in it now and there is no good solution to the war that has a garaunteed positive outcome to our lives.

I agree that this country has some serious issues when it comes to oil and foreign policies...I'm dropping $70 a week on gas as part of my job-- I'm not happy about it. But there is little that I can do beyond voting and crossing my fingers. I have to do what I have to do to survive and still try to enjoy as much of my life as I can and provide for my family's happiness otherwise it's pointless even living.

I would love to kick oil use to the curb but I don't really have a choice. We'd like to think we do..but for many of the working class..we don't. When I need to buy my next car, my income will decide what I buy regardless of how much I want a hybrid or buy a car that runs on water..if I can't afford it, or it's not available to me, I can't buy it.

So you see..I _DO_ agree with you...What I don't agree with is people following the media and jumping down the president's throat for giving up golf 5 years ago because it didn't feel right to him when he received grim news while on the golf course. But then we'll turn around and B*TCH about him playing golf when there is a war on...he can't win...and he won't win because sooooo many people dislike him and LOOK for a way to point a finger and give a dirty look.

I don't dislike him...I don't approve of some of his decisions, but it'd be ignorant of me to think I know all the facts around all the choice's he's had to make. All I can do is vote and hope. It's sad, but true.

I suppose it had nothing to do with this clip.

<a href='http://www.plime.com/redir.p?http://youtube.com/watch?v=pJvRUL81ZU8' class='plime' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'><b>flash video</b></a>

Oops, how did that happen?


"Bush Surpasses Reagan as the "Vacation President"
This was first noted in August of last year, when Bush was still trailing Reagan 436 - 418 in terms of vacation days. But according to CBS Radio correspondent Mark Knoller, Bush has now broken the record."

Looks like he's still MIA.

Wow. What a sacrifice!

/wipes tear.

/end sarcasm.

I agree with him.
And it's not that he's saying we should all give up things we like.
But he started the war.
He's responsible.

If I were responsible for killing thousands of people, I'd probably think twice before taking part in a leisure activity that others could see as my not caring.

Honestly?
I hate him and I hate what he's done to this country.
But this isn't really the worst thing he's done. It shows he's SOMEWHAT human.

4 times I've tried posting with quote and it won't go. I'm getting lazier each time.

Bush alone isn't responsible for the war. Many nations participated, a majority of US citizens backed him. Tony Blair had his own objectives and reasons...

it does take a village. both to raise children and to go to war.

Not playing golf is a small thing, but a considerate one. For anyone in his position.

Edit/Addition: I don't normally jump in on this stuff, but blaming bush for the state of the world is as useful as blaming big bird. he's a goofy figure head. and like him or not, he was elected by our country. Change starts with individual responsibiity and behavior.

*topples off soap box* whaaaoo!

You are a bit misguided.

If I can kick someone's ass without breaking a sweat does the fact that I do it without breaking a sweat somehow devalue what I have done?

If my snowblower allows me to clear my driveway in 5 minutes should I leave it in the garage and spend 30 minutes doing it with a shovel because that is how my dad did it?

The war on terror is no where near the drain on the nation that World War 2 was.

Really?

Per troop cost in 2007 dollars WWII 100,000 dollars...per troop cost in 20007 dollars Iraq war 400,000 dollars. This is disregarding the fact that modern medical technology has allowed us to "save" some 60% more mortally injured soldiers that will require lifetime care. So is it not a drain in the way that Chrysler is still building 300m's and crossfires rather than engines for tanks and Harley is still building Buells not bombs? Yes. Is it depleting and decimating our highly trained all volunteer armed forces? Is it destroying our standing within the world and perpetuating the one of us as the last imperialists? Yes. I'm not one of those "anti-war bleeding heart liberals" I'm all for sacrifice, I'm all for a draft, which if we were serious about fighting a war against "terrorism" to win (rather than fighting a war to line pockets) we should have had on Sept 12th 2001. The problem with this war is that the same people who are benefiting from its waging are the same who are making little or no REAL sacrifice.

You are still misguided.

When you talk about the citizens of a country having to sacrifice because the nation is at war you can not look at the dollar cost of the war you have to look at the cost as a percentage of GDP.

In 2007 the GDP of the USA was about $13.84 trillion. During World War 2 the US GDP was:

1938 - $800 Billion
1939 - $869 Billion
1940 - $943 Billion
1941 - $1094 Billion
1942 - $1235 Billion
1943 - $1399 Billion
1944 - $1499 Billion
1945 - $1474 Billion

You say the cost in today's dollars is $100K per trooper? How many troopers were in World War 2? Over 16 million troopers served in the American armed forces during World War 2. how many have served during the current "War on Terror"? Less than a million perhaps?

A "per troop" cost is also misleading because during World War 2 Tanks and planes rolled off assembly lines in the hundreds every day and did not cost that much to make. In comparison a single tank or plane in todays military costs upwards of $30 million each with ammunition for those same machines costing tens of thousands of dollars.

The simple fact is that the cost of this war is very small as a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of population needed to keep the war machine going.

You are simply misguided if you think people have to sacrifice at home just because a war is going on.

I wish he'd have given up the Presidency instead.