Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Bush Asked (Again) What He Would Do Differently About Iraq War; (Again) He Fails To Answer

The question from NBC's David Gregory earlier today was fairly simple.

GREGORY: You spoke of the troubles in Iraq. And as you know, we have Woodward and we have a shelf full of books about Iraq, and many of them claim that administration policies contributed to the difficulties there. So I'm wondering, is there anything you wish you would have done differently with regard to Iraq?

But Bush's answer was far from simple. Let's break it down.

PART 1: INCOHERENT RAMBLING

BUSH: Speaking about books, somebody ought to add up the number of pages that have been written about my administration. There's a lot of books out there -- a lot. I don't know if I've set the record, or not, but I guess it means that I've made some hard decisions and will continue to make hard decisions.

I guess Bush didn't read any of those books about his administration. Hard decisions? Sort of. Wrong decisions? That describes the situation more aptly.

PART 2: WHAT OTHERS COULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY

BUSH: And, David, this is the -- this is about the fifth time I've been asked this type of question. And as you know, there are some things that I wish had happened differently -- Abu Ghraib. I believe that really hurt us. It hurt us internationally. It kind of eased us off the moral high ground. In other words, we weren't a country that was capable of, on the one hand, promoting democracy, and then treating people decently. Now the world has seen that we've held those to account who are -- who did this.

Remember, the question was what he would have done differently. This is sort of a bait-and-switch answer.

Another point: Bush said the U.S. held to account those who did this. That statement came on the same day that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was asked if he bears responsibility for what has gone wrong in Iraq, to which Rumsfeld responded, "Of course I bear responsibility."

Isn't there a disconnect with these statements?

PART 3: I WAS RIGHT

BUSH: You know, there's just a lot of look-backs. Presidents don't get to look back, but I will tell you, the decision to remove Saddam was the right decision. And I would look forward to the debate where people debate whether or not Saddam should still be in power.

***

Bush said he'd been asked the question five times. He hasn't answered it yet.

Reporters should keep asking. Maybe some of them will someday write books about the president who was incapable of admitting he'd ever made a mistake.

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some people answer questions one way and some people dont answer tough questions at all.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061011/D8KMO6NG0.html

8:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Give us a break, anonymous.
There's a massive difference between Bush evading questions of national importance, and Harry Reid not answering questions about a personal land deal that may or may not leave ethical considerations.
Your link is worthless.
No justifiable comparison. Is that the best you Bush apologists can do, is point fingers instead of addressing the foibles of your own King and Master.

10:24 AM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Still having trouble grasping the English language, I see.

10:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the first things I learned in grade school was one should always make an effort to learn how to speak well because people make a direction connection between your ability to speak and your level of intelligence.
Bush?
He cannot even be evasive coherently.

11:09 AM  
Anonymous Kierkegaard said...

Bush Fails (Again)

That was really as far as you needed to go...

11:12 AM  
Anonymous Virginia Dare said...

Smug asshole brags about the books being written about what a disaster he is, he has no fucking clue what's being written about him.

11:13 AM  
Anonymous LynnTheDem said...

His reply would be "nothing".

He & cheney the dick have already admitted to treason, saying they would have invaded Iraq even if they had known Iraq had no "wmd" whatsoever. Even if they had known the Iraqis would not greet us with choccie and floral arrangements.

They would have invaded REGARDLESS.

They freely admit this.

It's criminal.

It's treason.

HELLO AMERICA, ANYONE HOME??!

11:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just pointing out that Bush answered the question and Reid hung up and ran like the little bitch lib he is. Just goes to show you that donks are pussies and cant face the media when they are wrong. Will Reid be resigning because of this bogus land deal? Is all the money he made from it in his freezer too? I am sure the lib media will be all over this story.

Hakuna Makaka Donks

12:14 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

It's off topic as usual, it shows no understanding of the discussion, and ignores the point JABBS was trying to make. Why, it's a post from anonymous! Of course!

12:19 PM  
Anonymous Angelina's Evil Twin said...

Anonymous: MUST PROTECT BUBBLE. MUST PRETEND CONSERVATIVES NEVER MAKE MISTAKES. MUST WAIT FOR ADVICE FROM MARK LEVIN. MUST ONLY LISTEN TO MARK LEVIN. MARK LEVIN CULT IS PURE AND TRUE. BUBBLE SAFE ...

12:43 PM  
Anonymous beyurslf said...

What an arrogant prick.

You'd think after all this time that they could have scripted an answer to these types of questions. What an idiot.

5:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you'd think

the irony is that he knows enough to know that he's been asked, but he still hasn't come up with a reasonable answer.

he's afraid, of course, that admitting he made a mistake will only lead to the logical "what else do you wish you'd done differently" response. It's very weak.

5:15 PM  
Anonymous Double T said...

The reason idiot-son does not have an answer is because HE would NOT have done anything differently. This idiot NEVER learns from HIS mistakes, HE just continues to repeat THEM.

5:16 PM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

There is only one thing this regime does and does well is frighten Americans.

Frightening Americans has become a standard ploy for Bush, Cheney and their surrogates. They add a fear factor to every course of action they pursue, whether it is their radical foreign policy of preemptive war(first ever in our history - Iraq), their call for tax cuts, their desire to privatize social security, their rhetoric about "terrorism",or their implementation of a radical new health care scheme. This fearmongering began with the administration's political exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy, when it made the fight against terrorists the centerpiece of its presidency.

Fear drives out reason. Fear suppresses the politics of discourse and dissent and opens the door to politics of destruction. Dwight Eisenhower said: "Any who act as if freedom's defenses are to be found in suppression and suspicion and fear confess a doctrine that is alien to America." Bush and Cheney want us to fear everything: terrorists, Muslims,North Korea, Iran, gays, gay marriage, womens right to choose, mushroom cloud, ticking bombs scenarios( like a nuclear bomb has been planted in the heart of a major city and authorities do not know who planted it or the authorities have someone in custody who knows which city and the detonate time - which is seductly simple and compellingly logical, but is pure fantasy), or the bird flu is going to spread to humans( but they do not believe in adaption or evolution!). If we overcome all of this then they will say the earth is going to be destroyed by a comet or a meteor.

The truthfull approach would be to admit that yes we have enemies and we are going to do something about it as an entire nation instead of using fearmongering.

By and large Bush, Cheney and their White House media operations have churned out fear with very few challenges from the media, from the voters, and from the do nothing Congress. Bush and Cheney regularily tells Americans that we are up against an adversary who, with a relatively small number of people, could come together and mount a devastating attack against a very powerfull United States( except at this point we are not all fearfull enough to unite, so they keep trying). No one ask how really likely any ticking bombs scenarios are to happen. No one ask what our government is doing to prevent or minimize the impact of an attack. Reading my e-mails, listening to my phone calls, finding out what books I read only waste time and all they will find out is that I think Bush/Cheney is the worst regime we have ever had or will have. I also think they would find the same thing with 99.9999% of Americans, but additionally find some usefull political information.

There is more fear to come because they are going to trumpet it loudly for the 2006 elections and use 2006 for a springboard for 2008 elections.

Right now we face another serious threat: our own government terrorizes us so much that we are willing to give up democracy in exchange for reducing our fears. It is therefore logical - if the Bush administration is truly concerned about catastrophic attacks in the U.S. it would be better to focus its eforts on prevention than on statements that create fear.

9:36 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares