• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bushs' Chickens Have Come Home to Roost

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Look at Bush dropping to his knees. Let the retribution of repentence begin for he and his corrupt Regime.


Bush says 'Bring 'em on' was error
He said his '03 remark had unintended consequences.

By Chris Mondics
Inquirer Washington Bureau

http://www.philly.com/mld/inqu...ews/front/10640407.htm

WASHINGTON - President Bush yesterday acknowledged that he had made a mistake in 2003 when, in a moment of bravado, he challenged Iraqi insurgents with the words "Bring 'em on."

Those words brought sharp denunciations from Democrats, who accused Bush of inviting Iraqi fighters to attack U.S. troops, and now apparently has triggered second thoughts by Bush himself, who usually is loath to acknowledge past missteps.

"Someone asked me the other day about mistakes and all that, and I think one of the things that I have learned is that sometimes words have consequences that you don't intend," Bush said in a White House interview with The Inquirer and reporters from 14 other newspapers. " 'Bring 'em on' was a classic example. I was really trying to rally the troops and make it clear to them that I fully understood what a great job they were doing."

Bush said he had similar second thoughts about his vow to capture Osama bin Laden "dead or alive."

"I can remember getting back to the White House and Laura saying, 'What did you say that for?' "

Of his acknowledgment that the remarks were ill-advised, Bush said: "I don't know what you would call that - a concession, a regret, a something."

Bush met with reporters in the Roosevelt Room of the White House to talk about his second-term agenda, which he has been promoting in recent weeks and which he is expected to discuss in greater detail in his State of the Union address early next month.

He spent much of the hour-long interview stressing the need to revamp Social Security by allowing younger workers to invest portions of their Social Security taxes in personal investment accounts. Bush said those workers would never collect benefits unless Congress acts to shore up the system.

"We are looking at an $11 trillion unfunded liability, and the longer that Congress delays in addressing it, the worse the problem will get," Bush said. "There are a lot of young people who do not believe they will see a dime, and therefore they expect government to do something about it. This is an issue you can quantify."

Polls show that Americans are concerned that the Social Security trust fund will run out of money in the coming decades but are uncertain about the advisability of privatizing part of the system.

If the government privatized a portion of Social Security, it would be forced to borrow trillions of dollars to replace the younger workers' money, currently paid into the system, that would be diverted into private retirement accounts. Under the Social Security system, current workers pay for the benefits of retired workers.

Borrowing of that magnitude likely would be a tough sell for the President and his Republican allies on Capitol Hill, so Bush has been emphasizing that the system faces collapse unless aggressive steps are taken. Although Democrats contend the system's problems are not so profound and can be fixed with a targeted mix of benefit cuts and tax increases, Bush insisted yesterday that the longer Congress waited, the harder the problem would be to fix.

"You have a whole Social Security Administration that has analyzed this and it makes it very clear when the problem begins," he said. "The reason why the system [faces troubles] is because it was designed in the 1930s, when life expectancy was much shorter and women stayed at home. In the 1950s, there were 16 workers [paying Social Security taxes] for every retiree. Today there are three, and soon there will be two.

"The way the system is designed, it cannot take the heat."

Bush also sought to highlight his initiative to restrict liability lawsuits, arguing that changes in the laws and a restructuring of the tax system would make the nation more competitive in the world economy.

On Iraq, he said that U.S. National Guard troops, many of whom have complained about unanticipated tour extensions, would be given more-certain departure dates.

"I fully understand that there needs to be as much certainty in rotations as possible, and the Pentagon is working toward that goal," he said.

Bush has periodically brushed off questions about whether he has made any mistakes or regretted any of his actions as President, notably during a rare White House news conference last April when he seemed unable to recall anything that he might have done differently. At one point he said:

"I hope - I don't want to sound like I have made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't - you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one."

He began in that vein yesterday, seemingly unable to think of anything that he regretted.

"Biggest regret, first term, hmm, let's see," he said. "What was the other [question]? Have I changed? Well you better ask my wife that question. They say my hair is grayer. But I come from a pretty white-haired gene pool. At least half of it is. And I'll get back to you on the regret. I am not a regretful person. I am a look-forward, get-things-done type of person."

Later, toward the end of the interview, when pressed, the President said it would have been rude not to answer the question and then detailed his second thoughts about the Iraq remarks.
 
The stumble-bum still can't admit he made a single mistake and he certainly can never emit the words, "I'm sorry".

 
Well, apart from not using the actual wording, I'm pleased to see he's actually acknowledging errors.


Still,
"Someone asked me the other day about mistakes and all that, and I think one of the things that I have learned is that sometimes words have consequences that you don't intend,

This is something that one is supposed to be aware of before assuming a station of such power and importance. Not the type of revelation one would expect from a 58yr. old Yale graduate. 🙁
 
Reminds me of something Nixon was supposed to have said along the lines of 'I know you thing you understood what you thought I said, but I don't think you realize that what you thought I said was not I was really saying.'
 
Catch the full interview with Barbara Walters tonight on ABC.


He's about as sincere as Jon Lovitz's "That's it...that's the ticket" character on SNL. It's just a PR stunt to try and boost his approval ratings in the wake of the revealing of his justification to invade Iraq as being a complete and utter lie.
 
Originally posted by: conjur
Catch the full interview with Barbara Walters tonight on ABC.


He's about as sincere as Jon Lovitz's "That's it...that's the ticket" character on SNL.

Tommy Flinagin.
 
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.

Clinton didn't kill thousands of people when he lied.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.

The RRR FLL's can whine and moan all they want the next 4 years, it won't change the opinion of Bush of the non FLL's.

I now know how the 60's Anti-War Flower children felt and had such a low opinion of their Government when we had our nose where it didn't belong.

Our "Leaders" as well as it's "Lemmings" just continue to show how history repeats itself and man has very limited ability to learn from mistakes.
 
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.

Clinton didn't kill thousands of people when he lied.

Oh... that makes it better.

If you are implying that Bush lied about the WMDs, there was credible intelligence at that time to support those findings. :roll: There is a difference between a lie and a mistake. Mistakes happen in intelligence.

If you rely on a mistake, does that make you a liar?
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.

The RRR FLL's can whine and moan all they want the next 4 years, it won't change the opinion of Bush of the non FLL's.

I now know how the 60's Anti-War Flower children felt and had such a low opinion of their Government when we had our nose where it didn't belong.

Our "Leaders" as well as it's "Lemmings" just continue to show how history repeats itself and man has very limited ability to learn from mistakes.

Thank you for admitting that you are not open minded.

 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.
He didn't acknowledge mistakes in the handling of Iraq. He acknowledge he used the wrong words in describing a couple of situations. BIG fvcking difference.

As for Clinton, hmm...he lied about not having sexual relations with someone. A private matter.

Bush is responsible for nearly 1400 American soldiers' deaths; over 10,000 wounded; hundreds of billions of dollars wasted; loss of respect from the world community; polarization in America; etc.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Clinton didn't kill thousands of people when he lied.
Oh... that makes it better.

If you are implying that Bush lied about the WMDs, there was credible intelligence at that time to support those findings. :roll: There is a difference between a lie and a mistake. Mistakes happen in intelligence.

If you rely on a mistake, does that make you a liar?
No, there wasn't. The intelligence was falsified and doubts and objections were removed from the NIEs that were sent to Congress.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: BBond
The stumble-bum still can't admit he made a single mistake and he certainly can never emit the words, "I'm sorry".
God has already forgiven him.
Why take a shot at the man's faith? That's such a petty argument.
Because his faith is fake.
 
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.
He didn't acknowledge mistakes in the handling of Iraq. He acknowledge he used the wrong words in describing a couple of situations. BIG fvcking difference.

As for Clinton, hmm...he lied about not having sexual relations with someone. A private matter.

Bush is responsible for nearly 1400 American soldiers' deaths; over 10,000 wounded; hundreds of billions of dollars wasted; loss of respect from the world community; polarization in America; etc.

Making a remark in a public speech about Iraq - especially when the remark is pointed at the Iraqi resistance - is a mistake in how he handled the Iraqi situation. It was a diplomatic faux pas, much as Prince Harry wearing a Nazi uniform was a diplomatic faux pas. Admitting a mistake in diplomacy is a pretty big deal.

There is no "big fvcking difference" as you so eloquently put it.

 
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: BBond
The stumble-bum still can't admit he made a single mistake and he certainly can never emit the words, "I'm sorry".
God has already forgiven him.
Why take a shot at the man's faith? That's such a petty argument.
Because his faith is fake.

It is still a very petty argument.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
I seem to recall many here criticizing Bush for not acknowledging any mistakes that were made in the handling of Iraq... and Kerry called him "stubborn" in that regard, if I recall.

You collectively cried out, in your sniveling voices, for the president to just be a man and admit his mistakes and failures.

Here the President acknowledges a mistake, and you pounce on him.

I seem to recall that when Clinton apologized for lying, everything was ok.

Nice double standard.
He didn't acknowledge mistakes in the handling of Iraq. He acknowledge he used the wrong words in describing a couple of situations. BIG fvcking difference.

As for Clinton, hmm...he lied about not having sexual relations with someone. A private matter.

Bush is responsible for nearly 1400 American soldiers' deaths; over 10,000 wounded; hundreds of billions of dollars wasted; loss of respect from the world community; polarization in America; etc.
Making a remark in a public speech about Iraq - especially when the remark is pointed at the Iraqi resistance - is a mistake in how he handled the Iraqi situation. It was a diplomatic faux pas, much as Prince Harry wearing a Nazi uniform was a diplomatic faux pas. Admitting a mistake in diplomacy is a pretty big deal.

There is no "big fvcking difference" as you so eloquently put it.
Oh, it *is* a huge difference. A remark, a flippant remark is not handling Iraq. Iraq is handling via policy, meetings with generals, planning, etc. A flippant remark is not "handling Iraq".


Iraq is a success. Bring on the elections!


There, I just "handled" Iraq.
 
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: BBond
The stumble-bum still can't admit he made a single mistake and he certainly can never emit the words, "I'm sorry".
God has already forgiven him.
Why take a shot at the man's faith? That's such a petty argument.
Because his faith is fake.
It is still a very petty argument.
In your opinion. Bush wears his fake faith on his sleeve. It's open to attack at any point.
 
"Secondly, the interesting -- there's a -- African American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people." George "Dumb ass" Bush.

OMG STFUA - jykio beyoku
 
Why take a shot at the man's faith? That's such a petty argument.

It is still a very petty argument.

I tell you what petty is, not approving of an employee's truthful take on a situation and out of retribution endangering the life of his mate in an effort to shut him up.

 
He spent much of the hour-long interview stressing the need to revamp Social Security by allowing younger workers to invest portions of their Social Security taxes in personal investment accounts. Bush said those workers would never collect benefits unless Congress acts to shore up the system.

:| Unbelieveable. What a dirtbag. Hey, nevermind the news about the search for WMD, nevermind the occupation or sham war, lookie here at SS instead!
 
Back
Top