President Bush Fires Back Against Critics

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Like I said, you're completely immersed in the zero-honesty in the administration framework, refusing to allow other perceptions to supplement your own.

Personally, I don't think the administration lied in all cases. I do think the truth was stretched some...but probbaly no more than the average politician.

What I do think though, is that Bush is simply inept. Honestly, the planning for this war sucked.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

> You've wrapped yourself completely in the precept that there is
>zero honesty coming from the leadership . . .

As you have cloaked yourself in a mantle of Bush infallibility. All critics of Bush hate the US. If you speak out against US policy, you're harming the troops. You're either with us or against us. All democrats do is lie, cheat and kick puppies.

I do not subscribe to that either, but I do subscribe to the notion that the recent attacks, by those that support, then claim to be victims of manipulation, are abandoning the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war. Disagree all you want, fine. The accusations however are almost otherworldly, and do provide incentive to enemies of the state.

Quote

The real world has a lot more shades of gray than that, and understanding requires more than seeing in black or white. A democrat extremist might think the US torture going on in Abu Ghraib and elsewhere means all our soldiers are evil. A republican extremist might think it's just a tiny minor problem that is best not spoken about; heck, it's probably already solved! A moderate will likely take it as a serious problem and want a solution, one that's a little better than "oh, it's not a problem once we punish some soldier."

Again, there's disagreement with policy and then there's a comparison of our Camp Delta to Nazi concentration camps.

Quote

This war is a quagmire, one that is going to take every bit of diplomatic and military skill we have to extricate ourselves from. Labeling anyone who wants to talk about doing that as a coward, or blind, or "making america run" will lead to more dead soldiers, poorer outcomes and a more divided nation.

The problem with this, Bill, is that is not what is being discussed. In fact, there is no discussion, there is only shrill. Senator Reid isn't saying, "Mr. President, we want a restatement or review of US policy on Iraq." He's saying, "Mr. President, it's time to come clean with the American people and admit that you lied about pre-war intelligence, and to the American people." Several others on that side of the aisle are saying the same thing. There is no debate. The only debate has been on setting a "pull out" date. That's not getting any coverage, yet that is the one thing that both sides should be beating on like a dead horse. The policy is the policy. It is the President's to make. It is the congress that decides to facilitate limited parts of that policy, and legislate on matters of law. Not policy. These clowns care less than anyone...that is a certainty.

Quote

The time has come to listen to alternate solutions. Bush and company have run this war without listening to anyone but their staunch supporters for almost three years now, and violence continues to escalate. It's time to bring in new ideas and new perspectives - at least, if we don't want to still be losing 1000 soldiers a year in Iraq in 2015. Time to start really supporting the troops by figuring a way out of this mess. Time to stop using them as frangible bullet sponges, pawns in a political power game.

Fine with me. Yet, there have been no feasible ideas from the opposition, only "Bush lied" "Bush is dumb"...yada...yada...

Thus, there has been no debate.

Quote

>If you refuse everything that is not congruent with what your believe,
> you corrode what you do believe to something that resembles
> nothing of what you intend.

Indeed. That is true of both blind support and blind denial.

Indeed.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

He met with a lot of people before invading including the Democrats in Congress. I guess your theory is true.

So Robertson is a democrat...or are you trying to say all democrats are religeous kooks? You are making no sense whatsoever....

You discount what Robertson has to say because supposedly everybody think he is a religeous kook and not worth listening to....yet your President made time in his busy schedule to meet with him (unlike meeting with fellow politicians....which really does make more sense considering his job)

Sp. why would the President meet with a religeous kook during one of the busiest times of his presidency? He must see some value in his views and opinions, enough so that alledgedly he even made assurances to him to appease him....

[Gravitymaster 0]

Maybe for the same reasons he just met with Chavez. Presidents meet with a lot of people, particularly those who have some influence. Some kooks only have some kooky ideas. Other times they can be perfectly rational. Heck, Clinton talked to Arafat, a terrorist. I don't blame him for it, it's his job.

I don't like Robertson, Jackson etc. or any of the other holy roller, money grabbers, but if I was President, I'd have to at least be obligated to listen to them.

[Wopelao 0]

Don't you know that Robertson actually instructed GW to take over the world after his brief meeting with him then? whoosh!!!! You are kind of slow in the facts today.

[billvon 2,989]

>are abandoning the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war.

Oh please. Cue the violins. We're all in this ship together; that is abundantly clear. If everyone was abandoning the president, no one would be responding to his taunts or pressing him for change. If no one cared about him, no one would be writing him missives and calling on him to do X, Y and Z.

>then there's a comparison of our Camp Delta to Nazi concentration camps.

Right, and you regularly assume that anyone who thinks torture is very, very bad is saying "the US is just like Nazis." Which shuts down the discussion right there. Lately you've been more interested in "winning the argument" with a real good zinger than talking about anything constructive.

>Senator Reid isn't saying, "Mr. President, we want a restatement or
>review of US policy on Iraq."

He (and other senators) have been saying that for THREE YEARS. It's taken the indictment of an adminstration official and political tricks like the closed session to even get a review of how we got into Iraq completed!

Here's one of Reid's speeches from this summer:
--------------
We need a common sense reform agenda for the common good. And that starts with defending our nation and making it more secure. As of this month, more time has passed since 9-11 than the time between Pearl Harbor and the defeat of Japan. During those three years and eight months – sixty years ago – we invaded North Africa and Normandy. We freed people from the Philippines to France. Hitler lay dead and Tojo was in chains. We had defeated fascism around the world and had begun to build the new United Nations.

But today Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, our homeland is still not secure, we’re still not energy independent, and – in many ways – Americans are less safe than we were before 9-11. . ..

The lines that divide Congress should be between right and wrong, not right and left.

Our enemies should not be those in the other party, but the common threats that face the American community.

Our goal should not be winning the news cycle, but breaking the vicious cycle of political battle and winning a future where all Americans can live out their dreams.

The defeat of the nuclear option shows what is possible when people of good faith – Republicans and Democrats – join hands and put principles ahead of partisanship.

This doesn’t have to be an isolated incident – a momentary ceasefire before Washington’s trench warfare starts up again. Rather it can be a new beginning. Because on issue after issue, there is a common sense center in America that knows what it believes and can’t understand why this Republican Congress won’t get the job done.
----------------------------------

Of course, that one never made the papers, because no one was calling anyone else names. That's the only thing that gets any attention. When Reid (and 40 other democrats) sent a letter to Bush urging him to review four parts of his Iraq policy, he got a FORM LETTER back, written by a junior staffer. A FORM LETTER. That's how seriously the administration takes constructive criticism.

So the only way to get anyone's attention is to hit them with the metaphorical baseball bat. (Works both ways; democrats certainly aren't immune to this.) If you say "Mr. President, we want a restatement or review of US policy on Iraq" you get a form letter back that says "Thanks for writing! We'll sure show it to some important officials. Candy."

So at this point, it's requiring extreme measures to effect change. If it takes a silly stunt like calling a closed session to finish the investigation - then so be it. If it takes calling people names to get the president to even respond to the senate, then so be it. It's a lousy way to run a government, but it's better than "stay the course no matter what we're headed for, and no matter how many people die."

[TheAnvil 0]

I've gotten quite a chuckle over the Dems' actions during the past few weeks - starting with Senator Reid's little stunt on the Senate floor. It seems they've expanded their horizons a bit. Instead of a merely 'oppose anything Bush says or does' strategy, they've now adopted a 'oppose anything Bush says or does' and 'state Bush misled America about Iraq every other sentence' strategy. At least they've a two pronged attack now - perhaps it's a hint that some are learning how to count.

The new prong of the Dem political attack machine is quite humorous to me, given the many, many pro-war comments made by so many Dems quite recently. Many of those leading the vanguard of the 'misled America' attack are among those who have made several hawkish statements in the recent past. Hannity used such comments to make Kucinich look like an idiot on his radio show a couple of days ago.

Bill, Senator Reid's quote shows a real lack of understanding of the current war. Drawing parallels between the WWII time frame and the war on terror or the capture of Imperial Japan and the capture of OBL doesn't really impress upon me a feeling that Sen. Reid has a firm grasp on things.

If Sen. Reid were serious about closing the border, he would support Senator Tancredo in his efforts to do so. We all know that he doesn't. He needs the illegals to vote for him later. I can think of few other people who have done MORE to draw the partisan line in Congress more than Sen. Reid as of late, so his comments on that elicited a chuckle out of me when I read it.

I would agree with Senator Reid in one thing - this Republican controlled congress has been a colossal disappointment.

I'm going to sip some good tequila and read a book tonight. Hope everyone is doing well.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[Channman 2]

>So I'm thinking the GOP should probably steer clear of blaming soldier's deaths on democrats. That might make people start thinking about who bears most of the responsiblility for this war.

>Well if your going to climb this tree you might what to wear a safety belt. A little back bone and you just might be able to say Republicans are the ones responsible for this war. The terrorist and those nations that support them are the true reasons but I understand we don't see it the same way.

More than eight years of no response to terror prior to GWB term began for starters. Lets not forget Bill liberals have loathed the Military and all it stands for for years. Why now, this war do liberals have this profound so called concern for our fighting men and women.

The Vietnam war was a criminal war as far as the left was concern and those that served there came home to scorn and themselves called criminal, i.e. John Kerry before the Senate. The Dem. party and the Media have been drawing parallels to tie this war with Vietnam.

So when this conflict is over and the troops serve no purpose to the left will we read in these threads they to were and are criminals.

I truely don't know how Americans can find themselves so far apart but I hope the majority of those that find themselves in the Dem. corner do not have the same veiw of some college Prof. telling 19 year old students that true peace will come when our soldier's turn their guns on there superiors.

This same Prof. seems that only those who hold his beliefs have the right to be heard but those that hold a conservative view point should be censored.

Cheers, hope you and the family have a good Thanksgiving. Enjoy the discussion.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>are abandoning the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war.

Oh please. Cue the violins. We're all in this ship together; that is abundantly clear. If everyone was abandoning the president, no one would be responding to his taunts or pressing him for change. If no one cared about him, no one would be writing him missives and calling on him to do X, Y and Z.

Newsflash Bill, everyone left of the aisle that voted for this conflict has done a 180. Everyone on the left that wanted Education reform, got to write the law, they've done a 180. They wanted perscription drug coverage, they got it, now it's a 180. They gripe about energy dependence, the President puts forth a policy (one of the first things he did as President by the way), they shoot it down.

Bill, the President has delivered on nearly every point of his campaign as a leader. He's even spending like a drunken sailor (really ticks me off) in true liberal fashion and all these people can do is cry they've been duped. Now they're lashing out and they have abondoned the President, demeaned him while he's overseas and are offering no solutions.

Quote

>then there's a comparison of our Camp Delta to Nazi concentration camps.

Right, and you regularly assume that anyone who thinks torture is very, very bad is saying "the US is just like Nazis." Which shuts down the discussion right there. Lately you've been more interested in "winning the argument" with a real good zinger than talking about anything constructive.

I didn't make the comparison Bill, Senator Dick Durbin did. The only person that has offered thoughtful commentary about the treatment of prisoners by the US is Senator McCain.

Quote

>Senator Reid isn't saying, "Mr. President, we want a restatement or
>review of US policy on Iraq."

He (and other senators) have been saying that for THREE YEARS. It's taken the indictment of an adminstration official and political tricks like the closed session to even get a review of how we got into Iraq completed!

Here's one of Reid's speeches from this summer:
--------------
We need a common sense reform agenda for the common good. ... ... ...... ... there is a common sense center in America that knows what it believes and can’t understand why this Republican Congress won’t get the job done.

And what about that speech brings debate, versus debase?

Quote

When Reid (and 40 other democrats) sent a letter to Bush urging him to review four parts of his Iraq policy, he got a FORM LETTER back, written by a junior staffer. A FORM LETTER.

I've heard about this form letter, composed of only four sentences, yet I can't find a copy of it anywhere. I'd like to read it. Of course, I'm sure it was courteous, not in the same realm of the filth that's been slung at the White House.

Quote

So at this point, it's requiring extreme measures to effect change. If it takes a silly stunt like calling a closed session to finish the investigation - then so be it. If it takes calling people names to get the president to even respond to the senate, then so be it. It's a lousy way to run a government, but it's better than "stay the course no matter what we're headed for, and no matter how many people die."

Here we disagree, to a point. The problem here is that there is no talking going on behind the press clips. Senator Reid has completely alienated himself from Senator Frist. Nancy Pelosi isn't taken seriously anymore at all. These Congress people will not consult amongst themselves, and they have the audacity to expect the same from the Executive Branch. The President hasn't even stooped to that level yet, Bill. He may be issuing rebuttals, but he's not coming anywhere near the language or near hatred that is steaming from the left on this.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[DaVinci 0]

Burger, Gore and Clinton all said the same thing and they got the intel when they were in power.

[billvon 2,989]

>everyone left of the aisle that voted for this conflict has done a 180.

I would too, if I had voted for a war based on incomplete information. I can't make good decisions based on bad data.

Good leaders have to a) make good decisions and b) revise those decisions when experience shows them, in retrospect, to be bad. Asking them to revise their decisions is not an attack, as several republicans have pointed out.

>Now they're lashing out and they have abondoned the President,
>demeaned him while he's overseas and are offering no solutions.

They are responding to HIS vituperative attacks that he made while he was overseas. If the president is going to use a diplomatic trip to Asia to pound people he is disagreeing with, then he must accept that people may do the same.

>I've heard about this form letter, composed of only four sentences,
>yet I can't find a copy of it anywhere. I'd like to read it.

"Thank you for your letter to the President expressing your concerns with Iraq. I've shared your letter with the appropriate administration officials, and agencies responsible in this area. Please be assured your letter is receiving the attention it deserves. Thank you for your compliments, Candy Wolf."

The letter was addressed directly to the president. Candy Wolf is a junior staffer.

>He may be issuing rebuttals, but he's not coming anywhere near the
>language or near hatred that is steaming from the left on this.

I don't think it's hatred, it's rage and frustration. They've been trying for three years to investigate why we invaded Iraq with faulty information. It has required stunts like the closed session to get the matter considered at all, and has required vituperative attacks from the left to get the attention of Bush at all, at least above the level of a form letter.

BTW kudos to Bush yesterday for responding more civilly than he has in the past, and kudos to Murtha for toning down his rhetoric and trying to take it out of the realm of partisan politics and into the realm of discussing what's right for the troops and for the USA. If both sides can start some serious discussion on what to do to end this war, then some good may come out of all this.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>"Candy Wolf."
.......
"has required vituperative attacks"

Poor girl, her parents were cruel. At least her last name wasn't Kane.

Where does anything 'require' vituperative attacks. "vituperative attacks" are solely self serving. Feeling that vituperative attacks are 'required' is strictly an emotionally driven position that boths sides of the aisle should avoid.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,989]

>Where does anything 'require' vituperative attacks . . .

If you've tried everything else, and nothing works except such attacks, then they are required to get what you want.

>Feeling that vituperative attacks are 'required' is strictly an
>emotionally driven position that boths sides of the aisle should avoid.

Now that the subject IS being discussed seriously, I hope they end as well.

[TheAnvil 0]

What would you have the President do, Bill? Ignore the endless barrage of attacks against him? The attacks have been coming for quite some time and given their nature, I felt the President's responses quite reserved.

What sort of revision would you like to see? Iraq un-invaded? The fact of the matter is that the US is currently IN Iraq and setting a timetable for withdrawal would be utterly stupid. Setting conditions that should be met for withdrawal would be acceptable, but that is not what the Dems are asking for. They want a timetable for use as a political weapon later, knowing full well that circumstances dont' often comport with timetables set from afar.

Justify the 180 swing of the Dems in congress however you like, but the fact is they HAD access to information and most did not avail themselves of it. Many who did still voted in favor of the war.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[billvon 2,989]

>What would you have the President do, Bill? Ignore the endless
>barrage of attacks against him?

-Respond to senate leaders who write him letters.
-Listen to people who disagree with him as well as people who agree with him.
-Stop retaliating against those who question his decisions. That leads to yes-men who help him make bad decisions.

>What sort of revision would you like to see? Iraq un-invaded?

Nope, too late for that. We should figure out what went wrong last time and fix it so it doesn't happen again, rather than start a propaganda war against the people who want to fix the problem.

>The fact of the matter is that the US is currently IN Iraq and setting a
>timetable for withdrawal would be utterly stupid.

The Iraqi president is trying to set timetables. Is he utterly stupid? Do we know better than the Iraqis how their country should be managed? Wasn't the whole idea to set up a government that can take care of itself? That's happening; we should support them and make good on our word.

>Justify the 180 swing of the Dems in congress however you like, but
>the fact is they HAD access to information and most did not avail
>themselves of it. Many who did still voted in favor of the war.

None of them had access to the primary conduit of information to the president, the PDR. Sorry, they didn't have the same level of intelligence, and saying it 100 times won't make it so.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

None of them had access to the primary conduit of information to the president, the PDR. Sorry, they didn't have the same level of intelligence, and saying it 100 times won't make it so.

They don't read the intel when they do get it.

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10375

Pointing this out 100 times won't change this mantra, apparently.

[Channman 2]

>This lame excuse they did not have access to the PDR, if that was the primary screw up.

They did'nt have access to their balls, or access to courage when it was and is required. They do some how have access to failure, running, and calling everyone else liers. They are more interested in failure and a full US military retreat then they are in victory.

But I will add if GWB and his administration was interested in victory, they would run the war as FDR ran WWII. Liberals would cry and conservatives would cheer.

[SudsyFist 0]

The following two ads drew my first attentions on that page:

"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam... Yours FREE! click here!"

"Stop Dating Liberals! (testimonial) 'I can't date another liberal guy!' Sweet Hearts NOT Bleeding Hearts! conservativematch.com"

Fuck me. And here I was, wondering just how binary thinking becomes so pervasive in these circles.

Do the "liberal" websites also litter their pages with such tripe?

EDIT: Spelling.

[AlexCrowley 0]

yes.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Just check out the Daily Kos. They do the same shit for the left. Binary is great...

for computers.

Although ya know, with the advent of the quantum computer, we weill have on, off, and on/off. So maybe I should reevaluate everything.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[SudsyFist 0]

Do the people who jack off to this stuff realize how they're being played? Or am I totally missing something here?

[Gawain 0]

Quote

... and kudos to Murtha for toning down his rhetoric and trying to take it out of the realm of partisan politics...

Bad news, he voted against his own resolution over the weekend. He was all about partisan politics, nothing more than another "Cindy Sheehan". He has done his constituency a grave disservice.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 2,989]

>They don't read the intel when they do get it.

I agree. They still didn't have access to all the intelligence the president did.

>Pointing this out 100 times won't change this mantra, apparently.

Nope, because it's not what I was talking about.

[billvon 2,989]

>Do the people who jack off to this stuff realize how they're being
>played? Or am I totally missing something here?

Ever been to a football game, and watched fans get so worked up they get into fights over a football team? Some people are the same way with politics. If "their team" wins, they're happy as clams. If the other guy wins, it's a personal blow. Never mind what's actually happening; that's for the refs to figure out.

[billvon 2,989]

>Bad news, he voted against his own resolution over the weekend.

I would have too. Getting out tomorrow would be a bad idea.

>He was all about partisan politics, nothing more than another
>"Cindy Sheehan". He has done his constituency a grave disservice.

Perhaps, but he has done the troops a great service by bringing this issue to the forefront of political discourse. Perhaps now we will hear more than "we're turning the corner!" "Mission accomplished" "they're on the run" "they're in their last throes" when it comes to planning for the future of Iraq.