Bush Accepts Responsibility For Iraq War Mistakes

[NavyDave]

Bush doesn't do the blame game that is what the Liberals do as well as play bothsides of the fence while trying to undermine the war effort.

[NavyDave]

When there is democracy in Iraq how many of these liberals are going to try to claim credit?

[Winslowalrob]

Bush took responsibility. This is good news. Hope he keeps it up.

[NavyDave]

Yeah now maybe the Democrats will take responsibilty for portraying the US as a paper tiger by spewing nonsense

[Predicto]

Of course he takes responsibility he is a man of convictions as most of us know.

.

No, no, he hasn't been convicted.

Yet.

[@DCGoldPants]

kudos for finally acting like a leader.

We all thought that "The Buck Stops here" slogan was banned from the White House.

Talk about pulling teeth, that was a tough one to admit.

Now tell us specifically how victory is reached. Then you'll break 50%.

[Kilmer17]

How much you want to bet ND? You need to break out of your right wing bubble if you honestly thing the democrats will not win seats in next years election.

I will take any bet you are willing to offer chom.

I bet you that the GOP will not lose any more seats than a typical 2nd term midterm election cycle.

[@DCGoldPants]

hmmm, is ND suggesting NO seats would be lost? Or was he going the Kilmer route?

What's typical?

[Thiebear]

If your betting on IRAQ, the Economy and or indictments for the 2006 elections...

Say, as opposed to voting for the correct person.. your already lost.

[NavyDave]

I think we may break even.

Louisiana is going to be interesting since New orleans is the city that puts the Democrats over the top in elections and is why some were pointing out how schoolbuses take the poor to the voting booth but werent used to get them out of harms way?

The democrats dont have ideas or a platform.

If I am the GOP I'm imitating David Spade's commercial by showin the Democrats as the party of NO and finish it with Who's In your Wallet?

[Ignatius J.]

So how many seats did the republicans loose during the 2002 midterm elections?

[Kilmer17]

hmmm, is ND suggesting NO seats would be lost? Or was he going the Kilmer route?

What's typical?

Average appx 25 in the house and 3 in the Senate. But Im willing to use less than that.

I bet the GOP wont lose more than 15 seats in the house and 2 in the Senate.

[@DCGoldPants]

ooooh, this would be interesting.

Chrom V. ND...... the price?

Self Impossed Ban for (X) time.

[Kilmer17]

A few other factors come into play.

In the Senate, the DEM will be defending 18 seats to the GOPs 15, and 4 of the Dems seats are 1st term guys who beat a GOPer in 00. Plus, I believe Dems are defending 6 seats in states that Bush carried in 04, while the GOP is defending only 2 seats in a state carried by Kerry. (Correct the math if it's wrong, but Im sure the scales tip that way).

In the House, similar percentages apply. And in addition, the polls showing Congressional approval are generic. And as we all know, all politics is local. Everyone hates Congress, but loves there own Congressman.

[Kilmer17]

So how many seats did the republicans loose during the 2002 midterm elections?

Not a fair example. 1st election post 9/11. The GOP gained 5 in the House and 2 in the Senate. A similar situation occured in 1942.

You need to look at averages to make sense of the future.

[AlexRS]

He stood up and took responsibility after lying to the American people for all these years, wow!

The timing of this action suggests damage control rather than an honest admission of mistakes.

Although, this is a good start.

I'd take right things done for wrong reasons over wrong things done for wrong reasons :laugh:

[Popeman38]

1. The destruction of our budget

2. Turning a $200Billion surplus into a $600Billion deficit

3. Iraq

4. Corruption

5. Indictments

You can start there, but there are about another 10 reasons why.

Com, Chom, Chom. :doh:

1. This happens when the country IS AT WAR! See, to pay for wars you have to spend unexpected money. So 9/11 cost a ton, Afghan cost a ton, Iraq cost a ton, and Hurricanes cost a ton (speaking of which, DEMS have no problem throwing money to reconstruct New Orleans which is built below sea level and lake level, but do not think the American people should rebuild Iraq. So basically saying Americans are more important than Iraqis. I thought the REP were the ones who hated on poor people)

2. The $200 Billion surplus was propped up by Social Security. And no President (REP or DEM) would have been able to keep a surplus with 9/11 happenning in their first term. Oh, and the economy was on a slow downslope BEFORE he took office. Now the economy is slowly going up and yet you still say he tanked the economy. Read the history books, it always happens in war.

3. He admits some pre-war intel was faulty. Doesn't change the fact that YOUR preferences for leaders VOTED with him on THE SAME intel. So blame everybody else if you want to blame him. (on a side note, DEMS have been bashing Bush for being dumb since he announced he was running, yet they accuse him of duping the ENTIRE country and half the world. How could such a dummy do that?)

4. Corruption - Are you kidding me. Show me a 2 term President whose party didn't have some corruption. Keenedy killed someone while drunk and DEMS look at him like a god!

5. Funny, these indictments keep getting trashed. Plame, oh yeah Woodward said he knew about her WAY earlier. DeLay, keep getting dismissed.

If we had the greatest economy ever, 9/11 had not happened and we didn't do to Afghan or Iraq, you would still hate Bush. The DEMS had TWO chance to beat him and couldn't do it and the REP party is in trouble? If he is so evil and dumb, why couldn't the DEM angel beat him?

[Popeman38]

He stood up and took responsibility after lying to the American people for all these years, wow!

The timing of this action suggests damage control rather than an honest admission of mistakes.

Although, this is a good start.

I'd take right things done for wrong reasons over wrong things done for wrong reasons :laugh:

So he has been lying to Americans for "all these years"? And your proof is where?

[@DCGoldPants]

the only difference is. You don't cut taxes when you go to War.

You ask American's to conserve, and at least keep taxes level to pay for the war.

Use every part of the Buffalo.

[AlexRS]

Of course he takes responsibility he is a man of convictions as most of us know.

Conviction - an unshakable belief in something without need for proof or evidence.

Is that who you want as a leader? Somebody who makes decisions based on BELIEF, without the need for proof or evidence?

Please, please tell me how convictions help one make better decisions??? Is it the lack of need for proof or evidence? Is that what helps decision making??

"Sheep have a strong instinct to follow the leader. When one sheep decides to go somewhere, the rest of the flock usually follows, even if it is not a good decision. For example, if the lead sheep jumps over a cliff, the others are likely to follow. Even from birth, lambs are conditioned to follow the older members of the flock."

[AlexRS]

So he has been lying to Americans for "all these years"? And your proof is where?

“We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of brutal dictator,” Bush said. “It is to leave a free and democratic Iraq in his place."

[Popeman38]

“We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of brutal dictator,” Bush said. “It is to leave a free and democratic Iraq in his place."

Ok, the idea of regime change was not a W Bush idea. Clinton spoke at length about regime change. The UN Reolutions violated since the first Gulf War gave authority for war to force Sadaam to comply. And regime change was stated pre-war as on of the reasons to go to Iraq. Go back and read the facts, not the Nancy Pelosi talking points. It was not the MAIN point taken to the UN. But it was referenced as A reason. So to use this quote as proof of a lie is in itself a lie. He is reiterating what was stated pre-war and pre-Bush. Don't slander the President because you don't like him.

[TheREALJBird]

Because what did he admit to? That he was wrong about the intel? hell, everyone already accepted that fact two years ago, why did it take him this long?

Here is the crux of his problems, and why he will be remembered as the worst leader we've ever had. . .

Saddam was absolutely NO threat to the American people. . . what was he going to do, bleed on us? he had no army, no weapons and was not a threat. The mere fact that Bush is still playing the Saddam is the boogie man card, shows how truly out of touch he is with reality. If you watched the MSNBC special last night, you can see why this is, and how he has a complete disconnect with reality. . . not a ggod thing for the leader of the free world.

I swear I cannot look at one thread that says "bush" or "US" in it without you stinking up the place with your ridicolous and wrong views, give it a rest demmy

[AlexRS]

“We are in Iraq today because our goal has always been more than the removal of brutal dictator,” Bush said. “It is to leave a free and democratic Iraq in his place."

Ok, the idea of regime change was not a W Bush idea. Clinton spoke at length about regime change. The UN Reolutions violated since the first Gulf War gave authority for war to force Sadaam to comply. And regime change was stated pre-war as on of the reasons to go to Iraq. Go back and read the facts, not the Nancy Pelosi talking points. It was not the MAIN point taken to the UN. But it was referenced as A reason. So to use this quote as proof of a lie is in itself a lie. He is reiterating what was stated pre-war and pre-Bush. Don't slander the President because you don't like him.

Tell that to the Congress who voted for the war because they got scared of WMDs. Tell that to the American people who followed a leader that prides himself in having "convictions." Tell that to your children and grandchildren who will be paying for this war.

[Kilmer17]

Show me where a Congressman said the only reason they were voting for war was WMDs.