or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Flip-flop Alert
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flip-flop Alert

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
From NYT:

In a speech to the national convention of the American Legion, Bush said, ``We meet today in a time of war for our country, a war we did not start yet one that we will win.'' That statement differed from Bush's earlier comment, aired Monday in a pre-taped television interview, that ``I don't think you can win'' the war on terror.

What a tool. He doesn't have the slightest idea of the outcome (nor did he give any real thought ahead of time to what would be required) and yet all his supporters can say at the convention is how strong he is on the WOT. I don't think one person this week will talk about how good George is for healthcare or the economy or the environment or international relations... they'll just talk about how "strong" he is and his "moral convictions" because that's all they have.

That's the only thing they can sucker the average uneducated voter with. [All the typical wealthy voter cares] about is their tax rate, and they know he'll come through there. At least that's always the first thing brought to my attention by the wealthy people I know... taxes. That's all they've ever had: tax breaks and strong defense.

I want the Jib-Jab Parody 2.0 after he's done with his speech; I'm sure he'll provide plenty of ammo.
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #2 of 22
I thought you guys liked nuance
post #3 of 22
Bush is leading the war on.....flip flopping. I guess it must be hard to control all the bull**** puppetmeister Karl Rove puts out there.
post #4 of 22
Thread Starter 
I loved how one of the press contacts for his campaign tried to cover up what he said on Monday... "No, no.... what he *really* meant was this..."

Ah strange days we live in. The President can't even speak for himself, even after having four years to brush up on his delivery.



Scott, I can't answer that as I don't presume to know what the definition of "nuance" is in your world.

Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by Moogs

Scott, I can't answer that as I don't presume to know what the definition of "nuance" is in your world.


Applying radically different standards of integrity to politicians depending on their party affiliation.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
I thought you guys liked nuance

Let's repeat the charge:

Last week Bush took a 'winning the war on terror' bus tour

this week:
Question: "can we win the war on terror?"

Bush: " don't think you can win'' the war on terror.



Nuance?!

These are not excerpts taken out of context, these are not votes about bills which are distinctly different yet packaged by Republicans as the same, they are not complex . . . you can't get less nuanced

the only nuance is that Bush does not know what to do or say without a script

that is why, throughout his work intensive campaign (when he should perhaps be acting like a president and working as a president) he has had ONLY staged psuedo-town hall meetings and thouroughly screened, with voting records, and party affiliation, and statement of support, and IDs for every member of the audience!!

He is lost when he is without a script: he can not think on his feet!! he might be intelligent, but not at a moment's notice!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #7 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
I thought you guys liked nuance

Bush's two statements are not "nuance". "We will win the W.O.T." and "the W.O.T" is unwinnable" are 180º in opposition, yes?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #8 of 22
But wait!!

It gets better,

Let's see how the right-media bends over backwards to smooth over his apparent incompetence:
From Salon:
Quote:
Mega-dittos, Mr. President

When President Bush gets into trouble, as he did yesterday with his off-message comment that "No, I don't think you can" win the "war on terror," he knows he can turn to Rush Limbaugh to help him get back on course. Bush made an appearance on Limbaugh's program this afternoon from Des Moines, Iowa, where Rush commiserated with his president about his gaffe -- "I think I know what you meant," Limbaugh assured him.

Predictably, Bush didn't have to worry about hardball on this show. From the transcript:

"RUSH: ... But John Edwards is out there saying (paraphrased), "A-ha! Bush is now flip-flopping, and we, John Kerry and I, we can win this, and Bush is..." What did you mean by this?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate you bringing that up. Listen, I should have made my point more clear about what I was saying, you know, what I meant. What I meant was that this is not a conventional war. It is a different kind of war. We're fighting people who have got a dark ideology who use terrorists, terrorism, as a tool. They're trying to shake our conscience. They're trying to shake our will, and so in the short run the strategy has got to be to find them where they lurk. I tell people all the time, "We will find them on the offense. We will bring them to justice on foreign lands so we don't have to face them here at home," and that's because you cannot negotiate with these people and in a conventional war there would be a peace treaty or there would be a moment where somebody would sit on the side and say we quit. That's not the kind of war we're in, and that's what I was saying. The kind of war we're in requires, you know, steadfast resolve, and I will continue to be resolved to bring them to justice, but as well as to spread liberty -- and this is one of the interesting points of the debate, Rush, is that, you know, I believe societies can be transformed because of liberty, and I believe that Iraq and Afghanistan will be free nations, and I believe that those free nations right there in the heart of the Middle East will begin to transform that region into a more hopeful place, which in itself will be a detriment to the ability to these terrorists to recruit -- and that's what I was saying. I probably needed to be a little more articulate."

No worries, Mr. President. Limbaugh let Bush know it was "an honor and a thrill" to speak to him.

"Well, make no mistake about something," Rush said. "I can't speak for everybody, but I can speak for quite a few. They love you out there, Mr. President, and they only wish you the best."

Have you EVER heard such a slather of long winded and endless nonesense?!?!?!

can you believe this man is our president?!

Unbelieveable
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #9 of 22
In the mean time the republican congress and president have left Mexico wide open with how many millions crossing the border every year? same spin from this administration, take our freedoms away and create a police state paid for by the American Tax payer and then pretend no terrorist or bad guys come in with the millions of mexicans. i thought the president was suppose to defend & protect this country? Bush is a freaking liar and so are the Republicans. Its not about security its about big business and a bigger govt getting more into our lives. If it wasnt they would have the military all over that border.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #10 of 22
This is the kind of thing that bites a candidate in the ass in mid October. All the Dems have to do is link one of Bush's "We will defeat this enemy..." speaches with "We can't win..." with the Iraq war. End the commercial with something snazzy like "Who's the flip-flopper now Mr Bush?" and there ya go. Bad press just before an election slandering all of Bush's positive points.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #11 of 22
Fucking Hell.

I loathe President Bush and the uniformed masses that vote for him.

post #12 of 22
I just can't believe that Kerry/Edwards are running on a ticket of "Oh, sure. You can win a war against terrorism."

Dumbasses. They should've said, from the get-go, "NO. THIS IS NOT A WINNABLE WAR. This is a war against an idea, and you cannot win those. What we can do is deal with our own domestic security rather than getting sidetracked into two wars in two different countries. We can reform and streamline our intelligence community so that we can will never be blind-sided again. We can work with the international community to cut off funding to terrorist groups around the world, because this is truly in the best interests of everyone, everywhere. Is this is winnable war? No. Not in the least. And George Bush led us there. And as for his apparent change of opinion the other day, we here at the Kerry/Edwards campaign are happy to see that, yet again, he's coming around to our position."
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #13 of 22
Of course it's a winnable war-- but are we prepared to do the things necessary to defeat global terrorism: namely end our ridiculous support for Israel, pull out of NAFTA and the WTO, encourage fair worldwide labor standards and reduce poverty-- among other things? No chance in hell. While I support incremental change by voting for Kerry, I think nothing short of revolution can seriously change things in this country and abroad.
post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Of course it's a winnable war-- but are we prepared to do the things necessary to defeat global terrorism: namely end our ridiculous support for Israel, pull out of NAFTA and the WTO, encourage fair worldwide labor standards and reduce poverty-- among other things? No chance in hell. While I support incremental change by voting for Kerry, I think nothing short of revolution can seriously change things in this country and abroad.

Well, actually, the only way that this will be winnable is if we are willing to kill everyone who exhibits any sign of disagreeing with us on anything. The point is that even doing what you suggest--hell, say we do everything we can think of to make the people who don't like us happy--will not stop the sheer number of people who want to kill us because they want to kill us.

This is a "war" against and idea/ideology. Those never, ever get won.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Well, actually, the only way that this will be winnable is if we are willing to kill everyone who exhibits any sign of disagreeing with us on anything. The point is that even doing what you suggest--hell, say we do everything we can think of to make the people who don't like us happy--will not stop the sheer number of people who want to kill us because they want to kill us.

This is a "war" against and idea/ideology. Those never, ever get won.

I'm not sure the major cause of islamic fundamentalist terrorism is "people wanting to kill us for the sake of killing us." I think you're definitely buying into the wrong assumptions-- the way Bush and his uniformed throng of supporters claim the major cause of terrorism is that "they hate freedom." Now I believe there are specific reasons for why the world looks like it does: specific foreign and economic policies are what engenders terrorism. It's a complex problem, but not an inherently unsolvable one.

And I don't quite buy into the notion that this is a "war against an idea." That's one of those media-fueled clichés that, in this case, overlooks the fact that every other war was fought over an "idea." No-- we're not fighting against other states in a militaristic sense. But in an economic sense, I don't think we're doing much to mitigate the conditions that cause terrorism-- world poverty, support for Israel, etc, etc. Personally, I don't offer much in the way of solutions, just a different way to think about the problem.

Yours isn't very helpful, Dr. Rogers!
post #16 of 22
How to stop terrorism:

1: Quit exercising (foreign) policy, often duplicitous in nature, that force groups needlessly into corners, inititiating violent retaliation.
2: Stop being involved in short-term funding for paramilitaries and rogue governments that almost always come back to bite us when they inevitably fall out of favor, and to be aware that the chances of "the enemy of our enemy being our friend" is highly unlikely.
3: Never invade a country that is no threat to us...
4: Initiate a campaign against global poverty, religious intolerance, dependence on oil etc, and other unnecessary social evils... and terrorism will wither away for lack of interest.

How to foster terrorism:

1: Follow the Bush agenda, which only can mean a simple cycle of war and retaliation.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #17 of 22
The war on terrorism will be 'won' when there is no person who believes the extremist ideas that foster extremist murder of innocent people as a means to an end:

It is a war against an idea, and the best manner to fight such a war is to convert the ground upon which it can flower, into a ground upon which those ideas whither. That means utilizing means other than military: cultural, economic, aide, fair trade, diplomatic, diplomatic, diplomatic . . . . most of all, however, it takes a vast and long term sense of strategy on many fronts that is highly engaged in profoundly introspective and circumspective relationships to the rest of the world . . . that means thinking critically about where our short-term interests would contradict the long term interests of a world less fertile to terrorists. . . .

I think of Hollbrook and Clark, and think that these are two guys who can think in those terms . . . and I know that Kerry would work with them . . .. and that Bush would work with Rumsfeldt, Wollfowits and Cheney .
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #18 of 22
This is also very good . . . I got it from Salon:
Quote:
The gaffe had Bush's campaign team scrambling yesterday -- and they continue today -- to explain the president's inconsistency. If John Kerry had make the remark, you can only imagine the GOP response: "Flip-flopper!" "Pessimist!" But the aides just shooed it away as a misunderstanding.

Here's an amusing "Who's on First?" exchange from CNN last night, with the anchors pressing White House spokesman Dan Bartlett for an explanation:

"BLITZER: All right. A lot of confusion today over what the president meant when he said that the war on terror is not winnable, you can't exactly win this war. What exactly did he mean by that?"

"BARTLETT: Anybody who has heard this president the last three years has demonstrated that he understands that we can win this war on terror ... When he said we can't win it, what he is saying is that this, it, Al Qaida is not a conventional enemy, not one that's going to sign up to a treaty and say we surrender..."

"WOODRUFF: But when he was asked that almost identical question on CNN just a few weeks ago, the same question, can the war on terror be won, he said absolutely it can be won."

"BARTLETT: That's what I'm saying."

"WOODRUFF: So which is it?"

"BARTLETT: Exactly..."
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #19 of 22
Quote:
I'm not sure the major cause of islamic fundamentalist terrorism is "people wanting to kill us for the sake of killing us."

I don't believe I said it was a "major cause," but whatever. But the simple fact remains that there are people out there who want to kill you simply because you're an American. Or white. Or a yankee. There are people who want to kill black people. Jewish people. Arabs. Hindus. Gays. Women. And they want to do this for a variety of reasons, not all of which are fundamentalist in nature.

Quote:
I think you're definitely buying into the wrong assumptions-- the way Bush and his uniformed throng of supporters claim the major cause of terrorism is that "they hate freedom."

No, I think ya'll are all operating under the assumption that this is a "war." It's not.

Quote:
Now I believe there are specific reasons for why the world looks like it does: specific foreign and economic policies are what engenders terrorism. It's a complex problem, but not an inherently unsolvable one.

The problem is that you are assuming that fanatics can be reasoned with. They can't. I don't care whether they're Islamic fanatics or Hindu fanatics or corn-fed white boy Baptist fanatics.

You cannot reason with fanaticism.

Quote:
And I don't quite buy into the notion that this is a "war against an idea." That's one of those media-fueled clichés that, in this case, overlooks the fact that every other war was fought over an "idea."

I don't know what media you're watching where you've seen that particular line. I haven't. And really, not every other war was fought over an idea, unless you count "I think I should have that country" or "I think you suck and should be dead" as an idea.

Quote:
No-- we're not fighting against other states in a militaristic sense.

I would be surprised if we ever do again for a long, long time.

Quote:
But in an economic sense, I don't think we're doing much to mitigate the conditions that cause terrorism-- world poverty, support for Israel, etc, etc. Personally, I don't offer much in the way of solutions, just a different way to think about the problem.

Again, you're ignoring the role of fanaticism in all of this and assuming that terrorism/terrorists are the reasonable result of oppression. While there are certainly many circumstances where this is the case, the fact remains that fanatics will always exist.

Quote:
Yours isn't very helpful, Dr. Rogers!

Sometimes the truth isn't helpful.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #20 of 22
Yes-- fanaticism will always exist-- but I believe we can substantially remove or lessen the conditions that allow fanaticism to foster-- particularly on its current scale. Don't you agree? And by a broad definition, we are waging a cultural, economic, and political "war" against the people of many countries.
post #21 of 22
John Stewart Knows best.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #22 of 22
More sagely advice from John Stewart Knows best. This is the tell tale summation of Bush's flip-flops. Enjoy.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Flip-flop Alert