NationStates Jolt Archive

So let me get this straight.

Bush was opposed to establishing an independent 9/11 commission.

Then he supported the commission, but didn't want to give up any information.

Then he gave up information in dribs and drabs, but wasn't going to talk to them.

Then he was going to talk to them and cooperate fully.

Then he would only talk to them for one hour, and not under oath (so it's not perjury if he talks out his arse), and only if Dick Cheney was there with him.

Then he wasn't going to watch the clock.

Then he said the 9/11 Commission vindicated him on Iraq. (The WMD/no-WMD, get-Osama/Osama's-not-important thing is a whole 'nother post.)

Then he read the report and admitted they said there was no cooperation between Saddam and al Qaeda.

Then he embraced the Commission's recommendations.

Then he proposed appointing an intelligence "czar" with no budget and minimal actual authority.

Now he says he wants the intelligence "czar" to have budgetary power.

And who are you calling a flip-flopper again?

Bush said he 'didn't think we could really win the war on terror'

A week later "we can and we will win the war on terror"

and this is the most powerful man in the world....

A week later? Try a day later. Any time that hydroencephalic chimp says what he's really thinking, the admin has to backpedal and spin like crazy.

and this is the most powerful man in the world....
Not when it comes to brainpower.

If I recall correctly, the line has generally been taken out of the proper context - that "victory" in the sense of a conventional enemy's defeat was not possible.

What is up with the recent obsession with footwear?

http://store1.yimg.com/I/flip-flops-inc_1805_2181

If I recall correctly, the line has generally been taken out of the proper context - that "victory" in the sense of a conventional enemy's defeat was not possible.

You are correct Anchoria. It wass takin out of context. But we all know that liberals love to take things out of context. :p

My favorite Bush flip-flop ...

Bush opposed the creation of a cabinet agency for homeland security until Congress passed legislation creating it in November 2002, thus delaying its launch until February 2003. Former press secretary Ari Fleischer said Bush told Congress "there does not need to be a Cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security," and Tom Ridge, then director of the non-agency White House Office of Homeland Security, said "I'd probably recommend that he veto" any bill creating a new agency. [White House Press Briefing, 10/24/01; National Journal, 6/5/02; George W. Bush, 11/19/02]

Yep, that's right, W was opposed to the Department of Homeland Security, which he now claims as his teat suckin' birthchild.

Never mind that he grossly underfunds it ... but, hey, a skinny third-world starving child is better than none at all, right?

Anyway ...



http://store1.yimg.com/I/flip-flops-inc_1805_2181

I remember when that was what we called "thongs".

You are correct Anchoria. It wass takin out of context. But we all know that liberals love to take things out of context. :pYou guys have made a cottage industry of taking Kerry's Senate votes out of context--you're hardly in any position to complain about a statement that was probably the most accurate thing Bush has said as President.

I remember when that was what we called "thongs".
I like what we call thongs now. :D

you cant take things like that out of context

"we cant win the war on terrorism" and "we can and will win the war on terrorism" are pretty self explanatory

you can see what hes reallly thinking when he doesnt have manuscripts to read shoved down his throat. he made the TRUE statement on the tour bus to a interviewer, the other bullshit was off a script written by some one else

A week later? Try a day later. Any time that hydroencephalic chimp says what he's really thinking, the admin has to backpedal and spin like crazy.
And they seem to be doing a lot of that lately...