FlaSoxxJim Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 President Bush says there is no need to hold anyone in his administration accountable for what has happened in Iraq because the voters have already spoken. "We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post for Sunday's editions. "The American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me." Full story: Bush Says Voters Ratified Iraq Policy Can there be a more arrogant asshole on the planet? The guy wears his stubbornness and self-inflicted ignorance like a badge of honor. How is it good that the President that surrounds himself with sycophants and ass-kissers and orders them not to bother him with any bad news about the war instead of finding people that will give him honest assessments he can use? And in an unrelated act of Presidential hubris, social security funds are being tapped to propagandize for the controversial Bush-backed social security overhaul plan. Yep, Social Security funds are being tapped to back a partisan political agenda - an agenda that is disapproved of by a federal worker's group that represents 77% of social security employees. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/politics...print&position= Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 If Bush thinks the war on Iraq solely got himself re-elected in the 2004 Elections, well that's just ludacrist quite frankly. And if you think the voters agreed with him and his cabinet's policies on Iraq, tell that to the families of those American Soldiers killed, and the Iraqi's whose lives still today are in danger from suicide bombings etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 I gotta agree with you, Flaxx. I saw this statement, and I was instantly :fyou, GWB. He got re-elected not because of Iraq specifically, but for larger security reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 To ratify don't you need 2/3 of the vote not a simple majority? Anyway, I am honestly speechless at that. 51% of the vote is NOT overwhelming... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 01:34 AM) I gotta agree with you, Flaxx. I saw this statement, and I was instantly :fyou, GWB. He got re-elected not because of Iraq specifically, but for larger security reasons. Exactly. In my mind, if there wasn't the world state on terror with Bin Laden etc. and if more national issues like the economy were more important, Kerry would have been voted in by America. We all heard the stories about how the Democrats thought they should wait until 2008, because they didn't want Kerry to have the job because of the current problems America is faced with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 You know what people? ... The American people picked the person they thought was the best man for the job of POTUS. Get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 02:48 AM) You know what people? ... The American people picked the person they thought was the best man for the job of POTUS. Get over it. But I'm allowed to criticize all I want right YASNY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 09:34 AM) To ratify don't you need 2/3 of the vote not a simple majority? Anyway, I am honestly speechless at that. 51% of the vote is NOT overwhelming... Actually, if you want to split hairs, it wasn't even 51%. Try 50.7%. The people get the government they deserve. We reelected a president who never saw fit to hold anyone accountable for problems in Iraq, failure to prevent 9/11, and a whole host of other problems before the election. What made anyone think he would after the election? We voted for someone who'd rather think he's right than do the right thing. Weak and ineffective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 Oh yeah, here's the outrage that nobody's talking about. Mike Chertoff, the new appointee for Homeland Security, perjured himself two years ago when he got his federal judgeship. So the new Bush cabinet has a perjurer and a torturer. I hear the new Secretary of Energy nominee crushes puppies too. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/politics...ed=1&oref=login Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 09:48 AM) You know what people? ... The American people picked the person they thought was the best man for the job of POTUS. Get over it. So, the above comments don't bother you at all? If my guy won and said stuff like that I would be PISSED. That kind of arrogance is an unbecoming representation of our country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted January 16, 2005 Author Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 12:16 PM) So, the above comments don't bother you at all? If my guy won and said stuff like that I would be PISSED. That kind of arrogance is an unbecoming representation of our country. That is the point, of course. How can even the biggest Bush backers (which I know YAS is not) feel good when he expressly states he sees no need to hold anyone in his administration accountable for what has happened in Iraq? It is a moronic thing to say. Just like his suggestion that he feels he never has to explain himself to anyone because he's the King (see sig). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 I think it is quite simple how someone can not be offended by those comments. Some people don't look at one simple quote and automatically assume its interpretation without seeing the whole interview and other comments that may or may not have been made around it. I read that and was not bothered at all. The article was not printed as a Q&A where you could get a better feel for the line of questioning and his answers. Words in print are way too easy to be taken out of context or even interpreted incorrectly. It is real easy to cherry pick a quote here or a quote there to satisfy one's agenda. It happens everyday on both sides of the political spectrum. I, as well as at least some others I assume, prefer to look at bigger pictures rather than isolating one comment here or one day there. Bush will eventually be judged on many fronts, including Iraq. Some can deal with that judgement coming later rather than having to judge him on a daily basis. I am not saying you are wrong in your views, just that there are other ways of looking at things as well, partisanship aside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 "...they looked at the two candidates, and chose me" Umm....George, that's really not saying too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 05:49 PM) I think it is quite simple how someone can not be offended by those comments. Some people don't look at one simple quote and automatically assume its interpretation without seeing the whole interview and other comments that may or may not have been made around it. I read that and was not bothered at all. The article was not printed as a Q&A where you could get a better feel for the line of questioning and his answers. Words in print are way too easy to be taken out of context or even interpreted incorrectly. It is real easy to cherry pick a quote here or a quote there to satisfy one's agenda. It happens everyday on both sides of the political spectrum. I, as well as at least some others I assume, prefer to look at bigger pictures rather than isolating one comment here or one day there. Bush will eventually be judged on many fronts, including Iraq. Some can deal with that judgement coming later rather than having to judge him on a daily basis. I am not saying you are wrong in your views, just that there are other ways of looking at things as well, partisanship aside. True, he was probably just thinking, "Geez, we already did the accounting on election day, and now they'll want a reaccounting in Florida again..." If you're saying this quote is being taken out of context, you should at least say how it's being misinterpreted. Here's the full Q&A. It seems pretty plain to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 the reason bush won was because carl rove, he is a genius, he is probably gonna go down as the best ever at what he does. For a 6 month period everything bad about bush was really blurred over, and everything about it being a tough job and how things were going well and this liberal media and how bush is TOUGH on terror...i got lost in it ... but then as soon as the elections ended, rove didn't have to work and a lot of people started to re-realize why there was so much criticism of bush. If he wants the american people to be accountable, he should look at himself first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 There's no need for accountability because Bush doesn't there have been any mistakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 thats true to... its a wonder if he's been sheltered from any responsibility his whole life, and thats why its no different in his presidency...any failure has been saved by priviledge, who is this man to tell people to work for their living when he has been handed a everything and has failed at most of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 09:48 AM) You know what people? ... The American people picked the person they thought was the best man for the job of POTUS. Get over it. No they didn't pick Bush because he would be the best president they picked him because they thought he had the best morals. f***ing ridiculous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 09:48 AM) You know what people? ... The American people picked the person they thought was the best man for the job of POTUS. Get over it. YASNY, Then what comments would be appropriate? Should we never criticize our elected officials? This was new, not bringing up something old that had been discussed before. The Iraqis had the right to say nice things about Hussein. We have the right to call every elected official to task is they do something we feel it wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 08:27 AM) If Bush thinks the war on Iraq solely got himself re-elected in the 2004 Elections, well that's just ludacrist quite frankly. And if you think the voters agreed with him and his cabinet's policies on Iraq, tell that to the families of those American Soldiers killed, and the Iraqi's whose lives still today are in danger from suicide bombings etc. I completly agree. I really believe that the only reason he got reelected was because he scared the piss out of the CHristian right and they had to come out and vote for him because Bush had them convinced that if Kerry was elected the entire United States would go to hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 05:48 PM) I completly agree. I really believe that the only reason he got reelected was because he scared the piss out of the CHristian right and they had to come out and vote for him because Bush had them convinced that if Kerry was elected the entire United States would go to hell. Correct -- the GOP National Committee were sending out pamphlets that if liberals were elected then the Bible would be banned...and that's not poetic license on my part -- the picture had a Bible with "Banned" written on it and a picture of a man proposing to another man saying "Allowed" http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/24/...ain645393.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted January 16, 2005 Share Posted January 16, 2005 I am a life long Christian and very conservative on most issues. but when I looked at what was best for our country, I knew that Kerry was the better option. You dont have have to be Liberal to vote demecrate. Vote for who will make america better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 17, 2005 Share Posted January 17, 2005 QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 11:48 PM) I completly agree. I really believe that the only reason he got reelected was because he scared the piss out of the CHristian right and they had to come out and vote for him because Bush had them convinced that if Kerry was elected the entire United States would go to hell. Uh huh. I see. Not that it matters who I voted for (I live in Texas so my vote REALLY didn't matter) but I was scared, peeing down my leg scared, if I didn't vote for GWB because of all the gays and liberals taking my Bible away. Good grief. What crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted January 17, 2005 Share Posted January 17, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 16, 2005 -> 06:13 PM) Uh huh. I see. Not that it matters who I voted for (I live in Texas so my vote REALLY didn't matter) but I was scared, peeing down my leg scared, if I didn't vote for GWB because of all the gays and liberals taking my Bible away. Good grief. What crap. Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large groups, Kap. I mean, look at Cub fans swallowing the Cubbie Kool-Aid (or should it be Flavor-Aid since that's what Rev. Jones used for the massacre...) There are plenty of religious "conservatives" mobilized in the Moral Majority etc. etc. that came out in force for Bush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 17, 2005 Share Posted January 17, 2005 I hear what you're saying, but sometimes I just don't think people are sheeple as much as we think they are. But maybe I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.