Well...there Goes That Campaign Issue

[KCFlyer]

Looks like they might want to cut back on the "flip flop" ads after this boner:

Bush Reverses Himself, Says Terror War Can Be Won

That depends on what "is" is, or in this case, it depends on what "not" is.

 

[USAir757]

Come on now, I've read enough of your posts to know you can do better than this. This isn't a flip-flop on policy, it's just a clarification on an earlier question.

 

[KCFlyer]

Come on now, I've read enough of your posts to know you can do better than this. This isn't a flip-flop on policy, it's just a clarification on an earlier question.

[post="174570"][/post]​

From:

"I don't think you can win it," he replied. "But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."

To:

"It's a different type of war. We may never sit down at a peace table, but make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win," he said in a speech which repeated this refrain four times.

That sounds like a flip/flop, or at the very least, a response to appease a group of folks who didn't like the way it sounded. YOu know...sort of like listening to pollsters to determine what you want to say.

And...the sad part is....Bush was right the first time.

 

[USAir757]

Listening to pollsters to determine what to say? Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black... that's what Kerry does before each stop! If you can't tell by now, this president acts without regard to the polls, that's an argument the dems have been making for a while... look at Iraq. You guys can't have it both ways.

 

[KCFlyer]

Listening to pollsters to determine what to say? Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black... that's what Kerry does before each stop! If you can't tell by now, this president acts without regard to the polls, that's an argument the dems have been making for a while... look at Iraq. You guys can't have it both ways.

[post="174740"][/post]​

No my friend, it's not the pot calling the kettle black. It's only pointing out that the "Bush doesn't let polls make his decsions" argument might be a little flawed. He made a statement that this war could not be won. I think his initial statement was correct. But that statement didn't sit well with the American Legion, the Vietnam Swift Boat commanders, the VFW, and others, so he "revised" his statement to say "What I meant was, there won't be a formal surrender". I don't want it both ways....just pointing out that y'all accuse Clinton and Kerry of following the polls, but Bush "misspoke". It's just that his "misspoken words" were not well received by some of his core supporters.

 

[RDU Jetblast]

I'm beginning to think it really doesn't matter who wins the election. The last four years were so screwed up that it will take another four years to straighten out and neither candidate will come out smelling very good.

In the next four years:

Somebody is going to have to decide if we'll need to implement a draft to sustain the war or retreat.

Somebody is going to have to decide where to cut social security at a time when pension funds are being abandoned and 401k's are losing money.

Somebody will have to figure out how to deal with more people who find themselves out of work or in part time jobs do we find a way to provide healthcare or let people get sick and die in the streets.

That 140 billion dollars already spent in the mid east could have helped out the US. Why was it easy to spend on a war but difficult to help us? The next fours will be a mess. I don't think either candidate will realy be a winner if they win.

 

[delldude]

Looks like they might want to cut back on the "flip flop" ads after this boner:

Bush Reverses Himself, Says Terror War Can Be Won

That depends on what "is" is, or in this case, it depends on what "not" is.

[post="174510"][/post]​

wow...i can't see it as kerry stack of flip flops seems to overshadow it.
typical lib.....pounce on it..i knew someone would do it..

 

[FredF]

Go look at what he said in its entirity and you will see that he is still saying the same thing. This is not a war that is winable in the conventional sense in that there will ever be any thpe of treaty.

He said that the first time, and amplified and clairified it the second time since it seems that there are some people in the press that cannot think and understand what he said the first time.

Except, that would be beneficial for the President so it would be a bad thing for them to report it.

 

[delldude]

Except, that would be beneficial for the President so it would be a bad thing for them to report it

the lib side jumped on this as a last grasp to defend the ultimate flopper.....looks like it don't hold water...doesn't it seem some party is desperate???

 

[hp_fa]

The truth of the matter is that Bush 43 must have a script to follow because he cannot speak extemporaniously. Why so few press conferenced? Why are most of his press conferences announced less then 24 hours before they occur? To catch the press off guard and to have a lot of lead time to prepare.

It's just facts....

 

[FredF]

It's just facts....

[post="175166"][/post]​

Prove it then.

 

[KCFlyer]

Prove it then.

[post="175240"][/post]​

Bush made a rare unscripted comment. That's a peek inside the mind of the man, not what Rove told him to say. Funny thing about those unscripted moments - you sometimes see more truth than the handler's want you to know.

 

[hp_fa]

Prove it then.

[post="175240"][/post]​

Here, start with this. Read carefully.

Washington Post Article

 

[sentrido]

Go look at what he said in its entirity and you will see that he is still saying the same thing. This is not a war that is winable in the conventional sense in that there will ever be any thpe of treaty.

He said that the first time, and amplified and clairified it the second time since it seems that there are some people in the press that cannot think and understand what he said the first time.

Except, that would be beneficial for the President so it would be a bad thing for them to report it.

[post="175007"][/post]​

Why dont you give Kerry this kind of consideration?

 

[FredF]

Why dont you give Kerry this kind of consideration?

[post="175397"][/post]​

See, that is exactly the problem. I do. I listen to what he says and what he said and when the two don't match up I challenge it. I looked into his voting record in the senate, I looked into what he said about christmas eve in cambodia, I listened to him say it was seared in his memory, I read a direct quote from a speach where he said he was in vietnam when MLK was assinated but that was 7 months before he went over there. He said all of those things years ago and you know what, today he is saying something completely different.

I heard him say that the President was wrong to go into IRAQ then I heard him say he would still vote to authorize the action.


I do listen to him, I read his quotes, I see for myself where he keeps changing what is he saying and trying to change what he said in the past.

THAT IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM.

You know what else, I have listened hard to try to find where the President has critized Kerry's war record and I can't find that either. I can read all I want about how the press would have you beleive otherwise, but he never has and won't yet I have heard Kerry tell the President not to critiaze his record but he never did. I read the accounts where the President served his time in the guard and was honorably discharged, yet I still hear the Kerry campaing say he was AWOL when that too is a lie and I have yet to hear Kerry tell those saying that to stop.