Quake3World

Bush Takes Responsibility for Failures in Storm Response
http://nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP ... r=homepage

''Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government,'' Bush said at joint White House news conference with the president of Iraq.

''To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility,'' Bush said.

The president was asked whether people should be worried about the government's ability to handle another terrorist attack given failures in responding to Katrina.

''Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack? That's a very important question and it's in the national interest that we find out what went on so we can better respond,'' Bush replied.

I get the feeling that Bush uses the term responsibility as an abstract concept, and not an action.

I guess it's a foreign word to him, so it's anybody's guess as to what it means.

But it almost sounds to me like he said "I promised to make us secure against terrorists attacks in our country, and I spent billions of your dollars to do it, so it's my fault that we are now just as unprotected as we were to begin with, and all your money has been wasted."

At least, that's what any rational person would mean by such an admission.

it means he resigns...

What a fucking moron, politicians should never say that unless they want to be utterly destroyed by public opinion. I wouldn't be suprised if he's out of the white house before Christmas.

yeah its a sign he is fucked...his advisors r freaking out...

lol - sack the thick cunt

shiznit wrote:What a fucking moron, politicians should never say that unless they want to be utterly destroyed by public opinion. I wouldn't be suprised if he's out of the white house before Christmas.

Some of us are hoping!

I'm hoping also, but I'm just saying it's dumb for him to admit it. I doubt he will resign but anything can happen.

It's not dumb. This is the last line of mitigating the effects of public dissaproval. Now it can be said 'yeah, well, he's admitted to that, so what's your point?' whenever the subject is brought up in any kind of anti-republican context.

Admitting responsibility for something makes a huge difference in public perception over here - at least that's the experience I've seen.

People are only going to start coming down on him a lot harder now that he has admitted being responsible for mistakes.

but see heres the thing...

IT DOESN'T MATTER

i mean really, the country is still going to be as republican as ever. the Fox news people and all the conservatives will someone defend bush about everything and well, yeah, nothings going to happen.

Freakaloin wrote:it means that nothing's gonna happen

fixed that for you...

and it does not matter to him.

the democrats have been anti-bush over the last years. i don't see how this would help them winning the next election.

hax103 wrote:

shiznit wrote:What a fucking moron, politicians should never say that unless they want to be utterly destroyed by public opinion. I wouldn't be suprised if he's out of the white house before Christmas.

Some of us are hoping!

me too, i can't wait until Cheney gets full power. no more n_ggers and gays! yes!

R00k wrote:

...with the president of Iraq...

:icon26:

What?

"lol - sack the thick cunt"

we can only hope.......

Foo wrote:It's not dumb. This is the last line of mitigating the effects of public dissaproval. Now it can be said 'yeah, well, he's admitted to that, so what's your point?' whenever the subject is brought up in any kind of anti-republican context.

My thoughts exactly.

I don't think he said it to mitigate further, as much as he said it because he had no choice. I'm sure people have been really fucking hot and heavy on him lately, about all our money he's been spending and getting practically nothing in return -- the proof is in the pudding, and this is what it finally took to show that his policies are failing at their most basic intended purpose. It's obvious to everyone that we responded worse to a domestic disaster than we would have before he took office.
He couldn't mitigate, deny and/or ignore the problems from this catastrophe the way he has been able to with Iraq, which is thousands of miles away. He has no choice but to finally own up to the reality.

wait 1,if bush got sacked (can they do that ? ) or impeached (which geoff prays for ) wouldnt that bring Cheney in as president?
this would be better because.......?
serious question here.

cheney has been dead for 3 years...

As temporary president, right? And early elections?

Ryoki wrote:As temporary president, right? And early elections?

Unfortunately, no.

I only wish Cheney could get impeached with Bush, but he publicly doesn't do a damn thing, so I can't imagine what would get him in the hot seat - unless it's general secrecy, or his energy task force stuff.

Freakaloin wrote:cheney has been dead for 3 years...

I laughed.

R00k wrote:

Ryoki wrote:As temporary president, right? And early elections?

Unfortunately, no.

So...what then, the vice president just becomes president for the rest of the term?

see truman...or lbj...jesus...