0
   

Bush Says reelection Ratified Iraq Policy

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:00 am
Bush Says Election Ratified Iraq Policy



Bush claims his reelection proves that a ratification of his approach toward Iraq.


By Jim VandeHei and Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, January 16, 2005; Page A01



President Bush said the public's decision to reelect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath.

"We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. "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."

Do you agree with Bush's assessment and conclusions.?

Link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12450-2005Jan15.html?referrer=email
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,788 • Replies: 39
No top replies

 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:24 am
Wait a minute. I thought that most people voted for his "moral values".

But whatever. When the moment's gone it's gone.

So you can do whatever the hell you want.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:34 am
Hi Au. I'm sure you'll love my answer. <smiles at Au>

Its sort of cut and dried, isn't it? When you put the incumbent back in office--it's tacit (if not demonstrable) agreement with what he did during the first term.

Don't you think?

I guess the worst it could be is a sign that whatever he did, it wasn't bad enough not to put him back in. So, either Bush pleased the majority of Americans--or Kerry was way too horrible to consider.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:45 am
I thought most people voted for him because they're scared shitless of being bombed, scared shitless of gays, scared shitless of not being the caucasians in charge forever and swollen with pride
and giddy with perceived power which they settle for vicariously through a bullying cut out character since they can no longer muster up the balls to get out of the recliner and display any positive traits independently. And that's no handshake.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:45 am
Lash
His reelection hinged upon the selling of his alleged moral values to the religious community. His reelection was in no way a vindication of his Iraq policy. Were it he would have been trounced no matter who ran against him.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:56 am
I think you may be surprised as the GOP continues to send Dems home from Washington--that it was much more than religion.

It may have been more anti-Dem than pro-GOP. A trend that bears attention...

<not arguing>...but if Iraq were considered all that bad by a majority of Americans, Bush would have been voted out. There just aren't that many Christians--and a lot of them are Democrats (well, blacks anyway.), wouldn't you say? I'm not trying to win an argument--these are my opinions--but, if you have statistics or something to better inform me, I'll certainly consider them.

There was a time when the overwhelming majority of Americans supported the war. Then, that plummeted as the news was bad, and WMDs weren't found. But, it surged when Saddam was caught. I don't know how it played during the election.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:09 pm
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=%2fap%2fbush_poll

Quote:
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) is entering his second term with the lowest approval ratings of any recent two-term president, even as he talks about an ambitious agenda of change, an Associated Press poll finds



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=%2fap%2f20050116%2fap_on_go_pr_wh%2finaugural_poll

Quote:
WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans say they feel hopeful about President Bush (news - web sites)'s second term, but those hopes are clouded by doubts about when the bloodshed in Iraq (news - web sites) will end.


People say Iraq should be the president's highest priority, according to an Associated Press poll that found that those surveyed are not optimistic a stable government will take hold there.


After winning re-election, Bush is preparing to pursue an ambitious agenda that includes efforts to change Social Security (news - web sites), federal tax laws and medical malpractice awards.


Ahead of Bush's inauguration on Thursday, six in 10 people said they feel hopeful about his second term and 47 percent said they were worried. Most said they were neither angry nor excited about his final four years in office.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:11 pm
Hmmm - the whole mandate thing is a slippery concept, I think - but I think Bush would generally be judged as correct in seeing the vote as supportive of his policies - including the invasion of Iraq.

Thing is - one never actually knows, really, why people vote for someone - and whether they do it in full support of all their policies - or whether, for instance, they voted for him while thinking "I hate what he did in Iraq, but I like him better overall." But, since we can never know, it is useless, I think, to quibble about it.

I am puzzled by this sentence, though: "no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath."

Huh? Governments are always accountable for their mistakes - I don't think being re-elected gives him, or his officials, a free pass in the accountability stakes....I find that a very odd concept - but perhaps I am not understanding what he means.
0 Replies
 
RfromP
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:11 pm
Interesting logic. Winning an election does not relieve anyone of accountability. I didn't realize an Iraq administrator was elected and not a President.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:25 pm
His election had more to do with his opponent's nature than his own. No mandate. No vindication.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:28 pm
Again Roger I say - who knows this for sure?
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:36 pm
for that matter ms. buns...who knows for sure that you're really a lovable bunny?

"Behold I send you out as bunnies amongst the wolves"
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:43 pm
Who knows what, for sure, Deb? That we voted on our perceptions of the lesser evil? That would be a small scale empherical observation. I don't personally know anyone who likes Bush. I know lots who voted against Kerry.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:43 pm
Lol - I think my character, warts and all, is more knowable than what was in US voters' minds as they cast their ballot!
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:46 pm
roger wrote:
Who knows what, for sure, Deb? That we voted on our perceptions of the lesser evil? That would be a small scale empherical observation. I don't personally know anyone who likes Bush. I know lots who voted against Kerry.


Interesting - but I do not think we can deny Bush his belief that the US voted to support his damned Iraqi policies - though they may have done it with their fingers crossed behind their backs!

(I am finding myself on the oddest sides of arguments these days!)

I do think his "accountable" remarks were nonsesne, though.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:50 pm
May I remind everyone that Clinton was reelected handily and it didn't stop investigations, criminal charges and needlessly expensive taxpayers funded mud slinging fests directed at him?

bush not only should not get, but he does not deserve, any more than anyone else, a free pass for anything shady or incompetent or outright stupid he's done. An election and an investigation into criminal activity are unrelated.
0 Replies
 
Greyfan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 01:52 pm
I would consider the election more of a referendum on the policy in Iraq if the Democratic opponent had been Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich or someone else who presented a clear alternative; Kerry did not.
0 Replies
 
VooDoo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 04:44 pm
RfromP wrote:
Interesting logic. Winning an election does not relieve anyone of accountability. I didn't realize an Iraq administrator was elected and not a President.


I wholeheartedly agree. This is nonsense.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 09:17 pm
The fact that the poll numbers say that a good deal of Americans are worried about Iraq and don't think we can get it straightened out, says at least something about the mindset of voters. Also Bush's overall low poll numbers says something as well.

It's confusing why a so newly reelected president's poll numbers are so low so it must mean that the vote for bush was not so much a vote for bush as it was that people didn't see that much else to vote for.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2005 10:29 pm
That's what I meant. What Greyfan just said.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush Says reelection Ratified Iraq Policy
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/03/2021 at 07:13:02