Now that's a flip-flop!

[TexasTiger 12,958]

Bush: ‘We’ve Never Been Stay The Course’

During an interview today on ABC’s This Week, President Bush tried to distance himself from what has been his core strategy in Iraq for the last three years. George Stephanopoulos asked about James Baker’s plan to develop a strategy for Iraq that is “between ’stay the course’ and ‘cut and run.’”

Bush responded, ‘We’ve never been stay the course, George!’

http://rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src...y-the-course%2F

A free Iraq will mean a peaceful world. And it's very important for us to stay the course, and we will stay the course.

President Discusses AIDS Initiative, Iraq in Botswana

July 10, 2003

It's in the national interest of the United States that a peaceful Iraq emerge. And we will stay the course in order to achieve this objective.

President Bush, Ambassador Bremer Discuss Progress in Iraq

October 27, 2003

They want us to leave, because they know that a free and peaceful Iraq in their midst will damage their cause. And we will stay the course, we will do our job.

President Bush Visits California -- Talks to Victims of Fires

November 4, 2003

We will stay the course.

President Bush, Italian President Ciampi Discuss Iraq

November 14, 2003

I was able to assure them that we were going to stay the course and get the job done . . .

President Discusses Trip to Iraq with Reporters

November 27, 2003

And, as in the aftermath of the terrible attack on Pearl Harbor, our Nation will stay the course, and we will prevail.

National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, 2003

December 5, 2003

We will stay the course until the job is done, Steve. And the temptation is to try to get the President or somebody to put a timetable on the definition of getting the job done. We're just going to stay the course. And it's very important for the Iraqi people to know that.

President Bush Holds Press Conference

December 15, 2003

I told the family how much we appreciated his sacrifice -- he was killed in Iraq -- and assured him that we would stay the course.

President Bush Discusses Iraq, 9/11 Commission with Reporters

April 5, 2004

We will stay the course. The Iraqi people don't have to fear taking the risk toward freedom and democracy because America won't turn and run.

Global Message

April 6, 2004

Look, this is hard work. It's hard to advance freedom in a country that has been strangled by tyranny. And, yet, we must stay the course, because the end result is in our nation's interest.

President Addresses the Nation in Prime Time Press Conference

April 13, 2004

And that's why we're going to stay the course in Iraq.

Bush, Blair Discuss Sharon Plan; Future of Iraq in Press Conference

April 16, 2004

If we don't lose our nerve, if we stay the course, someday down the road, an American President will be working with democratically elected leaders in the broader Middle East at the table to keep the peace.

President's Remarks at Mike Sodrel for Congress and Indiana Victory 2006 Reception

March 24, 2006

And I'd just like to reiterate what the other governors have said, that it is very important that we stay the course, that we provide support for these incredible people that are doing such a service for liberty around the world and protecting our freedoms here.

President Meets with Governors Who Traveled to Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan

April 19, 2006

And I saw people wondering whether the United States would have the nerve to stay the course and help them succeed.

Remarks by the President at the 2006 President's Dinner

June 19, 2006

As a matter of fact, we will win in Iraq so long as we stay the course.

Remarks by the President at "Green for Wisconsin" Reception

July 11, 2006

But there's no alternative but to stay the course with it. And we will.

President Bush and Prime Minister Blair of the United Kingdom Participate in Press Availability

July 28, 2006

We will stay the course, we will help this young Iraqi democracy succeed.

President Bush's Remarks Upon Arrival in Utah

August 30, 2006

Stay the course also means don't leave before the job is done. And that's -- we're going to get the job done in Iraq. And it's important that we do get the job done in Iraq.

Press Conference by the President

October 11, 2006

[AURaptor 1,125]

Might be more honest if you'd continue on with what Bush said to Stephanoupolos, instead of just cutting off the quote where you did. Nice mining job. Much ado about nothing.

[LegalEagle 22]

It appears to me that we've just about "stayed the course." This administration is like a moron gambler betting on the horses. He bet on a horse because he thought it was a winner. It didn't do so well. Now, every time the same horse is in a race, he bets on it again and again and loses and loses. He can't admit that he was wrong from the beginning. Sadly, he's playing with taxpayers' dollars that haven't even been collected yet. Now we pay the interest on his debt.

"You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em."

"Stay the course means change" is what doublespeak Bush is saying on the TV now.

[AUman43 5]

IMO, we are simply trying to protect the Sunni's against the Shiite's and the Shiite's against the Sunnis! Factor the Kurds in there somewhere although they would like to create their own country..... Now factor in the Iranian and North Korean arms supply and Al-Kaida. Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez! It doesn't take a Philadelphia lawyer or a rocket scientist to conclude this is NOT a winnable situation. Ameriican soldiers are dying in mass to protect these idiots who want to kill each other with us in the middle. I hope Americans don't buy into this mass hysteria of a national security in jeapordy if Democrats win because they are not complete idiots and couldn't do any worse than George. At the very least, it's past time to change our strategy drastically....

[AURaptor 1,125]

I hope Americans don't buy into this mass hysteria of a national security in jeapordy if Democrats win because they are not complete idiots and couldn't do any worse than George

Sadly, I don't think Americans care so much about security ( border / terrorism ) and that's what will cause the down fall of this country. Far too many are concered about what/who Paris Hilton is doing and who'll be voted next off on Survivor, etc...

The Democrats are complete idiots, and that should scare every American do death. They can do FAR worse than what we have going now. FAR worse.

[Captain Liger 0]

I hope Americans don't buy into this mass hysteria of a national security in jeapordy if Democrats win because they are not complete idiots and couldn't do any worse than George

The Democrats are complete idiots, and that should scare every American do death. They can do FAR worse than what we have going now. FAR worse.

Yep. Better the enemy you know than the one you don't.

[LegalEagle 22]

I hope Americans don't buy into this mass hysteria of a national security in jeapordy if Democrats win because they are not complete idiots and couldn't do any worse than George

Sadly, I don't think Americans care so much about security ( border / terrorism ) and that's what will cause the down fall of this country. Far too many are concered about what/who Paris Hilton is doing and who'll be voted next off on Survivor, etc...

The Democrats are complete idiots, and that should scare every American do death. They can do FAR worse than what we have going now. FAR worse.

Yeah, what did they do the last time they were in control? Lower the nat'l debt, lower interest rates, create jobs, increase social security longevity, etc. And the "head man" got a bj while he was getting all of that done!

I think this guy is saying, "We need to stay the course." Uh, that was last week's mantra - along with "either stay the course or cut and run." Now that the polls show the Repubs are in trouble (remember the party that doesn't make decisions based on polls?) there's a third option!!! Imagine that.

[AURaptor 1,125]

Yeah, what did they do the last time they were in control? Lower the nat'l debt, lower interest rates, create jobs, increase social security longevity, etc. And the "head man" got a bj while he was getting all of that done!

Actually, it wasn't the Dems who lowered the interest rate, it was Bush41 appointed Alan Greenspan. He, more than anyone in the Clinton administration, is responsible for the good economy. How did Clinton 'create' new jobs? I've yet to see anyone explain that. It certainly wasn't by raising taxes. SSI is a ponzi scheme, and anyone who tries to tell you different is lying. ( At least W tried to save the program, though I wish it were abolished completely ) The 'head man' got a bj DESPITE all that getting done. He certainly had little to do w/ it.

I think this guy is saying, "We need to stay the course." Uh, that was last week's mantra - along with "either stay the course or cut and run." Now that the polls show the Repubs are in trouble (remember the party that doesn't make decisions based on polls?) there's a third option!!! Imagine that.

All I hear is that we're there 'til the job is done. That's stay the course. You and the Press want to get all moist over Bush's change of semantics, by all means, have at it. The Dems certainly haven't offered up anything other than 'cut and run ' .

[TexasTiger 12,958]

Yeah, what did they do the last time they were in control? Lower the nat'l debt, lower interest rates, create jobs, increase social security longevity, etc. And the "head man" got a bj while he was getting all of that done!

Actually, it wasn't the Dems who lowered the interest rate, it was Bush41 appointed Alan Greenspan. He, more than anyone in the Clinton administration, is responsible for the good economy.

During the administration of President George H.W. Bush, from 1989 through 1992, Greenspan resisted White House pressure to keep interest rates lower than he thought necessary. Bush later blamed Greenspan for his electoral loss to Clinton in 1992.

Greenspan had smoother relations with Bush's Democratic successor. In early 1993, the Fed chairman lent critical support to Clinton's deficit-reduction plan -- even though it included tax increases -- describing it on Capitol Hill as "a very positive force for the American economy." The package passed with no Republican votes, but Greenspan's public backing helped win some dearly needed Democratic ones, recalled Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

During the mid-1990s, Greenspan worked closely with Clinton's economic team in crafting responses to financial crises in Mexico, Asia, Russia and elsewhere -- even when those efforts occasionally required government influence on the markets -- and drumming up support for them on Capitol Hill and elsewhere.

By early 1995, Greenspan's political influence was so great that House Majority Leader Newt Gingrich asked him to call conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh to explain the Clinton administration's plan to rescue Mexico, which was close to defaulting on its debts. Gingrich supported the plan, which the Fed chairman had helped design, but congressional Republicans were balking.

"I was looking for ways to get the conservative community to understand. . . . Rush is a leading communicator to 14 to 15 million conservatives," Gingrich recalled in an interview. Greenspan "is the leading economic policy analyst in the U.S. and arguably the world."

The Fed chief reluctantly made the call. Even so, Congress refused to back the plan, forcing the administration to take a different approach that didn't require lawmakers' approval.

Meanwhile, as the economy boomed in the late 1990s, unemployment fell, stock prices soared and the federal budget deficits turned into surpluses.

"The Clinton administration had huge successes carrying out the economic policies essentially fathered by Alan Greenspan and [Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert E.] Rubin, and they see that as an enormous feather in their hat," Rohatyn said.

Greenspan then argued for several years that the White House and Congress should "let the surpluses run" to pay down the government's debt rather than cut taxes or raise spending.

Greenspan wouldn't lower rates as much as Bush I wanted b/c Bush I wouldn't take the necessary steps to lower the deficit. Clinton hired budget hawks Panetta and Rivlin and partnered with Greenspan.

Despite their differences, Clinton and Newt could find common ground. One thing I will say for Newt, he realized that governing was an obligation. Most Republicans since have forgotten that. Since then, it is just about keeping power at all costs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2602123_pf.html

[MDM4AU 332]

From the Glenn Beck Program on CNN Headline News tonight:

In today`s "Washington Post," there was a piece on the president and his aides and how they`re annoyed at people that keep misinterpreting his Iraq policy as "stay the course." The White House is calling it a "complete distortion." He`s only uttered that phrase -- I think it`s eight times. They seem offended that a phrase that was hoped to connote "steely resolve" has instead become synonymous with being wildly out of touch with dogmatic commitment to a war that seems to be only getting worse, not better.

Well, here`s the real story. News flash: Nobody cares what language you use when you talk about the war, as long as we win the war. Men and women are dying overseas, and the geniuses in Washington are arguing over frickin` catchphrases. I don`t need a replay of Bill Clinton`s dance- around the meaning of the word "is." I get it. Call it the "Iraq war," the "war on Islamic extremism," call it "George and Dick`s excellent adventure," I don`t care. Just get the job done; get our troops home, safe and as soon as possible.

Speaking of word choice, this past weekend President Bush was on ABC`s "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos. He responded to a question about whether there was a recent spike in Iraqi violence and if it had anything to do or anything in common with the 1968 Vietnam Tet Offensive. Here`s what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, "THIS WEEK" ANCHOR: And for the first time, the president acknowledged parallels to Vietnam. It came when I asked for his response to "New York Times" columnist Tom Friedman`s contention that we`re now seeing an Iraqi version of the Viet Cong`s 1968 Tet Offensive that turned American public opinion decisively against the war.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He could be right. There`s certainly a stepped-up level of violence, and we`re heading into an election.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So they`re trying to influence the elections?

BUSH: Could be. I don`t know. I haven`t -- I don`t have any intelligence that says that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But what`s your gut tell you?

BUSH: George, my gut tells me that they have all along been trying to inflict enough damage that we leave.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Isn`t that pretty obvious to everybody, really? The real story here is that, yes, today`s conflict in Iraq has much in common with the Tet Offensive, but not really the way everybody would have you believe.

Is it just me or does it seem like there is an immediate knee-jerk reaction to the words "Vietnam"? Immediately people always think "quagmire." That is not the issue in Iraq.

Let me back up for a second. Let`s check our history. The Tet Offensive was a dramatic victory for the U.S. The North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong lost -- check this number -- 58,000 troops in a two-month span. The U.S., in that same two-month period, lost over 1,500. It was an unmitigated military success for our side.

This comparison isn`t about the violence; it isn`t about casualties. What we need to learn from the Tet Offensive is how the enemy learned to sway public opinion. Hello? 1968, an election year -- gee, kind of like we`re in now -- critical point in the Vietnam War -- gee, another strange coincidence -- a time when the V.C. was painfully aware they could never defeat the United States on the battlefield. Hmm. Our troops were too well-armed, too well-trained. Their only success came from sneak attacks and hit-and-run ambushes. Gee, this sounds like something I read in the paper today.

However, the V.C. realized that they could control the pictures and the footage coming out of Vietnam that was spilling into our houses and our living rooms. They figured out that, if they could control that footage, they could win the hearts and minds of the American people. Winning the P.R. battle mean they didn`t need to beat us in combat. Break our will, inspire anti-war factions to pressure politicians, maybe we would just get up and fold. That was the road to victory and, gee, it just worked.

The same thing is happening with Iraq: Convince Americans that Iraqi children and women are dying, that civilians are bearing the brunt of warfare, that it is horrible, and you know what? War is. Maybe if they had those pictures and they control them, the U.S. will pull out yet again. Please say it with me: Not this time.

There`s a job to be done, and the stakes are higher than they were in 1968. This war, if we lose, it will mean the end of the West as we know it! Osama bin Laden and President Thom from Iran have both said this is World War III, and this is the center of battlefield.

They say those who don`t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Isn`t it time we all learned the real lesson from Tet?

TRANSCRIPT

[AURaptor 1,125]

Greenspan wouldn't lower rates as much as Bush I wanted b/c Bush I wouldn't take the necessary steps to lower the deficit. Clinton hired budget hawks Panetta and Rivlin and partnered with Greenspan.

Despite their differences, Clinton and Newt could find common ground. One thing I will say for Newt, he realized that governing was an obligation. Most Republicans since have forgotten that. Since then, it is just about keeping power at all costs.

Didn't think you had a coherent, rational response to anything I posted. Par for the course, I suppose.

[TexasTiger 12,958]

Greenspan wouldn't lower rates as much as Bush I wanted b/c Bush I wouldn't take the necessary steps to lower the deficit. Clinton hired budget hawks Panetta and Rivlin and partnered with Greenspan.

Despite their differences, Clinton and Newt could find common ground. One thing I will say for Newt, he realized that governing was an obligation. Most Republicans since have forgotten that. Since then, it is just about keeping power at all costs.

Didn't think you had a coherent, rational response to anything I posted. Par for the course, I suppose.

Your posts never warrant rebuttal. You got more than you deserved or could mentally process. Went right over your head.

[AURaptor 1,125]

Greenspan wouldn't lower rates as much as Bush I wanted b/c Bush I wouldn't take the necessary steps to lower the deficit. Clinton hired budget hawks Panetta and Rivlin and partnered with Greenspan.

Despite their differences, Clinton and Newt could find common ground. One thing I will say for Newt, he realized that governing was an obligation. Most Republicans since have forgotten that. Since then, it is just about keeping power at all costs.

Didn't think you had a coherent, rational response to anything I posted. Par for the course, I suppose.

Your posts never warrant rebuttal. You got more than you deserved or could mentally process. Went right over your head.

Apparently, it all went over YOUR head. The issue was what CLINTON had done to make the economy so great, as YOU claimed, and you were unable to respond. Instead, you toss in his hire of 'budget hawks' Panetta and Rivlin w/ out elaborating what they really did, and give some nonsense about Newt and Clinton finding common ground. Was part of that common ground the stunt the Democrats pulled by shutting down the Gov't , during Christmas, no less, and then trying to blame it on the GOP?

[TexasTiger 12,958]

Greenspan wouldn't lower rates as much as Bush I wanted b/c Bush I wouldn't take the necessary steps to lower the deficit. Clinton hired budget hawks Panetta and Rivlin and partnered with Greenspan.

Despite their differences, Clinton and Newt could find common ground. One thing I will say for Newt, he realized that governing was an obligation. Most Republicans since have forgotten that. Since then, it is just about keeping power at all costs.

Didn't think you had a coherent, rational response to anything I posted. Par for the course, I suppose.

Your posts never warrant rebuttal. You got more than you deserved or could mentally process. Went right over your head.

Apparently, it all went over YOUR head. The issue was what CLINTON had done to make the economy so great, as YOU claimed, and you were unable to respond. Instead, you toss in his hire of 'budget hawks' Panetta and Rivlin w/ out elaborating what they really did, and give some nonsense about Newt and Clinton finding common ground. Was part of that common ground the stunt the Democrats pulled by shutting down the Gov't , during Christmas, no less, and then trying to blame it on the GOP?

I can't compensate for the ignorance your willingly choose. Educate yourself.

[AURaptor 1,125]

I can't compensate for the ignorance your willingly choose. Educate yourself

No, you can't answer a simple question, so you try to b.s. your way around it instead. Spare me the attempted ad hominems. You only make my case for me.