Bush: "˜We"™ve Never Been Stay The Course"™

smokeman · 10-23-2006, 07:04 PM

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 "œbetween "™stay the course"™ and "˜cut and run."™"
Bush responded, "˜We"™ve never been stay the course, George!"™ Watch it:

Bush is wrong:
[blockquote]
BUSH: We will stay the course. [8/30/06]
BUSH: We will stay the course, we will complete the job in Iraq. [8/4/05]
BUSH: 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. [12/15/03]
BUSH: And my message today to those in Iraq is: We"™ll stay the course. [4/13/04]
BUSH: And that"™s why we"™re going to stay the course in Iraq. And that"™s why when we say something in Iraq, we"™re going to do it. [4/16/04]
BUSH: And so we"™ve got tough action in Iraq. But we will stay the course. [4/5/04]
[/blockquote]
Digg It!
Full transcript:
[blockquote]
STEPHANOPOULOS: James Baker says that he"™s looking for something between "œcut and run" and "œstay the course."
BUSH: Well, hey, listen, we"™ve never been "œstay the course," George. We have been "” we will complete the mission, we will do our job, and help achieve the goal, but we"™re constantly adjusting to tactics. Constantly.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/22/bush-stay-the-course/

Man is he ever slippery as a snake....Look at him trying to slide his way out of the mess he created..... That man has no soul and hasalot mental problems....

[/blockquote]

Deleted User · 10-24-2006, 05:48 AM

[Deleted by Admins]

Canuck_Buck · 10-24-2006, 06:28 AM

what he means is that "the stay the course" directives have not been followed.

NCOutdoors · 10-24-2006, 06:41 AM

Clearly Bush has used the phrase "stay the course." But don't you think he means that we will continue toward the ultimate goal of achieving a stable democratic gov't? I have never interpreted the phrase as meaning that regardless of whether certain tactics work, we'll never change them. I think he'd do wahtever we need to do if he knew the ultimate goal would be achieved. Whether you agree that it CAN be achieve appears to be the main point of contention.

Iff: regarding Bush's comment that the war isn't winnable, I see no problem with that statement. To me it is like saying that we'll never be able to stop all crime in this country. We clearly won't but we can create a situation that makes it very hard for criminals to be successful.

You know that I'm no Bush apologist, but I think that people can take almost anything other people say and interpret it in different ways. Interpret it one way and it's an acceptable answer. Interpret it another and its a lie and a flip flop.

Deleted User · 10-24-2006, 09:18 AM

[Deleted by Admins]

Deleted User · 10-24-2006, 11:48 AM

[Deleted by Admins]

Canuck_Buck · 10-24-2006, 09:36 PM

maybe he means "stay on track with the fight on terror " or maybe he means " stay the golf course "...or maybe he means people have swayed off track in the fight against terrorism not only in Iraq but elsewhere in the world...

all eyes are on America now with the political bickering...the middle easterns must be laughing

vc1111 · 10-24-2006, 10:03 PM

Let those in the Middle East laugh...while they can.

Normally if they laugh, their leaders would disembowel them. So who cares what they think?

Whitehorse · 10-24-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

ORIGINAL: NCOutdoors

Clearly Bush has used the phrase "stay the course." But don't you think he means that the we will continue toward the ultimate goal of achieving a stable democratic gov't? I have never interpreted the phrase as meaning that regardless of whether certain tactics work, we'll never change them. I think he'd do wahtever we need to do if he knew the ultimate goal would be achieved. Whether you agree that it CAN be achieve appears to be the main point of contention.

Iff: regarding Bush's comment that the war isn't winnable, I see no problem with that statement. To me it is like saying that we'll never be able to stop all crime in this country. We clearly won't but we can create a situation that makes it very hard for criminals to be successful.

You know that I'm no Bush apologist, but I think that people can take almost anything other people say and interpret it in different ways. Interpret it one way and it's an acceptable answer. Interpret it another and its a lie and a flip flop.

NC, now come on... The idea is not to have a substantive discussion about the issue - the idea is to stir up negative & bash Bush. The dems & their apologists have nothing on the issues, no stances, no real plans, nothing they're for except to cut & run & be against.

It's funny how those who oppose rely on ignorance of not being able to tell the difference between "the course" & tactics. The course is correct - the tactics need to remain fluid.

petasux · 10-25-2006, 07:16 AM

Quote:

NC, now come on... The idea is not to have a substantive discussion about the issue - the idea is to stir up negative & bash Bush. The dems & their apologists have nothing on the issues, no stances, no real plans, nothing they're for except to cut & run & be against.

It's funny how those who oppose rely on ignorance of not being able to tell the difference between "the course" & tactics. The course is correct - the tactics need to remain fluid.

Its funny how most of the posts in here can criticize people for bashing one party and then slip so smoothly into bashing the other side in the next sentence.All the while complaining that its hard to have a "substansive conversation " on any subject.

What exactly is the course?

Was it to overthrow Saddams government?We did that right, mission accomplished?

Was it to find the WMD ? Looked for them, didnt find any did we?

Was it to put in place a Democratic government over there?Couldnt have been, we werent on a nation building mission were we?

Was it part of a war on terrorism?They didnt find much linking Saddam to terrorism either is I recall.

To combat the insurgency?Faulty logic, there was no insurgency untill we overthrew the government.Theyve admitted the underestimated it.

Please, explain which course were supposedly on.

Lets look at the tactics now.What exactly have we done to change them other then put more men on the ground and move them around?I think you got it backwards here, since the start of this the course has changed repeatedly according to the situation in that country, the tactics however have remained basically the same.