Just showing how the liberal media lets Democrats say things without any challenge.
For example: Clinton Denounces 'Mission Accomplished'
Democrats and the liberal media take that speech to mean the end of the Iraq war. They say the President is a fool and a liar because he told the America people we had won the war. He betrayed us and mislead us saying the job was done.
The fact is the mission accomplished sign was there for the ship that had finished their mission. And if the liberal media would actually show or print what the President actually SAID, then there wouldn't be ANOTHER misconception turned into fact for the American people (like the economy).
We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We're pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their crimes. We've begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. We're helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. (Applause.)
The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done. Then we will leave, and we will leave behind a free Iraq. (Applause.)
[...]Our mission continues. Al Qaeda is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations, and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger. The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland. And we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike. (Applause.)
The war on terror is not over; yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost. Free nations will press on to victory. (Applause.)
Sunday, April 29, 2007
What the President Actually Said on May 1, 2003
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
What Bush has brought upon himself in the "mission accomplished" case is actually great karma. It is indicative of his "I've got big balls" arrogance and the fact that those around him are either incompetent or underestimate the people's intelligence. Or both.
The carrier landing and the flight suit with straps, pockets, hoses, and the bulging "codpiece", the swagger. Bush as Richard the Lion-hearted.
There may be dispute about who put the "Mission Accomplished" sign up or why or what it meant, but it shows the incompetence of those around him not to understand the significance of the sign and that it was undercutting the president's own message of more conflict to come. And yet, the podium was set up to show that banner over the president's shoulder.
As we know, often image is everything. Whether or not he said it, whether or not that was the what he wanted to say, mission accomplished was the message
Amazing how in four years, the communicator in chief is unable to reverse that image and that message. Maybe if he actually came out and said things are not going well and it's going to take longer than six more months, six more months, six more months, his job rating would not be in the 20s.
In business if you told your customer "six more months, six more months, six more months", why would they believe you after the first two?
Well Jim, you might get your way and have Democrats lose another war. Scorecard on wars since the invention of the modern liberal: 0-3.
I don't know why liberals are so happy to be losers, but it affects people who don't want to be losers. And Jim, did you read the post? Did you read what Bush SAID? Guess not
Game, yes I did read your post. Did you read MINE? I said that it mattered less what he said than what the image portrayed. Whether the image was on purpose or by accident, the image conveyed a message regardless of what Bush said.
As for the modern liberal crap ... it's, uh, crap.
Let me give you your point. Now consider another one. I see 2 things in there that I would consider accomplishments out of that long list of things supposedly being done. I also see a trillion dollars in our treasure and expanding not declining terrorism. Why do I want to continue on this LOSING course.
"I said that it mattered less what he said than what the image portrayed."
Yeah. The image portrayed by you people.
Liberals spread anti-American propaganda around daily. When called on it, they are like, "who, me??"
"Why do I want to continue on this LOSING course."
Because the future does not belong to Islamic supremacists.
I have to say that it is one of the worst things I hear in this day and age that we must leave when it "appears" we are losing. I put that in quotes due to the fact that in wars past, I don't think the majority of Americans thought in terms of losing, only haven't yet won. It's reprehensible that anyone would want to bail before the job is finished, that anyone would bail when it seems to be a struggle or a challenge that dwarfs original beliefs. This is not American. This attitude is not what has made us the greatest nation on the face of the earth. Every war we've ever fought has had it's challenges. It's been said before. Yet, certain folks wish to continue with the plan of leaving now and somehow they believe that to be, what exactly? Prudent? We should be prudent and defensive in the face of true evil? Shame on all those who feel this way. Shame on libs for feeling this way. Shame on libs for BEING this way.
Well done Marshall...
Dem's don't see things the way Americans did when we were saving the world...
Which is why I am a bit sad for our future...we have people who actually WANT us to lose, or atleast accept us losing...instead of trying to figure out how to solve the problem, they want to run away and say it is over
Well, first off, DA BULLSS, DA BULLSS, DA BULLSS!!!
Secondly, I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the possibility that anyone WANTS us to lose. Yet, it's hard to deny it completely. I prefer to look at it as the Democrat Party is so concerned about gaining control of the White House, Congress and the Courts, that they don't concern themselves with the reality of today's world. It's all a big game to them. Unfortunately, the results will be the same: constant attacks by terrorist scumbags, token friendship and false respect from too many chuckelheaded European "friends", and misery for our children. No where have we seen any tangible evidence of true concern about terrorism by the Democrat Party. They simply cannot be allowed to win the White House in 2008. The world simply couldn't bear a truly weak America.
I have to say that it is one of the worst things I hear in this day and age that we must leave when it "appears" we are losing. I put that in quotes due to the fact that in wars past, I don't think the majority of Americans thought in terms of losing, only haven't yet won. It's reprehensible that anyone would want to bail before the job is finished, that anyone would bail when it seems to be a struggle or a challenge that dwarfs original beliefs. This is not American. This attitude is not what has made us the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
Dude, cut your holier than thou attitude. How come you guys think you are the super patriots and we are the "enemy"..Where do you think you get off saying preposterious shit like that. Wat you said above is your opinion!!!!!!!!!!~! Like it our not...Here's mine.
Note that it must be understood that the fight against and protecting ourselves from terrorists is far more vast than the Iraqi occupation. If you don't accept this basic assumption then we are far more at odds than I assumed and we are at an impasse that will not be resolved.
First, I said in a previous post all most exactly what you said in yours. Even if we pull out of Iraq no one is foolish enough to think that we are finished fighting the terrorist. The war is not over against them so how can it be lost? Next talk about bailing on a challenge..where is Osama? Why did we not continue to pursue him while we had universal support untild the job was done?
You are the one displaying a "weak America" by yeilding them street creed with your public pronouncements of fear of the most dangerous thing that exists in the world today. Your pronouncements go a long way toward making them feel mighty and the group to join if you want to do harm to America...you are uniting them with that kind of rhetoric whether you know it or not.
Second, Pursuing a losing course is not victory. Adjusting to the battle at hand is not losing. If this is to be a long battle against terrorists we must not be bogged down and we must not be outspending them 10million to one. Not for these results. A winning course would assume reduced terrorism and a universal recognition of the need to stamp it out. Both of those things are less true not more. Don't call me unamerican for not sticking with a failure and wanting to find a way that works so we can WIN! You are thinking quite narrowmindedly...but that is the old conservative stereotype isn't it?
I know, what would you do Ron? What would the unamerican liberals do?
I have many times noted things to be done. Of course you have a million reasons it won't work but I am ready to try something that makes more sense to me.
On the Macro level this would include a Universal fight against terrorism. This will only happen with more friends than enemies. While there was Universal disdain for the 9/11 evens (no the support, at least among Americans did not end clear up through the last poll I could find.
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. July 19-21, 2004. N=1,005 adults nationwide. MoE � 3.
"Thinking about U.S. military action in Afghanistan: Do you think the United States made a mistake in sending military forces to Afghanistan, or not?"
Made a
Mistake Did notMake a Unsure
Mistake % % %
7/19-21/04 25 72 3
1/02 6 93 1 11/01 9 89 2
Wow, clear into 04 the majority..more than are negative on Bush now, supported the Afganistan mission..Well how bout that! In a 2007 poll a majority still support it.
... The Iraq occupation is not the same thing and supported by far fewer people both in America and worldwide. That might tell you that the two actions are not equalivant in the minds of the majority of people. Yes they could all be wrong but could they all antiamerican, at least in America? The fact that we are ready to speak out against wrongs as a moral imperative even if..or especially if it is our elected representitives, the people that are the face of America is not unamerican and you will never convince me of that...ever. What if they present a face the we see as wrong and at least harmful too our interests? You guys seem to think that if we don't do exactly what you say we are all gonna die! That sounds pretty authoritarian to me!? Now, you may be right, then again trying some other way to counter this threat(PLEASE NOTE I HAVE NOT SAID TALK TO THEM ONCE!)
may be right. After six years of what I personally consider a disaster it is my choice to turn this ship around. Not to retreat but to to plot a course that will take me more quickly and effeciently to my destination. I too see it as a mission of survival. If we don't do it your way we lose. Thanks for the idea but it ain't workin for me.
"I said that it mattered less what he said than what the image portrayed."
Yeah. The image portrayed by you people.
Right, Jason, because it was us liberals who wanted everyone to think the mission was accomplished and the war was over. Right-o.
Get a grip.
Jim and Jay,
For you guys image is everything. You live on propaganda. Reality and truth are your casualties. When it comes to solutions, you only have one, "Tax, cut, and run".
The Democrat party doesn't learn from history, nor from experience. The are irresponsible.
Ron,
Forgive me for saying so, but much of your last post was difficult to understand, particularly the poll results. You don't have to bother re-posting those, however. I don't waste my time with polls.
We are now in the middle of a new tactic. We are still bringing in more troops per the Petraeus plan. We have yet to determine if that will work, and one cannot assess when the plan is not yet in place. So your wish has been somewhat granted.
Back to your polls. I don't believe conducting a war based on public opinion polls is good policy. The polls could be weighted more heavily to your side and I still would prefer those in charge, those with all the details and intel, those who know making the decisions.
I also disagree with the idea of backing off until we get the world to join in. That's tantamount to not helping out a mugging victim until the cops arrive. Things will only deteriorate for the victim in the meantime. There's no evidence that foreign nations will commit any more than they already have.
I don't know where you're getting your info, but from interviews conducted with troops in theater, our presence has emboldened the Iraqi people to turn on the terrorists. Our presence gives them the confidence to fight on the right side.
Iraq is but one front in the overall war. No one denies that is a single front. The disagreement is on the importance of this front. It may indeed come to pass that we must withdraw without achieving our goals. Now is not that time. Despite what your personal opinion may be, the rhetoric of the left is a call for defeat. Leaving now will be viewed as victory for the enemy, abandonment by the Iraqi people, and open us up for any wackjob that wants to prove themselves by attacking a nation like ours. Again, this isn't fear-mongering. It's the way it is. Past withdrawals (Viet Nam, Lebanon) have created this attitude amongst world scumbags, and now you want to pretend it isn't so. But it is.
Regarding calls for bin Laden, his impact on events is in question at this point. Considering the number of AlQueda leaders killed or captured thus far, I'd say we're doing a damn good job. The hunt for this particular scumbag goes on, but his immediate capture wouldn't change the situation. That he's still at large does not indicate anything of importance in the overal scheme of things. Would it be great to nab him? Of course. It would certainly shut up a few people for awhile. But it won't stop terrorist activity one iota. That will take a more universal resolve of which the world sorely lacks at this time.
jay--
The facts on the ground in May 2003 are different than the facts on the ground now. Nobody even in May 2004 was saying mission accomplished, though many were hoping, as we hope today, that we can turn a corner on Iraq.
Remember, the war was supported by Clinton, Edwards, Kerry, Biden, Dodd, and the intelligence at the time was good enough to convince countries like Italy, Poland, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, Australia, the Ukraine, and so forth to fight alongside us.
It is sexy to believe that one is speaking truth to power, and Bush was out to mislead everyone, but the historical record shows a different story.
ron--
I agree completely that revolutionary Islamists-- the kinds that want to establish a global Caliphate-- do not see the conflicts in Kashmir, in Thailand, in Iraq, in Sudan, in Somalia et cetera as separate wars. They are all part of a great Jihad, and literally millions of people are getting killed because of the Islamic supremacists.
If you understand the aims and ambitions of the Jihadists, then understanding the consequences of America abandoning honest citizens in the Iraqi democracy to one of the radical factions becomes obvious.
If you think people are simply resisting the big bully imperialist USA, then it is obvious why you think America must lay down its arms, end the Patriot Act, put the Gitmo terrorists back into circulation, stop any prospect of airstrikes on Iran's nuclear program, and end our support of Israel.
If you think that the United States isn't evil, but the jihadists will be nice to us if we're nice to them, you're simply stupid. There's really no way to sugarcoat it.
Ron,
Read this. I know it is old, but it does sum up your liberal bretheren quite well.
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/alt/04/creed.html
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/alt/04/creed.html
The url got chopped off in the last post.
Post a Comment