Posted on 12/18/2005 10:07:38 PM PST by ncountylee
WASHINGTON - No more rosy scenarios. After watching his credibility and approval ratings crumble over the course of 2005, President Bush completed a rhetorical shift Sunday night by abandoning his everything-is-OK pitch to Americans and coming clean: He was wrong about the rationale for going to war in Iraq; he underestimated the dangers; the country has suffered "terrible loss"; and the bad news isn't over.
Even with his high-profile display of candor _ a step anxious Republican leaders had been demanding for weeks _ Bush remained unyielding. "To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor and I will not allow it," he said in a prime-time address, capping a series of five speeches designed to reverse a stunning political free-fall.
There is some evidence that the rhetorical shift has worked. Recent polls suggest that while a majority of Americans disapprove of Bush's performance, his job rating has increased a bit. Nearly six of every 10 Americans said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized, which is Bush's position.
(Excerpt) Read more at idahopress.com ...
Ron Fournier has written left wing pieces on this president before... definite liberal.
AP should loose its liscence to diseminate
They never quit do they?
just more of the same clap-trap from AP
Nope, it's 24/7.
http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2005/12/14/snow1.jpg
Snow Sculpture of RON FOURNIER
Didn't his wife work for Kerry?
What what his connection to the DNC is? Their other major Washington Reporter, Jennifer Loven is married to a former Clinton big shot and DNC member. So how is Fourner tied to the DNC? The releationship between the AP and the DNC are so tight they would be a Conflict of Intrest in and honest, ethical business. But, of course, they do not call it "All Propaganda" for nothing.
It takes a real man to face the American people like this. The terrorist must be beaten somewhere sooner or later. We must finish the job. If not Iraq, where? The demorats have gone beyond hating Bush. They now hate America.
What an utter steaming pile of..."analysis".
Ron Fournier and the MSM have no shame. And no memory...
And, hopefully, in time, no job.
It seems that other people got here first with their comments about Ron Fournier.
What is a jerk like that doing getting a byline in the Idaho Press? Wouldn't good Idahoans call to cancel their subscriptions just based on that article alone?
Did the President really say "My rationale for going to war was wrong?"
This isn't just an ideological problem on behalf of the Ron Fourniers. He is bringing the conversation down to a third grade level by not talking about the new Shiite power in the Middle East and how it forces the Sunnis into being strategically on our side again. How $20B per year in oil is not only NOT going to terrorists, but a lot of that is going into the pockets of 200,000 Americans who spend. Nothing about 200,000 young arabs lured like flies to flypaper over the past 4 years in Afghan and Iraq.
Rosy?
These quotes are from the USS Liconln speech. The one the mission accomplished banner for the crew.
What is Rosy? Bush has been pretty damn consistant since the beginning.
"We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We're bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous."
"The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq."
"America and our coalition will finish what we have begun."
"The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding."
"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.
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."
"We are mindful as well that some good men and women are not making the journey home."
He's said all these things before, and the media took democrat lies that he hadn't. Now he repeats them, and the media acts like he's responding by admitting new stuff. But this isn't ancient history, I lived through it just a couple short years ago. I remember the President telling the nation that the war was going to be hard and long, we were going to lose lives, but in the end we would prevail.
IS ANYONE SERIOUSLY STUPID ENOUGH TO BE SHOCKED AND DISILLUSIONED BY THE WAY THE WAR IS GOING?!!
Or are they merely pretending to be shocked as a tactic to tear down the commander-in-chief during wartime for partisan political gain? Sounds like we do have a serious threat to America, but it's not an unwinnable war.
That's their plan.
Some dems & libs absolutely do hate America. It's stunningly short-sighted - and it's making me sad! One friend who does not hate America recently visited Columbia, and boy was she glad to be back in the U.S.!
The Editor of the Idaho press is at op-ed@idahopress.com.
Dear Editor,
Your website lists about 50 people working for your "editorial" team...yet in a red state you feel you have to publish left wing opinion pieces such as Ron Fournier's hatchet job on the President's speech last night.
Can you explain to the people of Idaho why you brought things down to a third grade level with the following:
>>WASHINGTON - No more rosy scenarios. After watching his credibility and approval ratings crumble over the course of 2005, President Bush completed a rhetorical shift Sunday night
The opening sentence is not professional journalism. It is an op-ed opinion piece. Yet you presented this as news. Is this because you are lazy or ideologically foaming at the mouth to get the President with such unprofessionalism?
>> by abandoning his everything-is-OK pitch to Americans and coming clean: He was wrong about the rationale for going to war in Iraq;
When did the President say he was "wrong" about the rationale for liberating the Iraqi people and, thus, the Lebanese, Egyptians and the rest of the Arab world? This blatantly unprofessional for the Idaho Press to print without a warning that it is an opinion.
PLEASE START PUTTING AP NEWS STORIES IN THE OPINION SECTION.
>> he underestimated the dangers; the country has suffered "terrible loss"; and the bad news isn't over.
I am sure we underestimated the danger of the Nazi SS units as well. Where is Ron's discussion of the secret deals the Sunni Insurgence is making with the US military to shift their focus onto Iran? Go to www.strategypage.com and other real news sites.
>>Even with his high-profile display of candor _ a step anxious Republican leaders had been demanding for weeks _ Bush remained unyielding.
What is this nonsense that Republicans are cracking? Is this supposed to make it look like Bush is the "only crazy one"? What about 80% of our soldiers and 90% of business managers in the USA? Are we all "anxious" as well?
>>"To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor and I will not allow it,"
Actually, from a military point of view, the only reason to stay in Iraq now is so we can invade Iran all the more easily. The insurgents can be handled by the Shiite army and police.
>> he said in a prime-time address, capping a series of five speeches designed to reverse a stunning political free-fall.
Not really. He just lost female independents who only voted for him because they correctly had a "feeling" that Kerry was bad news on the defense side. For starters, the military hated Kerry and we were obviously in the middle of a war and 9-11 hadn't yet been forgotten as it is more now.
>>There is some evidence that the rhetorical shift has worked. Recent polls suggest that while a majority of Americans disapprove of Bush's performance, his job rating has increased a bit. Nearly six of every 10 Americans said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized, which is Bush's position.
But it is not the journalist's opinion! And notice that the journalist shows ZERO knowledge of the Middle East history or current events.
>>The happy talk didn't ring true to many Americans, who watched in horror as the U.S. death toll climbed above 2,000
Nobody was "happy" about having to kill hundreds of thousands of terrorists in a sand trap designed to lure them to their deaths in "jihad."
But 2000 dead American soldiers was better than 130,000 dead and/or radioactive civilians combined with the nuclear destruction of 10 major Muslim cities, which is what would have happened if we waited for "them to make the next move" instead of taking a conventional fight to somewhere in the arab world first.
Somewhere where we would have the majority of locals on our side.
>> and wondered why Bush refused to take time off from his summer vacation to meet with the mother of a slain soldier. Cindy Sheehan became the grim face of a budding anti-war movement.
This is an insane partisan comment and the comment that may get you the highest number of canceled subscriptions. I would certainly cancel my subscription to your paper if I had one.
>Bush seemed out of touch, unable to grasp the concerns of people opposed to the war or even those who were starting to wonder about it.
Is this still something you decided to print in your "news" section???
>>While standing firm on his main principle _ that the war in Iraq is key to American security _ Bush reached out Sunday to those who disagree.
He reached out to those who aren't paying attention and those who were getting brainwashed by the media because they weren't paying attention.
>>"I also want to speak to those of you who did not support my decision to send troops to Iraq: I have heard your disagreement, and I know how deeply it is felt," Bush said. "I do not expect you to support everything I do, but tonight I have a request: Do not give in to despair, and do not give up on this fight for freedom."
>>His credibility now in tatters, Bush injected a dose of reality into his rhetoric.
This is pure methane!
>>This is exactly what many senior Republicans had urged Bush to do _ speak bluntly about war as Franklin Roosevelt did during World War II and eloquently about the cause and sacrifice as Abraham Lincoln did during the Civil War.
At least the leftist is comparing the President to Lincoln and FDR.
>>"Tonight was a high water mark in his acknowledgment that mistakes have been made and that he has to accept his share of the blame," said Republican Sen. John Warner of Virginia, chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
Remind me not to give any money to Warner's next primary campaign. This remark, if not taken out of context which it probably was, is craven.
"...yet in a red state you feel you have to publish left wing opinion pieces such as Ron Fournier's hatchet job on the President's speech last night."
I still cannot understand why there are practically no conservative newspapers remaining in the U.S.
Are conservatives never majoring in journalism anymore?
Why can't groups of wealthy conservatives (especially in the major U.S. cities) start publishing newspapers? Is it really that difficult to get one going?
Even if the profit is slim, the rewards would be much greater than throwing all the money at the GOP (which often ignores its conservative base anyway). To have many established conservative newspapers across America reporting the news would be a major feat.
I know it's possible; why it's not happening is a puzzle and a frustration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.