Posted on 07/06/2006 8:33:28 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Bush: I'd rather be right than popular
President, wife sit down for wide-ranging birthday interview
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush isn't troubled by some of the weakest approval ratings of his presidency, he said Thursday in a wide-ranging birthday interview with CNN's "Larry King Live."
"When history looks back, I'd rather be judged as solving problems and being correct, rather than being popular," Bush said.
"The president that chases the opinion poll is the president that will have failed policy," Bush said in an exclusive joint interview along with his wife, Laura, at the White House.
Some members of Congress are nervous about the effect Bush's political problems might have on their own fortunes in this fall's midterm elections.
But Bush predicted that Republicans would keep their majorities in the House and Senate, "Because we're right on winning this war on terror, and we've got a good economic record," he said. "People are working under the leadership of the Bush administration and the Congress."
When it comes to the most controversial single decision of his presidency -- invading Iraq -- the president told King he would make the same choice again, even knowing that Saddam Hussein's regime did not have weapons of mass destruction.
"We removed a tyrant," Bush said. "He was an enemy of the United States who harbored terrorists and who had the capacity, at the very minimum, to make weapons of mass destruction. And he was a true threat."
The president also said he believes recent missile tests by North Korean leader Kim Jong Il could present an opening to rally international pressure on the Pyongyang regime.
"I think he wants us to either fear him or pay attention to him. And I view it as an opportunity ...
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
blitzgig, Bush ain't the fool you paint him to be when you wrote,
Bush shows he is dedicated to doing the right thing no matter what the stupid polls say.The very nature of popular government requires that our leaders respect the will of the people. Do we trust our leaders so entirely there's no need for elections? Of course not. So the question is not what the polls say, but what the elections say. Clinton won twice. He must have done something right. Clinton's problem was that he read the polls too narrowly. Bush/Rove do not. But be damned sure they read the polls, for Bush ain't a fool.
And neither was Lincoln when he said,
If I were to try to read, much less answer, all the attacks made on me, this shop might as well be closed for any other business. I do the very best I know how - the very best I can; and I mean to keep doing so until the end. If the end brings me out all right, what's said against me won't amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong, ten angels swearing I was right would make no difference.Lincoln was saying nothing different from Bush today. But come on folks, of course the Prez cares about the polls. (And so did Lincoln - desperately). What differentiates Bush (and Lincoln) from Clinton is that Bush realizes that choices made according to immediate polls will not necessarily lead to good results later. Duh.
For Clinton, the focus on immediate polls it worked brilliantly in '96 and got him re-elected. If anyone here thinks Bush ignored the same during '00 and '04, they're delusional. Nevertheless, what Bush is saying is correct in that his focus is on long-term results, not immediate polls
CT, more opportunity here for the uninitiated to learn.
Actually, I care what COEXERJ145 thinks.
It gets old real quick, I was telling jveritas that on the NAU threads on why I don't post on them. It's the same-old same-old.
Please avoid the "don't get it" line. The lefties scream that at every opportunity, and I'd like us not to use their tropes. As for staying consistent with principles, that's great, but you can have a principled stand and still be dead wrong, which he is. My principles say different, and it's my job to bring pressure to bear wherever possible to try to make mine win out. If Bush loses on this issue due to the opposition of those like me, that's how our system works.
The NAU threads are great. The keywords are a hoot.
Criminalizing free speech and expanding a program with unfunded liabilities that are on the same order as all privately held wealth in America are historically significant.
Kinda like when the RATs say "we support the troops BUT..."
LOL - I like the CueSpookyMusic keyword myself.
Who is criminalizing free speech?
Oh no, not another replay of last night? LOL!
I'm always partial to "MORETHORAZINEPLEASE".
And when you are elected POTUS then you can act in accordance with your principles.
Apparently some have missed their doses!
No prob. Give me a few minutes to Google.
"If Bush loses on this on this issue..."
Bush is NOT, repeat, NOT running for anything again.
You guys are as silly as the dems...always gunning for Bush.
IF you are SO important...then why haven't you all changed the Congresswienie's minds?? THEY are the ones up for reelection.
That thread started me reading some of the old battles at FR. Man I can't believe how much HASN'T changed in 6 years.
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.