Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Yesterday's "taking responsibility" was nothing of the sort.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-23-03 04:09 PM
Original message
Yesterday's "taking responsibility" was nothing of the sort.
I hope the press picks up on this. I think they will, based on the White House Press Corps questioning today. They just are not buying it (and why should they?).

As with prior "announcements" by the administration, this latest change in stories only reveals the prior story to be a lie. Not only that, but within the admission of responsibility by Stephen Hadley, it is revealed that there actually are at least two other named responsible parties: Condi Rice and chief speechwriter Michael Gerson. They each received the same memos and/or phone calls. There were at least three instances of the CIA contacting the White House specifically to argue that they drop the Africa/uranium allegation from speeches, and they were not all to Stephen Hadley.

As this continues to simmer, and Bush's numbers continue to fall, I think (within the month) we'll see W. on TV addressing the nation and, finally, very belatedly, "taking responsibility" (without actually taking it). Though he really REALLY doesn't want the "buck" to stop with him, it is being thrown at him repeatedly. Eventually he is going to have to catch it.

But it is already too late. When two or three people are trotted out to accept responsibility before you do, and you only do it because the questions won't stop, then you just look like a coward. (I predict Condi will be forced into being the latest to "take the blame" in the next few days)

Bush will look like an irresponsible, untrustworthy coward to most of the nation by the time this is over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-23-03 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is how it will happen:
Edited on Wed Jul-23-03 04:35 PM by Brotherjohn
Around August 1, Bush will address the nation.

The thrust of this address will be to announce the voluntary resignation of National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice.

She will be resigning because she accepts blame for the Africa/uranium statement getting by her, thus making the White House look bad. He will say he wishes her well and respects her decision. There will be words about how the assertion is still "factually correct" and that the case for war was just and necessary, based on a mountain of evidence.

Then Bush will say, although he personally was not made aware of the CIA's doubts, as president, he will take full responsibility for the matter. Condi's resignation will allow him to "take full responsibility", while actually placing the blame on her. He might even actually have the balls to say "the buck stops here".

They'll have their "fall guy (girl)", who will have actually fallen. Then there will be closing talk about "I hope we can now put this matter behind us and get onto the serious business of fighting terra and making the world safe for democracy blah blah blah blah...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jbfam4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-23-03 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. right,
I agree, but right after Rice goes, Bush will address the American people.

He will get down on his knees and beg forgiveness. There will be families of slain service men and women who will accept his apology and embrace Bush. The banner behind will say: " I am sorry that I led your sons and daughters to war."..............while the patriotic music plays.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-23-03 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. You know what, Brotherjohn? I think you're absolutely right.
CON-di has botched too many things. And she should get bounced. And yes, they'll couch it like crazy. But she'll VERY likely be the first one thrown overboard in what will probably be a continuing series of "resignations" as more and more scapegoats are sought. It'll be just like Watergate.

but she's AWFUL! What a poor excuse for a PhD. A complete embarrassment not only for being asleep at the switch on this case, but also willfully so regarding 9/11 and all the advance warnings the outgoing Clinton people gave her - at which she just turned up her prissy little nose. Makes me almost ashamed to be female, having the likes of her so high up in the White House. And what the devil was she brought on board for, in the first place - as NATIONAL SECURITY advisor?!?!?!?! She's a f--king SOVIETOLOGIST!! She's a specialist in a country and a system that doesn't even exist anymore!!!!!! JEEEZ! Her specialty is completely obsolete. It makes her an absolute anachronism. And here she is advising on national security issues inside the Oval f--king Office...

Sheesh, I'm not pissed off today, am I?!?!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jbfam4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-23-03 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. shoot
There go her chances of running against Hillary in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC