Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Cut and Run...or Not?

It's always nice when you are able to paint the options as dualistic choices - cut and run versus what? Stay the course? Here we see the fatal logic behind W's thinking about painting the picture for democrats as if they were a recipe for disaster; like it could get worse by doing something different.

So, here's a question. Do the dems really want to cut and run, or do they want to ensure victory with less rather than more death in Iraq? Do the Dems want to cut and run or do they simply think a new plan is in order?

The President would have you think that his way is the only way, but conventional wisdom dictates that there is more than one way to skin a terrorist.

What say you?

Q Thank you. It's good to be here. Appreciate it. Following up on that answer, one of the things Democrats complain about is the way you portray their position --

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, really?

Q -- in wanting to fight the war on terror. They would say you portray it as either they support exactly what you want to do, or they want to do nothing. We hear it in some of your speeches. Is it fair to portray it to the American people that way?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's fair to use the words of the people in Congress or their votes. The vote was on the Hamdan legislation: Do you want to continue a program that enabled us to interrogate folks, or not? And all I was doing was reciting the votes. I would cite my opponent in the 2004 campaign when he said there needs to be a date certain from which to withdraw from Iraq. I characterize that as cut and run because I believe it is cut and run. In other words, I've been using either their votes or their words to characterize their positions.

Q But they don't say cut and run.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, they may not use cut and run, but they say date certain is when to get out, before the job is done. That is cut and run. Nobody has accused me of having a real sophisticated vocabulary, I understand that. And maybe their -- their words are more sophisticated than mine. But when you pull out before the job is done, that's cut and run as far as I'm concerned. And that's cut and run as far as most Americans are concerned. And so, yes, I'm going to continue reminding them of their words and their votes.

2 comments:

Hamilton said...

Well gawl-dang it, missy. I've been wearing out horses just gettin' to this here press conference. Shucks!

As a Republican who voted for Bush, I must say that it is his lack of sophistication and clarity in communicating his goals and beliefs that has me looking forward to 2008 the most. Indeed, I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and I cannot bear to watch or listen to him give a speech.

As for 'cut and run,' 'stay the course,' and 'support the troops'... so much of that is and has been standard political posturing (complete with fallacious arguments) since the dawn of politics.

How can anybody expect a politician not to fight for re-election and the continued empowerment of their party? I guess a more positive example is George Washington, who had complete power and voluntarily gave it up - twice.

www.fedlocally.com

Anonymous said...


The usual lies by the usual suspect

'And so, yes, I'm going to continue reminding them of their words and their votes.'

Bush will continue to put his words in their mouths. This man expects us to trust him?