In a flurry of interviews timed to coincide with this week's convention, Bush acknowledged a "miscalculation" about what the United States would encounter in postwar Iraq after the fall of Saddam's regime and said the "catastrophic success" of a swift military victory there helped produce the still-potent insurgency.
Then, in an interview shown Monday on NBC, he suggested that the war on terror could not be won.
No matter that Bush's comments reflected just the kind of nuanced, deliberative thinking that Democratic challenger John Kerry has often said he is proud to display, but which has also gotten him into political hot water. Democrats wasted no time making the most of Bush's remarks.
Matt's Chat
I have no problem with Democrats making something of this. After all, VP Cheney has taken John Kerry to task over his "sensitive war" comments a bit out of context as well.The difference between these two candidates, as far as politicking style goes, is that John Kerry has the ability to deal with the media (because they are on his side?) and George W. Bush does not.
To a certain degree, the President is better off making speeches and then letting his surrogates handle the media. He will need to make some appearances, but he is better off not taking questions - or putting off some questions rather than answering off the cuff - that he isn't prepared to provide a careful thought-out position.
That isn't to say that I don't think the President is capable of answering those questions, but rather his verbal skills sometimes gets him in to more trouble than his actual answer does. I'm less interested in what a President says and much more interested in what a President does. Actions speak MUCH louder than words to me...
Mark's Remarks
Mr. Bush clarified his position less than 2 hours after the interview, unlike John Kerry who still can't clarify things he said/did 30 years ago with the facts (Christmas in Cambodia). President Bush meant to say this is not going to be a conventional war with treaty parties in the Hague or Switzerland, don't you know liberals love to go to treaty events so they can shop and enjoy some skiiing? This war is being fought against not just a nation or a group, but against wrong thinking/ideology.
What amazes me is the either contempt liberals show to the cause or their own immense ignorance. They poopoo the idea of democracy being a calming force against evil and terror. They say it is foolhardy, but didn't one of their own icons advocate that we be an arsenal of democracy? (That was FDR, by the way) For people who claim to love liberty, they really don't see its value in fighting repressive ideals and demagogues...how sad! Sadder still is that they would advocate Saddam still being in power just for the sake of taking power. They would advocate for appeasement merely to gain power. I hope more and more Americans see this as the days unfold. It is not about the public trust to liberals, it is about bitterness and power.
