Bush, passive voiced, avoids taking responsibility for "the decision"

"As president, I'm responsible for the decision to invade Iraq", he said.

Er, Mr. President, begging your pardon, Sire, "The decision"? You mean, YOUR decision. And you don't mean, "as president, I am responsible for". You mean, "As the fuckwit who made the decision, I'm responsible for it, as I'm responsible for all MY actions."

Then he has the gall to blame SAddam for not meeting "ultimatums". The ultimatum was at first, disarm...which he had done....or surrender. Yeah, Saddam MADE Bush do it. He fooled Bush. All his fault.

Just like the speech where Bush "took responsibility" and said in the next sentence "I'm going to find out why the intel was bad." His responsibility is finding someone else to blame. And you know what? He isn't even doing that, is he, Mr. Tenet Medal Winner?

This is the same guy who said before the invasion that the decision was "mine mine mine" no matter what the UN said, no matter what the american people said, no matter what Congress said. Now he's only responsible because "the decision" occurred on his watch. It's almost as if Rummy decided. It's the same "taking responsibility" every executive takes when one of his subordinates screws up. But here, Bush did it. He screwed up. His decision, his bad judgment, his mistake, his telling everyone he knew best and that it was lonely at the top time. His fucking jumpsuit, his mission accomplished, his using the war to attack democrats. His desire to take credit when Saddam fell.

Bush isn't really involved, not when it goes wrong. He instinctively distances himself. He can't take the real responsibility. Bush's not taking any more responsibility for Iraq than he would over the unacceptable creme brulee at the WH christmas party.

He said he was responsible for the decision to invade Iraq AND FOR VICTORY. Because we are achieving VICTORY.

That's what he said, that's what the journalists heard.

The original post was correct in it's quote, without the words AND FOR VICTORY (See Bush's (nauseating) speech: Victory in the War on Terror).

To even raise the word "Victory" in such a situation as this is the height of stupidity. It's a disengenous trick to frame the issue such that everyone "has to" support the war (or be a defeatist by choosing failure over "victory"). Success could be a tolerable term--but since there are potentially many different definitions of "success", it wouldn't necessarily imply anything resembling "military victory". A success might be simply an early withdrawal! Indeed, getting the U.N. to take over peace-keeping forces would be a terrific success! The greatest "victory" in the war between good and evil would be the successful eviction of the Bush family and all their friends and supporters (Republi-Cons) from the White House (and Congress, Supreme Court, and all government agencies too). Victory, Schmictory, Georgie, Porgie.

However, I don't know where Bush is supposed to have said "and for victory" (can't find that phrase anywhere). Though, perhaps as a form of sarcasm it's fitting enough. Certainly there's no doubt that the press is "hearing what they want to hear" or is suffering from some other process of cognitive distortion! They've been reporting Bush as saying this and saying that but if one bothers to actually read what he says--he just cleverly dances around saying anything, but in a manner that almost begs a person to make assumptions, presumptions or non-existent associations and inferrences (never really strong enough to be called implications either).

His purpose is to save his sagging public approval rating, which will also aid him in maintaining support for his war. Furthermore, he (or his "brain", Rove) recognizes that people want to believe in their President, and to that end, they understand that he needs to at least appear somewhat humbled or contrite, in touch with reality, able to recognize and admit his mistakes and take responsibility for, and therefore be seen as being able to learn from them (you know, like a real leader). So they (BA) developed clever language which almost says that--knowing that the press wouldn't be able to restrain themselves from filling in the blanks... in order to "explain" to their viewers/listeners what Bush actually meant to say. That's probably partly a function of the thought process required to summarize a speech in one sentence (for article titles, and news lead-ins), and also partly a pervasive assumption by the media that the public desperately needs the benefit of their "special" abilities/skill/intelligence to understand the language/people/politics/news, so they skimp of reporting the facts in order to get more of their own personal face/voice on the air, telling us what it all means--since it's not only good for their egos, but we (us mere civilians/citizens) simply couldn't possibly grasp it all on our own (alas, for the Republican side of the population--their assumption may be uncomfortably accurate--hence the popularity of FOX "News" among those types). Anyway, we end up getting told what BushCo wants us to hear--despite the fact that's not exactly what he said. Alas, considering the bump in his poll numbers, their deception is working.

Nevertheless, it's true--he never "admits" to a "mistake" of any kind, and doesn't even claim that the reason he decided to invade (and he doesn't use that word either) was due to the flawed (and he doesn't use that word either) intelligence. By mere proximity, though, he rather "invites" that interpretation. Of course, if he did admit he relied on flawed intelligence, it would be yet another lie--he made up his mind to invade long before looking for evidence/intelligence (most clearly expressed by the Downing-Street Memo).

Alas, we simply cannot trust the press (and their Corporate masters) any further than we can toss them (and for, oh-so-many reasons), and given their penchant for reporting falsehoods (and failing to report other important matters) along with their dedication to conservative bias, it's hard to imagine finding any group we can trust less; it's easy to do... For instance, consider: the Bush Administration, Republican Leadership, Republican/Conservative Organizations as well as very nearly all Republicans. A very large but deceptive bunch (though I wonder how many resort to lying intentionally since most of the Republican "base" is primarily just suffering from "mass delusion/s" promoted by their leaders/organizations). Of course, since the two groups, the media and the Republicans are complicit, perhaps they are just one large 'thing' (for which I can't decide for the moment on an appropriate moniker)(minions of darkness would work admirably).

And yeah it's the height of stupidity, but look, I'm not your target, okay?...

Geez...

"you made me hit you." "Its your fault, I had not other choice but slap you." "It was for your own good."