Bush admits mistake with ‘bring it on’ rhetoric — sort of

The man who has trouble remembering making any mistakes in office now regrets some of his “[tag]tough talk[/tag]” regarding the war in [tag]Iraq[/tag]. Sort of.

[I]n an unusual admission of a personal mistake, Mr. [tag]Bush[/tag] said he [tag]regret[/tag]ted challenging insurgents in Iraq to “[tag]bring it on[/tag]” in 2003, and said the same about his statement that he wanted Osama bin Laden “[tag]dead or alive[/tag].” Those two statements quickly came to reinforce his image around the world as a [tag]cowboy[/tag] commander in chief. “Kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people,” Mr. Bush said. “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more [tag]sophisticated[/tag] manner.”

The complaint was never that the [tag]president[/tag]’s remarks weren’t “sophisticated” enough, but rather that the rhetoric was irresponsible and encouraged violence against American troops. Is Bush now conceding that his critics were right about how dangerous it was to taunt those who were trying to kill Americans?

What’s more, it’s relatively encouraging to hear Bush admit that his comments “sent the wrong signal,” but what most of the news accounts didn’t mention was that the president immediately followed up the concession by saying his “bring it on” talk was “[tag]misinterpreted[/tag]… in certain parts of the world.” In other words, Bush’s absurd [tag]rhetoric[/tag] wasn’t the problem — the problem was those who didn’t understand what the president’s cowboy talk really meant. It’s not his fault; it’s theirs. Typical.

There are a couple other angles to consider here. First, most outlets seem to have missed this, but Bush’s “regret” over his choice of words isn’t exactly new. The president said his cowboy talk can have “unintended consequences,” adding, “I don’t know if you’d call that a confession, a regret, something.” This admission came in January 2005 — almost 16 months ago. To treat yesterday’s concession as new would be a mistake.

Second, for Bush to acknowledge that the cowboy talk was at least inappropriate does undercut years of arguments to the contrary from his most loyal supporters, all of whom insisted that the president’s “tough talk” was not only right, but absolutely necessary.

And, finally, it’s not the most important factor, but to hear media personalities swoon over the president’s concession is deeply disturbing. MSNBC [tag]Chris Matthews[/tag], after hearing Bush say that his “bring it on” talk was “misinterpreted,” suggested that Bush was like Abraham Lincoln. It was a helpful reminder of why I need to keep a bottle of Maalox by my desk.

Just look at Bush’s chastened, hangdog facial expression as he made these comments. He looks like a guy recovering from a bad night at drunken party: “When I said ‘Yo Mama’ it was misinterpreted in certain parts of the room. I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner . . .”

  • When did Bush first start using “cowboy talk”? No one in his family talks that way (or walks that way – like a baby with a full load in his diaper). Few actual cowboys, other than character actors in 1930s B Westerns, talk that way; and actors can at least pronounce their words as written.

    How does one misinterpret “Bring it on” and “Dead or alive”?

    In days of yore at my university the Provost used to conduct public meetings in the auditorium with all the faculty, ostensibly to hear our complaints. After a while it got to be a joke. Faculty would ask a question or complain about something, and the automatic response (loudly whispered throughout the audience before it was uttered from the podium) was that this is a misunderstanding on your part. After a while even faculty get wise to such self-serving responses.

  • All a bunch of calculated bullshit to keep the press soft. If he shows a little faux humanity, they feel sorry for him and back off a few hundred more paces than they’ve been all along.

    I don’t care what anyone says, Karl got the job done a long time ago when he, Karen Hughes and the right-extreme punditocracy convinced the media they sucked. They’ve been self-loathing so long now that they actually sympathize with loathsome characters like Bush.

    The greatest success at working the referree ever!!

  • “…like Abraham Lincoln.”

    Personally, I think Congress should, in a bi-partisan effort, decree that Bush’s visage be carved into Mt. Rushmore as a reminder never again to elect such an ignorant, arrogant, dim-witted horse’s ass as president.

  • ….what Alibubba said. Except, is it possible to actually carve him on the back side of Mt. Rushmore?

  • His choice of words was definitely stupid, and may have encouraged those outside of Iraq to think of Bush as a cowboy, but it’s hard to believe that it had any real effect in Iraq. Does anybody seriously believe that the insurgents, Baathists, Al Quaidas, etc. would acted differently had Bush not made his ill-advised remarks? It’s not the rhetoric that he should be recognizing as a mistake, but the substantive choices involved in going to war in Iraq in the first place, and the way in which that war was mishandled as well.
    For that matter, his regrets over Al Ghraib also miss the mark: he doesn’t seem to realize that that was not some isolated, unfortunate accident, but the inevitable outgrowth of the policies and attitudes he and Rumsfeld, Cheney and Gonzales adopted.

  • I think Peter is right about his comments on Al Ghraib (?Abu Ghraib?).

    But I think the Bring It On comment did help radicalize a segment of the Sunni tribal society in Iraq that might not be so supportive of and active in the insurgency. Basically, Boy George II changed the enemy from just Baathists and Fedayin to nearly a third of the country’s population.

    Not a big help, really.

  • [I]n an unusual admission of a personal mistake, Mr. Bush said he regretted challenging insurgents in Iraq to “bring it on” in 2003, and said the same about his statement that he wanted Osama bin Laden “dead or alive.” Those two statements quickly came to reinforce his image around the world as a cowboy commander in chief. “Kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people,” Mr. Bush said. “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner.”

    Mission Accomplished!

    Also, I agree about Putsch and Mt. Rushmore – except, he should be carved upside down on the back of the mountain. And we should hang him by the arms, Abu Gonzalez-style, for the artist to use as a model while it is done…

  • “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner.”

    Sounds more like his naughty little cowboy act.

    Them fancy talking world leaders in certain parts of the world don’t understand my truthful plain speech so I’m learnin to talk more careful. I’m just sayin that I’m more sophisticated, but I’m still a cowboy in my heart…

  • “Kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people,” Mr. Bush said. “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner.”

    What’s stupid about comments like this, is that when you see footage of Bush talking from years ago- the 80s, say; there was a great example in the Enron documentary- he totally comes off as a spoiled, petulant upper-class Ivy-league educated frat-boy elite. When he comes out with comments like the above- trying to make himself out as, say, the building contractor or plumber who lives next door or acroos the street- he’s just being a poser, totally fake. It’s an act.

  • CB wrote:

    Second, for Bush to acknowledge that the cowboy talk was at least inappropriate does undercut years of arguments to the contrary from his most loyal supporters, all of whom insisted that the president’s “tough talk” was not only right, but absolutely necessary.

    Well, yeah. But comments like this are just whitewash:

    “Kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people,” Mr. Bush said. “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner.”

    Bush wants his supporters to support him when he talks the tough talk. He just wants to make sure that he’s made the comments like the above to cover his ass, to insulate himself from criticism, at the same time.

    It’s just like that remark the other day about not going to personal attacks on political opponents, or whatever. The fire from Colbert and the like got a little too hot, so now if Bush gets that statement out there, his supporters can keep coming back to it every time the Dems come out with some strong criticism of the Repubs towards the elections. Also it sends a message to the rank n file GOP activist- just like when he said “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” and when people kept saying “9/11 changed everything”- it lets them know that they may want to tone things down a little so it’s Dems who may end up looking like the ones who rush to criticize as the elections approach, because of course the goopers can see that the Dems may be bringing some really tough criticism as things develop.

  • Re comments 4 and 5: Rather than deface a natural monument with such an unnatural visage, why not just paint his face on a horse’s ass and trot it around the country?

    Meanwhile, the only thing that Bush “regrets” is that his moronic, “misinterpreted” remarks have been shown up for wha they really are. He couldn’t care less how many people die because of “bring it on” since he’s not in the line of fire. But you can bet, if the military had caught bin Laden, he would be strutting around like he did it himself. How I despise that cowardly man.

  • Lincoln??? I don’t think so. Maybe Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy said, “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” Just like W, except W’s version is more, “Speak tough-like and swing a stick around wildly. You’re sure to hit something.” Sure, it doesn’t flow off the tongue as nice, but it plays well with the Rethugs and children at birthday parties with pinatas.

  • I didn’t hear any apology. I heard yada, yada…

    “that kind of talk. I think in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted,” he said.

    He really didn’t think it was bad, some people just didn’t understand that he’s an idiot.

  • Chris Matthews has been a shill and a whore for Bush and his minions from day 1. I still get pissed when I think back on how Matthews swooned and professed his man-love for the simple minded Bush after he made an ass out of himself on the deck of the aircraft carrier. I’m plagued to this day by thoughts of the weasely Matthews pleasuring himself with his W action figure dressed up like a pilot in one hand and……YECHH. If Bush is like Abraham Lincoln, I guess that makes Chris Matthews like Edward R. Murrow.

  • What I heard was “it um…it um…well, it um…probably bring it on and um…an um..” What an effing Maroon!

  • “Kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people,” Mr. Bush said. “I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner.”

    I thought Bush didn’t do nuance.

  • Contrived
    Inadequate
    Designed to stymy the press (I’ve answered the damn question) and rally supporters who don’t want (Heaven Forfend!) a “sophisticated” leader.
    The entire answer reminded me of a job applicant responding to the stupid “What would people say your greatest weakness is?” question with “I work too hard.” Sincerity and credibility – as usual – were not in the house.
    What can one say about Chris Matthews? I am mystified that anyone finds this feckless and not terribly bright man worthy of an important platform in the public discourse. He is so in love w/ Bush that he will seize upon anything to justify it. Brokeback Matthews.

  • Bush is a bull in a verbal china shop. Saying crap like “bring it on” and talking up the “axis of evil” plays well with the base that thinks power is the ability to be a bully, but these ham-fisted expressions smash decades of delicate diplomacy where career diplomats created delicate bridges of carefully exercised words. Bush keeps demonstrating his tremendous immaturity for a job that requires a real grown-up to be in charge.

    If he really feels bad about Abu Ghraib, why not shut down Guantanamo, end extraordinary rendition, declare torture unlawful, take back his signing statements declaring he can end run around inhumane treatement of captives, stop torturing at Bagram AFB … oh, guess he was just lying out his ass again.

    Did any one else notice Blair seeming unusually fumbled-mouthed for being such a normally eloquent speaker? Tony seemed to be trying way too hard to reach for words that danced around the obvious truths.

  • Comments are closed.