Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, May 19, 2022

Former President George W. Bush made a plausible Freudian slip as he was criticizing the unjust war in Ukraine: "The result is an absence of checks and balances in Russia, and the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq -- I mean of Ukraine," Bush said.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Well doh!

#1 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2022-05-19 10:22 AM | Reply

I for one am neither "shocked" nor "awed" by his admission.

#2 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2022-05-19 10:24 AM | Reply | Funny: 1


Oops.

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-19 10:50 AM | Reply

Can we get a 2 for 1 prosecution at the Hauge?

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2022-05-19 11:12 AM | Reply

The man shouldn't have lied us into a war. There's evidence he feels some guilt for that now, but I wish that his Christian principles had kicked in at the time. He'll die and be remembered as an awful president who looks a bit better in comparison with Trump.

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2022-05-19 11:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Doh! I said the quiet part loud!"

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-19 11:20 AM | Reply

"A "gaffe" occurs not when a politician lies, but when he inadvertently tells the truth."

Michael Kinsley

#7 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2022-05-19 11:37 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Mission Accomplished!

#8 | Posted by Nixon at 2022-05-19 11:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#7

Word of the Week: Kinsley Gaffe
nancyfriedman.typepad.com

...Kinsley gaffe: A truthful statement told accidentally, usually by a politician. Named for the man who originally defined it, American journalist Michael Kinsley (1951-). Kinsley was the founding editor of Slate and later held editorial positions at the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and Harper's. He is now on the editorial board of Bloomberg View, an editorial and opinion website.

Wikipedia gives this definition: ( en.wikipedia.org )

A Kinsley gaffe or "gaffe in Washington" in American politics is an occurrence of someone telling the truth by accident. Typically, it refers to a politician inadvertently saying something publicly that they privately believe is true, but would ordinarily not say publicly because they believe it is politically harmful.

According to Barry Popik's website, The Big Apple, Kinsley first wrote "A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth" in the June 18, 1984, issue of The New Republic. ...


#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-19 12:03 PM | Reply

The same war Hillary voted for. If it were Hillary at the helm, every one of you loonies would be cheering her on.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-05-19 12:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The same war Hillary voted for. If it were Hillary at the helm, every one of you loonies would be cheering her on.

#10 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS AT 2022-05-19 12:46 PM | REPLY

You may have missed the primary election when Barrack Obama won the Democratic Party's nomination for POTUS over Hillary Clinton in large part because of this very issue.
But, nice try.

#11 | Posted by anton at 2022-05-19 12:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Dubya thinks it's funny to joke about getting Americans killed and maimed on his watch for no reason. No more from his inbred family should ever have anything to do with public policy again.

#12 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-05-19 01:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The recent republican president got a half million americans killed and tried to overthrow democracy.

The previous republican president lied us into a 7 trillion dollar war, got half a million mideasterners killed, sent a wave of migrants into europe which led to brexit and the rise of fascism, and destroyed our international credibility.

Both blew up the debt by making it rain tax cuts on rich people.

Cant wait to see what the next repub president can accomplish.

#13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-05-19 01:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The same war Hillary voted for. If it were Hillary at the helm, every one of you loonies would be cheering her on.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds

You mean the war she voted for based on the lies that she was fed by the lying republican administration?

I guess the lesson is - there's nothing republicans wont lie about. Not war, not election fraud, not pandemics, not when you can nominate a new supreme court justice. Nothing.

#14 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-05-19 01:27 PM | Reply

I agree with President Bush.

#15 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-19 01:28 PM | Reply

Lock him up. He's a total war criminal.

#16 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-19 01:52 PM | Reply

The same war Hillary voted for. If it were Hillary at the helm, every one of you loonies would be cheering her on.
#10 | Posted by LFTHNDTURDS

Man, you're dumber than you pretend to be.

Hillary voting for the Iraq was was detrimental to her in 2016 and turned off a lot of voters who where burnt out by the 16 years of continued wars in the Middle East.

You don't have to lie.

Try being honest sometimes.

You may receive different responses.

#17 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-05-19 02:42 PM | Reply

Hillary's vote, along with many others, was based upon the idea that the POTUS wasn't a liar who would break his word on waiting for inspections.

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2022-05-19 02:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hillary's vote, along with many others, was based upon the idea that the POTUS wasn't a liar

Pretty stupid of her.

Come on. You can admit it.

It was stupid.

I knew he was lying. I laughed at Colin Powell's UN misinformation about mobile WMD labs.

The fact you're saying she was dumb enough to fall for it.

Is you admitting she was being stupid.

#19 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-05-19 03:12 PM | Reply

"The fact you're saying she was dumb enough to fall for it."

70% of the population supported the invasion of Iraq. It was the next phase in the fight against global terrorism.

She wanted to be president...how do get there if you vote against fighting global terrorism?

#20 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-19 03:19 PM | Reply

Yeah, that "I got duped" excuse never felt legit.

To be fair I don't think I heard it from Hillary nearly so much as from the Clintonistas.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-19 03:20 PM | Reply

#21 If you want to blame it on someone, blame it on Americans. The US wanted blood after 9/11, and by early 2002 it was pretty clear it wasn't going to happen. Saddam was an easy mark because nobody liked him and he already been punked once before.

I don't think it's been well publicized, but Tariq Azziz actually approached the US government and offered assistance in post 9/11 counter-terror efforts. He was turned down. I think because the decision to strike Iraq had already been made.

#22 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-19 03:27 PM | Reply

#22 The decision to invade Iraq for 9/11 is reflected in Rumsfeld's notes from the morning of Sep 11, where he writes:

"Roll it all up, things related and not."

And in the PNAC document which recognized the need for a "Pearl Harbor Level Event" to galvanize public support for the war

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-05-19 03:33 PM | Reply

@#15 ... I agree with President Bush. ...

As do I. I agree with both sides of his mouth that spoke.

#24 | Posted by lamplighter at 2022-05-19 03:54 PM | Reply

"The fact you're saying she was dumb enough to fall for it."

70% of the population supported the invasion of Iraq. It was the next phase in the fight against global terrorism.

She wanted to be president...how do get there if you vote against fighting global terrorism?

#20 | Posted by madbomber

Because 70% of the population didn't think a president would lie to get us into a war. But as we now know, there's nothing repubs wont lie about.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-05-19 04:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It was the next phase in the fight against global terrorism.

#20 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I bet you still believe that crap.

#26 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2022-05-19 05:33 PM | Reply

Hillary's warmongering is why she has never been president.

So many people on the left absolutely despise her that they sat out the election or voted Green in a few states that we got Putin's stooge. She should never have been nominated.

And W should be sent to The Hague for trial.

#27 | Posted by DarkVader at 2022-05-19 08:55 PM | Reply

Hey Dark. Hillary made history as the first woman ever to make it that far only lost on a technicality and she won the popular vote. Yeah, those Greenturds and Berniebots sure showed us a thing or two. Absolutely brilliant... and quite honestly every bit as guilty as any of the right-wing waste of oxygen who showed us all by ensuring Trumptydumped won the election just so they could stick to Hillary... because they are4 mad angry men.

Do you know who stupid that was? Yeah, you get bragging rights to ------- up the country as much as any republicl0wn. You must be proud of your hate of Hillary. Feckless empty-headed pigs. Trust me your team is also going down in history as part and parcel of the Trump disaster because you insisted on it. You will be the footnote of stupid.

Pigs like you are worse than the ----------- because at least they got what they wanted!

#28 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2022-05-19 11:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I bet you still believe that crap."

I didn't believe it back then.

The problem I had with the argument to invade Iraq was that it was effectively based on Iraq being the root of all evils. There were no doubts that Saddam was a brutal dictator who had no issues killing his own people or his neighbors. That had been established. There was also no doubt he had nuclear ambitions. But to bin him with OBL as an Islamic terrorist while justifying the invasion on his alleged acquisition of yellow cake...that was too much of a stretch for me.

The US had been sitting on standing OPLANS to invade Saddam's Iraq since the Clinton years. Nobody liked Saddam or was willing to come to his aid. He was an easy mark when UBL turned out to be hard to kill.

#29 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-20 01:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"So many people on the left absolutely despise her that they sat out the election or voted Green in a few states that we got Putin's stooge."

If the left hates her, it probably means that everyone else doesn't. Which is a good thing if you want to get elected. And out of all the potential (D) candidates, Hillary was the best.

#30 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-20 01:29 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

The only thing Bernie won was Senator of Vermont... I'll say it again. Vermont... white white Vermont... he left New York for Vermont to be Senator of Vermont.

Vermont... a state that has garnered over $11,017,214,918 in DoD contracts over the past two decades.

Hillary on the other hand was a Freshwoman Senator of New York. New York... one of the states that were actually attacked.

9/11 didn't happen in Vermont

Bernie had no dog in the race in the aftermath of 9/11 and he sure didn't turn down the contracts for the creation of weaponry to take continue the ongoing persecution of Iraq.

Obama was a state senator his opinion didn't matter and is meaningless because any decision was above his pay grade at the time. OBAMA WAS NOT A PEACEFUL PRESIDENT AND TO INFER THAT HE WOULD HAVE HANDLED THE IRAQ SITUATION DIFFERENTLY THAN HILLARY IS ABSOLUTE BS THAT CAN NEVER ACTUALLY BE PROVEN.

I thought Iraq was a bad idea and it didn't qualify me for president.

Really people get over that one.

#31 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2022-05-20 09:34 AM | Reply

The ultimate Freudian slip.

#32 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-05-20 10:51 AM | Reply

#29 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I agree. The administration wanted/needed a win and everyone hated Iraq and Saddam. The change of focus to Iraq caused Afghanistan to go to hell in a handbasket. The Taliban regrouped and started taking big chunks back. I think if we'd have stayed focused on Afghanistan and out of Iraq we'd have had a much better outcome. Not to mention the lost international credibility.

#33 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-20 02:03 PM | Reply

"I think if we'd have stayed focused on Afghanistan and out of Iraq we'd have had a much better outcome."

I think the outcome in Afghanistan was inevitable. At the end of the day, it's impossible to create a democratic society in a country that has no interest in democracy. It's impossible to rule over a population that doesn't want to be ruled. You can do it, Iguess. 120 years ago Afghanistan was a multi-faith country. The Muslim Amir Abdur Rahman Khan gave Afghans the choice of converting or dying. Some chose to convert. I don't know if that sort of rule would be permitted by the global community in this day and age. We might find out in Ukraine.

#34 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-05-20 02:26 PM | Reply

impossible to create a democratic society in a country that has no interest in democracy

I agree with you there too. By better outcome I was referring to dismantling or at least marginalizing the Taliban. But you're right about pushing democracy or any other form of government on a people who don't want to be ruled. We might have taken a lesson from the Soviets' misadventures.

#35 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-05-20 02:48 PM | Reply

The same war Hillary voted for. If it were Hillary at the helm, every one of you loonies would be cheering her on.
#10 | Posted by LFTHNDTURDS

Man, you're dumber than you pretend to be.

Hillary voting for the Iraq was was detrimental to her in 2016 and turned off a lot of voters who where burnt out by the 16 years of continued wars in the Middle East.
You don't have to lie.
Try being honest sometimes.
You may receive different responses.

#17 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2022-05-19 02:42 PM | FLAG:
(CHOOSE)

And still not as stupid as you. Lie? about what? Hillary voted for that garbage war. Hillary, the one you an every other loonie tried to shame people into voting for in 2015.

---- you, you're a joke.

#36 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-05-20 03:43 PM | Reply

It's amazing how smart some people get AFTER thier time in office. While in office, couldn't be bothered.

#37 | Posted by fresno500 at 2022-05-20 06:26 PM | Reply

She wanted to be president...how do get there if you vote against fighting global terrorism?

#20 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2022-05-19 03:19 PM | REPLY MEH

I think it was more a matter of her being the freshwoman senator of New York and it was attacked. She had to make a strong choice. She was under more pressure than anyone of us will ever know and listened to bad advice.

Honestly, she was dammed if she did and damned if she didn't.

Condosleazy Rice slithered off to live in her closet with her girlfriend in Palo Alto when she played a wayyyyyyyyy larger part in the prosecution of that war than Hillary did. In fact, the actual major players ooozed their way over to FAUXnewz or appear only at cl0wnry fundraisers in front of hand-picked audiences.

Hillary's part was super small... minuscule relative.

She owns that it was on her too.

#38 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2022-05-20 08:43 PM | Reply

Freudian slips rarely ever get more Freudian or any slippier.

GWB is a war criminal responsible for the needless deaths of many hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

#39 | Posted by moder8 at 2022-05-20 09:01 PM | Reply

Is he evil incarnate?

#40 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2022-05-21 01:41 AM | Reply

Hillary, the one you an every other loonie tried to shame people into voting for in 2015.
#36 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTURDS

Me?

That's the funniest shht I've read you post.

You really don't know shht, do you.

Just keep huffing one Trump's taint.

#41 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-05-21 03:25 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort