87% want Bush impeached - MSNBC poll

[Solve et Coagula]

87% want Bush impeached - MSNBC poll:
*
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904#survey

 

[alphieb]

87% want Bush impeached - MSNBC poll:
*
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904#survey

Bush finally has the balls to admit he was wrong.

http://www.villagevoice.com

 

[alphieb]

Bush Admits He Was 'Wrong'
But his speech doesn't account for the administration's heavy hand in spinning faulty intelligence

December 14th, 2005 2:00 PM
George W. Bush answers a question from the audience after delivering remarks on the War on Terror.
photo: Kimberlee Hewitt/whitehouse.gov
In a speech today in Washington, D.C., President Bush accepted responsibility for faulty intelligence that led the nation to war in Iraq.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."
The point, however, is not only that there was faulty intelligence, but that the administration exaggerated that intelligence. As we wrote in 2003, 'WMD' could become the next Watergate.
http://www.villagevoice.com

What an idiot.

 

[Stinger]

87% want Bush impeached - MSNBC poll:
*
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904#survey

You failed to note "Not a scientifically valid survey."

I believe ORiely's was 93% in the support of wiretapping foeign agents if we detect they are talking with our enemies even if without a court order (which is not required anyway).

Why would you want to impeach Bush for doing his duty?

 

[Stinger]

Bush Admits He Was 'Wrong'
But his speech doesn't account for the administration's heavy hand in spinning faulty intelligence

December 14th, 2005 2:00 PM
George W. Bush answers a question from the audience after delivering remarks on the War on Terror.
photo: Kimberlee Hewitt/whitehouse.gov
In a speech today in Washington, D.C., President Bush accepted responsibility for faulty intelligence that led the nation to war in Iraq.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."
The point, however, is not only that there was faulty intelligence, but that the administration exaggerated that intelligence. As we wrote in 2003, 'WMD' could become the next Watergate.
http://www.villagevoice.com

What an idiot.

No where does he say he accepts responsiblity for the faulty intelligence. Why do you make that claim?

 

[alphieb]

You failed to note "Not a scientifically valid survey."

I believe ORiely's was 93% in the support of wiretapping foeign agents if we detect they are talking with our enemies even if without a court order (which is not required anyway).

Why would you want to impeach Bush for doing his duty?

May I add, please refer to post #3. Where I sited he admits to being....well retarded or perhaps a war monger.

 

[alphieb]

No where does he say he accepts responsiblity for the faulty intelligence. Why do you make that claim?

In a speech today in Washington, D.C., President Bush accepted responsibility for faulty intelligence that led the nation to war in Iraq.

It is right there in black and white. When are you righties going to accept it?

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphieb
Bush Admits He Was 'Wrong'
But his speech doesn't account for the administration's heavy hand in spinning faulty intelligence

December 14th, 2005 2:00 PM
George W. Bush answers a question from the audience after delivering remarks on the War on Terror.
photo: Kimberlee Hewitt/whitehouse.gov
In a speech today in Washington, D.C., President Bush accepted responsibility for faulty intelligence that led the nation to war in Iraq.

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."
The point, however, is not only that there was faulty intelligence, but that the administration exaggerated that intelligence. As we wrote in 2003, 'WMD' could become the next Watergate.
http://www.villagevoice.com

What an idiot.


Me>> No where does he say he accepts responsiblity for the faulty intelligence. Why do you make that claim?

In a speech today in Washington, D.C., President Bush accepted responsibility for faulty intelligence that led the nation to war in Iraq.

It is right there in black and white. When are you righties going to accept it?

I didn't ask where the villagevoice said he did, where did BUSH say that. It's not in what you posted and I could care less what the villagevoice thinks he said. He said he took responsiblity for the decission to go to war, and I'm glad he did.

 

[Stinger]

May I add, please refer to post #3. Where I sited he admits to being....well retarded or perhaps a war monger.

Do you want to have a serious discussion or are you just interested in posting baseless invectives?

 

[aps]

I support impeachment.

Hiya Stinger. :2wave:

 

[alphieb]

Do you want to have a serious discussion or are you just interested in posting baseless invectives?

http://www.cbsnews.com

Is that credible enough for you?

 

[alphieb]

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said during his fourth and final speech before Thursday's vote for Iraq's parliament. "As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."

http://www.cnn.com

Here is another source. He admits being wrong and the right wingers still uphold him.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Bad intelligence, right decision.

He isn't taking responsibility for the bad intelligence. He is taking responsibility for going into Iraq. At no point does he take responibility for the intelligence itself being bad.

 

[tecoyah]

Bad intelligence, right decision.

He isn't taking responsibility for the bad intelligence. He is taking responsibility for going into Iraq. At no point does he take responibility for the intelligence itself being bad.

OK...so...we now accept the fact there was bad Data, and that a descision was made to commit American forces to a war based on the bad data. I have one question:

Where Does the Buck Stop?

 

[Stace]

You failed to note "Not a scientifically valid survey."

I believe ORiely's was 93% in the support of wiretapping foeign agents if we detect they are talking with our enemies even if without a court order (which is not required anyway).

Why would you want to impeach Bush for doing his duty?

And how would O'Reilly's be any more "scientifically valid"? Of course a poll done by him is going to be favorable to Bush!!!!

 

[oldreliable67]

And how would O'Reilly's be any more "scientifically valid"? Of course a poll done by him is going to be favorable to Bush!!!!

Unless I misunderstood, that was indeed the point: neither of these polls should be relied on for anything more than they are - expressions of questions asked by two sources highly likely to have posed their questions is such a way as to achieve a desired result.

 

[cnredd]

Unless I misunderstood, that was indeed the point: neither of these polls should be relied on for anything more than they are - expressions of questions asked by two sources highly likely to have posed their questions is such a way as to achieve a desired result.

Agreed...I've presented this same conclusion on another thread...

Polls are sometimes decided before the questions are even asked....

You could ask the VERY SAME QUESTION two different ways and the poll percentages would be vastly different...

Question - "Knowing that Rafael Palmiero was found to be taking steroids, do you think he should be in the Hall of Fame?"...Yes/No

Question - "Knowing that Rafeal Palmiero is one of two players who have ever had 3000 hits and 500 home runs, do you think he should be in the Hall of Fame?"...Yes/No

Same question...you will get two incredibly different answers...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=132215&postcount=5

Here is an example of how a poll is slanted to get the results they want...

 

[Stinger]

I support impeachment.

Hiya Stinger. :2wave:

In your dreams, but I will say this this talk of impeachment because the President is carry out his lawful duties to protect this country is just one more thing that drive the Democrats out of power. It is irresponsible and dangerous for our country.

 

[Stinger]

http://www.cbsnews.com

Is that credible enough for you?

Is what credibled enough CBS News, who brought us the forged memo's? No. But if you want to post something they reported in order to support a contention feel free and we will discuss. If it is just more baseless accusastions and petty invectives, don't bother.

 

[Stinger]

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said during his fourth and final speech before Thursday's vote for Iraq's parliament. "As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."

http://www.cnn.com

Here is another source. He admits being wrong and the right wingers still uphold him.

No where it that statement does he say he is responsible for the bad intelligence. Where do you get this idea?

 

[alphieb]

No where it that statement does he say he is responsible for the bad intelligence. Where do you get this idea?

What exactly does he say?

 

[Stinger]

OK...so...we now accept the fact there was bad Data, and that a descision was made to commit American forces to a war based on the bad data. I have one question:

Where Does the Buck Stop?

Can you name me a war when there wasn't some bad Data? Have you every read the history of the mistakes that were made during WW2? Was Roosevelt responsible for each and every one of those.

For the life of me I don't understand this obession to try and place blame on Bush for what is SOP in these types of scenarios. Intelligence is not perfect, it is best guesses. And Bush doesn't go undercover and come back and report what he finds. He relies on our intelligence services to feed him thier best guesses, and that's what we act on.

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
No where it that statement does he say he is responsible for the bad intelligence. Where do you get this idea?

What exactly does he say?

Ahh exactly what is printed, exactly what he says which is not what you claim.

 

[Stinger]

And how would O'Reilly's be any more "scientifically valid"? Of course a poll done by him is going to be favorable to Bush!!!!

Didn't say he was, just pointing out that these phone in polls are only a reflection of the people who watch the show.

 

[Stinger]

Unless I misunderstood, that was indeed the point: neither of these polls should be relied on for anything more than they are - expressions of questions asked by two sources highly likely to have posed their questions is such a way as to achieve a desired result.

You didn't no misunderstand, Stace did as you pointed out. I would make the point that ORielly has an audience that is about 10 times the size of MSNBC and probably has a better cross-section of audiance, but that is only my pure conjecture and I have no interest in going out and trying to "prove it".