Froomkin: "Meet the 'New Bush'"

[leftchick]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/11/09/BL2006110900916.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

<snip>

So is this New Bush to be taken at his word?

It probably depends on whether you think the president's badly eroded credibility has been restored by his admission that he lied during the campaign -- or whether that just adds to the damage.

Because possibly the most startling aspect of a consequential press conference on a incredibly tumultuous day was Bush's repeated acknowledgment that things he said when he was campaigning were either no longer operative -- or were outright deceptions.

<snip>

It is quite telling that rather than duck the question -- which Bush is more than capable of doing -- Bush chose to lie instead.

But, amazingly enough, that wasn't the only example of Bush saying he didn't really mean what he was saying in the run-up to the election. Bush repeatedly -- and casually -- asserted that many of the major elements of his stump speech were, in fact, not to be taken seriously any longer.

[Avalux]

1. Bullies are dangerous when backed into a corner.

They'll say and do anything to save their own ass, then when they feel safe again, will bully again. Bush is a liar, always will be.

[leftchick]

2. I agree

he will be back in form in no time.

[durtee librul]

3. Like anyone with a brain

ever believed him to begin with - I listened to his 'speech' and I can say that he was such a liar and when the reporters called him on some of his remarks, he started in with all that chimpy down home talk....well chimpy, it ain't gonna work anymore and ANY one out there who now does NOT realize he can't be trusted is a moran.

[Ringo84]

4. No

I don't trust the jackass as far as I can throw him. He doesn't deserve my trust or my respect. This election doesn't change that.
Ringo

[laheina]

5. I've long since stopped believing anything that fool has to say.

He is a liar. He'll say whatever he thinks is convenient now, and lie about saying it after he breaks his word.

After he refuses to cooperate, he'll prolly just pull out the old "Democrats are obstructionist" bit. Ho hum.

[AnnieBW]

6. Same As The Old Bush

n/t

[mikehiggins]

7. Absolutely not. Winning this election is not enough to save the

nation from the decades of damage these thugs have done in the last six years.

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on me.

Fool me three times, what am I? A freaking idiot? Some of our Dems are already on level five of that scale, which would make them barely able to remember how to breathe.

Remember the hearings in the basement! Remember Valarie Plame! Remember the thousands who died in Iraq because these criminals lied!

Beleive this guy has changed? Not in a million years.

[baby_mouse]

8. He wishes to remain in power. That is all.

Anyone who can come to any other conclusion from this recent behaviour is...

...being over-optimistic...

[kenny blankenship]

9. That was a teeny little lie-what about the WHOPPERS told about Iraq?

He has no credibility to salvage.

[txindy]

10. I like how Froomkin keeps referring to him only as *. No title, just *.

I know it's happened before, but it just jumps out of the page at me this time. It's rather....contemptuous. As it should be.

[leftchick]

11. I do too!

Remember all of the M$M people saying clinton this and clinton that. NO president? Disgusting.