Sounds to me like Bush did a flip-flop. Just last week he said Rumsfeld was his guy. Told us loudly that Rumsfeld was going to stay on as SECDEF. Then he admitted yesterday that the decision was made long ago.
Lie or flip-flop? You decide.......
2006-11-09 12:28:07 · 18 answers · asked by Cold Stone 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He says he did it so it wouldn't effect the elections. Hey every liar has a reason of one or the other. You either have the balls to tell the truth, or you lie. How can you justify it? He started his flip flopping from the very start. He tells you one thing one week then later on it's the opposite. Like trying to sell the American voter on the idea that the reason we are in Iraq is because of the oil. That is not what he was saying before. The President cares about one person......George.
2006-11-09 12:40:45 · answer #1 · answered by DAVID T 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
technically, Bush was never against Rumsfeld...he actually requested Rumsfeld to not resign when his resignation was submitted...however, since Congress is not Democratic-majority, Rumsfeld will be unable to accomplish any of his goals and nothing whatsoever will happen, so Bush finally consented and allowed Rumsfeld to resign, both knowing it was for the best interest of the country, including what they are hoping to happen with the war effort
2006-11-09 12:30:53 · answer #2 · answered by BabyFace 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Lie AND flip-flop. He flip-flopped on his support for Rumsfeld, then lied to the American people about it. He 'fessed up to his lie today in his press conference.
I suspect he'll have to fess up to a few more lies over the next couple of years.
2006-11-09 12:30:48 · answer #3 · answered by Don P 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not that I think I shouldn't save my breath, but here goes:
The flip-flopper Kerry said he was FOR the war in Iraq. Later he decided he was against it. No crime, alot of Americans felt the same way.
Disastrous for a leader, though.
The decision to fire someone in charge of an unpopular war falls to the Commander in Chief.
A very different thing.
2006-11-09 12:35:06 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've heard that Rumsfeld was arrogant even towards the president at times and the president was tired of it.
2006-11-09 12:32:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
once again MR. Bush has shown that the presidency has overwhelmed him so bad he doesn't know how to act.he should quit making jokes about John Kerry flip flopping,when that is all he has done for 6 years.he should very worried right now.
2006-11-09 12:34:09 · answer #6 · answered by crazywildman1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who cares if this is his cousin? Are you dumb adequate to have faith that everybody in a family contributors believes a similar issues? My brother and that i could not be greater distinctive politically. Why do not you inspect the international realistically? Edit - great to verify that 4 liberals provide thumbs down because of the fact i in my opinion use good judgment.
2016-10-21 13:49:14 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush wanted Rumsfeld to stay, but he had no choice.
With all these new Dems., he had to pick another guy.
Nice "joke", bad information.... you and Kerry go great together.
2006-11-09 12:34:26 · answer #8 · answered by Mr. Agappae 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sounds to me that Liberals have called for Bush to fire Rumsfeld for a long time, they whined and moaned over it, and now that he DID fire him,..YOU ARE STILL MOANING AND GROANING!!!
2006-11-09 12:34:38 · answer #9 · answered by BAARAAACK 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yep,, Bush took a thumpin,, and kept on humpin,, Cheney could be out ,,, beside Rove and Bolton,, who will the next relevant VP be,, hum,,, Ms. Rice,, Rummy-grade-O for out ,, Gates in,, Flip Flop
2006-11-09 12:37:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋