Bush Laments ‘Tone’ In Washington

[nlm]

From Hannity's show - enjoy the irony of these words being spoken by Bush.

BUSH: Let me start with the least. I don’t like the tone in Washington, D.C. I feel like that the politics has gotten ugly, and that tends to discourage people around the country. And that’s just too bad.

I would hope in my last two years I can — and, by the way, I’ve never really resorted to name-calling. And I’m not trying to say, well, you know, I’m innocent and everybody else is guilty. That’s not what I’m trying to say. But I understand that it’s one thing to disagree with a person, but it’s another thing to have to resort to kind of shameless name- calling. And I really don’t think it’s fitting for the president to drag the presidency into that kind of a mudslinging.

On the other hand, it’s important for the president defends what he believes, you know, in a way that brings honor to the office. But Washington’s a lot — it’s just too — it’s too political in many ways.

[Alcon]

Not that you've done much of anything to help that, George.

[MODU]

Nope, he hasn't.  His intention to come into DC and "soften" the tone between the parties has been as sucessful as every other President before him.

[Dr. Cynic]

It's not as if GW has helped the tone in Washington... This is the same guy who has often called Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards".

[TomC]

Oh, no MODU. We have had plenty of Presidents including Reagan and Bush Sr. who have been much more patrician and less partisan. Bush blew it back in 2002 when he said Democrats weren't interested in the security of the United States, despite the fact that he stole the idea for a Dept of Homeland Security from them. Bush has been much much more partisan than any President since... gosh I guess Truman.

Bush has not only failed to soften the tone; he, and his advisors, are in large part responsible for elevating it to the point it's at.

[Rococo4]

It's not as if GW has helped the tone in Washington... This is the same guy who has often called Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards".

he did come trying to change the tone and it was working before the Senate Democrats backstabbed him and the Republicans by pulling off the Jeffords switch.  That kind of threw that away.  i dont recall the President ever calling Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards" either.........

[nlm]

It's not as if GW has helped the tone in Washington... This is the same guy who has often called Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards".

he did come trying to change the tone and it was working before the Senate Democrats backstabbed him and the Republicans by pulling off the Jeffords switch.  That kind of threw that away.  i dont recall the President ever calling Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards" either.........

Uh, yeah.

Jeffords left the GOP because he didn't like their tone. I assume you believe that the Democrats should have refused his vote for Daschle, and because they didn't - all the partisan hackery, overtly political policy choices, and divisive wedge issues (that are the GOP's trademark) that have come out of the Bush administration are the Democrats fault. Brilliant!

[The Dowager Mod]

Now this is funny.

[Gabu]

and, by the way, I’ve never really resorted to name-calling

omglol

I love how he went out of his way to take the time out of what he was trying to say to insert something so patently false and absurd.

[Dr. Cynic]

It's not as if GW has helped the tone in Washington... This is the same guy who has often called Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards".

 i dont recall the President ever calling Democrats "Cut and Run Cowards" either.........

Then you must have missed every stump speech this President has given since the War started. Ignorance truly is bliss, isn't it?

[Nym90]

I agree that Bush has made things far worse on this front. He's been a lot less successful than most Presidents at changing the tone for the better.

Hopefully a Democratic takeover of Congress can improve things somewhat; I'm hoping it'll at least make the President a bit more receptive to cooperation and be able to acknowledge that the country wants to move in a new direction. I think that might be a big part of Bush's problem with arrogance is that his party has never lost an election yet since he came into office. Won across the board in 2002 and 2004, so he never had the sobering taste of defeat like Clinton in 1994 or Reagan in 1982 had in their first midterms, for example.

[Democratic Hawk]

It all sounds a bit rich coming from him

Dave

[MODU]

Hopefully a Democratic takeover of Congress can improve things somewhat; ..

If they go in with the game plan to start up a whole bunch of hearings and investigations, it will only get worse.

[Beet]

Hopefully a Democratic takeover of Congress can improve things somewhat; ..

If they go in with the game plan to start up a whole bunch of hearings and investigations, it will only get worse.

At least the two parties will be forced to work together to pass a budget. Anything that comes out of Washington would be a guaranteed product of bipartisanship. Of course, that might mean fewer things coming out. Seriously though, I would hope a Democratic Congress (by no means a certainty) would exercise its coequal Constitutional role assertively, but not get too distracted by hearings.

The problem is that calling your political opponents terrorist abettors is not exactly helpful for the tone, nor is it particularly helpful for the 'war on terror' to be frank. It would be bad for the country if that kind of campaign pays off.

[MODU]

They just need to realize that their job is to manage the country, and not their re-election bids.  Throw off the damn D's and R's and get to work.  However, you and I both know that isn't going to happen.  They will continue their crap like they have for decades.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bush is quite the comedian.

[dazzleman]

Bush is quite the comedian.

He really is.  After all that people like you have done to raise the tone to a more civil level, he has no right to complain.

[nlm]

Bush is quite the comedian.

He really is.  After all that people like you have done to raise the tone to a more civil level, he has no right to complain.

Clearly young men with access to the internet should be held to the same standard as the leader of the free world - what were you thinking jfern, the partisan divide in this country is clearly all your fault.

[dazzleman]

Bush is quite the comedian.

He really is.  After all that people like you have done to raise the tone to a more civil level, he has no right to complain.

Clearly young men with access to the internet should be held to the same standard as the leader of the free world - what were you thinking jfern, the partisan divide in this country is clearly all your fault.

I meant people like him.  He is simply a reflection of many who share his views, and have more influence.

The tone in Washington was bad long before Bush came to office.  The previous occupant of the oval office also contributed to a bad tone.

And the attitude of large numbers of common people can have just as much influence as that of a single powerful person.  The far left has brought a nasty, ugly tone to American life in general for 4 decades now, and people like jfern are a part of it.  His behavior here is only emblematic of the effect of like-minded people on American life.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Tone is NOT PARTISAN.

Both sides are EQUALLY responsible.

Clinton was forced to be concillaitory since he had to deal with a Rep congress. Bush has had free reign, not really needing to work with others... threats of unAmericaness did the job for him.

Bascially - Bush complaining about the tone of Washington is a bit like Bill Clinton lamenting Ryan Phillippe's alleged infidelity.

[nlm]

Bascially - Bush complaining about the tone of Washington is a bit like Bill Clinton lamenting Ryan Phillippe's alleged infidelity.

I agree.

I think quite a bit of the current tone can be attributed to the Bush/Rove/GOP election strategy of appealing to the base more so than the center. Every President has done it to a degree, but I don't recall a President that used policy issues to fire up their base as much as this one. I also don't recall a President that has failed to build consensus - and has abjectly failed to even try - as this one.

Bush's conversatition with the American people has been almost entirely based on the presentation of extreme black and white choices. His way or a complete strawman constructed to represent his opponents. He has failed to seek common ground at almost every turn and has shown a complete disrespect for about half the population of this country (and even more than that as his time in office has passed by). He has divided this country with wedge issues for his personal political gain. He is, quite simply, the divider.

That is not to say that there are not many other divisive forces and people at work within this nation, only that the President has taken the lead in expanding them - when a good President would have taken the lead in combatting them.

[Democratic Hawk]

Lamenting the tone is one thing, apologising for setting it is quite another. I remember a certain George W Bush wanting to be a "uniter, not a divider". The goodwill in the wake of September 11 has been squandered. Not to mention the fact that a country I love is now widely reviled in the wider world, that is essentially his doing and I'll never forgive him for it

If, however, Bush can prove he can work with Democrats in Congress as he did with them in Texas, he will certainly go up in my estimation, even if the damage he's done to America's reputation is unlikely to be repaired in the foreseable future

Whatever, you do, Democrats and Republicans, for all our sakes chose your presidential nominees wisely in 2008

Dave

[dazzleman]

Lamenting the tone is one thing, apologising for setting it is quite another. I remember a certain George W Bush wanting to be a "uniter, not a divider". The goodwill in the wake of September 11 has been squandered. Not to mention the fact that a country I love is now widely reviled in the wider world, that is essentially his doing and I'll never forgive him for it

I think that's a pretty ridiculous statement.  Strong anti-US sentiment long predates Bush.  The fact that the goodwill in the wake of Sept. 11th wore off certainly isn't all Bush's fault.  There are many, many people who are happy to weep over the fate of victims, so long as they don't fight back.  Goodwill from such people will only remain as long as you stay a victim.

[opebo]

And the attitude of large numbers of common people can have just as much influence as that of a single powerful person.  The far left has brought a nasty, ugly tone to American life in general for 4 decades now, and people like jfern are a part of it.  His behavior here is only emblematic of the effect of like-minded people on American life.

The left has been fighting a regime which is actually ugly for 40 years (and more), dazzleman, and not only ugly in 'tone.  Your side has fought to continue the subjugation of poors, blacks, gays, women, and (this is really the point) white working class men.  I don't see why persons in those groups should care much about what was the 'tone' displayed by their oppressor. 

[dazzleman]

And the attitude of large numbers of common people can have just as much influence as that of a single powerful person.  The far left has brought a nasty, ugly tone to American life in general for 4 decades now, and people like jfern are a part of it.  His behavior here is only emblematic of the effect of like-minded people on American life.

The left has been fighting a regime which is actually ugly for 40 years (and more), dazzleman, and not only ugly in 'tone.  Your side has fought to continue the subjugation of poors, blacks, gays, women, and (this is really the point) white working class men.  I don't see why persons in those groups should care much about what was the 'tone' displayed by their oppressor. 

When you give up all your money, then I'll listen to what you have to say.