Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bush: Regrets? Confessions? Bring 'Em On!

By Leslie Savan, Boston Globe. Posted June 5, 2006.


Why have Bush's verbal misgivings received so much adulatory press attention -- when he's just rehashing the same tired pop phrases from 17 months ago?
Advertisement

This editorial was originally published in the Boston Globe.

To Tim Russert it was a "remarkable, remarkable admission." Bob Schieffer called it an "extraordinary statement." Chris Matthews found in it nothing less than "a little bit of Lincoln." The political talk shows were swooning over President Bush's press-conference admission last week that two of his most famous expressions were, in fact, bloopers.

"Saying 'bring it on,' kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people," the president said in answer to a question about mistakes he made in Iraq. "I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner -- you know, 'wanted dead or alive,' that kind of talk."

"For him to be so open, so open tonight," said NBC's Norah O'Donnell, "suggests a reflectiveness, suggests a man who in his second term is willing to perhaps change, who is willing again to seek reconciliation."

Or maybe it suggests a Washington punditry so willing to reconcile with the president that they're experiencing deja vu all over again.

In the second week of January 2005, with his reelection safely in the bag, Bush made two publicity stops in which he confessed to the same infractions of phrase. First, in a pre-Inaugural interview on "20/20," with wife Laura at his side, he told the nation's regret-elicitor Barbara Walters, "I said some things in the first term that were probably a little blunt. 'Bring it on' was a little blunt." Ditto on "dead or alive." He pledged, "I'll be more disciplined in how I say things."

The same week, in a roundtable interview with 14 major newspapers, he repeated the My Bad theme. "One of the things I've learned," he said, "is that sometimes words have consequences that you don't intend. 'Bring 'em on' was really a classic example." Regarding his vow to get Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "dead or alive," Bush said, "I remember getting back to the White House and Laura said, "'What'd you say that for?' " He says he told her, "I didn't rehearse it. It just was there when they asked for my opinion."

"So put that down," Bush told the gathered reporters, and he added, "I don't know if you'd call that a confession, a regret, something."

Since Bush had twice received big media play for recanting the same offending words just 17 months earlier (or as Matthews might say, three score and eight weeks ago), last week's "confession" was hardly extraordinary. Only a handful of journalists recalled Confession 1 or Confession 2. Much of the media reacted like Drew Barrymore in "50 First Dates," their memories as virginal as they were the first, second, and third time the administration claimed to have "turned a corner" in the war on terrorism.

Bush's verbal misgivings received more excited press coverage than his mention at the same press conference with Tony Blair that the prison abuse at Abu Ghraib was "the biggest mistake that's happened so far." (Actually, that's not new either, and, in any case, the mistake's been fixed because, he said, "the people who committed those acts were brought to justice," which handily excuses the chain of command for its responsibility.) Anyway, who wants to comb through that rat's nest? It's way easier to play with these fun phrases.

What Bush was really doing when he initially uttered his wayward catchphrases wasn't talking cowboy or talking tough so much as talking pop: the punchline-like, media-glamorized words and phrases that help us all score a point or close a deal. Bush used "Bring 'em on" and "Dead or alive" in the first place to blow through any skepticism about whether he was a competent "war president."

Now, like Peter listening for the cock to crow, he has three times repudiated these same pop phrases to blow through any skepticism about whether he is in touch with reality.

The whole episode echoes former CIA director George Tenet's use of the phrase "slam dunk" to blow through Bush's own skepticism over whether "Joe Public" (as Bush put it) would find convincing the administration's assertions about Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction. Tenet, too, expressed regret later, saying, "Those were the two dumbest words I ever said."

In each instance, the pitchman drew on some road-tested populist persuasion. That's the power of pop: an individual speaks it, but it has the roar of a crowd behind it.

Bush's ability to talk like a regular guy was supposed to be his strength, and some on the far right now see his apology for what it is: a rhetorical collapse. "One of the attractive things about the president is that he talks Texas," William Bennett said on his radio show. "But what broke my heart is when he said, 'I need to be more sophisticated.' What is this, Kerry talk?"

The big fuss over six little words is really about how the press -- especially the inside-the-Beltway press -- keep hoping that Bush will change. If journalists can just will him to say the magic words and do the humility thing, then they can like him again (and feel better about themselves). They'll not only forgive his rash choice of words, they'll even forget that he already apologized for them -- and did so as a way to not apologize for his rash war of choice.

Digg!

Leslie Savan is the author of Slam Dunks and No-Brainers: Language in Your Life, the Media, Business, Politics, and, Like, Whatever.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
well-done
Posted by: ladyoracle on Jun 5, 2006 3:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think you could add that perhaps the media also feels guilty for feeding the 'bring 'em on" flames.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really?
Posted by: WhatNow? on Jun 5, 2006 4:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Laura said, "'What'd you say that for?' "

Does she really end sentences with prepositions? I expect much better from teachers and librarians. This is part of our problem. We have such dumbed down leadership.

William Bennett said on his radio show. "But what broke my heart is when he said, 'I need to be more sophisticated.' What is this, Kerry talk?"

What's wrong with being intellegent and sophisticated? I want my president to be more intellegent than myself, much more intellegent. The last thing we need is another common asshole/moron. The cream is supposed to rise to the top. Why do these dregs have such buoyancy?

I am glad el presidente showed a little contrition however hollow and fake it may be. It is a slight improvement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eally? sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: eally? Posted by: adp3d
» Yes!! Posted by: russianblue1
Big Fuss?
Posted by: adp3d on Jun 5, 2006 5:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big effin' deal, Bush admitted to nothing of substance, not lying to the American people, not to the total disregard to the constitutional rights of American citizens, not to the dismal failure of the hurricane aftermath, not to the failing to regard warnings of plans of attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, not to the loss of lives of American servicemen or Iraqi civilians...
That the mainstream media continues to give him a free pass on these and more begs those of us who are progressives to label the media as right-wing and owned by rich Republican corporate fatcats much as conservatives had previously labeled and continues to the press as being "liberal". All one has to do is watch the evening news to know that media is owned by Big Pharma, Big Foods, and other giant supporters of Republican causes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Big Fuss? sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
Dee
Posted by: dmrohner on Jun 5, 2006 5:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Presidency is not a good place to work through your adolescence. Most boys, growing up, running their mouths sooner or later find themselves on their butts. This teaches the simple lesson that what you say has consequences. Because of his personality problems and his family, he has been shielded from these lessons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dee Posted by: woodford54
» RE: Dee Posted by: symcokid
» RE: Dee Posted by: woodford54
» RE: Dee Posted by: RhodesVan3000
» RE: Dee sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: Dee sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
As Far As Regrets Go....
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jun 5, 2006 5:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wonderful! As long as King George the Last was expressing a mea culpa or two, one might have expected him to say that he regretted the stupidest foreign policy move since Hitler invaded Russia in 1942 by invading Iraq. It's something you'll never hear so don't hold your breath - but you know, if there's in one thing that he or everyone else in this criminal administration could take back, it is that! Even the First Fool, as jaw droppingly stupid as he is, by now realizes what a catastrophic mistake it was.

Here's something to ponder: How about the regrets of the American electorate? Do they realize the hideous mistake they made in 2000 by sending this contemptable moron to the White House? Are they now willing to admit that by re-electing him four years later they effectively pointed the proverbial pistol at their own collective heads and pulled the trigger? Sure Gore actually won in 2000. Sure Kerry actually won in 2004 (they stole Ohio - admit it). But that is really no excuse. It should have been a landslide! Alot of the blame should be placed at the feet of Dubya's democratic opponents. Running against an asshole like George W. Bush should have been the political equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel.

Here's a little word of advice to the next democratic nominee who ever he or she might be (it's such a hard call at this point):

Dear Russ,
What ever happens in 2008, don't try to be "Republican Lite". Don't run away from your base as Kerry and Gore and Clinton and Dukokis and Mondale and Carter did. Be like George McGovern, Russ! Sure he lost in 1972 - but that was then and this is now! By the autumn of 2008, the American people will have had it up to here with the republicans (Note: I'm pointing at my forehead). Your a progressive, Russ! Hell, I'll get REAL honest here: You're a liberal, Russ! Don't hide from it like these other cowards. Be proud, pal! You're in good company. Remember Franklin Delano Roosevelt? It doesn't get any better than that!

All the best,
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com//

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: As Far As Regrets Go.... Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: As Far As Regrets Go....sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
Bush - saving face, glossing over, again.
Posted by: symcokid on Jun 5, 2006 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Sir Bush reiterarations of apology are not even worthy of print or press!!! He's sorry alright, he just doesn't realize what a sorry asshole he is!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's enough to make a person sick up a good breakfast.
Posted by: Longdream on Jun 5, 2006 6:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Behold the Bushwits, a day late and a few million people short, finally saying, "well, some of those guys may be right--we'll apologize and acknowledge our shortcomings, and people will forgive and forget, and we won't lose Congress."

This grudging, pandering minstrel dance is rooted deep in this ersatz government's mania for lies which favor their need to be unquestioned and unobstructed. Oh, yes....if only he hadn't said 'bring it on', all would be right with the world! And never mind the torture that's still going on--we prosecuted a few soldiers and relieved a general of her command. See? We're all good....

The only thing worse than this performance is the lickspittle press pretending that it's Lincoln at Gettysburg.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

corpwhorate media is licking Bush's boots same as they did clinton's books
Posted by: cry0fan on Jun 5, 2006 7:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when are you political activists gonna get it through your thick skulls that the elite media are power mad greedy monster just like the politicians, and they therefore they will kiss any butt they can to get more power and access to power and information.

Don't worry little sheeple. The democrats will be in charge soon and then the Freepers can take your place and froth at the mouth about how Russert is kissing Hilary's butt or warner's butt or bayh's butt.

Same as it ever was, but political activists never learn....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We know about Bush and hopefully take care of him after 2006.
Posted by: Prophit on Jun 5, 2006 7:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But what about that damn press. Werent' press members also tried in Nuremberg for crimes against humanity in aiding the nazi's???? I find this to be the equivalent and no amount of late night recanting is going to change the damage they have done and continue to do at the end.

I want them tried, convicted and serving jail terms for their treason to our nation in their pathetic a*s wiping of these nazis in office. I get enraged everytime I read something like this. P

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BRING IT ON=TREASON
Posted by: intothewild on Jun 5, 2006 8:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For that dolt to ask for attacks from a known enemy is to endanger the entire nation he is sworn to protect!

His treason knows no bounds..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BRING IT ON=TREASON sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
MEA CULPA
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 5, 2006 8:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does anyone out there believe this bad movie. The only thing missing was some flowers and "can we still be friends" ? NO!
Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mission Accomplished
Posted by: patvic1405 on Jun 5, 2006 8:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think, considering what is still going on in Iraq, that "Mission Accomplished" is even stupider, if possible, than "Bring it on." Did he actually say that or was it just on the banner on the ship while he was parading around half-cocked (pun intended) in that flight suit he was too much of a coward to wear into battle in Viet Nam? IMPEACH BUSH NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mission Accomplished sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
Aw, shucks!
Posted by: chasaturn on Jun 5, 2006 9:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Blah. Blah. Blah. All the while directing attention from what's REALLY going on. The "startling" revelations that U.S. soldiers and Marines are doing horrendous things to people who have been demoted to sub-human status as part of "conditioning" troops to view civilians as "trash" and "collateral" - all in preparation for deployment here at home. All for "rounding up" the cattle for relocation to those "holding facilities" Halliburton and associates are building with no-bid contracts. It all fits the pattern. Cruelty and heartlessness are NEEDED to affect a repeat, here in America, of Germany's solution to their "problems". Our troops are only doing what they are told to do - not that that is any excuse, but the generals don't lose any sleep over it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pitiful
Posted by: nbrown on Jun 5, 2006 4:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You gotta wonder who the media works for when this is all it takes. I mean, come on. Bush challenges Iraqis to kill Americans, and years later when he finally says it's "a confession, a regret, something" -- the media gushes with admiration?

Let's take a little walk through the Iraq war timeline, shall we?

July 2003: Bush challenges Iraqis to kill US troops. Number of US-dead reaches 147.

Nov. 2003: US Central Command says insurgency is 5,000 strong

March 2004: Bush jokes about there being no WMD in Iraq.

April 2004: Abu Ghraib torture discovered after months of sex crimes and torture.

Jan. 2005: Iraqi intelligence director says insurgency is 40,000 strong + 200,000 active supporters. Bush says "bring it on" was not smooth of him.

Meanwhile, both parties (are there honestly two -- it's hard to tell from the voting records) are voting to fund the war.

The number of US dead is over 2,500 -- including troops, journalists, contracters, and so on. Of the tens of thousands injured, how many of them linger on, but live with amputated limbs? Brain damage? Post-traumatic stress? Paralysis?

I guess all you gotta say is "oops" and the media will love you. There is no difference between the media and the White House. Although they have different offices, they function as an integrated unit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The media are cowardly suck-ups
Posted by: Democritus on Jun 5, 2006 4:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, for jouralists like Murrow and Cronkite. The latest crop is a bunch of weaselly panderers who swoon over Bush's mea culpas--even though these minor confessions by our president don't begin to touch on the horrific consequences that his lackadaisical and unreasoned decisions have brought upon us. Shame on Russert, Schieffer, Bennett, Matthews, and O'Donell for being the fawning little sycophants that they have shown themselves to be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: B.S. Alert! sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
the craftiness of it all
Posted by: concerned Canadian on Jun 7, 2006 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And so while he puts on a little media show for you all and while the media fawn over this act of self-flagellation and mistake it for some kind of Christian redemption, it is nothing more than another act to keep Americans busy out in front while your tax dollars (don't forget the 3 TRILLION US. dollars that nobody is willing to talk or ask about to any significant extent) disappear out the back door heading to wherever they want, to fund whatever they want, without a single care of what you may want for your country. Ask the leaders whose country it is - certainly not yours, you are only the people whom the constitution was written to defend, that's all. Of course if you continue to spend your tax dollars to enable this take place and this money goes to fund whatever it is earmarked to fund, then where will the money come when it will be time to rebuild America? But do you think those leaders will care? They will have retired with all the money that Americans to walk out the back door. They will be spending it in some haven untouched by the problems that are not being fixed now and will be defended by the very secretly funded group that they are funding now. Money talks, even the money that walks out the back door. And the citizens then? well, voiceless now and later you will be without money for anyone later to take you seriously. So without recognizing the urgent need to speak out now and stop your f'in bickering about party A or party B, confront the reality of what is happening and do something. For goodness sakes, the world is laughing at your failure to recognize the craftiness of you being provided with electronic (read able to be easily manipulated) voting machines, and falling prey to the subsequent skullduggery of those who thwarted any possibility of a legit recount, forcing Americans to have to live with an unelected leadership who is now doing his little dog and pony show for your media and presenting it to you to giggle over. Solve the problem and find your voices, while you still have vocal chords to find.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clarence
Posted by: clarence on Jun 12, 2006 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In his statement to the judge before sentencing, in a bid to win mercy, Tim McVeigh expressed regret that he had neglected to put a dime in the parking meter outside the Federal Building.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]