DVD Talk
Bush: "We're not going to have any casualties!" [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Bush: "We're not going to have any casualties!"


joeblow69
10-20-04, 01:09 PM
Did a search, didn't find anything on this... interesting, though:

from cnn (http://cnn.allpolitics.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+Robertson%3A+I%A0warned+Bush+on+Iraq+casualties+-+Oct+19%2C+2004&expire=-1&urlID=12006066&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2004%2FALLPOLITICS%2F10%2F19%2Frobertson.bush.iraq%2Findex.html&partnerID=2001)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- The founder of the U.S. Christian Coalition said Tuesday he told President George W. Bush before the invasion of Iraq that he should prepare Americans for the likelihood of casualties, but the president told him, "We're not going to have any casualties."

Pat Robertson, an ardent Bush supporter, said he had that conversation with the president in Nashville, Tennessee, before the March 2003 invasion U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. He described Bush in the meeting as "the most self-assured man I've ever met in my life."

"You remember Mark Twain said, 'He looks like a contented Christian with four aces.' I mean he was just sitting there like, 'I'm on top of the world,' " Robertson said on the CNN show, "Paula Zahn Now."

"And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.' "

Robertson said the president then told him, "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."

The White House has made no reaction to Robertson's comments.

Robertson, the televangelist who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, said he wishes Bush would admit to mistakes made.

"I mean, the Lord told me it was going to be A, a disaster, and B, messy," Robertson said. "I warned him about casualties."

More than 1,100 U.S. troops have died in Iraq and another 8,000 troops have been wounded in the ongoing campaign, with the casualty toll significantly increasing in the last six months as the insurgency there has deepened.

Asked why Bush has refused to admit to mistakes on Iraq, Robertson said, "I don't know this politics game. You know, you can never say you were wrong because the opposition grabs onto it: 'See, he admitted he screwed up.' "

Even as Robertson criticized Bush for downplaying the potential dangers of the Iraq war, he heaped praise on Bush, saying he believes the president will win the election and that "the blessing of heaven is on Bush."

"Even if he stumbles and messes up -- and he's had his share of stumbles and gaffes -- I just think God's blessing is on him," Robertson said.

As for Bush's Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry, Robertson said, "I don't think he's a leader. He's a ponderous debater, a good senator probably."
------------
bolded for your pleasure...

Don't know why Pat would come out with this now, as it surely makes his guy look like bad.

bhk
10-20-04, 01:13 PM
I believe that, esp. when over and over again Bush has said that the war on terror is going to be long and hard.

Has Dan ratherBiased started working for CNN?

joeblow69
10-20-04, 01:18 PM
So you're calling Pat Robertson a liar now? ;)

bhk
10-20-04, 01:22 PM
Everyone lies to certain degrees, I think he's lying about this or he is quoted out of context. For example: "Bush said we aren't goint to have tens of thousands of casualties."

Dimension X
10-20-04, 01:22 PM
To save everyone's time, just read this old thread (http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=338788). I doubt anyone's opinion of Pat Robertson has changed since then.

waveform
10-20-04, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by bhk
I believe that, esp. when over and over again Bush has said that the war on terror is going to be long and hard.



Of course, this the same Bush who believes god speaks through him...or maybe he's just thinking concretely and vaguely remembering what he considers a biblical precedent.

joeblow69
10-20-04, 01:40 PM
This certainly wasn't taken out of context, as you can read the transcript right here. (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/19/pzn.01.html)


ZAHN: He's been posed repeatedly in debates, what mistakes have you made? He's been asked that on the campaign trail and he hasn't come up with any.

ROBERTSON: I met with him down in Nashville before the Gulf War started. And he was the most self-assured man I ever met in my life.

You remember, Mark Twain said, he looks like a contended Christian with four aces. He was just sitting there, like, I'm on top of the world, and I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, Mr. President, you better prepare the American people for casualties.

Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties. Well, I said, it's the way it's going to be. And so, it was messy. The lord told me it was going to be, A, a disaster and, B, messy. And before that, I had deep, in my spirit, I had deep misgivings about going into Iraq.

Think what you want of Pat, I see no reason why he'd lie about something like this.

Mopower
10-20-04, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by waveform
Of course, this the same Bush who believes god speaks through him...or maybe he's just thinking concretely and vaguely remembering what he considers a biblical precedent.

He believes god speaks to him not thru him. But he believes in god and is open about it so I guess that means he is evil and needs to be stopped before he ruins the country with his christian rhetoric.

waveform
10-20-04, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Mopower
He believes god speaks to him not thru him. But he believes in god and is open about it so I guess that means he is evil and needs to be stopped before he ruins the country with his christian rhetoric.

Oh I must have misinterpreted his exact words.

" I trust god speaks THROUGH me. Without that I couldn't do my job."

16 July, 2004

So, apparently god is actually running the US. One would have hoped that omnipotence would have resulted in higher poll numbers.

Red Dog
10-20-04, 01:49 PM
I find it funny that certain people now take Pat Robertson seriously. ;)

Mopower
10-20-04, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by waveform
Oh I must have misinterpreted his exact words.

" I trust god speaks THROUGH me. Without that I couldn't do my job."

16 July, 2004

So, apparently god is actually running the US. One would have hoped that omnipotence would have resulted in higher poll numbers.

I seriously doubt he thinks god literally talks "through" him. As in his words are gods words. He uses god's guidance to help him make decisions.

waveform
10-20-04, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by Mopower
I seriously doubt he thinks .

AAAHH. That's better.

joeblow69
10-20-04, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by Red Dog
I find it funny that certain people now take Pat Robertson seriously. ;)
I don't take Pat seriously. I think he's an @-hole, fringe wack-job. But why is he slinging mud at the guy he says is blessed by god to run the country?

RoboDad
10-20-04, 01:59 PM
Just another weak October Surprise.

Venusian
10-20-04, 02:02 PM
i still dont take pat robertson seriously.


maybe pat wants bush to show some humility. that would be nice, although probably not politically wise

RoboDad
10-20-04, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by waveform
AAAHH. That's better.
0/5

waveform
10-20-04, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by RoboDad
0/5

Now god is pissed at you.

kvrdave
10-20-04, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by joeblow69
So you're calling Pat Robertson a liar now? ;)

If you want to side with Pat Robertson....I'm ready to play that game with you. :lol:

Red Dog
10-20-04, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by joeblow69
I don't take Pat seriously. I think he's an @-hole, fringe wack-job. But why is he slinging mud at the guy he says is blessed by god to run the country?


Can anyone explain why a wack-job does or says what he does?

joeblow69
10-20-04, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Red Dog
Can anyone explain why a wack-job does or says what he does?
Sure. Everything this particular wack-job does and says is for the following reasons: to get people to believe in him, to send him money, and to further his agenda. Which is why these comments have me :hscratch:

Maybe he thinks GWB is moving too far to the center, and this is just a little reminder to georgie that he needs to keep tending to his base, otherwise they'll turn on him?

waveform
10-20-04, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by joeblow69
Sure. Everything this particular wack-job does and says is for the following reasons: to get people to believe in him, to send him money, and to further his agenda. Which is why these comments have me :hscratch:

Maybe he thinks GWB is moving too far to the center, and this is just a little reminder to georgie that he needs to keep tending to his base, otherwise they'll turn on him?

...but...but...god is speaking through him.

waveform
10-20-04, 03:05 PM
Maybe god burned the wrong Bush.

bfrank
10-20-04, 04:35 PM
seems like everyone is jumping on this story

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=Robertson+bush&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&x=wrt

edit-

its now on Yahoo's front page

Michael T Hudson
10-20-04, 06:07 PM
EAU CLAIRE, Wisconsin (CNN) -- A White House spokesman denied Wednesday that President Bush told Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson that he did not expect casualties from the invasion of Iraq.

"The president never made such a comment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

Senior Bush campaign adviser Karen Hughes, a longtime confidant of the president, said she was "certain" Bush would not have said anything like that to Robertson.

"Perhaps he misunderstood, but I've never heard the president say any such thing," Hughes said on CNN's "Inside Politics."

Robertson, an ardent Bush supporter, told CNN in an interview Tuesday night that he urged the president to prepare the American people for the prospect of casualties before launching the war in March 2003.

Robertson said Bush told him, " 'Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties.' "

More than 1,100 American troops have been killed in Iraq since the invasion, most of them battling an insurgency that followed the overthrow of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

Sen. John Kerry, Bush's Democratic challenger, quickly seized on Robertson's account.

Kerry's campaign issued a statement Wednesday challenging Bush to say whether the "700 Club" founder and 1988 GOP presidential candidate was telling the truth.

"We believe President Bush should get the benefit of the doubt here," Kerry spokesman Mike McCurry said in a news release.

"But he needs to come forward and answer a very simple question: Is Pat Robertson telling the truth when he said you didn't think there'd be any casualties, or is Pat Robertson lying?"

McClellan said Bush did meet with Robertson in Nashville before the invasion, as Robertson recounted. But McClellan said Bush always has recognized that war "requires sacrifice" and that there would be American casualties.

In a statement issued Wednesday afternoon, Robertson restated his "100 percent" support for Bush's re-election and said he began and ended his CNN interview "with my warm endorsement and praise of President Bush." But he did not back away from his comments.

"I emphatically stated that, 'I believe 'the blessing of heaven is upon him,' and I am persuaded that he will win this election and prevail on the war against terror in order to keep America safe from her avowed enemies," Robertson said.

In his CNN interview, the religious leader described Bush on the eve of the invasion as "the most self-assured man I've ever met in my life."

"You remember Mark Twain said, 'He looks like a contented Christian with four aces.' I mean he was just sitting there like, 'I'm on top of the world,' " Robertson said on CNN's "Paula Zahn Now."

"And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.' "

He said that's when the president told him he did not expect casualties from the invasion.


Even if he stumbles and messes up -- and he's had his share of stumbles and gaffes -- I just think God's blessing is on him.

-- Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson



In the interview, Robertson also said he wishes Bush would admit to mistakes made.

"I mean, the Lord told me it was going to be A, a disaster, and B, messy," Robertson said. "I warned him about casualties."

Asked why he thought Bush has refused to admit to mistakes on Iraq, Robertson said, "I don't know this politics game. You know, you can never say you were wrong because the opposition grabs onto it: 'See, he admitted he screwed up.' "

Even as Robertson criticized Bush for downplaying the potential dangers of the Iraq war, he heaped praise on Bush, saying he believes the president will win the election.

"Even if he stumbles and messes up -- and he's had his share of stumbles and gaffes -- I just think God's blessing is on him," Robertson said.

DVD Polizei
10-20-04, 06:10 PM
Pat Robertson must've pissed Bush off. Which is very odd.

bfrank
10-20-04, 06:58 PM
"The president never made such a comment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

yeah right!

:lol:

bhk
10-20-04, 07:01 PM
yeah right!

Unless there is proof of the opposite, I would tend to believe McClellan. Just doesn't sound like Bush saying in public that this is going to be a long, tough, war and in private saying there aren't going to be casualties.

Pharoh
10-20-04, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by bfrank
"The president never made such a comment," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

yeah right!

:lol:


:hscratch:

Contactsport1
10-20-04, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by bhk
.... I would tend to believe McClellan.

I'm not saying I would trust Pat "in my chats with god" Roberston, but why would you automatically trust McClellan. He's going to divert, spin, or deny it. I can't see any circumstances where they'd own up to to the statement.

waveform
10-20-04, 07:18 PM
Originally posted by bhk
Unless there is proof of the opposite, I would tend to believe McClellan. Just doesn't sound like Bush saying in public that this is going to be a long, tough, war and in private saying there aren't going to be casualties.

File for future reference:

If Republicans say something stupid...they never said it.

If there is corroboration...they never said it.

If you hear something stupid you don't want to hear...Republicans never said it

If there is irrefutable proof that something stupid was said by a Republican, then, if you believe it, then you must want the terrorists to win.

Faced with completely incontrovertible evidence that a Republican said something stupid, then, if you believe it, you are anti-American.

It is important to maintain the dimwit as president.

Pharoh
10-20-04, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by waveform
....

It is important to maintain the dimwit as president.


Well, all of us dimwits need somebody we can relate to. Duh!

bhk
10-20-04, 07:26 PM
If Republicans say something stupid...they never said it.

If there is corroboration...they never said it.

If you hear something stupid you don't want to hear...Republicans never said it

If there is irrefutable proof that something stupid was said by a Republican, then, if you believe it, then you must want the terrorists to win.

Faced with completely incontrovertible evidence that a Republican said something stupid, then, if you believe it, you are anti-American.

It is important to maintain the dimwit as president.


:thumbsup:

waveform
10-20-04, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Pharoh
Well, all of us dimwits need somebody we can relate to. Duh!

And we now have the new Republican slogan.

waveform
10-20-04, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by bhk
:thumbsup:

and in a first acceptance of the new Republican slogan...

Nazgul
10-20-04, 07:32 PM
Since when have Atheists/Democrats believed Pat Robertson on anything?

waveform
10-20-04, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Nazgul
Since when have Atheists/Democrats believed Pat Robertson on anything?

Those atheist/Democrats are terrorists who don't support the troops and want to end fetal life by killing Republican babies just so their stem cells can be used to increase the welfare rolls.

Cloning is only another tawdry attempt to create babies for homosexuals...because after all, they can't get married and have their own kids, can they?

This is why we must re-elect the dimwit.

bhk
10-20-04, 07:57 PM
This is why we must re-elect the dimwit.

That's "the dimwit who keeps beating the smartest dems" to you, bub.

RoboDad
10-20-04, 08:03 PM
Originally posted by bhk
That's "the dimwit who continually outwits the smartest dems" to you, bub.

Fixed.

Or, to paraphrase Obi-Wan: Who's the bigger dimwit? The dimwit or the dimwit who is outwitted by him?

Captain Pike
10-20-04, 08:04 PM
Pat Robertson is now and has always been full of crap. The big question here is what his motivation was. He does have credibility with some people and he's worked hard to achieve it. Why would he make a statement that seems so unappealing to his audience? Is he just off the deep end? That's my guess.

joshd2012
10-20-04, 08:28 PM
He still is an avid supporter of Bush, so I don't know why he would say it unless it was true. He has nothing to gain by putting Kerry in power, but so much to gain with Bush in power.

The fact is, Bush probably said it but doesn't remember saying it or is just lying (both of which he loves to do around the American public). It was blown way out of proportion, but such is politics.

Pharoh
10-20-04, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by Captain Pike
Pat Robertson is now and has always been full of crap. The big question here is what his motivation was. He does have credibility with some people and he's worked hard to achieve it. Why would he make a statement that seems so unappealing to his audience? Is he just off the deep end? That's my guess.


Why would it be unappealing? Seriously, wouldn't this give credence to him as a prophet?

Goldblum
10-20-04, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by waveform
Of course, this the same Bush who believes god speaks through him...or maybe he's just thinking concretely and vaguely remembering what he considers a biblical precedent.

-rolleyes-

Mordred
10-21-04, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by joshd2012
The fact is, Bush probably said it but doesn't remember saying it or is just lying (both of which he loves to do around the American public). It was blown way out of proportion, but such is politics. There is also the possibility that Pat Robertson misunderstood Bush, that Bush mis-spoke or that Bush didn't understand what "casualties" meant.

Mammal
10-21-04, 07:04 AM
Well, they could both be getting the word from God, and she flip-flopped.

LiquidSky
10-21-04, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by Red Dog
I find it funny that certain people now take Pat Robertson seriously. ;)

Not me. I think Robertson is an asshole.

bhk
10-21-04, 04:09 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/21/kerry.guns.ap/


At a town hall meeting Saturday in Xenia, he talked about taking his rosary into battle during the Vietnam War. ``I will bring my faith with me to the White House and it will guide me,'' Kerry said.

Why do I suspect that the anti-religious(except Islam of course) will not care and still support him.

Ranger
10-21-04, 05:18 PM
Wasn't Robertson accused of making bribes to the former leader of Liberia?

dork
10-21-04, 05:35 PM
Pat Robertson on Hardball, June 23, 2004:


Well, I don‘t think God‘s opposed to the war, necessarily, but it was a danger sign. I felt very uneasy about it from the very get-go. Whenever I heard about it, I knew it was going to be trouble. I warned the president. I only met with him once. I said, You better prepare the American people for some serious casualties. And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don‘t have to worry about that. But it has been messy. And I think we‘re going to come out of it, though. I think we‘ll have a free Iraq. But it certainly has been a mess so far.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5277869/

:confused:


Bonus from the man of God:


But if I had been doing it, I think I would have much preferred the assassination route.

:lol: Just like Jesus taught!

adamblast
10-21-04, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Pharoh
Well, all of us dimwits need somebody we can relate to. Duh! The blind leading the blind
-- Michelle Goldberg, Salon, 10/21/2004


Even if they don't like to say it out loud, lots of Democrats think that George Bush's supporters are a horde of ignoramuses. Now comes evidence that they're right!

A remarkable new report, titled "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters," from PIPA, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, suggests that rank and file Republicans are more benighted than even the most supercilious coastal elitist would imagine.

Analyzing data from a series of nationwide polls, the report finds that a majority of Bush supporters believe things about the world that are objectively untrue, while the majority of Kerry supporters dwell in the reality-based community. For example, Bush backers largely think that the president and his policies are popular internationally. Seventy-five percent believe that Iraq was providing "substantial" aid to al-Qaida, and 63 percent say clear evidence of this has been found. That, of course, would be news even to Donald Rumsfeld, who earlier this month told the Council on Foreign Relations, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two."

Though its language is dispassionate, the report lays responsibility for this epidemic of ignorance at the White House's door. "So why are Bush supporters clinging so tightly to these beliefs in the face of repeated disconfirmations?" it asks. "Apparently one key reason is that they continue to hear the Bush administration confirming these beliefs."

Indeed, it says, "an overwhelming 82% [of Bush supporters] perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or a major WMD program (19%). Only 16% of Bush supporters perceive the administration as saying that Iraq had some limited activities, but not an active program (15%) or had nothing (1%). The pattern on al Qaeda is similar. Seventy-five percent of Bush supporters think the Bush administration is **currently** saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda (56%) or even that it was directly involved in 9/11 (19%). Further, 55% of Bush supporters say it is their impression the Bush administration is currently saying the US has found clear evidence Saddam Hussein was working closely with al Qaeda (not saying clear evidence found: 37%)."

These people aren't going to be swayed by the argument that Bush has alienated America's allies and left the country isolated in the world, because they don't believe this to be the case. "Despite a steady flow of official statements, public demonstrations, and public opinion polls showing that the US war against Iraq is quite unpopular, only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq," the study says. Bush supporters also think that world public opinion favors Bush's reelection. In a poll taken from Sept. 3-7, the study says, "57% of Bush supporters assumed that the majority of people in the world would prefer to see Bush reelected, 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred."

In fact, a PIPA study released in early September found that a majority or plurality of people from 32 countries preferred Kerry to Bush. PIPA surveyed 34,330 people, ages 15 and above, from regions all over the world. A Pew poll released this spring similarly found that "large majorities in every country, except for the U.S., hold an unfavorable opinion of Bush."

Bush supporters are also mistaken about the president's own positions (a pattern of misapprehension that an earlier PIPA report also documented). "Majorities incorrectly assumed that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues -- the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%); 51% incorrectly assumed he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty -- the principal international accord on global warming ... Only 13% of supporters are aware that he opposes labor and environmental standards in trade agreements -- 74% incorrectly believe that he favors including labor and environmental standards in agreements on trade. In all these cases, there is a recurring theme: majorities of Bush supporters favor these positions, and they infer that Bush favors them as well."

According to the report, this reality gap is something new in American life. "So why do Bush supporters show such a resistance to accepting dissonant information?" it asks. "While it is normal for people to show some resistance, the magnitude of the denial goes beyond the ordinary. Bush supporters have succeeded in suppressing awareness of the findings of a whole series of high-profile reports about prewar Iraq that have been blazoned across the headlines of newspapers and prompted extensive, high-profile and agonizing reflection. The fact that a large portion of Americans say they are unaware that the original reasons that the US took military action -- and for which Americans continue to die on a daily basis -- are not turning out to be valid, are probably not due to a simple failure to pay attention to the news."

The analysis says that the roots of this denial could lie in the trauma of 9/11 and people's desire to hold on to their image of Bush as a "capable protector." It offers no guidance, though, on how ordinary Republicans might be coaxed back to reality.

And while "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters" may be perversely satisfying to Democrats in its confirmation of blue-state prejudices, it carries a pretty disturbing question for all rational Americans: How can arguments based on fact prevail in a nation where so many people know so little?

Jam Master Jay
10-21-04, 06:08 PM
Damn, well there it is. I hate being such a DUmmie somtimes. I wish some people from overseas would write me and tell me who to vote for. :confused:

Dimension X
10-21-04, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by dork
Pat Robertson on Hardball, June 23, 2004:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I don‘t think God‘s opposed to the war, necessarily, but it was a danger sign. I felt very uneasy about it from the very get-go. Whenever I heard about it, I knew it was going to be trouble. I warned the president. I only met with him once. I said, You better prepare the American people for some serious casualties. And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don‘t have to worry about that. But it has been messy. And I think we‘re going to come out of it, though. I think we‘ll have a free Iraq. But it certainly has been a mess so far.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5277869/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:confused:


:hscratch: So, in June Robertson said the President told him we wouldn't have "serious casualties," but four months later he said the President told him we wouldn't have "any casualties."

Contactsport1
10-21-04, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by Dimension X
:hscratch: So, in June Robertson said the President told him we wouldn't have "serious casualties," but four months later he said the President told him we wouldn't have "any casualties."

I think your reading that wrong.

I said, You better prepare the American people for some serious casualties. And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don‘t have to worry about that.

I read it that Robertson predicted the casualties and Bush blew him off. Assuming you believe Robertson to begin with.

chess
10-22-04, 08:21 AM
Robertson is a tool and a liar.
Bush is a tool and a liar.

Let's just call it a wash.

Dimension X
10-22-04, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by Contactsport1
I think your reading that wrong.

I read it that Robertson predicted the casualties and Bush blew him off. Assuming you believe Robertson to begin with.
What exactly am I reading incorrectly?

June:
I said, You better prepare the American people for some serious casualties. And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don‘t have to worry about that.
Oct.:
And I was trying to say, Mr. President, you better prepare the American people for casualties.

Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties. Well, I said, it's the way it's going to be.
Not only does Robertson change what he alleges he said to Bush, he also changes Bush's alleged answer. From the June quote, it sounds like Bush's alleged response was in reaction to talk of "serious casualties" (which I assume to mean large numbers), but in the recent interview Robertson said Bush told him there would be "no casualties." There's quite a bit of difference between saying there will not be huge numbers of casualties and saying there will be no casualties at all (which probably explains why the Hardball interview in June wasn't a big story, but this interview was).