# Bush's waffles **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 10, 2004, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526 "2004-03-10T18:54:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2004, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/61 "2004-03-11T23:30:07Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Slip of the tongue, Kerry _meant_ to say “major league assholes.” Surely Kerry is deserving of the same linguistic charity that we daily apply to the utterances of the president and his cohort. Oh, you can believe both guys meant **exacly** what they said. 🙂 I’m not really taking a side here, just trying to understand where the “Bush said Kerry was unfit for the presidency” came from. It’s been stated twice on this thread, and I don’t believe it can be substantiated. Bush is using the “flip flop” accusation as a campaign tactic. Alls fair in love and politics. Kerry can do one of three things: 1. Ignore it and hope it doesn’t stick 2. Counter it with the reasons he had for changing positions 3. Try to throw the same accusation back at Bush I say he loses (this battle) if he picks 2 or 3, so best to go with #1 and attack Bush on where he is weakest (WMDs, the economy). ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/62 "2004-03-12T02:13:21Z")
Not even the Ides of March, and the Bush campaign is already resorting to Plan B after the disatrously received 9/11 commercials, going negative on Kerry. That smacks of real desparation. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/63 "2004-03-12T02:14:19Z")
> [@](#): > > This is not true, before Bush invented the Homeland Security Department there was no such discussion of such a bureau, it did not exist. I can’t believe no one has called TBC on this nonsense. There was plenty of discussion on such a cabinet level position, and that discussion began BEFORE 9/11 when a bipartisan comittee and Clinton both recommended it. Bush scoffed at the idea even after 9/11, deriding the idea of creating a new gut-guzzling government agengy. Then he, in a rather brilliant move, flipped on it and came out for it… only with certain employment stipulations that the Democrats who had previously been pushing for it didn’t support. This had the effect of making it look like they were against the idea. While that was an expert political move, the fact is that this was a HUGE flip-flop for Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/64 "2004-03-12T03:49:00Z")
**Apos** , I was about to jump all over that, too. Just to clarify for the informationally-challenged: > [@](#): > > A debate over how to best structure the federal government to prevent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil **began even before the September 11 attacks.** **In 1998** the U.S. secretary of defense created the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century (also known as the Hart-Rudman Commission for its cochairs, former U.S. senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman) to assess global threats to domestic security and develop a national security strategy. This commission reported in February 2001 that homeland security functions were “scattered across more than two dozen departments and agencies, and all fifty states,” and it warned of future attacks against U.S. citizens on their own soil. It recommended the creation of a new **National Homeland Security Agency** —integrating FEMA, the Customs Service, the U.S. Border Patrol, and the Coast Guard—to coordinate government homeland security activities. From: [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia\_701610362/Department\_of\_Homeland\_Security.html](http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_701610362/Department_of_Homeland_Security.html) see also: > [@](#): > > JOE LIEBERMAN Homeland Security & Immigration; **Lieberman pushed for the creation of a homeland security department while Bush still opposed it (The President later changed his mind.)** Now he would give $7 billion to state and local governments for first responder needs, set aside money to hire new firefighters, develop new information technology sharing systems and establish a National Homeland Security Academy, under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security, to cultivate future leaders in domestic defense. He’d strengthen port and border defense and up the Coast Guard’s budget. From: [http://www.time.com/time/election2004/candidates/lieberman\_home.html](http://www.time.com/time/election2004/candidates/lieberman_home.html) Bush: Flop it up, flip it, rub it down. And this was the first observation of **TBS** right out of the gate. There’s that old saying about when the clock strikes 13, how do you know which one was erroneous… How about the very first. Should we proceed to the second? ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/65 "2004-03-12T04:51:09Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > I can’t believe no one has called TBC on this nonsense. There was plenty of discussion on such a cabinet level position, and that discussion began BEFORE 9/11 when a bipartisan comittee and Clinton both recommended it. Bush scoffed at the idea even after 9/11, deriding the idea of creating a new gut-guzzling government agengy. Then he, in a rather brilliant move, flipped on it and came out for it… only with certain employment stipulations that the Democrats who had previously been pushing for it didn’t support. This had the effect of making it look like they were against the idea. While that was an expert political move, the fact is that this was a HUGE flip-flop for Bush. Speaking of the Department of “Homeland Security”, a scathing opinion on it from Computerworld: > [@](#): > > DHS: Dumb, Huge, Slow > > Opinion by Maryfran Johnson > > MARCH 08, 2004 (COMPUTERWORLD) - If you’ve been at all worried that the Department of Homeland Security might be doing something worth paying attention to, rest easy. When it comes to having any signifi-cant impact on corporate IT security plans, the $36 billion federal agen-cy has been monumentally ineffective. > As our front-page story this week points out, it’s private-sector companies – particularly in transportation, utilities and finance – that are driving their own IT security strategies to protect the nation’s critical infrastructures. Without any push from the DHS, for example, the Rail Industry Security Committee is busy sharing best practices for both physical and cybersecurity. In the natural gas industry, same story. “All of the initiatives are industry-driven,” says Gary Gardner, CIO of the American Gas Association. > > Given that the private sector owns and operates 85% of the critical infrastructure that keeps our lights on and water flowing, this may seem like the natural course of events. But at least part of the fantasy behind spending billions of our tax dollars on the DHS was to create an agency that could orchestrate a public/private collaboration on security matters. “I think largely we’ve dropped the ball,” says Richard Clarke, former chairman of the President’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board. > > CIOs and senior IT executives would no doubt agree. They’ve all noticed that there are no incentives in the 1-year-old “National Strategy to Secure Cyber Space” plan for private industry. No tax credits. No cost sharing. No real reason to care. > > [Full article](http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,10801,90813,00.html) ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/66 "2004-03-12T05:04:36Z")
Thanks, **Hentor** and **Apos**! I was going to call TBC on that one 'cause I knew it was dead wrong but my quick google search failed to turn up a good link on it. I also didn’t realize that some forward-looking people had called for creation of such a department even before 9/11. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/67 "2004-03-12T05:08:25Z")
> [@The\_Broken\_Column](#): > > You are right, I should be remembered for this. It’s not every day a liberal message boards is presented with such a good researcher for the Conservative side. Yes, I am sure **Sam Stone** , **John Mace** , and all the rest of those folks must be just thrilled to have you on their side! I can tell you one thing: we’re certainly thrilled to have you on their side! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/68 "2004-03-12T06:01:05Z")
Fresh Waffles. Get your HOT FRESH WAFFLES HERE: [Bush Shitcans Own Outsourcing Czar Choice](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51177-2004Mar11.html) ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/69 "2004-03-12T06:45:43Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > I also didn’t realize that some forward-looking people had called for creation of such a department even before 9/11. I find the whole Homeland Security episode rather strange. I guess the Bushies were pissed that the proposals for Homeland Security didn’t include nuclear weapons: > [@](#): > > [Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century](http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) (warning, .PDF) > > **HOMELAND DEFENSE.** America must defend its homeland. During the Cold War, nuclear deterrence was the key element in homeland defense; it remains essential. But the new century has brought with it new challenges. While reconfiguring its nuclear force, the United States also must counteract the effects of the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction that may soon allow lesser states to deter U.S. military action by threatening U.S. allies and the American homeland itself. Of all the new and current missions for U.S. armed forces, this must have priority. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/70 "2004-03-12T07:24:25Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > Yes, I am sure **Sam Stone** , **John Mace** , and all the rest of those folks must be just thrilled to have you on their side! I can tell you one thing: we’re certainly thrilled to have you on their side! 😉 I’m not on anyone’s side. To my knowledge, I’ve never agreed with **T\_B\_C** in any thread, including this one. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/71 "2004-03-12T07:37:19Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Actually, I’d say that Kerry is the one making charges of “unfit for office” via his latest comments when he thought the mike was turned off, calling Republicans a “crooked, lying group”. Sounds like he was just stating a fact to me. Or shall we drag out those nonexistent Iraqi WMDs again? ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/72 "2004-03-12T07:52:52Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Sounds like he was just stating a fact to me. Or shall we drag out those nonexistent Iraqi WMDs again? **312 DAYS … AND STILL NO WMD FOUND IN IRAQ.** Above from [http://www.informationclearinghouse/](http://www.informationclearinghouse/). For those in the ABB camp, you can sign up for a very good daily news summary with LOTS of links at this site. But probably best to wait till mid-Friday to go there based on this message below (now I wonder who would want to do such a nasty thing? :rolleyes: ). > [@](#): > > NOTE: Website Hacked > > www.informationclearinghouse was hacked and as a result I have been unable to access the server to update the site. > > Our web host is working on repairing the damage and the site will be updated within the next 12 hours. ---
**Author:** ![Monocracy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monocracy/32/4493_2.png) [@Monocracy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monocracy)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 9:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/73 "2004-03-12T09:17:28Z")
> [@The\_Broken\_Column](#): > > Uhh … **HELLO MORON** … Amendments are ratified by the States, it is far from taking away “State’s Rights”. If it were, you’d be looking for a federal law that over-rules all State laws. > > God damn…shit…I hate anti-Bush morons. States’ rights is an issue which revolves around the Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Therefore an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, by definiton, is taking away some States’ Rights. > [@John Mace](#): > > I’m not really taking a side here, just trying to understand where the “Bush said Kerry was unfit for the presidency” came from. It’s been stated twice on this thread, and I don’t believe it can be substantiated. Actually, the word used first was not “said”, it was “insisted”, but i think a better word word would be “implies”. Bush is using this as a major campaign tactic, which means he is using this as a reason why he should be elected instead of Kerry. I think we all know what (s)he meant, let’s not lose the discussion by taking a modified statement too literally. > [@John Mace](#): > > Bush is using the “flip flop” accusation as a campaign tactic. Alls fair in love and politics. Kerry can do one of three things: > > 1. Ignore it and hope it doesn’t stick > 2. Counter it with the reasons he had for changing positions > 3. Try to throw the same accusation back at Bush > > I say he loses (this battle) if he picks 2 or 3, so best to go with #1 and attack Bush on where he is weakest (WMDs, the economy). Although a fourth option would be a combination of 2 and 3. Explain some of your(Kerry’s) flip-flops. Then point out some of Bush’s flip-flops, but also explain them, giving them a pro-Bush spin. Then explain how it isn’t good to be “Steady In Changing Times”. Bush’s current campaign strategy would be shattered, and he’d have to start from scratch. Although i doubt the Kerry campaign will go this route. It looks like he’s trying to play it safe … rifing the anti-Bush sentiment without pissing off too many people. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/74 "2004-03-12T12:39:57Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I’m not on anyone’s side. To my knowledge, I’ve never agreed with **T\_B\_C** in any thread, including this one. Of course, I was being sarcastic in saying that those of you of a conservative persuasion who actually make coherent arguments would be happy to have **T\_B\_C** around being “such a good researcher for the Conservative side.” ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/75 "2004-03-12T17:44:21Z")
All’s fair in love in politics… I can agree that some of the Bush flip-flops were warranted. I mean, wasn’t it obvious after 9/11 that it was necessary? TBC doesn’t really do himself any favors saying that nation-building was this 70’s era idea of supporting dictators. I was against nation-building too, but my opinions changed along with many others. There I won’t fault Bush. And surely Bush has had some flipflops. But I got news for everyone here! Everone lies to get elected! The only politician running for president that had a serious chance that didn’t lie or flip flop (much) was Howard Dean. He wasn’t sinless either. I remember him having flipflops. Kerry has had plenty. Being in the Senate for 20 years you are going to have to make some changes. Bush is President and as a presidential cantidate you are going to have to waffle or do whatever to get elected. Its normal. So every politician does it. You tell me one single politician that has never flipfloped or waffled or been untrue in his resolve, and I will be impressed. Actually I think that the best thing is to have a politician that has resolve but isn’t afraid to bargain for the greatest good. Its being pragmatic. Now Bush comes along and accuses Kerry of being an untrustworthy waffling bastard. Its his right, and he has to drive Kerry’s negatives down, because if he doesn’t, Bush is in deep doodoo. The best way is to make attacks on his character, because individual positions can be respectfully disagreed with, but character flaws are forever. As a Democrat there are two ways to defend these kinds of attacks. Firstly you can try to go through them point by point like TBC did for Bush. But you’ll end up looking silly as TBC did. Or you can defend it as a normal part of politics, which is what trying to show Bush’s waffles does. Bush’s waffles vs. Kerry waffles doesn’t really bother me. Bush’s negatives are low enough and that point doesn’t need to be made. Bush’s positions at the moment are bad enough and his record is awful, so its not like we Democrats need to paint him as untrustworthy to win. Its pretty obvious at this point. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/76 "2004-03-12T19:23:05Z")
Just IMO, but I’d much rather follow someone who can change his views and beliefs as information and circumstances change, rather than someone who remains rigidly inflexible regardless of changes in the information and circumstances. Thus, “flip-flops” from Kerry and Bush don’t bother me at all. However, for the Bush camp to accuse Kerry of being an unfit candidate because of this is stupid and hypocritical. Not that it’ll stop them from doing so, I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/77 "2004-03-12T20:07:12Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > Of course, I was being sarcastic in saying that those of you of a conservative persuasion who actually make coherent arguments would be happy to have **T\_B\_C** around being “such a good researcher for the Conservative side.” You liberals are all alike-- couldn’t tell a libertarian from a conservative if your lives depended on it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/78 "2004-03-12T20:32:02Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Just IMO, but I’d much rather follow someone who can change his views and beliefs as information and circumstances change, rather than someone who remains rigidly inflexible regardless of changes in the information and circumstances. Thus, “flip-flops” from Kerry and Bush don’t bother me at all. I agree that the more dangerous kind of person is one like Bush who has a rigid, inflexible ideology and decides on the policy damn the facts and then even tries to twist the facts to fit the pre-set policy. That is clearly what happened with the tax cuts, which were originally sold as a way to refund taxpayers for overpayment in a time of growing surplusses but then became a stimulus package when the economy tanked and the surplusses turned into deficits. Never mind that the tax cuts were not structured to provide very efficient stimulus when the economy needs it…Rather they were structured to give about the minimum stimulus bang for the maximum buck…and the bucks keep on building into perpetuity. We now have evidence that Iraq was sold similarly. I.e., 9/11 and WMDs to terrorists just provided a convenient excuse to pursue the policy of overthrowing Saddam. The correct motis operandi is (1) assemble and weigh the facts. (2) use these facts to formulate policy. This President operates like this: (1) formulate the policy based on your ideology. (2) cherry-pick the facts (or use facts to make up justifications…“Oh, the economy is tanking, well now we’ll call our tax cut plan a stimulus package”) to sell the policy. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526/79 "2004-03-12T20:48:48Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > You liberals are all alike-- couldn’t tell a libertarian from a conservative if your lives depended on it. 🙂 Sure we can, **John-boy**. We just don’t care enough to bother. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushs-waffles/233526.md?page=3)