Probably not. From where he is standing on the "approval rating scale" one can't go anywhere but up.
I am glad he's taking responsibility. He probably should have done some things different. However, as the inevitable congressional hearings will show, this sounds like a failure on about every level of government, top-to-bottom.
If you don't stand for SOMETHING, you'll fall for ANYTHING.
Mikey711MN From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1398 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2314 times:
Quoting LHMark (Reply 2): Well, it's pretty easy to take the blame when there are no actual repercussions from doing so, so a safe move by Bush to shore up some of his crumbling support.
While I respect anyone who "takes responsibility" for something, part of that includes paying consequentially for one's actions or lack thereof. And therefore I agree with you LHMark, I'm not really sure I see that in this case.
But his value as a leader--indeed now "responsible" for putting the correct resources, both personnel and otherwise, in place to fix the problem--will be told from this point on, and for that, I'm glad that we seem to have some sort of starting point for the rebuilding to begin. Without anyone taking responsibility for past [in]actions, there is no explicit person to take responsibility to move forward.
Dan-Air From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 614 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2286 times:
Well, that's a start. I must admit I am surprised, although looking at the poll numbers, Bush has only one way to go, and that's up. He would have a lot more credibility in my book if he had admitted mistakes on 9/11 and Iraq , although I think the Iraq debacle warrants impeachment.
Now bring FEMA back to where it was under Clinton. Start by firing all the unqualified cronies. Open up the re-building efforts to competitive bids. Eliminate planned tax-cuts to cover the cost of recovery/re-building.
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2237 times:
It's about time he takes responsability for something. In order to go forward you need a first step, so let's hope his statement was the first step towards better leadership, although after some of the stuff he said about Iraq and Siria, I doubt it.
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2220 times:
Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 12): Now bring FEMA back to where it was under Clinton. Start by firing all the unqualified cronies. Open up the re-building efforts to competitive bids. Eliminate planned tax-cuts to cover the cost of recovery/re-building.
FEMA was a joke then too. It took six days days for a response to Andrew. States need to follow California's lead in what they did after the San Francisco earthquake and get a standardized plan together.
WellHung From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2219 times:
Wow, good for him. Seriously - is this the first time he has publicly accepted responsibility for one of his administration's many major 'mistakes' (to put it mildly)? And who in the administration allowed this acceptance of responsibility to slip through the cracks? At this point you'd think it would have thrown up red flags at the earliest stages of proposal.
Maybe he can put together another bureacracy to oversee DHS , FEMA, etc. for one of his inexperienced friends to mismanage that can make the response to the next disaster even more convoluted and disorganized.
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39879 posts, RR: 74
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2208 times:
I still don't trust Bush and will not give any praise for accepting responsibility.
Why did Bush hire Michael Brown in the first place?
Didn't Bush see that this man brought nothing to the table?
Bush doesn't deserve any medal for accepting responsibility for his administrations f--k ups.
Besides, every conservative news outlet is blaming and pointing fingers at every Democrat that was in the path of hurricane Katrina's path.
Therefore, George W. Bush himself doesn't need to do it.