President Barack Obama: "I was wrong."

The Obama screwed up and he admits it. Congratulations. He takes full responsibility. What a champ. He's fantastic. He's amazing. He's brilliant. He's a genius. What a speaker. What powerful rhetoric. What a great guy. What a great dad. What a wonderful husband. He's a great provider. He's got a good jump shot. That's just grand.

He is an adult

Unlike many here on newsvine demonstrate daily ................

Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of myself,and when I was wrong promptly admitted it.

Props to my President.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Denial seems to be a legitimate political platform for some.

The Incredulous One

The Obama screwed up and he admits it. Congratulations. He takes full responsibility. What a champ. He's fantastic. He's amazing. He's brilliant. He's a genius. What a speaker. What powerful rhetoric. What a great guy. What a great dad. What a wonderful husband. He's a great provider. He's got a good jump shot. That's just grand.

And you are what? A Free Marketer? A Drill, Drill, Driller? One of those who believe that companies should police themselves and that those who would protect our natural resources are Nazis? Or Socialists? Or (God forbid) Liberals? One who equates the American Way of Life with complete disregard for the environment?

I think he assumed that the oil company would have a better response than what the government could muster. However wrong that assumption was, I don't blame him for assuming it.

They (oil operator) caused this spill.

And while I appreciate his assuming some mantle of responsibility, the blame squarely lies on the people who don't have adequate plans for their business operations. The governments responsibility is to ensure they are operating safely, and it appears that needs a lot of work (given the levels of corruption, it's not surprising a mega oil operator can get away with half-a&$ed work).

I think what's telling is he really did not have to apologize for anything but he felt the need to. That's being responsible, often times in life we simply don't want to be wrong, and we have a choice, we can apologize and move the situation forward or stay stuck in the mire.

Creed,

Well, we can certainly see that YOU are wrong, though you may not realize it.

Show me greatness and I'll admit it. Show me folly, and I'll admit that too.

ok so why was comment 1.1 collapsed and comment 1.5 stays?

So, the big cheese takes the blame? That is sure a lot of blame to shoulder. At least he didn't fly a banner over the drill sight reading, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!" The irony here is that Obama's buffoon predecessor allowed the cozy relationship between the Minerals management bureau and the oil companies to flourish. Bush WAS an oil man if I do recall.

Yup. The oil spill is Bush' fault!

We take no responsibility here.

Pfew....all is back to normal. :)

ok so why was comment 1.1 collapsed and comment 1.5 stays?

Because readers collapsed 1.1 and did not collapse 1.5. That doesn't prevent you from reading either.

The spill is not Bush's fault, begging for someone....anyone to deep drill in the Gulf and being told by every major oil company that they were not interested because of the liability and danger, save for BP and they even said that we do not have the technology yet to handle the potential disaster while also echoing that the liability was too great.

So Bush relaxed the rules (don't have to file a disaster plan) and capped the liability. Now the Dems try to repeal the cap yesterday and the Republicans balked and stopped it....Had his administration not changed the rules for "Drill baby drill" this well would not have been built yet and if it were a solid plan would have been in place.

Liberal gang flagging. A well known activity here on Vine. Thought and opinion suppressing fascism at its best, fully endorsed by MSNBC and the moderators of Newsvine. Get used to it? :)

Because conservative or tea party posters/threads never do that....

Well, lol, they certainly don't make it a practice to send emails to each other to go to a certain thread to collapse it or to certain comments to do the same like a certain group among the liberals here on the vine do.

@1.19

That's a childish statement. Its done on both sides.

But this is 2010 and we live in a "blameless society." Jesse James blames his "childhood abuse" for his infidelity. If we don't point the finger of blame at someone, how do we collect damages? How about this for a compromise? You can all blame ME!! That's right, blame "Vanwood" for the oil disaster. You can file a class action suit against me and take everything I own. Because in the long run it is I and every working middle class schlep who will inevitably foot the bill for this. The base price for a barrel of oil will rise costing us all more at the pump. The Gulf coast will dry up and vanish as tourism dies. More unemployment and recession in that entire region as fishermen lose their livelihood. The cost of shrimp and other shell fish will skyrocket. Shall I continue?

My comment was not so much a why specific to the fact of it being collapsed because I do understand that someone was offended and felt it needed to be closed.

Wow that last thought (someone did not like what was said so they had to have it quieted) that isn't to controlling of a concept is it?

So back to what I was saying. The comment in 1.5 took the time to wildly assume the intents of comment 1.1 yet it remains and comment 1.1 which was for reasons unknown a post that gave many words of acknowledgement to the president, they may or may not have been sincere but they where at the least positive and on topic.

So my question is this. Why is it OK to collapse the one and not the other. I feel the second one was far worse than the first yet both should be left unchanged for the readers to see. This is not a question of how it happens but more of a thought provoking why does it happen. This is a site that is open for free exchange of opinions so long as they follow the COH so at what point do we justify collapsing a comment just because we do not agree with what is said. This applies to deletion also.

Last, where is this feature that allows the 'community' to collapse a comment? We are the community and I only see the ability to flag a comment and not one that reads collapse.

Just Neli

Ah. Are you one of the free speech supporters who collapsed my comment?

I'm just someone who doesn't extol the man who screwed up and then admits it. The best I can muster is a blank stare. Yeah, okay good for The Obama for being savvy enough to recognize that the newest political PR meme is to admit to voters you screwed up; they are very forgiving. I get it. And he gets it, too.

But that this demands respect? He admitted he screwed up. So what? You want me to nominate him for another Nobel Prize?

Where Barry was and is most at fault.

1) Underestimating Bush and Company and or Cheney's closed door regulatory and No Bid Contract policies cabinet.

2) Review all issues and policies made by 2.0 w Bush, and yes even Clinton's, Bush 41 and Reagan. Then repeal any and all accordingly to President Obama's promise of change.

First, I love James Carville. He's the worst kind of partisan if you're on the right, but the man says what he believes and has a heart. That's been evident throughout his career and I deeply respect that.

Second, one of things that bothered me most about Bush/Cheney (and there were lots of them) was that they never said they were wrong. They continually reminded me of schoolchildren who could never just say, "yea, i could have handled that better'.

Third, I believe Pres Obama is genuine. However, it's also politically expedient for him to say that he was wrong. He has to backpedal away from licking the boots of the oil industry and make friends with the sane members of both his base and independents. I don't know how you make that 180 pivot without saying "I was wrong" and not come off as a Bush/Cheney-type fake.

Fourth, DAMN RIGHT YOU WERE WRONG! You know what President Obama, we didn't elect you to make friends with oil companies. You were elected to effect CHANGE. Remember that slogan? You agreed to that expansion to kiss the asses of the oil industry and make concessions to Republican who have repeatedly, publicly, told you to go @!$%# yourself. You look both WEAK and DUMB for doing so. Grow a pair.

Yes, we have a sweeping overhaul of the healthcare system that we're proud of, but no public option.

Yes, you're going to pass a Wall Street reform bill, but without capping banks' risk so they're still going to go after the short-term gains and leave us in the tank when they fail.

Troops are still in Iraq last I checked and yes, you did promise to focus on Afghanistan, but guess what...we have no @!$%#ing idea why we're over there...and it's costing HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

You knew that the MMS was corrupt. I think they did a frickin 60 minutes piece on the corruption of that agency and every other agency under Bush/Cheney because they put people in there whose job it was to destroy the regulatory power of those agencies. Why did you let the head of MMS offer her resignation? Fire her ass!!! CHANGE President Obama. CHANGE. Fire her ass. And you need to weed them all out and you're running out of time. Bush/Cheney destroyed the regulatory power of government. They left us with a HUGE mess. But you were hired to FIX IT. So plug the damn hole and fire the boot licking scum heading these agencies. You should have fired her ass.

You either fire them or you join them. You joined them on this one. BIG TIME. We're massively disappointed in you for that. And CHANGE requires that it doesn't happen again.

ok so why was comment 1.1 collapsed and comment 1.5 stays?

I can't be positive but it may have a little to do with the commenter and not the comment. Comments are, after all, collapsed by the readers and not by moderators or admins like Tyler. Fair? Perhaps not. But uncollapsed comments (usually) add to the conversation.

Well, lol, they certainly don't make it a practice to send emails to each other to go to a certain thread to collapse it or to certain comments to do the same like a certain group among the liberals here on the vine do.

Yes, they do.

In particular if they have started a thread. They do the same thing, group mentality to defend the thread if people start posting opposing opinions. Try to collapse the comments, etc.

First off, I've never gotten a single email or pm to come collapse a thread. I hit the report button because I feel somehthing is inflammatory, no value, insane, or advertising.

This is a site that is open for free exchange of opinions so long as they follow the COH so at what point do we justify collapsing a comment just because we do not agree with what is said. This applies to deletion also.

WillBoyd, your comment indicates that you are a thoughtful and principled person, and the fact is simply that many NVers aren't. The "collapse" phenomenon happens on NV all too often, and is only sometimes justified when legitimately offensive (to the community) is posted. Many times comments are collapsed for exactly the reason you pointed out. In this case, enough of "the community" did not like what I said, and they impose a form of speech control. They're afraid to let others easily see what I wrote for fear some might agree with me.

Last, where is this feature that allows the 'community' to collapse a comment? We are the community and I only see the ability to flag a comment and not one that reads collapse.

I don't how this works either. I assume that people flag no value, or inflammatory, quite a verdict given all the extremely "valuable", and "non-inflammatory" crap posted here all the time, and after some number, the commented gets collapsed.

and after some number, the commented gets collapsed

That's my assumption, too.

And, no offense meant Incredulous One, but I'm guessing that the "no value" option was probably what collapsed your comment. It just didn't add anything and was a "Wah, wah, rant."

Now, an interesting option, in my opinion, would be for the owner of the seed to be able to, at their discretion, uncollapse a comment and overrule the "community."

I'm just someone who doesn't extol the man who screwed up and then admits it. The best I can muster is a blank stare. Yeah, okay good for The Obama for being savvy enough to recognize that the newest political PR meme is to admit to voters you screwed up; they are very forgiving. I get it. And he gets it, too.

That comment right there speaks volumes of truth. This is exactly the problem I have with the whole thing. Is this just a political move or is this sincere? To compare his statement of fault to past Presidents in different situations is not correct either. They did exactly the same thing he is doing now and that is say the thing that would cause the best response from the public.

President Obama has made history several times now. He is walking a path of integrity and love of his country which he puts above himself. This is not the only thing he has said and done that actually brought tears of gratitude to me. Saying that he had to do what was right for the country and let the politics work themselves out later, also was extraordinary. One step at a time he works on a promise made during his campaign while at the same time dealing with everything else and working on getting the next issue addressed.

We lack often true insight into all he is doing and the extent of his efforts. I think there needs to be some sort of additional news release from the White House carefully detailing the truth of what is happening and the efforts of the Obama administration handle situations.

They did exactly the same thing he is doing now and that is say the thing that would cause the best response from the public.

Well, Bush would have gone a long way toward burnishing his legacy had he admitted at least some of his @!$%#-ups. That one press conference where he said he couldn't think of any will have to be the lasting image we have of him instead.

Sometimes admitting you are wrong is the what public wants to hear. Sometimes it is simply the right thing to do. Sometimes, it's both.

According to this...why is he apologizing? People are amazing.

Oil Pollution Act, signed into law by President George H.W. Bush in 1990, restricts government involvement in oil spills to a supervisory role. The law was designed to avoid the situation that followed the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, in which the government was left to clean up a private company’s mess and then had to sue the company to recover costs.

The same act restricts the liability of oil companies to $75 million, although they remain fully responsible for completing the clean up. That’s why BP is required to clean up its own mess. As the White House pointed out in a blog post yesterday, they’re also the ones who have the equipment…

Doty, like untold thousands of progressives frustrated by the continuing disaster in the Gulf, interprets his own lack of knowledge as a lack of action by Obama. One could actually investigate the facts, but it’s easier to cling to them to justify participation in this wave of misplaced populist anger… Populist anger inspired and perpetuated by ignorance of the facts, remaining undeterred by the facts: it’s not terribly different from those who believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya and who continue to believe it even when shown his birth certificate.

This, by law, is entirely BPs responsibility. The government doesn't (and isn't supposed to) have equipment for this. They are not very actively involved in the sector (because oil companies want it that way).

From this view, it's tremendous of him to assume responsibility and apologize to the American Public. More people should see that.

Killfile,

The way collapsing works is simple. If enough people report a post as being inappropriate for the same reason, it gets collapsed. This is community moderation; there is no all-powerful-moderator involved.

This was my guess but it is very helpful of you to explain this. I was not sureexactly how that took place.

This does then lend some credence to what I said. The 'community ' is practicing speach control and apparently there are ( unknown what number it takes to collapse a comment) many who share the same opinion.

So again thanks for the help Killfile.

Douglasq,

Now, an interesting option, in my opinion, would be for the owner of the seed to be able to, at their discretion, uncollapse a comment and overrule the "community."

good thinking that would indeed be helpful.

The sooner you can admit you are wrong, the sooner you are open to more viable solutions. Thats really it. If even in your mind, you cant admit something isnt working, you wont be receptive to new ideas. And thats not just with the president.

Im a coach, and it sometimes takes years to get a kid to reach their full potential because they cant see that they need to change up their technique a bit. Had a kid who was running lacluster times in the 100m. I told him he would do much better moving up to the 400m. Wouldnt hear of it. He finally got embarrassed in the 100m so bad, he decided to give the 400m a try...he will be attending Baylor next year on a full scholarship.....He would have missed out if he continued to be stubborn.....

Douglasq,

Sometimes admitting you are wrong is the what public wants to hear. Sometimes it is simply the right thing to do. Sometimes, it's both.

I agree with you on this and wish more would follow this advice.

My comment was geared more with the thought of the guidance of the speech writers and the people who tell the President the political wind at the moment. They are the ones who are behind most of the "what is the best thing to say" stuff. I think what 'The Incredulous One' said rings of truth (may be my cynical side talking) that it is hard to believe anything that comes out of the mouth of a politician and I can not help but question the motivation behind it. We can only dive into the deep subject of motivation behind the talk when we determine truthfulness of content and since the two are oxymoron's (truthful politician) we shall be hard pressed to know the why behind his statement of guilt.

douglasq:

And, no offense meant Incredulous One, but I'm guessing that the "no value" option was probably what collapsed your comment. It just didn't add anything and was a "Wah, wah, rant."

I agree that's why it was collapsed. I disagree it had no value. It has at least as much value as any comment giving him respect for taking responsibility and admitting he's wrong. I suppose I could have said: "no, he doesn't deserve respect for admitting he's wrong" Presumably, that would have gotten votes or not, but would not have been collapsed (but who knows?)

Instead I expressed my opinion sarcastically. So what? I also strongly suggested that my scorn extends to the huge numbers of people who see and saw in him something marvelous, something brilliant, something truly great, and unique, etc. Here was a man who could walk on water. The Obama has risen. Now his erstwile supporters will deny that anyone thought of him as the messiah, or that he was really all that. They will ignore the millions of people marching and celebrating his arrival. Change. Change. And hope. Oh my god, the world will be a better place now that The Obama is on the scene.

And he screwed up AND he admits he is wrong. Wow, what a guy. Doesn't he deserve respect? Well, at least some applause? No, not in my book.

Nope, my comment was at least as valuable as the ones praising him, the difference being theirs were not collapsed.

In my view: "no value" means the seed is about elephants, say, and I introduce an irrelevant comment about cars. Of course, "Inflammatory" is just a catch-all for anyone's indignation, so that probably gets flagged all the time.

Collapsing a comment means that some people do not want other people to readily or easily read an opinion they disagree with. That's all it is. There may be a place for it in very rare circumstances that might actually pose a threat or a danger, but otherwise, let other people say what they want. Let other people read what they want.

Is there another link to his speech? The video with this article did not have him saying 'I was wrong'.

What I did get from the video and the article was more condemnation of 'previous' administrations and oil companies plus a propaganda promo of his crap and tax bills.

I suppose I could have said: "no, he doesn't deserve respect for admitting he's wrong"

Again, I can only respond that Bush might have GAINED some respect by admitting he was wrong but he failed even at that.

It was said many times in the run up to the election, that a lot of Obama's support was built on the premise that he wasn't Bush. After eight long years of that massive display of denial, I think a lot of us are simply relieved to not see more of it.

My respect for the man just grows and grows. No, he is not going to do everything right, he is afterall human like the rest of us. Nice to have a thinking 'Adult' in the White House again.

Honestly, that's just about the most inspiring thing I think I've ever seen a US President say.

LMAO! This is the funniest comment I've ever seen here on the vine. Hell, it may well be the funniest comment I've EVER seen.

Stop feeling persecuted if people choose to "No Value" your post. Is that not their right? Part of "freedom" is the freedom to speak/write and the freedom to ignore/turn off what is being said. Are you going to cry if people exert their right to collapse your comment(s)? You would deny people this right?

And Creed, "liberal" has nothing to do with collapsing your comments, so stop being so dramatic. People are likely offended by the fact that after reading your posts they feel as if they've gotten dumber for trying to understand moronic reasoning.

Honestly, that's just about the most inspiring thing I think I've ever seen a US President say.

I think that's a bit of a stretch to say it's "just about the most inspriring thing a US President has said". I applaud Pres. Obama for saying what this. I believe it was the right thing for him to do, he owned up to the responsibilities of the office of President.

The office and the country are more important than the office holder.

I couldn't agree more!

Obama standing there and saying "I was wrong" is... powerful. I don't agree with his response to the crisis, but I have a lot of respect for that.

I couldn't agree more!

there may have been a slow response to this crisis, but in the end, the u.s. government can not stop this problem. we do not have the technology. only bp can stop, and it is their fault. let us not lose sight of that.

i also believe that comparing this to katrina is not exactly fair. we could clean up katrina, and we were in charge of the preparations and the following clean up. bp is the lead on this with our government basically advising or helping if we can.

to stop the leak, not the clean up. our nation will have to do that. i hope bp pays some toward it, but i am not going to hold my breath. i do not want to die.

I'm not sure I ever heard George W. Bush say he was wrong. And he was in office for 2 terms. Great job Killfile.

Mike,

Don't you remember when Bush said he made no mistakes?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011002731.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/24/AR2006042400850.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/01/2009112155218719767.html

All you Pres. Bush bashers should have pretty damn selective memories. Is it just as inspiring to you when Pres. Bush admitted he made mistakes?

Well, lol, they certainly don't make it a practice to send emails to each other to go to a certain thread to collapse it or to certain comments to do the same like a certain group among the liberals here on the vine do.

Funny, the only group I remember getting in trouble and banned for doing this were righties.

Got proof, Mrs. R.?

To the Right Wing silliness, there is an easy answer, if Bush did admit errors where was the mass criticism of those errors from Republicans ...... pffft .... this growing habit of having the only dream in life being to hold up a Nations President to Public ridicule ....

- I don't give a damn whether The President so vilified was Republican, Democrat, Free {whatever}-

.... it is a total National disgrace, and a growing cancer in most of the Free World. The foul behaviour sure as hell is not confined to the US alone.

He held up his hand and said "I was wrong" - as he promised he would during the Presidential Election. Is this the way a US President standing by his promise to act with honour and integrity is supported by his own population?

Because if it is, and you consider slamming the US President for demonstrating honor and integrity is clever and a demonstration of "Free Speech"- you really should go back and re-evaluate what you all established the US for in the first place.

Criticism is one thing when solidly based, validated and aimed at correcting a wrong is one thing. Gutter Sniping for purposes other than the "professed one" is lower than the gutter, and demonstrates a total lack of respect of the Office of the Presidency of your own Country.

Its pathetic, you don't deserve this guy, his standards are lost on you. That should generate me some hate mail - but I have a good trash can for that.

I certainly appreciate President Obama saying he was wrong and taking responsibility. Harry Truman put it more bluntly (no surprise) in his "the buck stops here," comment. I volunteered for Obama in 2008, but I was starting to think that his rhetoric was empty. He finally seems to be stepping up to the plate.

The discussion about comments being collapsed was also interesting. I hadn't really paid attention to the NV group censoring options. The only thing I've ever reported on were obnoxious business solicitations. In general, most of the people who post on NV seem to be adult. It's really easy to skim and ignore trollish comments. In general, I think it's better to let people decide for themselves who to ignore, and let the trolls hoist themselves on their on petards.

So basically that is a blanket statement for virtually everything he has said since his inauguration right? He was wrong..

I guess there is something to the old adage that the first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem.

It reminds of one of my wife's apologies, "I'm sorry you are mad at me"...

His apology is basically saying "I'm sorry BP is so incompetent" ... as you can see he clearly does not take the blame, his mistake was to trust them....

Excuse me for a minute your mistake was not doing more and bring the resources you had to solve the problem... as clearly noted in his speech today ... they have experts standing by to take over if it turns out the leak is not stopped... where were these experts when the leak started???

Beyond this I am going to say Obama needs to start acting on his promise of alternative energy sources.

That should generate me some hate mail - but I have a good trash can for that.

If it was possible to send you another friend request, I would. As it is I think the FRs coming your way will far outnumber the hate.

Smith Cassidy #1.44

Stop feeling persecuted if people choose to "No Value" your post. Is that not their right? Part of "freedom" is the freedom to speak/write and the freedom to ignore/turn off what is being said. Are you going to cry if people exert their right to collapse your comment(s)? You would deny people this right?

I'm not sure if you're kidding or not. If you're joking, you should be more obvious or add a smiley or something.

If you're serious: I find you're comment to have no value.

People are allowed to find no value or extremely important value in anything they want. Not a problem. The problem, even if you don't see it, is that people are making it difficult or inconvenient for others to see the opinion because YOU think others should not conveniently see it. YOU do not like the opinion, so YOU decide for others they shouldn't see it.

I say X. You do not like what I said, and you do not think others should see it. Now re-read your comment, and tell me again about how you support freedom of speech.

And btw, I see now that my comment #1.1 was restored. I'm glad that someone (NV, I assume) agrees with my point about collapsed comments.

"I was wrong."

He better get used to it. He's wrong on most things. Maybe the sense is finally coming into him with that on the job training.

The people on this vine that consistantly criticise the President will never give him credit for anything. That is not surprising to me. These individuals spend all their time here on newsvine spouting all negatives in regards to this President. No matter what he proposes they disagree with it and criticise him for it. Now the POTUS has came out and stated something fmr President BUSH never did. He stated he was wrong, he made a mistake thinking that BP had the ability to solve the problem they created. Overtime it became obvious to all of us including the President they did not. These are the same people who spout less government, the private sector can take care of itself. Well it is obvious BP created a problem well over their heads and now our government has to step in. I, like the President at first thought BP could fix this, so I really don't see why these individuals are taking this opportunity to take digs. I'm quite sure initially you thought and hoped BP could correct the problem they created. If you did and I know you did even though you will never admit it, how is the President any different than you in this regards. No one initially thought the government step in to fix this problem. So keep up your negativity of President Obama and aspiration of President BUSH even though he never uttered the words " I was wrong". Intelligent thinkers know it takes a mature individual with a lot of guts to admit when he or she has made a mistake. I must admit something also, I was wrong, i was wrong thinking that maybe someday those that constantly ridicule the President will show some sense of compassion, respect and faith in our Commander in Chief. Overtime they have proved me wrong. No matter what this President does they come down on him, call him names and show total disrespect. They behave as if they are more qualified to run the country. Well then why haven't any of you jumped into the political spectrum on a national scale? Is it because you know you are not qualified to run anything but you mouths? I believe so. I have praised the President and critised him, I attempt to be fair and balanced and I don't watch FOX. It is sad to see people such as this calling themselves Americans when our military are on the front lines risking their lives and dying for these people to sit back here get on their PC's and just slam the POTUS.... You are not American in my view....... Last word for Simplistic Reality, The POTUS does not have to get use to anything you suggest, and even though progress is slow the country is turning around under his watch.. I think you are the one that needs on the job training on what it really means to be an American, to live in a country that allows you the freedom to blast it's leader. If you were in China, N Korea or other countries you would have been locked up or even killed a long time ago. You and your cronies are a sad bunch......

Well, Prophat247, you've made an excellent point and therefore I would expect it to be ignored in this thread.

Bush certainly admitted mistakes, and it got no traction in the media, only condemnation from liberals and "progressives" who were quick to point out that previously he said he couldn't recall any mistakes. But now that we all know how cool it is to admit mistakes, it ain't no thang. Everyone does it. It's en vogue.

What mistake did President Bush admit to? Name it...

He was wrong, he said, to assume that oil companies were prepared for the worst as he tried to expand offshore drilling.

And he still doesn't get it. All I wanted was I was wrong not to throw everything the U.S. Government had at this Oil spill. Today I correct that mistake.

That is what I wanted to hear. That is what America wants to hear. That would get my vote in 2012. All I wanted out of President Obama is to lead. I guess I'm asking for to much.

What mistake did President Bush admit to? Name it...

PoliticoMan, re-read #1.62, then move your mouse over the link there. Click the link, and it will take you to articles you should read to get your answer. I read them. Now it's your turn.

You just can't satisfy some people regarding President Obama. If he says he was wrong and tries to move forward on the problem, they slam him. If he had gone into denial and done nothing, again they would slam him.

As far as the leak, no one had ever had to deal with something like this before, that is, a huge leak of oil sitting 5,000 feet down at the bottom of the ocean. And I would remind readers that although Obama supported offshore drilling for a short time, it was NOT Obama who thought that idiotic idea up, nor was he responsible for the leak itself. As it turns out, no one at first had any clear idea how to stop it. I have heard today they finally stopped it, and that is good.

The bigger picture here is a lesson the United States learned the hard way: If you plan on going deeper under the ocean and stretching technology to its limits to feed your addiction to crude, well...sometimes that tech will fail you and then you're left with a big mess. Twenty years from now, if you hike along the coastline near the Gulf, you are going to see occasional globs of oil as a reminder of the Big Spill.

Hopefully, we'll all be driving electric cars by then. I said in an earlier article that the Gulf spill would be the thing that finally woke up America to the dangers of oil. It's an addiction, and the drug is crude.

Obama's statement today took me back to a part in a book I wrote once about another President taking responsibility.

From The 13th Day of Christmas:

"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States…

“Thank you for coming today,” he began. “Before I take any questions, I have a few words.”

He opened his notes. “This morning at 9:28 AM, Eastern Standard Time, the Crew Exploration Vehicle Ohio launched from Cape Canaveral. It rendezvoused in Earth orbit with the Mars spacecraft and transferred to it the three astronauts who will become the first human beings to set foot on another planet. The Abraham Lincoln has already performed what NASA calls an ‘injection burn,’ and the spacecraft is now on course for Mars.”

He paused. “When I asked NASA three years ago if we could put men on Mars, they told me they didn’t know. Today, America has taken a giant step for mankind even farther than Neil Armstrong’s, and we are showing the world what America can do, and what is possible when people work together. I ask everyone to pray for the safety of the astronauts. They are pioneers in the truest sense of the word. Thank you. I will take your questions now.” Richardson pointed to a brunette woman sitting in the second row.

“Thank you Mr President. Shelby Patterson, Washington Post. Sir, there are reports that Mars 1 was a thrown-together rush program, because of pressure from the White House to put humans on Mars during your first term. How do you respond to these reports?”

“I did not order NASA to go to Mars,” said Richardson. “I only asked them if it was possible. My decision to commit us on this course was about opportunity and what I believe this country needs right now.”

“Mr. President, many experts are saying that the Mars mission is an inordinate risk for the astronauts. Will NASA will be held responsible if the mission fails?”

“No,” said Richardson quietly. “That responsibility would be mine.”

The Incredulous One

President Bush admitted he made a mistake with the statement "Bring em on". In all three articles he admitted mistakes were made regarding Iraq as we both know however he never admitted he was responsible for those mistakes. In all three articles the emphasis is placed on his administration's approach and terms like "we" are used. That is a lot different than "I" as we both know. So I give President Bush credit for admitting "Bring em on" was a mistake but we both know there are bigger mistakes he needs to admit too. Do you still believe Saddam had WMD?

The Incredulous One

I wasn't joking. If something I say gets collapsed, I move on. It's really not a big deal. Nothing on this site changes anything; it's typically one big pissing contest and it amounts to little.

As for your statement in particular (1.1), I didn't find it objectionable at all and have no idea why it was collapsed. That being said, it takes more than 1 person (how many exactly I wonder?) to collapse a comment, therefore at least 2 people, and likely more, had a problem with something you said. I think that's fair. Further, as was pointed out, your comment can still be read, and in fact it might be more intriguing collapsed as it adds a restricted or dangerous element (something like that) to the text.

And btw, I see now that my comment #1.1 was restored. I'm glad that someone (NV, I assume) agrees with my point about collapsed comments.

I get your point, I do, but doesn't it seem a bit authoritative to you that a single NV employee undid the actions of a number of NV members? Why is one right and the others wrong?

The Incredulous OneRestored

The Obama screwed up and he admits it. Congratulations. He takes full responsibility. What a champ. He's fantastic. He's amazing. He's brilliant. He's a genius. What a speaker. What powerful rhetoric. What a great guy. What a great dad. What a wonderful husband. He's a great provider. He's got a good jump shot. That's just grand.

Going back and reading your post...

What you wrote isn't offensive, but it isn't constructive either. You are clearly being sarcastic, but you aren't even following through with it...the whole post seems incomplete as it appears you are building up to rip into Obama for something, yet you never get to your point. And you comment on him being a dad, his jumpshot, his skills as an orator, etc. And yet it's a mystery why some people thought it trivial? Perhaps that people disliked your incomplete thoughts? Or perhaps they just didn't like a sarcastic post that added nothing to the conversation?

My rewrite of your post:

"The Incredulous One - ohh, he's incredulous. How super he is. What a fast typer. But don't collapse his comments, oh no, then he gets mad. Watch out for the Incredulous One. He has parents. Maybe a sister, maybe a brother, maybe even some children. Oh yeah, he's the Incredulous One. Oh yeah. He watches tv and eat food. Watch out."

Rahlly, I do indeed remember when Bush couldn't come up with a single thing he'd done wrong. Wouldn't you call that a little strange? Hmm...

I believe Dubya admitted he was wrong when he mistakenly thought he was wrong earlier in the day. Turns out, as usual, he had money and a powerful daddy and therefore he was right.

PoliticoMan

In all three articles he admitted mistakes were made regarding Iraq as we both know however he never admitted he was responsible for those mistakes.

Look, first you challenge me to name a mistake Bush admitted to, then you find one. One. Now you say he didn't take responsibility for the mistakes. You claim you read the articles. Did you miss this?

"Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me," he told the nation. "It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq." He added that generals have "reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes" and "they report that it does."

He goes on to describe any number of mistakes that were made. You see this with your own eyeballs or not?

Re-read the headlines. Re-read the articles.

As He Touts a 'Way Forward,' Bush Admits Errors of the Past

Bush Admits Mistakes in Iraq, Defends Tactics

Bush admits 'mistakes' in office

Put this together with the responsibility he said was his for any mistakes and you should be able to draw the correct conclusion. (or not)

Now if only 0' said "I Lied" that might be worth a few points.

Smith Cassidy #1.69

I wasn't joking. If something I say gets collapsed, I move on. It's really not a big deal.

I didn't ask, but now that you've mentioned it, thanks, I've made a note: Smith Cassidy moves on. Just so you know, because you don't, I didn't get mad, and was not actually one who complained about getting collapsed. The discussion afterward was pretty general, about the idea of collapsing comments. I never argued that my comment should not have been collapsed based on its content. I said it shouldn't get collapsed just because some people didn't like what I wrote. I made that pretty clear. Most people get it.

You are clearly being sarcastic, but you aren't even following through with it...the whole post seems incomplete as it appears you are building up to rip into Obama for something, yet you never get to your point.

I didn't think I was being subtle, but just in case I wasn't clear, I'll quote myself from #1.39

Instead I expressed my opinion sarcastically. So what? I also strongly suggested that my scorn extends to the huge numbers of people who see and saw in him something marvelous, something brilliant, something truly great, and unique, etc. Here was a man who could walk on water. The Obama has risen. Now his erstwile supporters will deny that anyone thought of him as the messiah, or that he was really all that. They will ignore the millions of people marching and celebrating his arrival. Change. Change. And hope. Oh my god, the world will be a better place now that The Obama is on the scene.

That's what my comment meant. Plenty enough "follow through" implied by my original comment, and if you missed it then, you had #1.39 to work out the details.

And yet it's a mystery why some people thought it trivial?

No, that's not a mystery. The mystery is why anyone would think that opining that Obama deserves respect for admitting mistakes is a profound comment that does not merit getting collapsed, while expressing the opposite opinion deserves collapsing.

I get your point, I do, but doesn't it seem a bit authoritative to you that a single NV employee undid the actions of a number of NV members? Why is one right and the others wrong?

Unless this is an assignment for a philosophy class, my simple answer is that I don't care for mob rule, and I'm not an anarchist. The entire judicial system is based on it. Single or several judges often make decisions that many people may disagree with. Your boss at work does it, too.

My rewrite of your post:

demonstrates that you do not get it at all. That's ok...moving on, just like Smith Cassidy.

Of course, implicit in the President admitting his mistake of mustering insufficient urgency reining in Big Oil with restoration of proper government oversight is a subtle criticism of the fact innumerable wackadoos have been deriding his entire time in office as a Marxist Nazi Commie Kenyan Takeover Destroying America.

Frankly the episode is part and parcel of the practice of fools making this nation ungovernable and soon untenable.

Incredilous One

When I take sole responsibility for something I don't follow it up with "we". Following up a statement with "we" is attempting to share responsibility with someone else, therefore I am stating "it's not all my fault" That is what he did. I give him credit where it is due, but to say I take full responsibility and then follow up that statement with we, in my view is not being totally honest. When I say I take full responsibility I follow it up with "I" not "we".. That is just the way "I" am.... if I say "I was wrong" I won't include my family....

Boy or boy, as upset as some folks get with collapsed posts (still readable, takes a sec to click on it), you'd think they were white folks getting all uppity after being pulled over in Arizona to show proof of birth.

good one, people sure are touchy.....

I said it shouldn't get collapsed just because some people didn't like what I wrote. I made that pretty clear. Most people get it.

That's absurd. What other criteria are people going to use other than liking it or not?

The mystery is why anyone would think that opining that Obama deserves respect for admitting mistakes is a profound comment that does not merit getting collapsed, while expressing the opposite opinion deserves collapsing.

Because your 1st post did not express an opinion, there was no point, no argument, no debate, simply a string of sarcastic one-liners. Perhaps you should have just made a post like in 1.39 as opposed to trying to be witty, having your comment collapsed, and then getting annoyed.

That's what my comment meant. Plenty enough "follow through" implied by my original comment, and if you missed it then, you had #1.39 to work out the details.

So you finally posted your point some 30+ posts later. Got it. And you don't sound at all bitter regarding Obama...not at all.

And as for the whole "moving on" thing, I said I "moved on" if one of my comments got collapsed, that I didn't dwell on it. At least try to apply what I said in context if you're going to try to be sarcastic toward me with it.

First off, I've never gotten a single email or pm to come collapse a thread.

Me, either. It's like there's a party going on and I'm not invited.

And you won't because it doesn't happen nor is there any sort of conspiracy by Newsvine to interupt the flow of opinions on this site.

It is the consumer who may find your comment or article as trash and respond in kind.If you feel this happens to one party more than the other who you favor,find a site like Sarah Loves America.com or Obama our new king.Either way get over yourself and stop trying to force people to accept your line of thinking.

If your comment is collapsed or deleted don't blame the Vine just check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Smith Cassidy #1.78

"That's absurd. What other criteria are people going to use other than liking it or not?"

You're really not getting it, and it's not that tough. The point is that the comment was collapsed because the collapsers didn't want OTHERS to see it. Of course, they didn't like it. They just don't want anyone else to like it.

"Perhaps you should have just made a post like in 1.39 as opposed to trying to be witty, having your comment collapsed, and then getting annoyed.

Perhaps not. But I never got annoyed. In fact, I never complained about anyone collapsing my comment, and I never asked that anyone restore it. Just so you understand what happened and might resist the temptation to misrepresent it again:

(1) I made a comment #1.1. At some point it was collapsed.
(2) Just Neli #1.5 made a personal attack against me based on her many assumptions.
(3) WillBoyd #1.12 wondered why my comment was collapsed but Just Neli's was not.

(4) I replied #1.23 to Neli. Ah. Are you one of the free speech supporters who collapsed my comment?

Hint: that was sarcasm

and further explained my comment.
(5) In #1.29 I complimented WillBoyd on his comment with which I agreed.
(6) An actual discussion of my opinion of Obama with douglasq #1.41

And then you barged in with your irrational and I hope merely thoughtless comment of #1.44. Freedom of speech to you means the freedom to shut people up? That's a "freedom" that you support? What a ludicrous notion. And you are serious? That's not a freedom; that's coercion. Get a clue.

And you think I feel persecuted. Are you pulling my leg or what? I didn't complain about my comment being collapsed. The question was raised (and not by me) that if my comment deserved collapsing, then why wasn't #1.5 collapsed? WTF has that got to do with feeling persecuted?

My point, and I've repeated it, is that except for very rare circumstances, no ones comments should be collapsed.

Collapsing a comment means that you are trying to control what others can readily read. You are in favor of that; I am not.

But I sure hope you mean it, because I wouldn't want to accuse you of being disingenuous. After all, you are someone who just moves on if your own comments are collapsed (you said), though you find it important enough to butt your nose into this discussion which has nothing to do with you. Your comment wasn't even collapsed and yet you took time from your busy schedule to let everyone know what YOU do when your comments are collapsed. I'm sure someone must find your unsolicited advice very helpful.

And you don't sound at all bitter regarding Obama...not at all.

You sound like you made a discovery. Do you think I've been concealing my disdain for the man? If you want to call it "bitter", ok. I'm sick and tired of the adulation he gets for no good reason. It's astounding really. He admits he screwed up, and the lefties want to give him props. He deserves respect, they say. Really? I don't think so.

(hey, maybe "the community" will want to collapse this comment, too. It's pretty subversive, isn't it?)

KF #1.30 said

Collapsed posts are reviewed, as I understand it, by the NV moderators though the community's decision is rarely reversed.

and I'll note that the #1.1 collapse by "the community" was indeed reversed.

KF, looks like NV posted me twice. Please delete at will.

Ya know, it more like it was collapsed because the people who voted DIDN'T want it on their screen. There's a little click box that everyone can use to see the collapsed comment. So it's not like it really hidden from anyone. Usually when it's something polarizing, it's a hate filled rant. And when it's a collapsed comment by someone I know is liable to post hate filled rants I like the fact it's not on my screen. I tend to just read down, read it all, so I stop short when I come to that sort of vituperative mess. If it is collapsed I look at the name, if it 's one i recognize for their tendency to be disgusting I don't click it. If it by a friend or an unknown, I will just to see what it says. If it hating, I close it back.

Therefore all that "comment collapsed by community" means is that it was found to be objectionable and you way of course read at your own risk, it also provides you with a means to do so. So no, I don't consider it censorship. Censorship would mean you aren't allowed to read it.

The Incredulous One,

What you wrote:

And then you barged in with your irrational and I hope merely thoughtless comment of #1.44. Freedom of speech to you means the freedom to shut people up? That's a "freedom" that you support? What a ludicrous notion. And you are serious? That's not a freedom; that's coercion. Get a clue.

What I wrote:

Part of "freedom" is the freedom to speak/write and the freedom to ignore/turn off what is being said. Are you going to cry if people exert their right to collapse your comment(s)? You would deny people this right?

Just a bit of difference there between what I wrote and your rant above.

The point is that the comment was collapsed because the collapsers didn't want OTHERS to see it. Of course, they didn't like it. They just don't want anyone else to like it.

Perhaps not. But I never got annoyed.

My point, and I've repeated it, is that except for very rare circumstances, no ones comments should be collapsed.

Collapsing a comment means that you are trying to control what others can readily read. You are in favor of that; I am not.

Fair enough. We'll just disagree. It's not that I'm in favor of it, it's just that it doesn't bother me in the least. If the ability to collapse comments went away, that wouldn't bother me either.

Lol...funny article. Now how about a dose of reality

Did anyone actually read this article? Obama saying he was wrong reminds me of my brother's lame apologies when he would get caught & try to deflect blame. "Gee, I'm sorry I didn't realize that you were such a softie & wouldn't be able to handle my 200 lb fist brushing your arm accidentally." Unbelievable. That was an admission of being wrong???

Marxist Nazi Commie Kenyan

Putting Kenyan and Nazi in the same sentence is oxymornic..... and ridiculous!

LMAO.....dude is really pizzed no one liked what he said. GET OVER IT for real. Its a blog for cripes sake! SMH....

He has to prove his accusations that the President is a Marxist, Nazi, Commie Kenyan which he can't. But what he has proven is that he is an idiot !!!!!!!!!!

Disliking someones way of doing things does not make the person you dislike idiotic. It simply means you dislike that person's way of doing things...duh.....

All the extra drama around simple dislike is unnecessary and grade-school-ish.....

I knew I respected him as a man for some reason, even if it isn't his policies.

(I know, hard to believe huh?)

I can disagree with him and yet still respect the man.

well said CK. wish that sentiment pervaded our political environment these days...

America is getting lazy. Much easier to stereotype the opposition/supporters with labels.....

I agree, my left leaning friends bash me for listening to Boortz and other voices from the right, but I don't see how we move forward unless we can find a way to work together.

@ KANE

You can say that again! And half the time, the stereotypes are WAY off anyway! People watch too much cable TV! LOL!