From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Rich Gauszka wrote:
> After lunch - Gates amended his comment to the political doublespeak of  -
> we are neither winning nor are we losing in Iraq
>
>
> "Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote in
> message news:4575dc34$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> "LEVIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gates, do you believe that we are
>> currently winning in Iraq?
>>
>> GATES: No, sir."
>>
>> Adam
>
>
I loved Tony Snow's response:

"White House Press Secretary Tony Snow responded to Gates comment
about winning or losing in Iraq by saying the nominee's remarks are
consistent with what President Bush has been saying. But asked whether Bush
thinks the United States is winning in Iraq, Snow said the president did
believe it.

"If you want to try to get a nuanced and full understanding of where
Bob Gates stands on these issues with regard to the president and his
policies and the definition of what it is to win in Iraq and what it takes,
then I think you're going to find that there is — that he agrees and also
that he is committed to the mission. And that's what the bulk of today's
about," Snow said."

Umm.....mmmmkaaay...

A) "Mr. Gates, do you believe that we are currently winning in Iraq?

GATES: No, sir."

vs:

"But asked whether Bush thinks the United States is winning in Iraq,
Snow said the president did believe it."

=

"If you want to try to get a nuanced and full understanding of where
Bob Gates stands on these issues with regard to the president and his
policies and the definition of what it is to win in Iraq and what it takes,
then I think you're going to find that there is — that he agrees and also
that he is committed to the mission. And that's what the bulk of today's
about,"

?????? Talk about having to dig deep into semantics as a pseudo-answer.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5