GREGORY: Mr. President, after the -- mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, when you raised two-year-old intelligence talking about the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, it's met with increasing skepticism. The majority in the public, growing number of Republicans appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully. Can you explain why you believe you're still a credible messenger on the war?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear, in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked. And I firmly believe that . You know, look, this has been a long, difficult experience for the American people. I can assure you, Al-Qaeda, who would like to attack us again, have got plenty of patience and persistence. And the question is, will we? Yeah, I talked about intelligence yesterday. I wanted to make sure the intelligence I laid out was credible, so we took our time. Somebody said, "Well, he's trying to politicize the thing." If I was trying to politicize it, I'd have dropped it out before the 2006 elections. I believe I have an obligation to tell the truth to the American people as to the nature of the enemy. And it's unpleasant for some. I fully recognize that after 9/11, the calm here at home, relatively speaking, you know, caused some to say, "Well, maybe we're not at war." I know that's a comfortable position to be in. But that's not the truth.
I am voting for idiot. He mischaracterized Gregory's question, then asserted that because he reads the intelligence, we have to believe him, even though the question really goes to that question. After all, he cited intelligence to take us into this quagmire. Oh well, I am sure he is right now.
BTW, let's not forget that even moderate Republicans think he is lacking credibility. Only Bush thinks he still has it.