Bush admits being President, that's all. Not mistakes.

[Inland]

He takes responsibility for the Katrina response in the usual "it's on my watch" way.

But he doesn't admit that a single thing went wrong. So all we are left with is the obvious: Bush is president and therefore nominally and legally in charge. Bush admits only what is undeniable in a manner that gives the air of making a concession while making none.

Now when Bush admits that something went wrong, or states that he wouldn't appoint Brown to FEMA if he had a do-over, that would be something. Something so out of character of this pissy little man, this self serving dry drunk, this craven narcissist, this man living the philosophy of the solipsist, this miserable failure of a president who won't just get the fuck out of the way so that anybody in the US could do a better job than him....

[Orrex]

1. I don't know why you limit your search-field to the U.S.

IMO, pretty much anybody PERIOD could do a better job.

In my line of work I deal with a lot of brokers and salespersons. When circumstances require one of them to express regret and admit fault, nine times out of ten the phrase used is "I do apologize."

Careful, though not unrealistic, reading of that phrase indicates that the speaker isn't apologizing; the speaker is doing. That sounds like a nit-pick, but in a lawyer-saturated business, pretty much everyone is very careful in the selection of words. If someone is not willing to apologize, one can certainly "do," right? I mean, there's no apology (or admission of fault or responsibility or regret) in that case, so everyone's happy, right?

It's all part of the same sick mindset that allows this kind of thing: "John Doe Enterprises admits no fault but agrees to pay $100 million to the families of the people whom its products killed."

Bush, for all of his disgusting incompetence and non-accountability, is 100% a product of the CEO image into which his handlers have morphed him.