Quotes that Kill..or..The Definitive 'Bush Lied People Died' Smackdown

By speciallist Posted in | | Comments (81) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Promoted by absentee

Among the many misrepresentations and distortions that have been repeated about the debate over Iraq, one stands out above all others. This is the charge that George W. Bush misled us into an immoral or unnecessary war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been definitively smacked down.

This charge has had amazing success in getting established as a self-evident truth even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by irrefutable facts and evidence. I want to expose it for the lie that it really is. I hope to refresh memories that have grown dim.

Another "lie" that George W. Bush is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

We were informed of the possibility that Saddam himself would use these weapons against us or our allies...and there was the still more dangerous possibility that he would supply them to terrorists like those who had already attacked us on 9/11 and to whom he was linked.

Lets say, for the sake of argument, that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the period leading up to the invasion. It defies all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted that they did. To lie means to say something one knows to be false.

Mr. Bush believed in the truth of what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.

George Tenet, his own CIA director and hold over from the Clinton administration, assured him that the case was "a slam dunk." Mr. Tenet had the backing of all 15 agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States.

The National Intelligence Estimate of 2002 offered with "high confidence" that "Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions."

The consensus of the intelligence community was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.

Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. "In the late spring of 2002," Pollack has written...

"I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant (a facility for separating uranium isotopes)."

But the unanimity on which Bush relied was not created by his own administration. In fact, it was created in the Clinton administration. Here is Bill Clinton himself, speaking in 1998...

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program."

Here is his Secretary of State Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998...

"Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Here is Sandy Berger, Clinton's National Security Adviser...He makes no bones about it...

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

Mr. Clinton's secretary of defense, William Cohen, was so sure Saddam had WMD that he remained "absolutely convinced" of it even after the invasion and search turned up nothing in March 2003.

Leading Democrats in Congress did not have any doubts about it. Soon after Mr. Clinton and the Dems made the statements above, a group of Democratic senators, including Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, urged the President "to take necessary actions, including if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites.

Nancy Pelosi, then a member of the House Intelligence Committee, added her voice to the chorus...

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

The Democrats WMD drumbeat intensified when Mr. Bush succeeded Mr. Clinton in 2001. Many later pretended to have been deceived by the Bush White House.

In a letter to the new president, a group of senators led by Bob Graham declared...

"There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf war status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

Sen. Carl Levin also reaffirmed what he had told Clinton years earlier...

"Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton agreed, speaking in October 2002...

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members."

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed as well...

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

How about Bush's opponents in his two campaigns for the presidency.

Al Gore in September 2002...

"We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Mr. Gore again, in that same year...

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

John Kerry speaking in 2002...

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force--if necessary--to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Statements made by Sens. Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, also in 2002...

Kennedy: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Byrd: "The last U.N. weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons."

I remember the mainstream media could not get enough of these two very liberal politicians.

During the last two years of the Clinton administration, editorials in the New York Times repeatedly insisted that...

"without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year and future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again."

The Times also pointed out that it was...

"hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country's salvation."

The Washington Post, greeted George W. Bush in January 2001 with this...

"Of all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerous--or more urgent--than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons."

HELLO...Can you hear me Now?

Mr. Bush did not lie or exaggerate or hype the intelligence presented to him. The intelligence itself was so compelling that it convinced everyone who had direct access to it.

Nobody in the world believed that Saddam had, as he claimed, complied with the 16 resolutions of the Security Council demanding that he get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.

Another charge is that Bush and Cheney somehow forced the CIA to lie. In its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee stated that it...

"did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities."

The March 2005 Robb-Silberman commission report, which investigated intelligence failures on Iraq, reached the same conclusion...

"no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . . Analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."

Many others accused Bush of telling a different sort of lie, Bush characterized the risk as "imminent." But this is false. Bush consistently rejected imminence as a justification for war.

State of the Union address in 2003 (three months before the invasion), to bring up the word "imminent", in order to repudiate it...

"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

How about the links to terrorists?

Was it really a "lie" to suggest, as Mr. Bush and his people did, that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? The Senate Intelligence Committee, contrary to the mainstream media, explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives.

And so long as we are talking about liars, how about the Democrats now proclaiming that they were duped. And how about all those, who in their desperation to delegitimize the larger mission in Iraq, have consistently used distortion, misrepresentation and selective perception to vilify what is proving itself more and more every day to be a victory of American arms and a vindication of American ideals.

Well then...if your going to claim that the Bush administration lied to get us into war, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same "lies". Here are just a few more examples that prove that the Bush administration didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction...


"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."...Letter Signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."...December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities"...From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement."...Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."...Robert Byrd in October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we."...Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs."...Jacques Chirac on October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."...Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."...Hillary Clinton on October 10, 2002

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people."...Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."...John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."...John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction."...Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."...Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."...Bob Graham, December 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."...Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed."...Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."...John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"We need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."...Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."...Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."...Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq?s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East."...John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts."...Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

What was that?...You need more?......OK Lets go WAY back...


"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."...Madeline Albright, 1998

"Saddam will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983"...National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."... President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."...President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."...Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."...Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

People that claim 'Bush Lied People Died' think in their minds they have proven something and yet in my mind I cannot figure out what that is. I think that a reasoned mind that sustains itself on facts will never figure out the insane mind that sustains itself on emotion.

All New Trol...New commenters that blame the War on Bush will be directed here before Engagement...Open Thread.

that's such a great list of quotes. Well done on the research, man.

Recommended for the sheer usefulness of the material.

.

"As for being me being a shill...I had the best time last election posting on Kerry's blog. I made myself out to be a gay veteran and got away with posting some of the most outlandish stuff about Kerry on his official blog."......john wayne

Excellent post. Love it.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

in Boston, there's lib bumper stickers everywhere with the "Bush lied..." and "Endless(this) war". I'm going to print this out and make 1000 copies and leave them on libs' cars and hand them to them just to witness their reactions.

" his success/I attribute it to good looks, smooth oratory skills/Al Gore not running/an evil, hard-bitten witch with a toxic last name/and Silky Pony, the pretty ambulance chaser."....EPU

I see that "Endless(this) war" sticker (it has the "less" crossed out). I cross out the "End" and write in "Win" in its place.

-- digitalhap

Take the war to their bumpers. Change the "F" to an "I"!!

I'm one of your fellow travelers, digitalhap.

"A mind is like a parachute: It'll let you down really quick if it's not loaded right."

But I really doubt that it will clear away all the "Bush lied, people died" spam.

The MSM is now concentrating on Scottie's charge that Bush was pushing "political propaganda." This from a former press secretary! It's like Joe Goebles writing a book charging that "Hitler lied!"

But I hold the President to a higher standard. Just because Nancy Pelosi or Bill Clinton believe something isn't justification for believing it. Right?

He is the one who committed the troops. He is the one ultimately responsible. He is the one who got it wrong.

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

"He is the one who committed the troops. He is the one ultimately responsible. He is the one who got it wrong."

He was Right...keep trying..

It seems that what the GOP needs is a Republican Bill Clinton (with better morals) ....dingo

exact same thing because they had the SAME intelligence and you hold this President to a higher standard? How very LIBERAL of you...

By the way speciallist I love that list of Dem's etc saying the same thing the President said and I have it saved in my documents file and use it when I encounter idiots but you have fleshed it out futher....great job.

Freedom of Religion NOT Freedom from Religion

Yes, I hold the man who sent our troops into harms way to a higher standard.

Isn't it obvious that there MUST be a higher standard of certainty and responsibility when it involves American casualties???

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

than acting on the best information you have.

When did the US have adequate "proof" of Nazi Concentration Camps?

Answer: In 1945 when those camps were liberated.

Everything else is sateliite photos, human reports, and a lot of guessing

I agree with what you are saying.

But ultimately, Bush got WMD's wrong and he is responsible for getting that wrong.

I am not suggesting a president need be perfect or make all the right calls. That's impossible.

But when a president gets one wrong, like WMD's in Iraq, and it's a big one, I will hold him responsible and accountable.

I also hold him accountable for staying too long with Rumsfield and I give him credit for putting Gen Patraeus in charge.

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

Your not going to Vote for Bush in Nov.?

"Face it, we aren't going to win. I'd start buying gold and hiding cash under my mattress in preparation for the ultra Dem. Congress and the ObamaMessiah and Princess Pouty Face's Socialist! Paradise!".....Illinidiva

Naw...He's just saying the the President must NEVER be wrong.

Even if he makes the right call given the evidence, and even if it turns out right, Liberals will still say he was wrong.

FDR must have been wrong too--look how many died because he took us into war in 1941. And Truman in 1950? He should have stopped at the 38th parallel the FIRST time. But darn it, he listened to MacArthur and kept going north.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. All of them.

According to Liberals, the President needs to be endowed with precognition, clairvoyance, and the talent of "distant viewing." He dare not be human.

Democrats: Abandoning Allies, One Country at a Time.

I said that President Bush was wrong about Iraq and WMD's. The Whitehouse admits that.

The questions is whether or not he should be held accountable.

The main post said no, he should be excused. There should be no accountability because other people got it wrong too.

I don't agree - in my mind, the man in charge, making decisions, is accountable when things go well (putting in General Patraeus) or when they go poorly (being wrong about WMD's).

Bottomline - you believe in accountability or you don't.

I do, and so we disagree.

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

was held accountable in 2004 by being re-elected? And after 2006 with Congress agreeing to fund the surge?

Should we find Saddam's closest surviving heir and re-install him as dictator and repair his torture chambers so he can resume the mass slaughter in the dark of night that went on before we liberated the joint?

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

AARRRGH! My answer was destroyed by an expiring login.

Shorter version:

Gamecock is right.

Also, say as often as you want that "I hold the man at the top to a higher standard," it appears that on this issue he had to be able to know that the same evidence that convinced everyone else in the WORLD (including the leading Democrats) was wrong, and that Saddam was behaving irrationally and against his own interests.

The White House admits it was wrong about Iraq and WMD's? I say the White House was wrong to 'admit' being wrong.

If you insist that Bush should have been clairvoyant, you should also do the research, which is available. WMD's were only one of many reasons to attack Saddam, and not the most important one.

Or do you really think Bush lied? Or knew something the rest of the world didn't?

Democrats: Abandoning Allies, One Country at a Time.

For the sake of argument I grant you that GWB should be "held accountable".

You haven't mentioned what that should entail. I mean, heck, are you recommending some specific action be taken (impeachment, etc.) or is this just a typical liberal exercise in mental masturbation?

Put up or zip up.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

How 'bout we put him over our knee and give him the Belt...

Come on LibRepub dont be a Monday morning QB

"I whine and I vote / And the people I volunteer for in Congressional elections get elected."..... by hscohen

to believe he had them, and it's still possible some are buried in the Beqaa Valley and elsewhere. Not to mention there was also a low-intensity air war for 12 years, when Saddam's troops fired on no-fly-zone patrols and were retaliated against, almost daily.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

you not remember the to no fly zone? Our military has been in the region since 91...or do you think this all started in March 03? Let's be CLEAR it was the beginning of the END in 03..and we will be victorious.

Freedom of Religion NOT Freedom from Religion

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

Sure, it was demographically inevitable in those places but that's what we have.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

us Islamic republics.....it is what it is however we have a footprint in the region and with that comes intel....we know what those republics have in the way of weapons...

Freedom of Religion NOT Freedom from Religion

"Ultimately responsible." Bill Clinton was ultimately responsible for the progression from "Blackhawk down" to 9/11. Nevertheless, given the information available at the time to everyone who had access, it would have been "wrong" for Bush NOT to effect "regime change" in Iraq that Clinton called for but did nothing to bring about.

History will determine whether the Iraq move was wise, but it cannot be said yet that Bush "got it wrong."

Incidently, how do you square a "mixed economy" with your classical liberal emphasis on "individual rights and equality of opportunity"? And how do any of your examples comport with those who now wear the "liberal" banner? The number self-identifying as "liberal" has dropped (to about 18% currently) from a near majority as those who claim the standard adopt more of the policies of Sens Sanders, Kennedy and Obama. If everyone identified the word "rose" with the odor of a stinkweed, would you still be proud to call your flowers "roses?"

are you here to demonstrate that liberals are incapable of moral thinking?
He committed troops with a bipartisan vote of support.
He did not get it wrong, except to misjudge just how smarmy and disloyal and anti-patriotic people like you are.
Please just go away.

that just once to dem sitting next to them on live tv. It would win the debate for the country for the public to affirm what most think but are too timid to say in this pc redefined patriotism era.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

He got it wrong on WMD's. So did a lot of other people. However, I hold the man at the top to a higher standard.

"He did not get it wrong, except to misjudge just how smarmy and disloyal and anti-patriotic people like you are."

You mean the people whose pressure forced the President to change course, fire Rumsfield and put the war in the hands of General Patraeus?

The war was won shortly after the 2006 elections. Because it forced much NEEDED CHANGE.

WHICH IS WHAT AMERICANS HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO DO.

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

Are you saying that Bush bowed to pressure from the American People?....LOL

"You mean the people whose pressure forced the President to change course, fire Rumsfield and put the war in the hands of General Patraeus?
The war was won shortly after the 2006 elections. Because it forced much NEEDED CHANGE.
WHICH IS WHAT AMERICANS HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO DO. "

"I hold the man at the top to a higher standard. "

I know...you have said it 3 times

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

"The war was won shortly after the 2006 elections"

So it's won now? The libs are admitting it now? It's not a civil war now? It's not a catastrophe that we need to pull out children out of? Please inform me because I was unaware that anyone who used the blatantly false "He got it wrong on WMD's" talking point was of the opinion that anything was won.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Dude..it was the Smarmy and disloyal and anti-patriotic people that made Bush change course.

Just looks like six of one kind, and a half dozen of the other.....moijea

Didn't change course. Changed strategy and tactics.

Democrats: Abandoning Allies, One Country at a Time.

the whitehouse says they got it wrong on WMD's.

I agree with them.

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

from the press. With as many hold-overs with questionable loyalties from the last administration, incompetents like Scott McClellan and a "New Tone" to unite Washington, the Whitehouse appears incapable of defending itself.

Did the Whitehouse even bother to point out that Scooter Libby did not leak Plame's name (not that it was a SECRET!!!)? Did they bother to point out it was Armitage, Powell's man? No. They rarely get political which irritates the crap out of me.
So some dingbat said they were wrong on WMDs. So what? They also "admit" that Iraq is a hard to fight war. Anyone with any grasp of history would know that Iraq and Afghanistan are among two of the most successful wars of all time - occupation included. These wars are barely a struggle for us.

But the Whitehouse doesn't play that way. You've got nothing.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

Why does it have to come down to empty rhetoric like this?

Some conservatives believe he made the wrong call. The administration made the case for war to the world and to the public here at home primarily based on WMD...which wasn't there. The President does bear the grave responsibility for that error.

That doesn't mean we don't support finishing the job.

That doesn't mean we don't think people cannot make mistakes.

That doesn't mean we think he lied.

That doesn't mean we aren't patriotic.

It DOES mean, however, we expect our leaders to be right about big decisions like this one.

Two administrations made the case for war to the world and to the public here at home primarily based on WMD, not just this one.

The only empty rhetoric is coming from you...

"The administration made the case for war to the world and to the public here at home primarily based on WMD...which wasn't there."

Saddam used them in the Iraq-Iran war and he used them on his own people...

"It DOES mean, however, we expect our leaders to be right about big decisions like this one."

Thats what this blog is about..He was Right!

"They hire someone to keep them in the know, and dressed cooler than a polar bear's toenails."....elevatingshoes

It has been mentioned here before that WMDs have been found.

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

Sure people could say "But it wasn't the Jerry Bruckheimer style stockpile" that the media wanted to put on camera, but it was an enormous violation of the first Gulf War cease fire. That on its own is enough reason. This whole "but he had to convince us, the American people, with an overwhelming need" argument is empty. Look, he convinced me and many others that it was worth going over there regardless of the WMD discovery status. The fact that so many now reject his reasons doesn't make his reasons "illegal" like so many posit. It was still a perfectly legitimate excercise of executive authority without the "giant WMD stockpile" reason, and the world is better off for it today. Heck, he could have legally done this whole thing if Iraq simply opened fire on one of our aircraft patrolling their no-fly zones-which they did.

Besides, I don't know if you are one to buy into conspiracy theories, but I imagine you do since you do buy into so much of the Bush was wrong propoganda. Which is a more plausable conspiracy "Our govt doctored intelligence and got every other nation's intelligence, congress and past administrations to agree", or that "Saddam trucked his stockpiles out to Syria or somewhere else"? As far as conspiracy theories go, I'll take the latter.

"Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist."

I personally thought the best and only necessary reason was that Iraq was or would become a safe haven for al Qaida.

Democrats: Abandoning Allies, One Country at a Time.

He violated the ceasefire. Not removing him in 1991 was seen as a victory over the US by the jihadists. And then not removing him as violated the ceasefire for a decade caused UBL to see us as a weak horse that he could bring down.

The word of the US must be feared. Credible deterrence is VITAL for us, as we are the target of all the megalomaniacs on earth and always will be unless we fall.

After 911 it would have been an impeachable offense to allow Saddam to defy the US.

And, as Bill Clinton observed in 1998, Saddam didn't need al qaeda. They needed him.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

GC, we think alike. You've been doing it faster lately, though.

Excellent points, and excellent reasons for voting against any Democrat.

Democrats: Abandoning Allies, One Country at a Time.

I have to come up with a new award!!
Truth will truly make you free and sometimes (especially for liberals) it's very painful!!

veritas vos liberabit

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

The liberals I converse with voices all go up in tone and in loudness everytime I bring any of these up. I especially enjoy the part where I tell them to reread the 9/11 commission report after they tell me it states that there were no ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda prior to operation Iraqi Freedom.

Obviously, a recommend from me.

"40 million American households with Bush are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have Bush."

would make a great movie montage. The RNC should have them up on youtube today.

--------------------

Small is beautiful.

I heard you today during your interviews....YOU ARE WEAK!

"he'll throw us a smelly bone, and the results will be no different than if a democrat were in the white house. NO different."....moijea

why ya gotta bust on Scott Mac?

.

it's not his fault his name shares similarities with the buttwipe with the book.

.

his way out of a box.

Seriously, your list is genius. I think we need more posts like this to refer trolls to before they merit engaging. Otherwise, poor Moe will spend all summer pressing the "flush" button.

I'll have to think of an appropriate topic to write on.

Thanks!

Excellent compilation, speciallist. BTW, I had the pleasure of watching my lefty chess wizard buddy get schooled on Res. 1441 by a German last weekend. Lefty didn't know what hit him...talk about Zugzwang. The German is battle-hardened from close-combat on the European Front.

"ma deuce says verstehen Sie es, Kommie?"

THE. BEST. SMACK. DOWN. EVER! I will be printing this out (if you don't mind of course) to give to every annoying democrat and/or liberal that I know; as opposed to my usual reaction when faced with this topic which is to choke back vomit and try not to scream loudly.

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

With the abundance of 30 minute wonder trolls we've put up with lately, NOT ONE has commented on this blog.

Great job speciallist! This should be front paged.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

And the swine are running the Congress and may win the Presidency.

speciallist can do serious work?

Coulda fooled me! ;)

Well done.



Now also found at The Minority Report

Your right...not many jokes...this is some Serious Ammunition.

Thanks Simpson...Do you have an Obama Gaffe pic up yet?

You got some Graphic skills dont ya?

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

No graphic skills whatsoever. Just not my thing.



Now also found at The Minority Report

Then try to find the FTP:// address of your website (file transfer protocal)...In there you will find a Main folder where you can Upload all your pics from your PC...Yours might be Easy..ftp://thehinzsightreport.com?...the pics will Not show up on the Site but they will be able to be accessed...For example..My little site http://home.pacbell.net/special ...special is the main folder
I upload to ftp://home.pacbell.net/special

Once you get Filezilla set up you can Drag and Drop pics and files to your Main folder...Then its just Html...

Example...(img src="http://home.pacbell.net/special/Kobe driving.jpg" width="400")

This will display pic from my Main folder..If you have more questions give me a holler.. special@pacbell.net

Added to favorites and going to be distributed with the best of them.
Now, someone, buy this man a beer!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just a typical, small town, British-American girl...

the MSM hasn't mentioned all this..Ha...This stuff has been floating around for a while....I'm glad I could Compile it for you

"40 million American households with McCain are generally happier
than those people in households that don't have McCain."

I want to keep this for quick reference. Good job.

Support libertarian Republicans here and here.
www.rlc.org
www.fairtax.org

I mean, didn't Saddam claim to have WMD, threaten to use them (again), and not let inspectors into the facilities where their presence was suspected? If a escaped convict murderer has shot several people in front of witnesses yesterday, and claims to have a gun when confronted by a policeman, and the policeman sees the criminal point what looks like a gun at the policeman and threatens to shoot him, what is the policeman supposed to do? To not act and let the fugitive shoot him and then flee is not the choice we would want the policeman to make.

Let's not forget: we did not close the Iraq borders prior to the war to prevent all those trucks from going to Syria, and Iraq is the size of Texas. We cannot stop the illegals from getting into Texas from Mexico. What makes folks think we can search all of Iraq and monitor its borders?

Excellent list of quotes. I've seen Glenn Beck have video clips of some of these in a medley, but never seen them in print with references. Thanks so much. Next myth to dispel is the "Mission Accomplished" sign, which referred to the carrier group's mission being done. Those that deny this, yet say they support the troops, are outright liars.


-- A true evolutionist would let endangered species die off. Anyone care to change sides?
-- Rapture: the real separation of church and state --



as cute as they are, those little floating stars are really distracting when your trying to read...

at your superb work is that printing it will take me so long.
My other regret is that we have people to whom all this doesn't matter, Bush being the real enemy and hate being impossible for them to give up.

The Dulfer Report stated that up to the invasion Saddam had small WMD programs still running, riacin and nerve gas. Small but where the man's heart was. In a WSJ article Dulfer said that he didn't recognize his report from the news coverage it was receiving. Rather like the coverage the Surge is now getting. Fair to say some prefer politics and death over success and life. You can't fool a liberal!

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

unassailable since he was also president and so the deniers can't say that bush lied without saying clinton lied. And Bill specifically tied sadam to wmd AND terrorists.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service