So "Clueless George" has admitted that there were no WMD and it was because of bad intelligence, however he still would have gone into Iraq anyway. Hmmm....it seems to me that the more accurate statement would be that he KNEW at the time that there were no WMD but he still wanted to go into Iraq anyway. Why? To get even with Saddam for turning daddy into a one-term prez? Who knows? Any reasonable person would say that he LIED...
As for the war itself, the administration didn't go in with a plan to win the war, only to win the initial battle.
We didn't secure and protect areas where large amounts of weapons/explosives were being stored and subsequently stolen and because of these and many other errors on the part of the 'leadership/administration' have lost over 2,000 American troops with tens of thousands more in harms way every day. Not to mention those who have returned with disabilities both physical and mental that will affect not only the returning soldiers lives but the lives of family and friends. But again it goes back to the reason that we are in Iraq in the first place...because of a lie.
So our 'president' lied to congress, and lied to the American people, and his lies have cost thousands of lives, and affected tens of thousands more. But thank god that ole' George wasn't getting a "Blow Job" in the oval office ! (or anywhere else..) Now that would be news right ?
I guess we don't impeach for deceit on a large or global scale that involves the death of innocents....we save that for getting your knob polished....
Sunday, December 18, 2005
A Lie Of Any Nature Is Still A Lie.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
No, the point Scott was trying to make (at least for people with their own brain) was that he lied about the WMD's in Iraq as the justification of going to war with Iraq.
If you're not going to read the post the whole way through, then don't bother commenting on it.
Well, I believe that the U.N. weapons inspectors found various things that pointed to a 'desire' to obtain WMD's, but did not actually find any WMD's.
Also France, Russia, China, Spain, England, the U.N., Egypt Israel, etc. all believed that they had WMD's because they were listening to Bush, his cronies, and looking at OUR intelligence data (to the point that the admin would release or give them access to.)
As Kemp already stated and as the post clearly says, a lie/ deceit/deception was used to get us into Iraq. This lie has also had a more disastrous result then not wanting to get caught getting a hummer from someone other than your wife.
So where is Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson who was so vocal about upholding "The principal rule of law" and seeing that "equality under the law" was adhered to during the Clinton investigation?
Seems like the Congress should be investigating Bush for lying to Congress, and pushing to make sure that those same standards that Senator Hutchinson was so adamant about during the previous administration are as vigorously applied today.
abuse of power for the select few does not happen in a vacumn. lets follow the money trail that justifies all this homicidal deceit. so called cristians are being used to committ murder on a scale not seen since the early 20th century. all if not most of this behaviour is criminal and yet the american people allow it to continue to happen in thier name. no wonder others want to kill us-we can't even stop our own evildoers from even coming to office.
Just a quick thought....
If we want to start going back in history then let's ask about why the big deal over the Lewinsky affair? Cause conservatives were bent that they couldn't 'prove' anything against Clinton in the Whitewater Investigation.
We can continue to go back, what about Iran/Contra. There were a bunch of illegal activities in that one that went all the way to the White House.
The basic point is and always has been, serious events and loss of life have occurred based on very questionable if not false information. It's time for those involved to step up to the plate and if not it's time to investigate and force them into the daylight.
Clinton wouldn't have been before a grand jury answering questions about a 'blow job' if the members of congress would have got their heads out of their asses and instead got on with the business of running the country instead of going on a witch hunt....
As for prior administrations and their support or belief that Iraq was a threat, yes liberals and conservatives alike knew that Iraq was a 'dangerous state', however was it an immediate, direct threat to the U.S. ? That has also yet to be proved
Once again the discussion is about the deceptive/twisted information that was used to justify us invading Iraq.
Looking back Bush's opinion was that he was going into Iraq with or without the support of Congress.
So once again the discussion goes back to the deceptions that were used to send our troops into invading another country and getting us into another 'police action' that is casuing unecessary deaths of U.S. troops, not to mention a debt from this that our great great grandchildren will be paying...
Once again you are missing the point of this discussion and focusing ony on your narrow view of defending the indefensible actions of an administration.
Our position is not whether the decision was made by liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialist, etc. but that the decision that was made was
a) wrong
b) based on deception
c) and that more than 2,000 troops have died because of a personal vendetta.
Has this all been proven yet, no not yet, however this is our opinion.
A lie is in the eye of the beholder. Serious well reasoned thought is as rare in the political discourse as statesmanship is in the congress. I want to see just one senator, congressman or political leader of any stripe step up to the microphone and say "You know folks, I have taken a partisan stand on this issue because I need to raise money for my re-election next term and the activists and special interests won't give me any unless I tow the party line as they see it. I acknowledge my talking points are confusing and inconsistant
(shades of the last election) but it is more important that I get elected." I'd probably vote for that guy. That's because as a pragmatist I can be a Democrat or a Republican as I see best. I can be hated by both the left wing lunatics and right wing hate mongers.
Kemp and Scott et al are still beating that dead horse. Get past it boys. It is time to come up with some new ideas. How do we protect our country from the Islamo-fascists who want to kill your family and still protect our rights? Is it important to have rights if you are dead? It seems like somebody forgot to prioritize things. 200 years ago our rights could have been more important but now days a million of your closest frineds and neighbors can go up in a mushroom cloud in a millisecond. Tell them that tapping somebody's phone was too aggregious to contemplate. Tell them that water boarding some terrorist was just too awful. Tell them our image in France was more important. Giving the president those emergency war powers only makes sense.
To the guy that says giving the president power to tap our phones is like living in a totalitarian country I say waaaahhh. What are you talking about that is so important that it trumps saving other people's lives? Are you talking to your chippy? Discussing your coming out of the closet? Doing a drug buy? Tell me one reason that is more important than preventing another 9/11. I suppose some lamo will say that it is his right to be free from warrantless searches. Yeh, so what? Do you think your emails aren't already being saved? You have no right to absolute privacy. I don't know of anybody who disagrees with that. Even the ACLU acknowledge the government's right to certain stuff. So what is so important? I'll tell you why this is so bg an issue- It is all about Bush. You Bush haters are so filled with rage that it clouds your judgement. You would sacrifice your mother if it meant you could get Bush. And it will cost you another election. You won't win because you come across looking petty, mean spirited and hating America. And you have no ideas. You are so tied to the radical left wing agenda that you have aliented guys like me who would vote Democrat if you had someone that didn't come across like an idiot.
I don't have a probelm with tapping of phones in order to protect the country, but I do not want to give the power of end decision to "Clueless George". He has repeatedly demonstrated that he is not capable of making the big decisions.
As for me, I am more of a 'centrist'.
I was a republican when I was younger.
Then as I grew older I realized that unless my income was amoung the top 5% of wage earners (along with some other issues) that the republicans would not care about my thoughts or opinions. So I became a democrat.
Do I believe in all the principles of the democratic party? No, so that is why I am a centrist, who leans to the left.
Rights are necessary to protect everyone from the unlawful acts of a group or individual. However individual rights cannot unwaveringly stand in the way of the rights of the masses. (The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..)
Ok, so I went future geek for a moment, but it seems to fit.
We need to protect the country as well as the rights of the individuals, but lets not leave it in the hands of "Clueless George". As a nation, we can do much better.
Scott
OK, I'll buy a pint of what you are selling. But we don't have anyone else but Bush. The Dems defaulted. Do you want to wait until we get someone else to give him/her that authority? The public has already pretty well puked up their disappointment about what they percieve, right or wrong, but now the dialog has to take a new turn. Just bitch slapping Bush isn't getting the job done. Any moron can do that. But that is all the Dems and libs are doing! It just reinforces the notion that they are not fit to govern. My comments are not just rantings. I suggest those who agree say so in other blogs, letters to the editor and in private communications and conversations. We can't wait until the Dems get it together because the won't. Not in our lifetime anyway. They are too dependant on the far left tit.
Post a Comment