What Did Bush Decide and When Did He Decide It?
What Did Bush Decide and When Did He Decide It?
The Downing Street Memo reported that in a July 23, 2002 meeting between Prime Minister Blair and his war cabinet, attendees of the meeting discussed the fact that President Bush had already made up his mind to attack Iraq. According to the minutes of the meeting:
“There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action.”
Yet, as the record below proves, President Bush claimed over and over after July 23rd until the war began that he had not made up his mind.
Bush: “Of course, I haven’t made up my mind we’re going to war with Iraq.” [10/1/02]
Bush:“Hopefully, we can do this peacefully — don’t get me wrong. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there’s a chance he may decide to do that. And war is not my first choice, don’t — it’s my last choice.” [11/7/02]
Bush: “This is our attempt to work with the world community to create peace. And the best way for peace is for Mr. Saddam Hussein to disarm. It’s up to him to make his decision.” [12/4/02]
Bush: “You said we’re headed to war in Iraq — I don’t know why you say that. I hope we’re not headed to war in Iraq. I’m the person who gets to decide, not you. I hope this can be done peacefully.” [12/31/02]
Bush: “First of all, you know, I’m hopeful we won’t have to go war, and let’s leave it at that.” [1/2/03]
Bush: “But Saddam Hussein is — he’s treated the demands of the world as a joke up to now, and it was his choice to make. He’s the person who gets to decide war and peace.” [2/7/03]
Bush:“I’ve not made up our mind about military action. Hopefully, this can be done peacefully.” [3/6/03]
Bush: “I want to remind you that it’s his choice to make as to whether or not we go to war. It’s Saddam’s choice. He’s the person that can make the choice of war and peace.” [3/6/03]
Bush: “We are doing everything we can to avoid war in Iraq. But if Saddam Hussein does not disarm peacefully, he will be disarmed by force.” [3/8/03]
Bush: “Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it.” [3/17/03]
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So he decided to go to war before he pretended to not want to go to war – all before he actually went to war…
June 7th, 2005 at 3:48 pmIt never ceases to amaze how 51% of us voters chose such a liar. I think it’s because not enough of us actually read about the issues, while the TV media props up two talking heads that express their viewpoints without any supervision from the media host. Whoever comes up with the simplest repetition gets their message heard no matter how false it is.
June 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pmAs I understand it the military was already doing bombing runs to soften up Iraqi air defenses while Bush was talking about “war as a last resort.”
June 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pmYou could assume that Saddam knew the die was cast, that he would be invaded and there was nothing he could do about. Time to plan for an insurgency in his own occupied country, and the failure of any exit strategy, not failure, you have to assume that exit was never the objective, and here you are. And likely to remain for years.
June 7th, 2005 at 3:56 pmYes, Ouch, our army walked right in, not even having to build new bridges or anything to replace the ones bombed behind retreat.
D
June 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pmthis should be in a simple enough format for the MSM (gawd I hate that term) to use and explain to our fellow *citizens*. Thank you once again, TP and Center.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:02 pmAll this and yet Mr. Bush has not been asked about this memo? Further, there was some 40 million spent by Republicans to find out that Bill Clinton lied about his sex life and to date, not one of them have investigated what our President has done. Amazing!
June 7th, 2005 at 4:05 pmI don’t think they are interested, but you are right, Flamethrower. Speaking of the networks, occasionally there is good stuff.
Saw this fellow Pape on CNN over the weekend.
http://ww8.shrewd.com/cgi-bin/q.cgi?isbn=1400063175
I was impressed and surprised. Also, on Fox with Greta, of all places, a one on one with the Big Dog himself. William Jefferson Clinton. It was segmented, I’m not sure how many segments there are but they didn’t show the whole interview on one night. It may be tonight that the last part is on. Very good. Anyone else catch it?
June 7th, 2005 at 4:09 pm…
What reporter has the balls to ask
some direct questions?
Who is out there?
Does anyone have the clout
to pound this unpopular president
into the ground? For Godsake
somebody step forward!
Your country needs you.
Dan Rather, Barbara Walters,
Morley Schaffer? Pumpkinhead?
Are there any hard hitters anymore?
Who in the hell is going to finally nail this guy?
waiting….sheesh!
…
June 7th, 2005 at 4:11 pmDealing with our overseas engineering partners has taught me how much they know, and how little the American public knows. Its about media and access. In the US, the media is as liberal as the conservatives who control them. This is well understood in “old” Europe and throughout Asia.
Which do you think would make a bigger splash with the US citizenry; a story about this memo that proves Bush lied, or a story about how Gannon as a FOB (Friend of Bush) spent the night at the WhiteHouse 13 or more times? We may never know the answer since the media reports none of it even though they have access to the information.
Germany 1938, anyone?
June 7th, 2005 at 4:17 pmKen Mehlman told Tim Russert that this memo had been thoroughly discredited. Actually, he said this about two other items running around the news. Seems Russert did not follow-up with “what part of this was discredited and how so”. No wonder Bush lackies like appearing on Meet the Press!
June 7th, 2005 at 4:21 pmHe was against being for it before he was for being against it.
Right?
-
June 7th, 2005 at 4:25 pmRead the Toledo Blade. They are the hard hitters. They are just a small local paper. They did a pulitzer prize winning series on Tiger Force before the election, which is still being investigated by the US Army, proving everything Kerry said about atrocities was true. Did you hear about it? No. But you got Swift Boat Bullshit up the yin yang. The Blade is busily covering Ohio’s coingate. There are little local papers that are chipping away. If you watch MSM, you are just watching a 24/7 commercial for Bushworld and it’s attendant products. Cable, Satellite and a bigger, flatter TV to watch crap reality TV programs and deodorant commercials on.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:27 pmThe country is at a crossroads – or perhaps more appropriately, we are at the point of crossing the Rubicon – when Caesar chose to cross the Rubicon he broke with tradition and brought his armies inside the area surrounding Rome that was previously protected from the armies of Roman generals. So doing, he took a step that could not be reversed so to speak. So too, America is at the Rubicon. We must break with tradition. Or perhaps someone in the military must break with tradition. As the madman president who will never admit mistakes or defeat (has a certain Hitlerian ring to it) brings us to the brink of doom in Iraq, what will the military do? Will some one or more Generals finally step forward and do the right thing and withdraw the troops from Iraq immediately, and ignore any countermanding orders from the President, as required by the Geneva Conventions which prohibit war crimes.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:29 pmbreaking at the Blade. Ohio Coingate bigger than we thought. This could be the deep throat of our time, kids. Going right into the legitimacy of the elections.
BWC lost $215 million in high-risk fund
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050607/BREAKINGNEWS/50607018
June 7th, 2005 at 4:31 pmIt would augment your case, if you could provide an intelligence source that was dismissive of WMD’s in Iraq. This is the problem. You have to prove that the admin knew that there were no WMD’s, and support that with another foreign intel service that does not agree with the Bush admin’s view that they had weapons. Best of luck…
Saw Katherine Harris is running in Florida. The dems will have the choice of campaigning against her, with a respected imcumbent to represent them, or they may decide to use her association with Bush 2000, to make this a protest vote against Bush.
Harris v. Nelson? Nelson wins.
Bush v. Nelson, w/ Harris in the shadows? Harris wins.
Guess which plan your party will take…
June 7th, 2005 at 4:32 pmYou should include all of Bush’s “I jess don’ unnerstand all this drum-beat to war” comments. That was an early example of his administration’s propensity to try to blame the media for exposing what they were actually doing.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:34 pmThere were many intelligence sources dismissive of WMD in Iraq – Richard Clarke was just one source -
The weapons inspectors themselves were another. Also the yellow cake Niger report was trumped up possibly by the CIA or by MI5 and fed through Italian intelligence – that could probably be easily proven with just a small amount of research – go to Greg Palast’s website if you need more sources
The facts show that Bush had little or no proof and he invaded a country and caused the deaths of 100,000+ on hearsay and wishful thinking. That’s a war crime. And it’s certainly a high crime and misdemeanor
June 7th, 2005 at 4:38 pmWell what do you expect if all you ever quote is official White House news releases. Opps…that can’t be right…
http://www.hairytruth.blogspot.com
June 7th, 2005 at 4:40 pmYou should all be aware by now that certain posters have an “agenda”. In time you can spot them in under 30 secs.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:43 pmWow! Awesome post! I found you through Eschaton. What a great montage of quotes!
June 7th, 2005 at 4:43 pmWhere is your conscience to do what is MORALLY right, Mr. Polish Snausage? Yes it will be hard, but as George says, “Its hard, er, its hard work”.
How’s the weather up there on your high-horse?
June 7th, 2005 at 4:44 pmI now many conservatives and republicans and these facts just don’t matter. They will always support the party. Nothing…NOTHING will change their minds.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:48 pmCan the people start an impeachment prceding against a president or does it have to be a member of congress?
June 7th, 2005 at 4:48 pmWhom do you think would have the guts to do it?
Here’s a library containing the Downing Street Memo and other Iraq-related documents.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:49 pmNo on Richard Clarke, saying there were no WMD’s.
You can say this or that was hyped, stovepiped, etc. but you simply can’t point to someone or some country that said, “There are no WMD’s.”
Even if you found one country, then it would be in contrast to every other country believing that Saddam had them. So, before you bust a nut over the Downing Street memo-I ask you, what country said, “You will find no WMD’s”?
Give it up….
June 7th, 2005 at 4:50 pmShit for brains is on right now, Live. You know he is taking a beating. He hasn’t been flapping his uncoordinated lips so frequently in his entire reign. The people can demand that their elected reps do the deed or face their ire at the ballot box next election Diane. But we are powerless to do anymore than that.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:51 pmMr Polish Sausage –
June 7th, 2005 at 4:52 pmIt may be ‘hard’ for you to understand so let me ask you – who said there ‘were’ wmd. the only people who said there were – Bush and Blair -that’s it – so the shoe is now on your sausage
You really can’t believe that the truth will be verified, Snausage? I find your lack of faith disturbing. Keep kickin’ the dog and you shall see.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:55 pmpolish sausage wrote, It would augment your case, if you could provide an intelligence source that was dismissive of WMD’s in Iraq. This is the problem. You have to prove that the admin knew that there were no WMD’s, and support that with another foreign intel service that does not agree with the Bush admin’s view that they had weapons. Best of luck…
I guess you’ve never heard of Hussein Kamal.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:55 pmWe can do whatever we like, Cocktail Weenie. It’s a free country. your level of fear and panic is palpable. We enjoy that.
June 7th, 2005 at 4:55 pmPolish Sausage, check out this quote:
“[Saddam] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.â€?
Who said it?
Answer: Colin Powell
June 7th, 2005 at 4:57 pmhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/28/iraq/main575469.shtml
Cocktail Weenie knows the end is near. The tray with Hors’ Dourves, the one he has been riding, is approaching a rotund defense lobbyist, neocon policy wonk, and a high priced hooker at a K street cocktail soiree. He is about to get eaten by his own. At least he will get washed down with a martini.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:02 pmHow comical is Bush’s repeated use of the phrase “disarm” given that there weren’t any arms there to begin with…
June 7th, 2005 at 5:05 pmHe’s trying to spin the DSM with Blair right now. He’s talking about “hard work” again. He’s toast. maybe Cocktail Weenie can become a pig in a blanket.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:06 pm“BTW Bono has come to see me!”
That’s too rich. Stick a fork in this porker. He’s done.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:08 pmThe International Atomic Energy Agency had discounted the nuclear weapons threat well before the invasion. It was widely reported that the aluminum tubes were for rockets, not centrifuges. The yellowcake story had been discredited. Likewise the anthrax-bearing drones. All that was left was a vague fear of chemical or biological weapons that might be used against the invading forces in Iraq but which posed no threat to anybody else. All this was in plain sight if you just read the newspapers in the first two and a half months of 2002.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:11 pmSorry, sausage, but the dunce-in-chief had no intention of allowing the inspectors to finish the job, very specifically so that morons like you would present this foolish argument. Read some Scott Ritter, and look upon a real American rather than fellating the deserter-in-chief and his gang of cowards. Or stay mired in your ignorance and pathetic petulance, I don’t give a shit. But know that you’re a liar, and that we see it clearly.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:23 pmIt was sad to see Blair state “the facts were not fixed” and then continue to spin. Anyone know when a transcript will be up? After that it will take the press about five and a half minutes to show that Bush and Blair lied. If only the press were so bold.
June 7th, 2005 at 5:25 pmSo, no one here can name a country who believed there were no WMD’s. So much for your memo. So how are you going to make the case that Bush misled us, with the world intelligence agencies backing him up?
Never heard of Hussein Kamal…googled him, he apparently died in 1996. Long before Clinton decided to bomb Iraq’s ‘nuclear, chemical, and biological’ programs in 1998. Apparently they believed they existed. I could link you to the Clinton speech, but I don’t have to…you know it is true. Tsk, tsk…
June 7th, 2005 at 5:35 pmColin Powell said there were no WMD’s small weiner. Don’t you trust what Colin Powell says?
Every single weapons inspector said there were no WMD’s…what’s wrong with your hearing small weiner?
Bushie is a self proclaimed war president.
I didn’t have to read his lips to hear his proclamation either.
Votetoimpeach.org
June 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pmhttp://www.nationalreview.com/levin/levin072103.asp
“”Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”
“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons.”
“And so we had to act and act now. Let me explain why. First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.”
Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998.
Boy, are you guys stupid or what?
Colin Powell worked for the NSA, the CIA, or the State Department? Next time we need some intel on WMD’s, we just ask State?
June 7th, 2005 at 5:55 pmPsausageâ€â€
June 7th, 2005 at 5:55 pmFor your convenience, here are the Bush admin’s claims about Iraq’s weapons capability, and the serious questions raised at the time. Not sure why you’re so hung up on having another country say there were “no wmds”  there was widespread doubt about the nuclear weapons all along, and you’ll notice that damn few countries signed on for our little adventure. Your weirdly specific demand isn’t much of a cup to bail out that leaky boat you’re in but if it’s all you’ve got…
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,235395,00.html
Two months ago, a group of Republican and Democratic Senators went to the White House to meet with Condoleezza Rice, the President’s National Security Adviser. Bush was not scheduled to attend but poked his head in anyway  and soon turned the discussion to Iraq. The President has strong feelings about Saddam Hussein (you might too if the man had tried to assassinate your father, which Saddam attempted to do when former President George Bush visited Kuwait in 1993) and did not try to hide them. He showed little interest in debating what to do about Saddam. Instead, he became notably animated, according to one person in the room, used a vulgar epithet to refer to Saddam and concluded with four words that left no one in doubt about Bush’s intentions: “We’re taking him out.”
June 7th, 2005 at 6:01 pmI’m reading and hearing so many folks think the Downing street memo’s are old news, we are there, why go on trying to find out why were there. The reason is to be sure this never happens again, so we have to keep pressure on the MSM to stay on this story. They keep saying our intrest level last for seconds, lets prove them wrong. Write to your people in congress, sign the petition on John Conyers web site, we have to keep making noise, and it is time to fight.
June 7th, 2005 at 6:05 pm“Fuck Sadaam. We’re taking him out.”
George W. Bush to Condi Rice and 3 U.S. Senators. 3/2002
It all stems from this quote.
There is a skittishness among democrats and progressives who believed Sadaam had WMD, to criticize Bush for going to war on faulty intelligence. A number of democrats, particularly former Clinton Administration officials have been cowered by Bush’s repetition of the assertion that the Clinton Administration believed that Sadaam had WMD
We must overcome this. And we must overcome it by asserting that this analysis misses the point. When a President chooses to send our troops to war, he or she must assess the evidence first AND THEN make a decision.
Bush got it backwards. He made the decision first and then fixed the evidence to meet the decision.
According to Time Magazine, in March of 2002, Bush told a group of Senators who were meeting with Condi Rice: “Fuck Sadaam, We’re taking him out.”
All assertions that the Bush Administration fixed the pre-war intelligence must begin here.
Add to that the recent revelation of the Downing Street Dossier which indicates that Bush was fixing intelligence to the decision to go to war.
Then add Walter Pincus’ article indicating that Analysts who erroneously assessed that Sadaam had WMD were actually given job performance awards in each of the last three years.
As Josh Marshall says:
Almost across the board in this administration, the people responsible for this trail of error and/or untruth have been rewarded while those who resisted it or went along unwillingly have been marginalized, punished or fired.
It’s truly a national scandal — the surface of which has barely been scratched because the institutions with oversight responsibility have vested interest in not revealing what happened.
Also, let’s look back on the supposed conversation between Bush and Tenet in December of 2002 – as reported by Bob Woodward – in which Bush questioned the intelligence about WMD.
During the campaign, Rove and co. presented this as if Tenet was convincing Bush that the intelligence indicated a need to go to war. However, reading between the lines, even if this conversation happened as reported, this is not a conversation about whether to go to war. This is a conversation about whether the propaganda is good enough. Bush is not asking whether there is enough intelligence to justify sending our troops off to die and kill. He is asking whether he can convince the American people to go to war based on this intelligence. It’s akin to a prosecuting attorney not caring whether the defendenant is innocent or guilty but caring only about the jury verdict.
As we have laid out, Bush had already made the decision about the verdict he wanted, George Tenet was telling Bush that his case was a slam dunk, because the evidence had been fixed to get a conviction.
The most profound and fateful decision a President can make is to send our troops to war. The decision must be made based on a clearheaded perception of the threat AND the consequences of acting or not acting. This is the standard by which the Bush Presidency should be judged for its decision to go to war in Iraq. As previously noted , The Minneapolis Star Tribune has made the most insightful analysis to date George W. Bush’s performance.
In exchange for our uniformed young people’s willingness to offer the gift of their lives, civilian Americans owe them …our duty to ensure that they never are called to make that sacrifice unless it is truly necessary …In…Iraq, the American public has failed them; we did not prevent the Bush administration from spending their blood in an unnecessary war based on contrived concerns about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.
President Bush and those around him lied, and the rest of us let them.
It is high time that those progressives who supported the war and believed that Sadaam had WMD, acknowledge that the Bush Administration used their good will and good faith to build a case for war, which the Administration knew was built on trumped up, out of date or unconvincing evidence.
All progressives, regardless of one’s position on the war BEFORE IT STARTED, must join in a call for an investigation into the politicization of pre-war intelligence. If we do not investigate, all we can do – to paraphrase Pete Townsend – is “get down on our knees and pray we won’t get fooled again.”
June 7th, 2005 at 6:06 pmSo Bill bombed them for weapons right? Snausage, doesn’t that signal that we knew he didn’t have them anymore because we destroyed them? Hell, we strafe-bombed Iraq long before officially going to war anyway, so did Saddam replenish the WMDs during that time. Weapons inspectors found no evidence remember? Plus, I’m betting that you were among the right-wingers slobbering on about Bill bombing Iraq as a diversionary tactic away from Monica-gate, right?
June 7th, 2005 at 6:07 pmThe Downing Street Memo at the Bush-Blair Press Conference
June 7th, 2005 at 6:07 pmIf Bush declared his second term election victory as a “Mandate”, how does he now define his disapproval rating? Does the word “landslide” fit?
June 7th, 2005 at 6:08 pmNothing could be confirmed. The resolution for war stated the purpose of the mission. WMD’s were a part, but given that we no longer had inspectors in Country, our planes were being targeted and shot at, the cease fire was over. Saddam was openly paying 25,000 to Palestinian suicide bombers. Even without WMD’s, he was spnsoring terrorism. Had we not acted, the world would be up shit creek. No on the Israeli-palestinians, no on Syria leaving Lebanon as a staging area, the Russians would have held Ukraine. We would have no leverage anywhere, Iran and NK could sell/supply Iraq in one truck, all the nukes they would need. This world is far more stable now, then it would have been. If the perception of the US as a superpower began to fade, you might even see Chavez make a move into Central America.
War is not the only answer, but then, this thing in Iraq never really amounted to much of a War. Had we not proceeded, we would have spent the past 4years, inspecting and debating-something dems are eminently more qualified to do, just ask them. Sometimes you go with what you got…
The ultimate pardon? Woodward quoting Tenet-”It is a slam dunk…”
Good enough for me, and 51% of the country.
June 7th, 2005 at 6:18 pmCocktail Weenie is really jealous of Willie’s prodigious willy. Me too. It’s always about Clinton’s willie with us less well endowed guys. Maybe you have some issues around that. You seem awfully phallo-centric. For a straight man. I’m assuming that, at least, you think you are. I used to think I was one myself. Then Laura did that joke about the horse and it made me kind of insecure. Hey! Who can compete with a horse? I can’t, won’t even ride one. they scare me!
June 7th, 2005 at 6:19 pm“So Bill bombed them for weapons right? Snausage, doesn’t that signal that we knew he didn’t have them anymore because we destroyed them?”
Genius quote of the day.
actually bombing them for throwing out our inspectors was legit . A diversion would be telling your wife you want to be alone after attending Ron Brown’s funeral-so you can get a blow job. Or wearing the tie that your girlfriend gave you on the day she is testifying, or bombing the Sudan because they are manufacturing nerve gas for UBL and Saddam, on another day of testimony.
If Americans could let it go, the downing street memo is a joke.
To quote the flying toaster people-moveon, moveon….
I like Clinton, he made me rich. Not much on Foreign Policy, but that is why we brought Cheney in….
June 7th, 2005 at 6:25 pmIt’s a joke alright. But the joke is on you, Cocktail Weenie! And I’m the butt of it! Please shut up! You are just making it worse! Be quiet! Maybe it will just go away!
June 7th, 2005 at 6:31 pmCocktail Weenie! I have a plan!Tell me what you think. It’s for the deposition. You know. That thing they do to me before I get deposed…. What if I say this,
“It all depends on what your definition of the word “lieâ€? is.”
June 7th, 2005 at 6:36 pmMuch of the back and forth argument in this thread makes it seem that some here have not read the actual memo.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/
If you have not read the memo in it’s entirety, there’s not much point talking about it here.
June 7th, 2005 at 6:53 pmIf Americans could let it go, the downing street memo is a joke.
To quote the flying toaster people-moveon, moveon….
Cocktail Weenie, I don’t think your Jedi mind tricks are working. Dicky gave me this Darth Vader action figure and told me you were a 44th level Jedi or something. Damn that George Lucas. He told mme jedi mind tricks were real! Never believe a guy named George. They make up the wildest shit. None of it’s ever true. What about all those quasi-legal bombing missions softening up the Iraqi infrastructure before we invaded. This really looks bad for me.
June 7th, 2005 at 6:55 pmAs ‘Deep Throat’ once said, “follow the money.” The Bush administration spent funds allocated for Afghanistan in Iraq long before the Bush administration even hinted that there could be an Iraqi invasion. Although this was a violation of the Congress’ determination to spend that money on Iraq; it was also a clear indication that a decision was made about war in Iraq long before anyone admitted it. Even Bob Woodward was surprised that the Bush people would be so blatantly illegal, which he detailed in his book. It’s also disturbing that there’s been no congressional investigation to the executive branch specifically going against a congressional directive and spending money allocated for Afghanistan in Iraq instead. This violation of spending authority, in combination with the Downing Street Memo, makes a pretty strong case that the decision to invade Iraq was made well before 2003.
June 7th, 2005 at 6:57 pmCocktail Weenie… you still here? Hello? Helloo?
June 7th, 2005 at 6:59 pm-thump- -thump- Is this thing on? Cocktail Weenie? Helllooo?
Like Bushie, Buckshot/small weiner is a traitor to his country.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:00 pmThats why he’s hiding in Alaska.
He tried to kill my daddy.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:02 pmThanks Mr. Snausage, but obviously you didn’t even attempt to understand what I wrote. Think about it. It will come to you eventually.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:09 pmI thought he was my daddy. I tried to kill him, too. It was an oedipal thing. You’ve seen my mom. She’s a hottie!
June 7th, 2005 at 7:10 pmAll this stuff is laid out in the Frontline documentary called Rumsfeld’s War. You can even watch it on line at the PBS website. It came out about a year ago. I didn’t like it much because it was more about Rummy, and it made me look bad… what? I… I shouldn’t be Mpphhmmhp! Owww!….
June 7th, 2005 at 7:15 pmMore Proof that the Downing Street Memo is True
If you recall a few days ago I made the mistake tiring to speak to some right-wing crack pots, you can read that post here.
In short, they say that the Downing Street Memo is a fake, and that you must forget all other data points that only add valid…
June 7th, 2005 at 7:18 pmPolish Sausage is just another classic example of what conservative brainwashing does. He rails on and on about topics completely unrelated to the issue at hand:
DID BUSH LIE ABOUT WHEN HE DECIDED TO TAKE US TO WAR.
He waxes about whether or not weapons existed and delights in trying to trip people up over who said this and who knew what.
But the bottom line is that in typical right-wing fashion, he cannot address the issue at hand, and therefore must try to redirect, spin and obfuscate the discussion as much as he can in order to make everyone forget what the point was in the first place.
We are hip to your silly games little man.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:23 pmWhite House Transcripts of Bush-Blair speech
In regards to the Memo, Blair states:
” Well, I can respond to that very easily. No, the facts were not being fixed in any shape or form at all. And let me remind you that that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations.”
That seems to be an admission that the memo is authentic.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:25 pmJohn Kerry visits the set of Girls Gone Wild.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:40 pmAnd apparently Gordon drinks from the same GOP trough as Polish Sausage…
Don’t like a subject? Don’t have a response? Just change the subject!
I’m sure John Kerry in a photo with a couple of large breasted women is FAR more sinister than Bush lying to the country to go to war…
Thanks for lowering the bar, Gordon.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:49 pm[Don't forget, they PAY people like Polish Sausage to get on the boards and keep it a "debate" as though there are two sides to a blatant and boldfaced lie. That's their strategy -- make everything a he said/she said. Sometimes, there is only truth "The Republicans are lying scum who will say and do ANYTHING to get what they want."]
On the matter of the Neo-con plan for war and the memo.
The whole strategy leading up to the war was for the Republican Bush administration to twist and manipulate every piece of intelligence until it looked like it MIGHT possibly imply that there were WMD and to ignore or destroy any data that implied anything else. Finally, once they had the bare minimal intelligence that MIGHT, possibly, imply something they would speak of it as if it was pure PROOF.
Remember Cheney? “We know exactly where they are, in the north, the south, to the east, west and outside Tekrit?” or some such bs. That’s not “We have a very strong confidence that they are there.” If I tell you that you have a dead body buried in your back yard and I tell you EXACTLY where it is, that implies a MUCH more specific factual basis for my ideas than just a “suspicion.” They had NO SUCH clue. It was all LIES. And then, he goes on TV and DENIES he ever told the lie, even as they bring up the footage of him telling the lie — THIS GOES BEYOND INNOCENT! This is PURE EVIL.
Meanwhile, they were also projecting an attitude of ABSOLUTE TRUTH that there were WMD in Iraq, through Bush’s “Sadam must disarm” speeches. Well, you can’t disarm if you don’t have the arms.
It was basically a cop yelling at an innocent man that he “must stop beating his wife” over and over again and there is nothing the guy can do, until the cop finally arrests him for beating his wife. And the guy is SINGLE!
All the Democrats and most of the Republicans were LIED to by the Administration and fed false and tweaked intelligence with any opposition or “balance” removed (send Bolton out there to get anybody fired who disagrees) and then the congress was convinced to support this agenda that Bush has had since before he was even in office.
Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com
The Days of Decision are coming: We are frogs begin slow-cooked, and by the time we realize the water is boiling, we won’t have the strength to jump out of the pot. Keep an eye out for your “jumping moment” and we’ll all jump together. FROG FREEDOM!!!
The Republicans in power have lied and innocent people died.
June 7th, 2005 at 7:51 pmThe Republicans in power have stolen and given to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
The Republicans in power have cheated and claim they are the “moral” ones.
We must flush all Republicans out of power in ‘06 and ‘08.
Take back American Democracy. Don’t vote Republican.
Great list, but there is at least one more important example. George Bush stated in Cincinnati on October 7, 2002 that “war was not inevitable” just four days before the Senate voted on the Iraq War Resolution. John Kerry cited Bush’s statements in his Senate floor speech on his IWR vote, which was clearly not seen as a vote approving the type of war planned by George Bush, when he said:
“As the President made clear earlier this week, ‘Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable.’ It means that “America speaks with one voice.”
June 7th, 2005 at 7:57 pm“”Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.â€?
“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons.�
“And so we had to act and act now. Let me explain why. First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.�
Bill Clinton, December 16, 1998.
Boy, are you guys stupid or what?
Colin Powell worked for the NSA, the CIA, or the State Department? Next time we need some intel on WMD’s, we just ask State?
Bill Clinton was misled by the folks at The Project for a New American Century.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqmiddleeast2000-1997.htm
June 7th, 2005 at 8:10 pmGordon’s really cool. He’s got that really cool website, Dogsnot Diarreaha. He left the link in his post. Here’s a picture of Gordon he sent me and Turdblossom. I think it was last Halloween and he was a trickin’ and a treatin.
http://dogsnot.net/mt/images/gordon.jpg
June 7th, 2005 at 8:20 pmJust copy it and paste it into your browser. It will work then.
June 7th, 2005 at 8:21 pm“First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.” Yes, at that point it was true bombing was justifiable because Saddam had kicked the inspectors out. But you say Bush was also justified “given that we no longer had inspectors in Country.” This time, the lack of inspectors was Bush’s fault. Saddam unconditionally invited them to return in September 2002. The inspections began in November, and went until March 2003, when they withdrew after Bush publicly announced “for their own safety, all foreign nationals, including journalists and inspectors should leave Iraq immediately.” Oopsie.
June 7th, 2005 at 8:21 pm[Don’t forget, they PAY people like Polish Sausage to get on the boards and keep it a “debate� as though there are two sides to a blatant and boldfaced lie. That’s their strategy – make everything a he said/she said. Sometimes, there is only truth “The Republicans are lying scum who will say and do ANYTHING to get what they want."]
Charlie L. is right. This ain’t no friggin’ debating society. We don’t need to be civil or reasonable with liars and thieves as long as people are dying for a lie. Our people. Fellow Americans and innocent Iraqis. When they come around, convince them to leave with extreme prejudice.
June 7th, 2005 at 8:28 pmIam with you MDR. Liars can’t be debated, only ridiculed. The supporters of the Bush administration are criminals too and they will be held to account.
June 7th, 2005 at 8:38 pmI suppose you can call it a debate about the definition of the word “lie” which has caused people to “die”. But we didn’t want to hear about it when Clinton wanted to debate the definition of the word ‘is” that may have caused a person to “jizz”. You folks watch TV. I know it’s “hard work”, too, cuz I do it all the time. Violence good, sex bad.
June 7th, 2005 at 9:09 pmI’m George Bush and I approve all these messages. I don’t have to read ‘em. I don’t think I’d understand them unless I disassembled them and I don’t have the time. Mommy and Poppy assembled all my toys for me on Christmas. I still can’t read.
June 7th, 2005 at 9:13 pmI seem to recall the comment made by Bush to Condoleeza Rice in front of several Congressmen & Sentators, “Fuck Saddam, we’re taking him out.” That in and of itself would seem to indicate that he had already made up his mind. Unless you’re stupid, or brainwashed, like most Republicans.
June 7th, 2005 at 9:13 pmI’m pretty sure Saddam kicked the inspectors out in ‘98, they were let back in and then the UN withdrew them in advance of the US/UK bombing.
June 7th, 2005 at 10:01 pmThe proof of a nation not believing Saddam had WMD is in the Kohr al-Amaya Oil Shipment story. The nation was the United States, when they allowed 14 tankers to leave the Iraqi port, unchecked, in the month preceeding the public ground invasion – Page 5 and Page 65 (Section III.C.5 of Minority Staff Report on Illegal Surcharges on Oil-For-Food Contracts and Illegal Oil Shipments from Kohr al-Amaya) – http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/REPORTwchartsIllegalSurchargesKhoralAmayaFINAL.pdf
See also: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/d9d4d8b0-64f6-11d9-9f8b-00000e2511c8.html
June 7th, 2005 at 10:06 pmI’m officially bored…
June 7th, 2005 at 10:08 pmThe Daily Kos, and the Liberal Avenger both have entries today (spurred on by Think Progress’
The proof of a nation (the US) not believing Saddam had connections to al Qaeda and didn’t fear alleged (at the time) al Qaeda associated terrorists getting WMD is the MSNBC report: “White House kills Pentagon plans to strike Zarqawi’s camp in Northern Iraq in order to maintain the White House’s claim that Iraq has ties to terrorists” – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601
This story was also reported by ABC News in August of 2002, 24th, I think. (Don’t have the link handy).
If Bush were truly concerned about Zarqawi and Ansar al Islam he would have taken a shot or two or three at knocking them out… they were in the No-Fly Zone north after all.
No, instead he left them where they were so he (and Powell in his Feb. 5, 2003 spin at the UN) could use their existance for drumming up support.
June 7th, 2005 at 10:20 pmIsbister, Saddam didn’t kick out the inspectors, they left because they felt they were being interfered with.
As for whether Bush lied about the WMDs, Wolfowitz said that WMDs were just something to market the war with a couple of years back. The French specifically stated the WMD evidence was ‘unconvincing” – that is why your Congresscritters are eating “Freedom Fries.”
June 7th, 2005 at 10:24 pmPlease note WMDs aren’t the only thing W and his Bush League minions are lying about. Remember when they edited out any mention of human activities affecting global warming? How about today’s reporting about White House and Pentagon lies about the Boeing Tanker Scandal? The Bush Administration has piled up an impressive amount of lies even for politicians – anything they say is now suspect.
“It would augment your case, if you could provide an intelligence source that was dismissive of WMD’s in Iraq. This is the problem. You have to prove that the admin knew that there were no WMD’s, and support that with another foreign intel service that does not agree with the Bush admin’s view that they had weapons. Best of luck…”
How about this:
Press Release: Star Witness on Iraq Said Weapons Were Destroyed: Bombshell revelation from a defector cited by White House and press (2/27/03)
June 7th, 2005 at 10:29 pmhttp://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1845
and this:
June 7th, 2005 at 10:31 pmWhere Did All the Weapons Go?: Before the war, media overlooked a key story (5/1/03) By Seth Ackerman
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1139
Some of you still love me!
June 8th, 2005 at 12:08 amOne ot two of you… I will prosecute the rest of you!
June 8th, 2005 at 12:09 amAmazing how the thread degenerates – yet again – into a discussion over weapons inspections and fictional weapons of mass destruction.
Yet again, this is about whether or not Bush lied when he kept insisting that he sent us to war as a last resort well after he had already decide to do so.
June 8th, 2005 at 12:20 amSo has the downing street memo appeared on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC or in NYT WaPo Newsweek, Time, LAtimes?
The thing is I don’t watch or read any of that crap anymore.
So I’m kind of counting on you all to tell me. Seems like this downing street memo is only talked about on idiot lefties websites, in between swipes at John Bolton and Janice Rodgers Brown.
By the way in your terms of use page the first paragraph starrtes out by claiming this is a nonpartisan effort that doesn’t pay taxes. It’s not good to introduce yourselves to the world with a lie.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:02 amSomeone fix that mui pronto.
Or don’t fix it – it makes no difference to me.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:05 amI won’t be coming back here either way.
Jim,
You ignorant slut. This is a progressive site. We are not Democrats or Republicans. We can’t stand either of those parties, like most Americans. We are the sane ones. You are probably a righty libertarian. (snicker). Someone should fix you mui pronto, so you don’t spray all over the place and chew on the furniture. Try Fox News. They have been covering it. What are you, too poor or too cheap to buy a newspaper? If the paperboy’s aim is off, you could always steal one, as long as he missed the owner’s property by a few inches.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:11 amScott Ritter, the man in charge of getting rid of the WMD’s in Iraq, KNEW there were on WMD’s in Iraq.
He tried to tell the world and was crucified.
For those of you who are whining “everybody thought there were WMD’s in Iraq” that is BULLSHIT. The people who knew, who were the inspectors, KNEW there weren’t any there.
The proof, which is when I knew the administration was full of shit, is when the administration kept saying “we know exactly where they are” and the inspectors said “well then tell us ONE site where we can find some” and the administration refused. REFUSED. All they had to do was point to ONE SITE for the inspectors to find, and they would have had a case.
They couldn’t do it.
I knew they were lying then, and I knew they were lying now.
Anybody with an ounce of objectivity back then would have realized the same damn thing.
So for those whiners — shut the hell up. You’re wrong.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:18 amJeebus, Jim! You are right. You are either an American, and I decide what party that is, or a commie. All democrats are commies, but we keep them around so we look good. If we didn’t have them we would look bad. At least it worked for awhile. I think folks is starting to see through that. Now they don’t like the Democrats, either. They sure as hell don’t like us Americans. We in some deep doo doo now.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:19 amJim is smarter than he looks. He knows saying that only the “idiot lefties” are reporting the news and the facts. hehe Good one, Jimbo!
June 8th, 2005 at 1:25 amDear Polish Sausage,
I don’t understand why anyone needs to “name a country who believed there were no WMD’s.” What does that have to do with this Downing Street memo? The argument being made here is that Bush/Blair decided to go to war before going to the UN, let alone going to their respective populaces. And that they based their claims on faulty intelligence–perhaps even doctored evidence.
This memo appears to support those lines of thought. Do you have a direct response to this argument or not?
As for your claim that “every other country” believed that Saddam had WMDs, which countries are you referring to? (Please don’t respond “the US” or “England”, aka Bush/Blair.) Please provide me with some evidence that other countries (and “world intelligence agencies”) were claiming that Saddam had weapons of mass distruction. I don’t remember such claims. Rather, I recall a lot of countries remaining pretty silent on ths issue, choosing instead to demand evidence from the US and UK of their claims. The burden of proof lies with the one making the argument. As I recall, some (France, Germany, members of the US and UK’s own intelligence communities) were unhappy with the evidence that the US/UK did provide, and all of that “evidence” has since proven to be suspect.
In this regard, several people here have replied to your request that we name intelligence sources that were dismissive of WMD’s in Iraq. I don’t understand why you say that Richard Clarke doesn’t count. Or Colin Powell, for that matter.
Well, I just don’t understand you. I look forward to your reply.
Cheers,
June 8th, 2005 at 1:25 amNo Fun
Coctail Weenie (that’s his code name, Polish Sausage is just his cover. I thought of that one. Cool, Huh?) is a GOP operative. We pay him to come here and get abused.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:28 amThis is top secret.
http://www.outofthefryingpan.com/recipes/weenies.cocktail.shtml
June 8th, 2005 at 1:31 amHey, George W. Bush:
Don’t you have better things to do than post at this blog, so late in the nighttime? Like reforming our Social Security? Or protecting our beloved Homeland?
Cheers,
June 8th, 2005 at 1:37 amNo Fun
The Republic is dying. See the evil worshippers as they are.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:13 amWe have a document by the PNAC, a neo conservitive group with members like Cheney, Rumsfeldt, Wolfie, Jeb Bush, stating in 1999 that to put forward their plan they would need a galvanizing event like A NEW PEARL HARBOR (badda bing, badda boom) we have September 11. We have the minutes from a top secret document which was never meant to see the light of day outside the highest levels of the British Government which states that the Bushies were planning on lying to the American Congress and the American People so that they could create military bases in Iraq (something the PNAC document stated was one of their plans).
June 8th, 2005 at 2:43 amOur government was formed by men who knew that power would be abused, had personal experience that power would be abused, and attempted to create a system of government that would halt that abuse. Any student of history can bring to mind many instances of the abuse of power. There has been a moment for me, I remember it quite well, where I realised that the administration in power of MY country is guilty of TREASON and WAR CRIMES and needs to be IMPEACHED AND PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW. If they are let off of the crimes they are guilty of, I think that we need to change that line in the song which says something about the “land of the free and the home of the brave”
Wasn’t it “the lying, not the sex,” that was supposedly the grounds for impeaching President Clinton?
Bush got caught lying in this memo — that must mean it’s time for another impeachment.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:30 amNo Fun,
You’re not the boss of me. I’m the boss of you and don’t you forget it. Besides, all “hard work” and no play make George a dull boy. And all that stuff ain’t fun no more cuz peoples don’t like my ideas. It’s No Fun! Ha! Ha Ha! I made a joke.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:36 amIt is important to consider the FACT that George Bush has not really told us why we are in Iraq. His words today are more proof of his continuing lie. Take note of this comment by the Commander in Chief who could not protect America from attacks by commercial airplanes:
“Somebody said, well, you know, we had made up our mind to use military force to deal with Saddam. There’s nothing farther from the truth,”
Isolate the structure…
“Somebody said”
The guy is a master lie sorcerer. The word, “Somebody” makes the individual who made the allegations dissapear. Bush Sr. developed a class to teach CIA operatives how to lie. I’m sure his boy was schooled by the best.
The next bit of the structure is great… “well, you know,”
No we don’t know you lying pustule. We never knew. We don’t know anything because nothing out of your mouth has ever been the truth. What the President is actually doing is dismissing the question. We know. If we know the answer there must not be a question.
If there is still a question the next bit of structure completely answers the inquiry because he confesses.
“We had made up our mind to use military force to deal with Saddam.”
Did I say the putrid liar has never told the truth?
I was wrong fellow Patriots. I did not intentionally mislead you. He knows he can fake out the polygraph test if he sprinkles his lies with truth. In this case he sprinkles America with his golden showers. Blair is a shrimper (he likes to suck toes). To each his own.
Digest those words of truth. You may hear them again.
Finally, the master deceiver sells us the ticket all of America wants to buy. The destination? Oz. The event? Theatre of the absurd.
There’s nothing farther from the truth,”
Which part?
He is once again referring to that little clause “you know”.
This time it is “you”. Those that question are the one’s, in his opinion, that are farthest from the truth.
I am a Patriot and an American. Our President is a War Criminal and a Traitor. Acceptance of this war is complicity in the criminal activity. The Representatives and Senators who continue to condone the war are in violation of the RICO Act. Stand up. Tell them you do not support the war and you are not complicit in the criminal activity.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:51 amIn a graduation speech at West Point, Bush cites the realities of a new post-Cold War era and outlines a major shift in national security strategy — from containment to preemption.
“Our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives.”
President Bush Delivers Graduation Speech at West Point, June 2002
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html
The president also calls for an American hegemony: “America has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond challenge.” Both strategic aims — preemption and hegemony — echo the recommendations Paul Wolfowitz made back in 1992 in his controversial Defense Planning Guidance draft.
http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/96unclass/davis.htm
From the Memo, 7/23/2002
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
Timeline of the evolution of the Bush Doctrine
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/etc/cron.html
Rumsfeld’s War
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pentagon/paths/bush2.html
June 8th, 2005 at 4:26 amNot to nitpick, but the opinion of a roomful of Brits isn’t what I’d call ‘fact’, it’s hearsay.
But I’d still like to see Bush impeached, along with Cheney. Send them to Gitmo for some rehabilitation, if need be.
But don’t confuse opinion with fact, even if you agree with the opinion. Which I happen to do.
June 8th, 2005 at 5:40 amWhat were the lies on WMD by the Bush administration? See http://dearkitty.modblog.com/core.mod?show=blogview&blog_id=438390
June 8th, 2005 at 5:50 amHearsay is when testifying under oath you say, “I heard so and so say…”. When that roomful of Brits says who those so and sos are, and they are put under oath, and asked what they said, that ain’t hearsay. The rules of evidence may also treat minutes of a meeting as direct evidence, not hearsay. Are you a lawyer? I’m not, either. I’m the preznit!
June 8th, 2005 at 6:07 amPOLISH SAUSAGE:”Even if you found one country, then it would be in contrast to every other country believing that Saddam had them. So, before you bust a nut over the Downing Street memo-I ask you, what country said, “You will find no WMD’s”?”
Start here:
U.S. Allies Were Not Persuaded By U.S. Assertions on Iraq WMD
June 9, 2003
Institute for Science and International Security
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/usallieswmd.html
Despite the Bush Administration’s assertions, allies of the United States did not fully agree with the Administration’s assessment on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
For example, Russia was not convinced by either the September 24, 2002 British dossier or the October 4, 2002 CIA report. Lacking sufficient evidence, Russia dismissed the claims as a part of a “propaganda furor.”2 Specifically targeting the CIA report, Putin said, “Fears are one thing, hard facts are another.” He goes on to say, “Russia does not have in its possession any trustworthy data that supports the existence of nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we have not received any such information from our partners yet. This fact has also been supported by the information sent by the CIA to the US Congress.”3 However, Putin was apprehensive about the possibility that Iraq may have WMDs and he therefore supported inspections. The Russian ambassador to London thought that the dossier was a document of concern. “It is impressive, but not always…convincing.”4
French intelligence services did not come up with the same alarming assessment of Iraq and WMD as did the Britain and the United States. “According to secret agents at the DGSE, Saddam’s Iraq does not represent any kind of nuclear threat at this time…It [the French assessment] contradicts the CIA’s analysis…”5 French spies said that the Iraqi nuclear threat claimed by the United States was a “phony threat.”6
June 8th, 2005 at 6:10 amMOINTY -
That link to TIME didn’t work for me but here is the citation:
“We’re taking him out”
June 8th, 2005 at 6:20 amDaniel Eisenberg. Time. New York: May 13, 2002.Vol.159, Iss. 19; pg. 36, 3 pgs
Good enough for me, and 51% of the country.
Comment by polish sausage  June 7th, 2005 @ 6:18 pm
It’s not 51% anymore:
Poll Finds Dimmer View of Iraq War
52% Say U.S. Has Not Become Safer
By Dana Milbank and Claudia Deane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 8, 2005; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/07/AR2005060700296.html
For the first time since the war in Iraq began, more than half of the American public believes the fight there has not made the United States safer, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Nearly three-quarters of Americans say the number of casualties in Iraq is unacceptable, while two-thirds say the U.S. military there is bogged down and nearly six in 10 say the war was not worth fighting — in all three cases matching or exceeding the highest levels of pessimism yet recorded. More than four in 10 believe the U.S. presence in Iraq is becoming analogous to the experience in Vietnam.
June 8th, 2005 at 6:22 amPOLISH –
It’s not 51% anymore:
Poll Finds Dimmer View of Iraq War
52% Say U.S. Has Not Become Safer
By Dana Milbank and Claudia Deane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 8, 2005; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/07/AR2005060700296.html
For the first time since the war in Iraq began, more than half of the American public believes the fight there has not made the United States safer, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Nearly three-quarters of Americans say the number of casualties in Iraq is unacceptable, while two-thirds say the U.S. military there is bogged down and nearly six in 10 say the war was not worth fighting — in all three cases matching or exceeding the highest levels of pessimism yet recorded. More than four in 10 believe the U.S. presence in Iraq is becoming analogous to the experience in Vietnam.
June 8th, 2005 at 6:24 amOh the lies he told
June 8th, 2005 at 6:42 amGood work from the Think Progress team. They have pulled together the facts on the Downing Street Memo and the lies later told….
When are WE going to nail this administration for lying to congress and the people of the world about WMD’s and the threat that Iraq had against the US? We need to start a movement to take over our country., take it away from the ruthless people that are running it. Start with calling, emailing, writing are news media and congressmen and women. It is about time to get off our ars’s and did something about the continuous lies that this president and cheney keep telling us. Are you willing to write to your reps and senators? are you willing to write to your news media?? Then lets do it.
June 8th, 2005 at 7:42 amhttp:www.house.gov/writerep
http:www.senate.gov
Very good Jack Sir, but…are the congressmen actually able to break the corporate chains that hold them?
June 8th, 2005 at 8:42 amI just love the Republican shills on this site…add Jim to the list. Of course, in the face of a fairly damning memo – that was NOT refuted or identified as false yesterday by Blair OR Bush – the natural BushBot tendency isn’t to engage in a debate over the merits of the official document, but rather to throw up a or two or just put up an ad-hominem smokescreen.
Now if only these little chickenhawks and members of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists could apply their tactics for winning a debate to military operations…oh wait, they have. I guess that explains a lot.
June 8th, 2005 at 8:54 amEDIT – MISSING WORD
“but rather to throw up a STRAW MAN or two“
June 8th, 2005 at 8:58 amJack, your comments are completely understandable, however, I’ve been writing our representatives and newspaper editors for a long time now expressing my outrage at what this Bush administration has been doing. I’ve responded to every petition coming my way and made phone calls. None of it gets anywhere (that I can see). Mine is but one voice but it is going out through as many channels as I can find. It is very discourage when I receive no response from any of them. Let’s face it, Bush, Rove and all their criminal cronies have bought and paid for silence in the news media. My greater disappointment is in the lack of outrage by the opposing democrats. Oh wait….we wouldn’t hear about that in the news media, would we?
June 8th, 2005 at 9:22 amBe patient. I know some of us have been patient longer than others. But considerr that many are coming to this realization for the first time. Every day, more and more people are starting to realize what many of us have known for a year or more. These things take time. Don’t give up. A national strike may be an option. They do it in other countries. Just keep truckin’.
June 8th, 2005 at 9:47 amConrad, My patience is running thin – while we are being patient, Bush and his band of criminals are doing more and more damage, with more and more lives are being lost, he is enlisting more and more of his criminal friends into positions of power, destruction continues both here and around the world. I want to see the Bush/Rove/Cheney corruption stopped now before it’s too late! What amazes me is the passiveness of the American people who allow such corruption and cover-up to take over our country.
June 8th, 2005 at 10:30 amI went home, wanting to watch the news, but fell asleep…did you guys make any progress on getting Bush impeached?
It warms my heart to see Woodward, champion of the Dems for getting Nixon, has now given the trump card to Bush.
May I reiterate…”It’s a slam dunk, Mr. President.” Good enough for me, good enough for America.
Wake me up again if you get 43 impeached.
PS-’No Fun’ is ‘Arne Langsetmo’
June 8th, 2005 at 10:38 amConrad, My patience is running thin – while we are being patient, Clinton and his band of criminals are doing more and more damage, with more and more lives are being lost, he is enlisting more and more of his criminal friends into positions of power, destruction continues both here and around the world. I want to see the Clinton/Gore/Albright corruption stopped now before it’s too late! What amazes me is the passiveness of the American people who allow such corruption and cover-up to take over our country.
Comment by Limbaugh  June 8th, 1996
June 8th, 2005 at 10:41 amLimbaugh, My patience is running thin – while we are being patient, Nixon and his band of criminals are doing more and more damage, with more and more lives being lost, he is enlisting more and more of his criminal friends into positions of power, destruction continues both here and around the world. I want to see the Nixon corruption stopped now before it’s too late! What amazes me is the passiveness of the American people who allow such corruption and cover-up to take over our country. Oh wait…we did rid ourselves of that criminal – and how many went to prison??? History repeating itself?
June 8th, 2005 at 10:55 amI always wondered why all the ethnic jokes made fun of Poles for being stupid. Now i know.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:10 amWhen Bush and Blair were speaking about aid to Africa yesterday on CNN, Bush out and out lied about the Memo being trumped up to stop Blair from winning the election. He has told so many lies, he has to tell new ones to cover up for the old ones.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:20 amPolish Sausage:
Re:
“We believe [Iraq] has reconsituted nuclear weapons.”
- Dick Cheney, on Meet the Press
Please cite the foreign or domestic source for this declarative statement.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:30 amIt’s not that Polish Sausage is stupid, it’s just that he has nothing intelligent to say on this topic. I’m sure he was plenty hot and bothered when Clinton lied to the country about getting oral sex, but Bush lying to send the nation war…that’s much ado about nothing.
Cons – they put the C-O-N back into ‘consistency’.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:33 am‘but you simply can’t point to someone or some country that said, “There are no WMD’s.â€?’
Scott Ritter. He would know, he was one of the ones who cataloged and destroyed what was there.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:54 am“We believe [Iraq] has reconsituted nuclear weapons.�
I have to see the transcript. oh wait…
Here it is:
“…And I think that would be the fear here, that even if he were tomorrow to give everything up, if he stays in power, we have to assume that as soon as the world is looking the other way and preoccupied with other issues, he will be back again rebuilding his BW and CW capabilities, and once again reconstituting his nuclear program.”
Seems you paraphrased-
here’s a link, http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/cheneymeetthepress.htm
Apparently you are a Graduate of the Rather school of Journalism, where so long as you combine what you believe with what is said, you come out with an almost truth.
In the future you may wish to actually cite your source, as opposed to believing it to be true.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:54 amPolish Sausage–
Apparently you are a Graduate of the Mehlman school of Journalism (”I respectfully disagree”), where it’s perfectly all right to avoid the issues at hand, so long as you lob something out there that is remotely related to the topic.
In the future you may wish to actually address the current topic first — in this case the fact that the memo shows that Bush may have lied about when he decided on war — as opposed to going off on as many tangents as possible to further obscure and confuse the matter.
June 8th, 2005 at 12:37 pmTo cocktail weenie,
The Downing Street memo was created by the head of British intelligence. There’s your country. It was him reporting what he heard from our intelligence. There’s your other country. We both knew that Iraq was less of a threat than Iran, North Korea and Libya. Using OUR OWN intelligence, does it make any sense to attack the country that might be the 4th largest threat against us?
June 8th, 2005 at 12:54 pmPolish Sausage:
“ AND WE BELIEVE HE HAS, IN FACT, RECONSTITUTED NUCLEAR WEAPONS.�
– Vice-President Dick Cheney, NBC, “Meet the Press,” Transcript for March 16, 2003.
Source:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/cheneymeetthepress.htm
I take your silence on this matter as your agreement that Dick Cheney lied to take the country to war and should, therefore, be impeached.
June 8th, 2005 at 1:50 pm“and we believe”…so you have the knowledge of what Cheney actually believed now? Without the ‘we believe’, you might have had something…
The Downing Street memo was created by the ‘head of British intelligence’?
“The case was thin,” summarized the notes taken by a British national security aide at the meeting.
Might want to correct this misconception with the WAPO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/12/AR2005051201857.html
John- to borrow your quote “that Bush may have lied about when he decided on war”
by placing the ‘may’ in your own sentence you acknowledge that it has not been proven. Some here believe it to be fact, regardless of what they find.
A LOB?
Dean says: Republicans are evil. White Christians are the Republican party. Therefore, White Chrsitians are evil.
Can’t wait for this off year election. I’m seeing that Byrd is now vulnerable…tsk, tsk
June 8th, 2005 at 2:02 pmPolish – Downing Street Memo discredited? Even your boy Russert said not so. 51% of Americans back the war? Have you read the polls recently? We had to take out Saddam so that Iran & N Korea couldn’t sell him WMD? Wouldn’t it make more sense to take out the countries who MIGHT sell him the weapons, Iran & N Korea? If you so strongly believe in Chickenhawk George and his war why aren’t you there fighting and dying? And please don’t say you’re too old, any old warm body will do. Put your body where your mouth is.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:09 pmDid you really need a memo to find out that Bush was lying? The whole world knew he was (I didn’t here any apologies directed to Germany, France or Canada for that matter for not getting on the band wagon of war under false pretext). Stop watching Fox news people if you want a dose of reality. Cheers!
June 8th, 2005 at 2:11 pmSo, just to be absolutely clear, you are unable to cite a single source for Dick Cheney’s claim that Hussein had reconstituted nuclear weapons.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:16 pmTo paraphrase Polish Sausage:
“Dick Cheney is from the Rather school of government, where so long as you combine what you believe with what is said, you come out with an almost truth.”
“In the future Cheney may wish to actually cite his source, as opposed to believing it to be true.”
To Polish Sausage: you may wish to read the source you obviously found, before you accuse someone of lying.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:19 pm“Military action was now seen as inevitable,” said the notes, summarizing a report by Richard Dearlove, then head of MI6, British intelligence, who had just returned from consultations in Washington along with other senior British officials.
From your article, cocktail weenie.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:24 pm“If you so strongly believe in Chickenhawk George and his war why aren’t you there fighting and dying?”
Why aren’t you out in the streets protesting ala’ Vietnam? ohhhhh….this internet thing. Yea that worked great for Dean.
You are so freaking lazy, that you’ll tell people what they should be doing but you can’t even get a million people together to protest. What have you done, to oppose the War? Obsess over proving that Bush lied? Echoing conspiracies?
(You have also made a serious assumption about me, for which you have nothing to prove it.)
To quote Sam’s friend-”Did you really need a memo to find out that Bush was lying?”
At least he is honest about his beliefs. The ‘progressives’ are such a group seeking instant gratification, that they incapable of organizing in any relevant fashion. Instead of blurting the ‘rumors’ of the day, you need to build a case and present in toto. IT escapes all of you, because you type nifty little inuendos, and the truth, there is some mixed in, gets drowned out by the nonsense that these websites procreate. Every step towards credibility is countered by two steps back, in falsehoods, misrepresentations, and the need for instant gratification.
I have never heard what plan ‘b’ was…given the choice between a crappy plan (based on assumptions) and no plan, awaiting a terrorist attack, we opted to take action.
Please give the other method of resolution for Terrorism in the ME. I wouldn’t want to distract you from discrediting Bush, but at least in doing that, you don’t have to admit that you don’t have a coherent strategy for anything.
Once and for all, the Downing Street memo is the summary of an Aide’s assesment of the meeting. What I didn’t get out of the memo is that intel will be created…I also did not get a specific desire to avoid the UN, and proceed, merely the thinking for the justification for the War.
It was so credible that Tony Blair was elected again, even with support for the war in the 40% range. Apparently the Brits did not take it seriously.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:30 pmSo polish sausage, while this boat continues to sink and we try to bail the water out, assholes such as yourself keep pouring it back in. Thanks for your help, but we’d be better off if you just jumped out and swam.
What part of the GOP is chock full of lying hypocrites and murderers don’t you understand?
You are part of the problem.
June 8th, 2005 at 2:44 pmActually, the majority of America is what you have a problem with…
I take it you do not have an alternate plan for dealing with terrorism in the ME. How can you obsess over throwing out the only people willing to deal with it? and should you, by some miracle, get the Senate and the Presidency back, what are the dems going to do?
My suggestion? Invest your energy coming up with a plan, that deals with establishing democracy and fighting terrorism in the ME.
If you ask a dem, what is great about America, they’ll tell you, ‘nothing’. They’ll fixate on what is wrong and they’re hard pressed to find a positive. Just what I want from my leadership.
Or you could just have a chatroom, sit in you house with your pant around your ankles, and fantasize about getting to guard Bush at Gitmo.
Instant gratification, anyone?
June 8th, 2005 at 3:07 pmI’d like to work at Gitmo.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:13 pmCocktail weenie,
June 8th, 2005 at 3:17 pmMy alternate plan for dealing with terrorism is to not create more of it. That’s why dubya needs to go.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:17 pmHow inventive, given that the Embassy bombing, the Cole, and the 9/11, happened before invading Iraq…I really can’t see how Bush can be blamed for any terrorist attack. I’m not going to blame Clinton either…just the people who were, are, and will be(ing) trained to kill innocents. Some supported by governments, who believe (by history) that their actions have no conseqeunce. These leaders no longer believe that they are being ignored.
Bush is spreading fear around the world…fear that a country maybe toppled because he is displeased. In fairness, the progressives are building Bush’s reputation, making him larger and more invulnerable in appearance than he really is…
Foreign press, believes that Bush can do whatever he wants, and is crazy enough to do it. IN presenting him as a grand architect, you are helping scare the crap out the world’s dictators. So if there is a silver lining, your critique of Bush, is making us safer…argghhh, can’t believe I typed that one.
Dean still is a big loser( I feel better already)
June 8th, 2005 at 3:37 pmMr. Sausage,
There were over 600 terrorist attacks worldwide last year. A new record. That’s 3 times more than the previous year. Dubya’s solution for that? Let’s not publish the report anymore.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:47 pm…and that doesn’t include anything that is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan.
June 8th, 2005 at 3:48 pmGo back in time abit and read:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html
Looks like we get a direct path from Cheney to CIA to curveball to doctored facts >> To the Downing Street Minutes.
June 8th, 2005 at 4:01 pmAgainst Americans?
Or are you including the attacks in Saudi Arabia that have resulted in a seperation of State and al-Queda?
600 seems small. What are those car bombs in Iraq? Michael Moore’s freedom fighters?
I just got hit with the sinking boat analogy, now I’m getting ‘don’t rock the boat’ and it will all go away? Seriously, change comes from crisis, not tolerance. Get some protests going, and you might have the appearance of a crisis in America. At least something you can point to and call a crisis.
It is not like I’m dancing in the street that American soldiers are being killed, but you can’t help but notice that the rate is dramatically receding. I hate the idea that citizen soldiers are being used in this matter, or men and women planning on getting out are being held by stop loss, and as a result getting killed.
My insticnt for instant gratification tells me bring the troops home now, we can deal with terrorism later. But you don’t have a plan to deal with it…and until you get a plan, or the crisis is resolved, the only support you will gain is from committed dems. You gain nothing, you lose everything.
So similar to Soc sec it is almost funny. No plan, unwilling to discuss(unless concessions are made not to discuss all options), and a problem that the dems are unwilling to address. You guys want to lead? By all means give it a try…
June 8th, 2005 at 4:02 pmtesting..testing…
June 8th, 2005 at 4:03 pmThat link to the Guardian article broke up. Try this:
June 8th, 2005 at 4:04 pmhttp://tinyurl.com/h7bp
“If you ask a dem, what is great about America, they’ll tell you, ‘nothing’. ”
Comments like this and a failure to engage in substantive discussion demonstrate that PS is not a serious person.
Rather, likely a child using his or her parent’s computer.
Whatever the case, the adults are moving on.
June 8th, 2005 at 4:10 pm“But your Honor! She said she was 15!”
Gordo’s last words before being sentenced for having sex with an eleven year old.
June 8th, 2005 at 4:19 pmActually, if you are discussing soliciting of a minor, I believe someone mentioned Inspector Ritter?
He’s writing for AL Jazeera
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ADCA48CC-9307-466B-BA18-82724CAA7484.htm
(hope that link doesn’t get the feds on your case web host)
when he isn’t seeking companionship from minors- how was that sex offender class, scatty?
June 8th, 2005 at 4:30 pmhttp://dogsnot.net/mt/archives/000287.html
see you later Arne.
June 8th, 2005 at 4:31 pmBut he wasn’t tried, convicted and sentenced like you Gordo. But then, you were set up. She told you she was 15!
June 8th, 2005 at 4:37 pmCocktail Weenie is on this mailing list. And use your imagination as to why he likes ‘em young. Cocktail Weenie?
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/06/family-research-council-and-ku-klux.html
June 8th, 2005 at 4:41 pmPolish – So now that you,ve spewed your venom, how about telling us all why you aren’t fighting and dying in Iraq? You’re all for it – go for it. Go back and read your postings, they’re like Dubya’s off the cuff remarks – rambling and “dissasembling”.
June 8th, 2005 at 4:55 pmPolish Sausage is a proud member of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, much like Jonah Goldberg.
These brave men sit comfortably at home here in the United States, where it is easy to extoll the benefits of war and downplay the casulaties.
We proudly salute you.
June 8th, 2005 at 5:51 pmThe Memo itself is a lot more convincing than Bush and Blair would have us believe. But OK, just for the sake of argument… what else have we got?
Well, what about those millions of anti-war protestors who demonstrated around the world before the invasion, demanding that UN weapons inspectors be given more time? They sure didn’t think that war was inevitable (nor did they all believe that Saddam had WMDs, even though we are repeatedly told that “everybody” thought so).
What about the UN itself, who steadfastly refused to endorse another Security Council ultimatum to Saddam? Remember, folks, UN Weapons Inspectors were forced to flee Iraq just days before the bombing started, after the US and Britain repeatedly claimed that they were being totally ineffective. We now know they were 100% effective and there really were no WMDs in the country.
What about people like former NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark, who told Tim Russert on ‘Meet the Press’:
‘ I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, “You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.” I said, “But-I’m willing to say it but what’s your evidence?” And I never got any evidence.’
Who did that?
‘Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House.’
What about the neo-conservative’s dirty little Office Of Special Plans? What was the purpose of this secretive group, if not to hand-pick intelligence on Iraq and massage it into a case for war?
What about all the lies we were told, like the Niger uranium, the weather balloon trucks, the aluminium tubes? What about Powell’s totally discredited presentation ot the UN? If no decision had been made to attack, why was there a need to generate all these lies? Who was responsibile for them and what was their agenda?
What about intelligence insiders who resigned in disgust because they felt intelligence was being manipulated in favour of war?
Finally, (well, for now at least) what about the words of Bush himself, who once said:
June 8th, 2005 at 8:35 pm“God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did.”
Well, George, when exactly did God tell you to invade Iraq? Was it before or after the Downing Street meeting on July 23, 2002? Because I assume that would be when you really made up your mind, right?
Amen Gandhi!
June 8th, 2005 at 8:54 pmFantastic! Someone finally addressed the topic at hand…thank you gandhi.
But you do bring up the only real question, which is since the memo certainly does seem to point to the fact that G-d commanded Bush prior to or on July 23, 2002.
But since Ken Mehlman hath declared “that report has been discredited by everyone else who’s looked at it since then. Whether it’s the 9-11 Commission, whether it’s the Senate, whoever’s looked at this has said there was no effort to change the intelligence at all.”, then I suppose all the questions have been answered, and no further inquiry is required.
Now good luck finding those answers.
June 8th, 2005 at 9:16 pmhttp://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines04/1028-01.htm
Open website above, it tells that Bush planned on invading Iraq before he even became President.
June 8th, 2005 at 11:15 pmI am training my sons to fight. I am training them to fight for justice. I am not traning my sons to fight in Mesopotamia or Persia. Those folk’s fight themselves well enough.
June 9th, 2005 at 12:29 amOh, comeon people! Let’s all just admit that the corporate media outlets in are embedded and will bend to the will of the government whenever those corporate executives believe their media companies are going to damage their special interests in Washington D.C. No promanant news company will dare challenge the status quo. Think about it. Clear Channel, Microsoft, General Electric, ect. All of the corporations are receiving government subsidies and their board members are receiving huge tax cuts. They aren’t going to give up their gravy train just for a few minutes of fame that comes with exposing so dirty politician such as George W. Bush.
June 9th, 2005 at 2:53 amNo more debate necessary – Bush is a lying bastard and half of the USAites who voted were dumb enough to vote him in. *shakes head in disbelief*
June 9th, 2005 at 4:19 amJune 9th, 2005 at 4:42 am
Well its sad to know that when this bumpkin has finished his term and theres a big mess – it wont be his fault now will it? it will be the democrats/liberals/arabs/insert anti-war movement here………….
June 9th, 2005 at 6:04 amWe can find a way to resist that, Ian. We are not the victims, here. Nor are we the victimizers. That zeitgeist of simultaneously being the victim and the victimizer, as in other fascist regimes, does get worn out. That dog should no longer hunt.
June 9th, 2005 at 6:44 amGet rid of the dog…he’s craping on the world and nobody is picking it up after him
June 9th, 2005 at 7:40 amStill no alternate plan to Iraq.
You all must be geniuses.
Given the choice of no plan, and a plan, I’ll take the latter. I can be convinced to pursue another method, just haven’t seen it…
Some assumptions are being made about my service, but given what I’m watching, fact is irrelevant, if it does not match your beliefs.
I point to an eroding degree of support for the War, but no increased support for Democrats. The american people aren’t happy, but still they have no democratic plan to support.
So what’s the plan?
You all are pretty much inconsequential.
June 9th, 2005 at 8:42 amOne they you, the Americans, will wake up asking yourselves how could you let that happen, the same way Germans did about Hitler.
June 9th, 2005 at 10:38 amHitler?
If we took the oil, started up Arab concentratrion camps, installed our own government in the region…maybe.
More likely, gonzo, your tiny brain is incapable of finding a difference between Hitler conquering Europe to acquire land and the US just fighting so they can get out. If Bush is Hitler, then you are calling our soldiers, Nazis.
a ‘Hitler’? Someone who directly orders the slaughter of innocents, despises jews, and has no real plan for governance, other than his will.
Islamic extremism is so close to Nazism, that for you to even suggest that Bush is the equivalent of Hitler, is proof that you can accept that there are people in the world who, if not killed, captured, or stopped will continue to grow as they slaughter more and more of the ‘infidels’. This is the true power in the ME. If Bush is trying to change that, but fails, you can pretty much expect that terrorism will continue to grow.
Like these dems, you have no plan, other than blissful ignorance, of what has been going on. You accept it, as it grows, wishing and hoping, without any hope of resolution.
Democracy in the ME? A long shot. But Sadly, the only shot. Let’s here your alternate method of resolution…
I’ll give plan ‘b’. No foreign aid, period. We use our money for defense. we shut down the borders, and we become the island of America. We don’t import/or export. The choice is, play offense or defense. If you are playing defense you can never score, only get scored upon. Clueless, mindless, hopeless…
June 9th, 2005 at 12:09 pmPolish – Quoting you, “Some assumptions are being made about my service, but given what I’m watching, fact is irrelevant, if it does not match your beliefs.” HUH?? Tell us please, so that we don’t have to make assumptions, why aren’t you fighting in Iraq at this moment? Why is some other mother’s son dying for you. Also, please explain what you are “watching”, what “fact is irrelevant” and what our “beliefs” are. And if we all are pretty much inconsequential, why are you spending so much of your time telling us so.
June 9th, 2005 at 12:11 pmI have a suggestion and this important: Can we all start calling the Downing Street Memo, — the Downing Street Minutes. Since the White House’ new lie, eh line in defense is “that the memo was written after they went to the UN”. That might be true, but the Minutes were recorded July 22, 2002. So what do you all think?
June 9th, 2005 at 12:12 pmPolish Sausage-
Still trying to drum up an argument over an alternate plan to Iraq in a forum about the Downing Street memo?
You must think you are a genius.
Given the choice to discuss the relevant issue here, or throw up a myriad of straw men, your choice is clear.
No assumption is being made about your service. If you aren’t actively deployed in the military, then all your pandering and tough-talk is merely chickenhawk BS.
I point to your continual embrace of war and mockery of those opposed to it – particularly progressives – as proof of your toeing the GOP party line, and a shill for their talking points.
So what’s the point?
Your contribution to this discussion is not only inconsequential, but terribly irrelevant.
June 9th, 2005 at 1:23 pmIf the notes of an aide at a meeting, should be accepted as fact in regards as to what was said, over the people who were actually there…
It would make for interesting court testimony.
What the notes don’t contain-
The declaration by anyone there, stating there would be no WMD’s.
Funny how they were going to ‘fix’ the argument(not the intelligence) around WMD’s and then they went to the UN, and made the argument based on WMD’s. If they knew, when they were at the UN that they wouldn’t find them, they would have added a lot more reasons, or emphasized other issues.
Personally, if I’m fixing the ‘intelligence’ to support something and plan on basing my argument in front of the world on it, I would cover my ass, just in case no WMD’s were found. The presentment at the UN would have been self-defeating if they knew there were no WMD’s. Or, if you believe Bush is so sinister, why not plant WMD’s?
There may or may not have been WMD’s. A biological lab can be moved or destroyed in a day. Saddam knew we were coming 3 months before we actually did. I still don’t know if there were WMD’s or not. I do know that he had 20,000 bio suits that were purchased from France after 1998. Why?
You, apparently know that there were no WMD’s based on others testimony. I heard testimony that there were WMD’s. IF I had to guess, I would have guessed the same way.
Changing the subject? No, it is all relevant.
Funnier still? All this discussion over WMD’s and not a single comment about Joe Wilson. For six months, it your obsession…I take it by the silence that he has been discredited?
June 9th, 2005 at 2:06 pmSausage,
First, you are obviously a neocon plant. Second, you’re asking your opponent for an exit strategy, I would have thought Rummy and Shrub would of had one before the first soldier boarded a plane. Three, the war was wrong in the frst place based on lies or not.
Here’s your plan, you may have heard it before it is from a think tank expert on Iraq. It came out many months ago. Some recognize that the three cultures will never assimilate. Therefore, the country should be divided in thirds and each culture rules their own country. In fact, at one point in their history the country was divided as such. Please note that this was the fate of the past Yugoslavia as well due to ethnic differences so it can work.
In closing, the US needs to leave now, we are not adding stability, in fact we are fanning the flames of hatred with all Arabs and therby endangering our own citizens. Wait until you see the terrorism 20 years from now.
June 9th, 2005 at 2:15 pm“If you aren’t actively deployed in the military, then all your pandering and tough-talk is merely chickenhawk BS.”
So basically, if I am not in Iraq, and I favor the war, I’m a chickenhawk.
Cluck, cluck, cluck…
I don’t have a problem with conscientious objectors, the world would be a better place if there were more of them. I don’t have any objections to Buchanan’s opposition because he has an argument and principles.
What I do have a problem with, is people who oppose this, not based on consistency of character, but merely for political reasons. He’s a “republican, unfairly elected, illegitimate, AWOL, moron, blah…., blah…..”. This is the argument of morons. You may not be one of those, but I’d ventrue a guess that the people who are obsessing over the war, simply can’t accept it because it is a Republican.
If Iraq was not a wise decision, then what was? Sitting in Afghanistan for 40 years, so that terrorists can come and go, picking us off without an exit strategy?
Iraq, in many ways is the exit strategy for Afghanistan. Without it, we’d be in another Vietnam, something I’m extremely familiar with. Zarqawi was operating out of Northern Iraq with Answar Al-Islam. They too, knew we were coming. Wonder what they were working on up there…
June 9th, 2005 at 2:21 pmPolish Sausage – an obvious plant – avoids backing up points when he knows that he can’t…
If the notes of an aide at a meeting, should be accepted as fact in regards as to what was said, over the people who were actually there…
The obvious GOP tactic of discredit the source. Yes, sure we can all buy that a high level British Official drafting a memo to read by the highest officials in the government would just make stuff up and pull things out of his ass. You have leapt to a very laughable conclusion there.
What the notes don’t contain- The declaration by anyone there, stating there would be no WMD’s.
Another irrelevant point spawned by even more GOP talking points. The relevant point HERE is that clearly Bush gave the Brits the impression that he was determined to go to war LONG before he claimed that he had in fact made up his mind. And the passing reference to the timing of the invasion with elections here? Yes, surely we must conclude that this another red herring conjured up by some leftist.
Changing the subject? No, it is all relevant.
Joe Wilson and all the other subterfuges you have introduced throughout this thread certainly ARE you changing the subject, but contrary to your assertion, have no relevance here.
Might I remind you of the actual TOPIC here?
What Did Bush Decide and When Did He Decide It?
Does it need to be spelled out to you phonetically?
June 9th, 2005 at 2:29 pmPolish Sausage-
So basically, if I am not in Iraq, and I favor the war, I’m a chickenhawk.
You finally got something right!
The classic definition happens to be “an epithet used in United States politics to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who votes for war, supports war, commands a war, or develops war policy, but has not personally served in the military.” (Google it if you must).
Therefore, you succintly fit the shoe, and seem to wear them proudly…
As to your other ramblings, I will refer you – YET AGAIN – to the topic of this article.
June 9th, 2005 at 2:34 pm“Some recognize that the three cultures will never assimilate.”
I can guarantee it is happening. On this, I have better sources than you. You have a media that can’t leave the Green Zone, so you are in Plato’s cave, looking at the shadows on the wall, telling me what the world outside the cave looks like…don’t be so sure of yourself.
When is the last march top have the US leave that has been televised from Iraq?
We don’t want to fan the flames of hatred, they might start bombing our embassies, our ships, and hijacking planes and flying them into our buildings…oops, it already happened?
Maybe you missed American approval ratings in the ME, because it was always in the low teens, if not single digits. I really don’t see how we could have made things any worse.
You also want to leave immediately after dividing the country up into three seperate states, like Yugoslavia. You do realize that we have peacekeeping forces there, after the former President promised them home by Christmas, the next year…
Get back to your drawing board, unless your ME expert, a million to one it is Juan Cole, can explain how three seperate Countries from one in the ME is a victory for anyone.
Interesting that you are citing one expert to augment your case-
if Bush had to his conclusion based on one expert, I find him as stupid as …nevermind.
June 9th, 2005 at 2:35 pmJohn based on your theory of the ‘chickenhawk’ the miltiary should not be under the command of any non-military. I agree. Only veterans should be allowed to vote regarding War. They have seen it. The military should not be subject to the citizens of the country. It should be a private caste, and when the civilians want to wage war, they come and hire from this seperate guild, the non-chickenhawks.
Vietnam, with the draft was a little different. But then there were drafts for Korea and WWII. I have a problem with stop-loss, or any forcing of individuals to fight against their wishes. My personal belief is that if someone wants to walk out on the military, before the term is up-they can do so. But no future benefits for them. Since this is an all-volunteer army, I find it disgustingly stupid for someone to sign up, and then realize, this is not what I signed up for…
What were they thinking? These greedy pigs, got in for the signing bonus, and they don’t want to fight? Let these clowns out, if they payback the signing bonus. We could streamline this thing, cut payroll, and produce better fighters.
June 9th, 2005 at 2:53 pmWe have 70,000 in Germany!? For what? Oh, if we pull out of there, the German economy will get crushed. South Korea. We’d be better off sitting in the Ocean than with mortar range of NK. Apparently a lot of chickenhawks are making some dumb decisions, across party lines.
First off Polish, it isn’t my theory on what a chickenhawk is. It is the accepted definiton of what a chickenhawk is.
I agree with your line of thought that “Only veterans should be allowed to vote regarding War”.
Unfortunately, this would exclude most of the people you seem to be cheerleading for, namely Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and nearly every other member of Congress (though there are certainly some in there that have served, but the Swift Boat Vets don’t seem interested in most of them).
Unfortunately, we have yet again gone off topic of…
What Did Bush Decide and When Did He Decide It?
June 9th, 2005 at 3:03 pmWhat Did Bush Decide and When Did He Decide It?
June 9th, 2005 at 3:05 pmJohn-
Since only the memo is open for discussion, there is insufficent evidence to draw any conclusion.
Polish Sausage-
You have finally hit the nail right on the head:
Since only the memo is open for discussion, there is insufficent evidence to draw any conclusion.
Which means that a formal investigation must be conducted. However, since the media here in this country has gone brain dead on the issue, the press corps has gone soft on bringing it up and the likes of the GOP have already taken it upon themselves to “discredit” the memo, it seems unlikely that there ever WILL be a discussion amongst those that need to be having it.
I find it amazing what a hulabaloo Clinton getting oral sex caused, and even went so far as impeachment (chiefly for perjury i.e. lying), but the notion that Bush lied to the country to take us to war doesn’t even register as a blip on the radar of those same moral crusaders outraged by Clinton.
June 9th, 2005 at 3:37 pmRumsfeld was a Pilot during the Korean war. Bushs served in the National guard, during Nam. Six years. The planes he was flying were no longer going to be used. He skipped an the last six months-yep, big deal. Kerry served in field-very good, but then used it politically, and later lied big time about his service and the people he served with. Maybe not a traitor to his country, but unforgivable to the people he served with. I won’t even bring up the medals…he wasn’t the only one trophy hunting.
I get the feeling that I’m talking to someone, who never served, but is trying to tell me I’m a chickenhawk because I’m not in Iraq. Try shooting at someone, while they are shooting at you, while you have the option of hiding and letting the other in your platoon shoot. You have no idea how horrible it is, and then you get used to it.
Cheney? I’d rather have him running ops, than Clark anyday.
Apparently, Lincoln was a chickenhawk, as well as FDR. I respect both of them…you labeling them as chickenhawks shows how desperate you really are…your anger towards me obscure how many honorable people who never served, but saved this country, and sometimes the world are being smeared. Clinton? by your def, a chickenhawk. Nixon? was it his fault that Johnson and Kennedy had him hip deep in Nam. The man saved lives getting us out. If a dem ahd been elected, we would still be there today. Don’t worry, if things go bad in Iraq, you’ll get a dem president. If they go well, it may be another 20 years. I know who you will be rooting for…one of the things that kept the VC going was the reports that Americans had grown tired of the war-actually they had grown tired of the protests, and the body count.
If you had another plan that was reasonable, you would have something more to say…it probably explains the obsession with seeing Bush fail. There was this little resolution that half the dems signed on for…they were given the evidence. Have any of them pointed to piece of evidence that they were shown and said they were lied to? No.
One more issue. The 2000 election…it took Joe Lieberman, another ‘chickenhawk’(by your def) to see the that the military vote was honored. I don’t think it ever was…seems to show how much respect you dems have for the military.
June 9th, 2005 at 3:38 pmIt’s a British memo, let them investigate it. Maybe they already did, and then had an election about it.
I doubt we have the subpoena power. You can read about the reports by linking to the British journals. Enjoy the conspiracy to make the dems look stupid, it seems to be working.
June 9th, 2005 at 3:43 pmPolish – In your ramblings you seem to want it every which way.
June 9th, 2005 at 3:49 pmHave you ever read any of the documents from PNAC? Not only do the Neocon writers state that what the US needs is another Pearl Harbor, but also mentions US world domination and yes, even space domination. They also talk about Iraqi oil. It’s a lot of reading but you might be able to handle it. The point is that the Neocon authors – Rumsfeld, Cheney, Kristol, Wolfowitz, etc. all had plans to go to war with Iraq long before George came to power. So therefore, the Downing Street Memo is just another piece to the puzzle, along with Paul O’Neil’s and Richard Clarke’s statements, false documents from Niger, and the list goes on and on.
You might also be interested in the latest New York Times poll which includes the following:
Nearly three quarters of the people polled say that the number of Iraq war casualties is not acceptable.
Two thirds say that the military is bogged down.
6 in 10 say that the war is not worth fighting.
52% say that the war has not contributed to our long-term security.
52% disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job.
56% disapprove of Republicans in Congress.
6 in 10 say that Bush and the GOP leaders are not making good progress on the nation’s problems.
55% say Bush has divided the country.
There’s more, but you get the picture. Don’t you?
Polish-
You truly are a buffoon. Your rambling incoherencies serve absolutely no purpose other than to give you that Republican high and mighty sense of being smug in thinking you hold the answers to everything.
Bush’s “service” in the military? Laughable. Then you contradict yourself by saying you would prefer Cheney running the military as opposed to Clark, a seasoned General. But I thought you said you were OPPOSED to chickenhawks? I guess your CONsistency knows no bounds.
Me a chickenhawk? No, stupid. I do not support warfare, and therefore have neither served in the military, but neither do I fashion myself an expert on warfare nor do I advocate it.
As to your incessant yearning for someone here to come up with a plan…what a red herring. How is it MY responsibility to plan for a war I never supported. Remember, YOU are the chickenhawk, not ME.
As to your final ludicrous insinuation about the memo being British – despit its OBVIOUS implications back here at home – you finally show us all your mindless GOP ways. I suppose you would have concluded that if Monica Lewinsky were Swedish, her blowing the President would have been up to Sweden to investigate…
As for looking stupid, yes the Dems certainly do their fair share of it. But you Republicans take the grand prize when it comes to acting the fool.
Keep on spinning yourself wildly out of control – much to the delight of the readers here.
June 9th, 2005 at 4:08 pmIraqi oil? 20 billion dollars produced a year. 30 with better tech.
Somehow the ‘war for oil’ is so cliche’, that the logic escapes those who believe that is the reason. We could produce more oil from our own country than we could from Iraq.
Include me in that three quarters about our soldiers deaths being unacceptable.
Paul O’Neil was the Treasury Secretary? OK.
The neo-cons? Not oil, not space, not domination- simply democritization of the ME. Rumsfeld is not a neo-con, he just serves at the President’s wishes. Wolfowitz is a democracy nut. Krystol is a writer, his government job before was with Clinton. He can write freely, it is his job to give an opinion. Cheney is not a neo-con, but lacking any other ideas on how to stop terrorists from targeting the US….
You are giving polls to support your ideas? There is this little thing called an election, we just had one, and we’ll have another in 2006. Wonder which policy will win. We’ll just say that that poll was 51-48.
FYI-when Bush was reelected
42% approved of Iraq. I infer that the dem postiiton(?) was worse. Kerry must have believed the polls.
27% approved of the casualties at the time.
Seriously, check the link, his numbers on Iraq were bad when he got reelected.
The dem problem? They don’t have a plan for anything. You guys bitching is one thing, but Americans don’t want their politcians whining, if they don’t have a plan.
This is like the classic question”Do you eat meat?” 95% of us do.
Would you kill your own animal, that you were going to eat, or become a vegetarian? 65%, opt for the vegetarian deal.
I guess when you don’t have any political victories to speak of, the polls let you wonder, “What if?” IN 2006, you’ll be wondering “What if?” and 2008, you’ll be doing the same.
Last Democratic President to get over 50% in a general election?
A crappy plan beats a “What if” any day.
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm a good source for polls, a bad method for shaping you message to get elected.
June 9th, 2005 at 4:37 pmThe depths of your – and the rest of the GOPs – stupidity knows no bounds:
A crappy plan beats a “What if� any day.
If you really think that jumping in with a poorly concocted plan is better than carefully weighing all the options BEFORE taking action, then you certainly have found yourself the right leader.
I suppose though that your brand of thinking can be positive. since it is what ultimately brought Hitler down…after all, if anyone questioned his plan to invade Russia during the Winter spoke out, I am certain that they were met with “At least it’s a plan!”
June 9th, 2005 at 4:53 pmPolish Sausage – You are absolutely delusional. You are a hopeless oaf. My last word to you is get off the stuff you’re on, perhaps you’ll see the world as it really is. Army recruitement is way down. Join up. Uncle Sam Needs You! They’ll take even the delusional.
June 9th, 2005 at 5:15 pm“BEFORE taking action”
Again I ask you, what your plan for stopping terrorism in the ME and preventing any future terrorists action against us.
You have no plan…
except wait. Waiting for what…?
the dems plan ‘b’?
Insanity is doing the same things over expecting different results. Ignoring the growing threat from the ME would have been that insanity. I’m not in love with the war…but it is apparent that you, yourselves have no other solution.
Hitler…jeez. You all should read the Boy Who Cried Wolf…there were issues that you had solid traction on, but you became distracted by newer and wilder ones, leaving them by the wayside.
You behave as children watching a building being built. IT’s not done, the pieces don’t fit, blah….
But you really don’t have any idea what you are talking about. Like a game of telephone, where the message is distorted thru a thousand relays.
The funny thing is, you guys(the dems, and one blog in particular) were so close, all you had to do was pull the string that was standing, but you distracted yourselves with a new string…basically, you were in a position to ruin Bush, and in all the noise and distortions, you lost the truth. The opportunity passed, and history will never know. Funny, Audrey (and John) that you have the best intentions, but rather than think independently, you are running with a herd that shapes your own message, and you don’t even realize it…
I guess the Bush election caused you guys to snap…understandable.
June 9th, 2005 at 5:56 pmYour ability to comprehend anything rational is pretty much proven to be non-existent.
What is the REPUBLICAN plan, smart guy? You don’t have one, except for bumbling from one half-assed plan to the next.
You seem to be in love with all the GOP talking points, since you regurgitate them frequently.
Obviously, your feeble mind stopped on the word “Hitler” and didn’t bother to understand the point of that comment, which I won’t bother to explain since if you had bothered to read it in its entirety makes perfect sense. (And regarding your fake outrage over people being compared TO Hitler, Rick Santorum didn’t seem to have any problem with it last month.)
But you really don’t have any idea what you are talking about. Not like a game of telephone, where the message is distorted through a thousand relays, but in your case the distorion comes from a single trough that you and your ilk all feed from.
Keep up the brilliant posts, though. We’re all getting a big chuckle out of them.
June 9th, 2005 at 6:22 pmAnother George Bush cover up exposed
June 9th, 2005 at 11:09 pmGeorge Bush speaks with a forked tongue.
Another George Bush cover up exposed
June 9th, 2005 at 11:26 pmGeorge Bush speaks with a forked tongue.
I have been reading this for the past 191 entries. I am not an American. Nor am I in America. Many people in my country wish they were. Our military spending is growing almost as quickly as the USs, even though we are to the best of my knowledge not at war. Every time an international source writes about our countries military spending, they never fail to mention, that our government is not telling the truth about it. Neither is your’s, I believe.
June 10th, 2005 at 5:41 amFrom this blogg, it seems like there are only two possibilities for American people: The republicans or the democrats. In my home, there are two possibilities, too. You can believe the party or you can be a fool and occasionally get shot at by the military. You got all the political freedom you want. Get yourselves an alternative.
Oh, by the way, my country has plenty of nuclear weapons. And a huge army. Come on, attack us allready. We are ready for a democracy here. I would like to click on all those tempting links. But the communications people seem to only have missed this one blogg.
Oh, to get to the point: I don’t see why it’s important whether or not Bush lied. Either he knew that there were no wmd and lied, or he thought there actually was an immediate danger, and that would mean he was not doing his job right. Why get all moral about it, the result should be the same. Our president always sais the truth, of course.
I’m curious to here from you all.
AbC
Actaully, there are a happy group of moderates in both parties, but the lunaticxs in both parties, influence the balance of the elections. The Republicans, have a deeply religious segment, 30-35% of the party, and the democrats have anti-religious segment, 25-40% of their party. The rest of the Republican party votes that way because, they favor smaller government, more indivudal responsibilty, and are pro-business(non-governmental). The democrats believe that the government should be very large and all encompassing, so that they can administer social services.
Income used to be taxed at 70% for top wage earners, in the 1970’s, and at that time our economy was shrinking realitve to other countries. When Reagan came into office, he dropped the highest tax rate to about 35-27% of income. Business flourished, and since the tax rate has remained low, we get GDP growth of about3-4% annually, relative to other European countries, that tax at a high rate, and are filled with joy to grow at 2% a year. When it was done it was discounted, as ’supply side economics’ but in reality it returned our national wealth as we were growing our economy and wealth twice as fast as any other modern eurpoean country.
Fro the most part, democrats don’t understand the finances of it, and would like to increase the size of government. IT is also interesting to note, that the republicans are painted as the rich or the religious, but in reagrds to the rich…you only pay taxes on earnings. Someone who is extremely wealthy, but is not working, is basically free from taxation. A surpirsing number of democrats are as wealthy as republicans, but the billionaires represent the true wealth of our country, and the best way to achieve this wealth is by taking advantage of other countries with poorer economies, and officials who can be bribed in those countries. IT is not happening in America, so we ignore it.
Since the party’s are relative equal in size 40% each, the independent voters decide who will be president. This small 20% keeps the other two groups in check. The democrats cannot raise taxes on workers or business, excessively and the republicans cannot institute religious policy upon everyone else.
Personally, I am pro-choice to a degree(abortion is important but does not influence lections like it once did), I am pro-leagalization of some drug use, and I am an atheist. This is inconsistent with the Republican party, but given the choice of parties, I feel the issues of keeping our country growing are the most important, all other are secondary. In the past, I have voted democratic, and given an honorable candidate, will do so again.
The democrats seem to be losing influence, as the have lost control of all three branches of government, -the presidency, the senate, and the congress- a situation which has not occurred for 50 years. I cannot explain this to you in simple terms, but the fact remains-the Republican party is gaining strength. There is a great deal of dissent within the party, and memebers do not always support all policies. The democrats have shrunk to a minority party and now must vote together, if they wish to anything. This is good for them short term, but in the long run, by refusing to act independently, they appear as thoughtless robots.
Your observation about Iraq is correct, but, despite what the party in opposition says, they have not been able to prove Bush lied. They probably would have been better off saying that he was fooled by people in his administration, but in trying to claim both, look foolish-they don’t know either.
The ‘attack us already’ line seems to be a sad presentment of how the US is perceived. Most cultures in the world do not follow our government, but they all watch our movies. The movies are from America, so the problem is that the concepts of America come from our entertainment. Americans find entertainment to escape, but it does not represent America, it represents a wishful desire to escape the troubles of the day.
The next power that will exceed nuclear, is biological-if a lethal virus was spread, but before spreading it immunization was available to one country, it would be the ultimate weapon. Within 20 years, armies and nuclear missles won’t matter, biological war will be the ultimate evolution in destroying ourselves.
All things are relative though.
June 10th, 2005 at 11:29 amIt is time to wash these filthy rotten humans (Bush-bots) from our seats of power. How much can the public tolerate? I think that answer may soon appear. These are truly rotten human beings that are intent on a Nazi-type campaign. Lets cleanse America, impeach Bush and Cheney, NOW!
June 10th, 2005 at 11:38 amAbC
See this previous post to understand. He votes dem, and will do so the rest of his life. That is the way it is for 80% of the country. Independents, this tiny 20%, get to select Presidents. If yuo chase the 20%, you’ll never get enough from either party, but we hold these politcal rocks of Gibralter in check.
Frustrates the hell out of them. At current time, the dems are trying to change their image, but their policies remain the same. Oppose everything that the other party is doing, don’t compromise, in the belief that they once held power, and will do so again.
It won’t happen. The democrts will destroy their party, but since we have elections every 2 years, they always have a chance. In the cycle of things they’ll probably come back to power, but not for another 20 years.
They’ve haven’t had a President elected by a majority of Americans, since 1976, 30 years ago. Or 7 Presidential elections. The Republicans have had three break the 50% mark in that time.
Also in America, the dems are favored on social issues, but when it comes to Foreign policy, they trail the republicans 56-33%. so long as foreign policy is the top concern, they have no strength for their campaigns.
The current democrats, are obsessed with foreign policy, reminding america that the world is a dnagerous place, but they don’t have a plan other than, ‘we won’t be as angry as the Republicans’. Nice idea for social issues, not for foreign policy. Basically they are fixating on their weaknesses, and forgetting about their strengths.
There is a chance of a new party forming, from the moderates in the Democratic Party, after watching how poorly they are represented joining with moderate Republicans, supply siders, like myself.
If you see a blog, seeking to insult somebody, it is a democratic or republican one. If it lacks anger or emotion it is a moderate.
Hope this helps…
June 10th, 2005 at 2:47 pmABC-
I assure you the LAST person you want to be listening to is Polish Sausage.
He is a die-hard Republican, though he poses himself otherwise depending on the circumstance.
But since some of us (unlike Sausage apparently) work for a living, I am unable to shower you in long-winded rhetoric.
Perhaps this weekend I will go back and sift through his usual brand of nonsense, and translate for you his endless ramblings.
June 10th, 2005 at 5:42 pmArmy now investigating a case of two U.S. Officers fragged and killed by their own troops in Iraq. Good Morning Viet Nam. Good-bye Polish Sausage. Stick a fork in that weenie. He’s done.
June 10th, 2005 at 7:35 pmThe Art of Framing
All the black Republicans in Congress
Have a look, Cocktail Weenie. And don’t be in such a hurry to get to the next elections. You will just be Hors’ Dourves at the many Democratic victory parties.
June 10th, 2005 at 7:41 pmABC,
We expect all politicians to lie. Lieing to get us into a war, when the country to be invaded poses no threat, but has oil, and can fatten the fat cats even further, that just goes to far. If this were the Gong Show, Chuck Barris would be banging the Gong. If this was the Apollo Theater, The Big Hook would already be pulling the the crappy act from the stage. And if this were Burlesque, the stage would be covered with rotten fruit and vegetable matter.
June 10th, 2005 at 7:47 pmSausage was never saw a shot fired in anger. Not in Nam, not anywhere. peace time military if even that. A few of his ex-wives may have capped a few rounds off in his general direction.
June 10th, 2005 at 8:36 pmFailed foreign policy leads to Uncle Sam whimpering uncle. Like a Cocktail Weenie.
US in talks with Iraqi insurgents
June 11th, 2005 at 6:32 amSee this is the problem with democrats. They complain and whine, but they really don’t have any answers. Attack the messenger is their favorite.
On Iraq- bush lied or was misled, or will be proven correct. If he lied he was smarter than they want to let on, if he was misled they have focused so much on blaming him, that they ignore the people responsible.
Our economy? They can’t understand that private enterpise will grow faster, and be far more efficient than any government program. They can look across the Atlantic at countries with high tax rates and crumbling social services promised, growing half as fast as we are, and they still think cutting taxes is irresponsible. Increasing the size of a government is good? Only in their minds.
Freedoms? You cannot be religious if you wish to hold office or be a judge. Despite the fact that 90% of our judges and elected officials are religious.
ON race? Affirmative action, the promotion of equally qualified applicants being given preference on race. BUT, if you are a conservative, you do not qualify for Affirmative Action.
Ask a democrat what they stand for…they won’t say “supression of religion, growing the government by taxation, and obstructing Republicans, but right now-that is all they got. A majority of their party is supportive, only for the fact they oppose the Republicans, but they have no plan for leadership.
Failed Foreign policy?-They can’t state an alternative. Simply saying no, is not really a plan. Openly discussing other foreign policy nightmares, from the year 1992-2000 is also taboo. IT only becomes an issue when a Republican is given credit.
More troubling for them is the fact that a majority of Veterans still support the current administration, reagrding foreign policy.
They’ll tell you they support the troops, but riduculr the commander of the forces. IF the soldiers are doing their job, he will get credit. If they portray the soldiers as failing, then they can blame the commander in chief. Despite his being reelected, they still believe that ridiculing the command structure and the mission, is an action supportive of our soldiers. The only thing that has keot them in check is the embarassment in the maaner some of their more extreme memebers behaved . state-side, during nam.
I wonder waht would have happened to them if they had tried it during Korea or WWII.
June 13th, 2005 at 12:07 pmJust saw the ‘black republicans in congress comment’- it is safe to assume that the author is white.
I could go on with the various afrcian american appointments made by the current administration, but it would be beating a dead donkey.
In all fairness, the dems do have Al Sharpton, who they even found a spot for at their convention. Good to know that the dems have their finger on the pulse on the African American community. Alton Maddux the next Supreme? Only in their world.
Please expand on this highest appointment made by Clinton to an African American, or perhaps more recently, the highest position in the Kerry campaign for an African American. Seeing as the dems won’t be nominating anybody, anywhere, anytime soon…they seemed to have missed the boat.
June 13th, 2005 at 2:30 pmPlan ‘b’? Was there ever one?
June 13th, 2005 at 2:31 pmGood ol’ sausage…
I never get enough of GOP shills spinning themselves into oblivion…
Keep up the fine work!
June 14th, 2005 at 10:28 amWhat do Janet Arvizzo and the the far left have in common?
Attend a rally of screaming liberals or watch her on the stand-you get the feeling that the stuff they are screaming about is inherently false, because of the lies they blend in with the truth. Suddenly you realize that it is not about the truth, it is about something else…Arvizzo wanted money, the democrats want power. I thought they might have learned from 2004’s election, as Arvizzo learned yesterday but their political suicide continues…
Just saw Bill Nelson is at a 47% approval rating. I like the guy, more than Katherine Harris, but it is now clear that the dems will help him lose his reelection. Congrats.
Overdone.
June 14th, 2005 at 12:00 pmMuch of the attribution to Bush of a decision to go to war in Summer of 2002 can be attributable to a missperception on Condi Rice’s part. When Haas came to talk to the President in an effort to talk him out of Iraq, she told Haas that there is no point because his mind is made up. Similarly, Clarke in his book assumed from the President’s posture that this was also the case. In fact, as of 9/11, begining with the first Camp David meeting, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were trying to get Bush to go easy on Afghanistan and to retaliate against Iraq. Bush adamently postponed Iraq, insisting that Afghanistan was his sole concer. In fact, tracing testimony, it is clear that Powell only scared Bush into delay to go to the UN with his Pottery Barn Rule. However, even after Bush saw no hope of UN action, he was still hoping for a toppling of Saddam. Keep in mind that “go get Saddam” was a perfect storm, in that both Israel and Saudi Arabia were pushing for it. But Bush put off a decision by accepting the LEGITIMACY of all those insisting that we must go in and “take out Saddam,” as a way of obtaining more patience from them. The French in Dec. 2002, just before Christmas sent a general from l’Etat Majeur to offer 18,000 French troops, making France the single biggest force, if you don’t count in the corporate mercinaries. But Bush’s reluctance to make a decision and the shenanigans of Rumsfeld, refusing the French the same sector authority that was given the English, turned the French against Bush. Chirac misread indecision as something louche!
The JCS had to work with every deadline as ASAP, because Bush was expected since Jan. 2002 to call for an Iraq attack on a moment’s notice. However, though he could have said “go” at any time, he did not decide to go– EXACTLY as he claims– until the last moment, only because he was told that it can no longer wait. Yet, reading Brit Ambassador Miller’s review of Woodward’s book in NEW STATEMENT, one learns that the Brits DID NOT expect any move until the next Fall. That makes the DOWNING STREET MEMOS exactly what were Rice’s comments to Haas– an assumption that was wrong, for Bush only said “go” when they told him that he had to go or scrub.
July 17th, 2005 at 12:36 pmIn your free time, check some relevant information in the field of…
September 26th, 2005 at 8:10 pmmotorola ringtones
motorola ringtones For it was the Class-characters who had volviose of the churches at Edusa, and the printe
October 6th, 2005 at 7:18 amPlease check out some information in the field of… Thanks!!!
October 16th, 2005 at 4:01 amvigrx
October 22nd, 2005 at 7:02 pmpill prosolution
October 31st, 2005 at 7:40 amlettering,waxer?stinking!Ruth.equity,sponsor,precedent
November 7th, 2005 at 9:25 amceleb fakes
In your free time, take a look at some relevant information on girls bathroom 10 year old girl in panties
November 20th, 2005 at 2:41 pmbleakly development conferrers markedly fetus toward!before Lenin
November 22nd, 2005 at 1:43 ampro solution pill review
November 23rd, 2005 at 5:09 pmBogartian uphold expressibly.redeemer system!… Thanks!!!
November 25th, 2005 at 10:53 pmShanghaiing score ingeniousness incorrect bleachers fainting
January 6th, 2006 at 5:11 amdreadfully!Walden.crotch anhydrous?retrains Martians?Bradley.parasite reiteration?
January 11th, 2006 at 10:47 am[...] (3) Bush and Blair insisted they were trying to avoid war with Iraq for 8 months – right up to the day before the invasion began: http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=1042 [...]
February 6th, 2006 at 8:44 pmMost of you obviously do not know what you are talking about. UN resolution 1441 was the sixteenth and final resolution for Saddam Hussien. He had many chances to disarm and let UN weapons inspectors in. He threw them out on numourous occasions. Saddam brought war on himself. Not it’s time to get the media out of Iraq and get the job done, and let the men and woman of this nation come home. You all really can’t be so narrow minded. Think before you post.
July 9th, 2006 at 3:46 pmhttp://www.123pethealth.com
pet health insurance, pet health care, pet health question, pet health care information, pet health care insurance, dog health insurance pet, pet health information, pet health plan, pet dog health, pet health supply, online pet health, holistic pet health, pet health info, pet animal health, pet health food
December 15th, 2006 at 4:16 amI like your website ,and like to communicate with everyone on this issue!
February 16th, 2007 at 12:11 pmthank you for your wonderful web site. I liked it very, very much.
February 16th, 2007 at 12:12 pm