Skip to comments.So, Now It's "Bush Didn't Lie"
Posted on 06/16/2008 6:51:04 PM PDT by bocopar
For almost five long years, many of us have tried to explain to a deaf media and public that President Bush was a victim of the world's intelligence when it came to the whole weapons of mass destruction thing with Iraq. Liberals chanted "Bush lied, people died" and some have called for The Hague to try him for war crimes.
So, you can imagine my frustration and near uncontrollable anger when after all that, the Los Angeles Times decides to shock the world...
Bush never lied to us about Iraq
(Excerpt) Read more at blackandright.mndnet.com ...
Dennis Prager was really talking up this story today. It’s some small consolation to have such a liberal newspaper finally put this in print. Anyone who still says Bush lied has no credibility whatsoever; none.
Thanks for the post!
Those are just the cutest little emoticons.
I say this without a hint of humor - it is too difficult for a liberal to use critical thinking skills, especially when it is so much easier for them to chant stupid slogans like Bush Lied, People Died.
I stole them fair and square from sionnsar...
You know what is funny? I have posted the following question on many forums when “discussing” this with a liberal(s):
“Since President Bush was using intelligence supplied by the agencies staffed by Clinton and quoting many Democrats in Congress at the time, does that mean that Clinton lied also? Oh yeah, I remember now. Clinton was disbarred and impeached for lying under oath.”
I have never received a comeback or response. Even when I goad them into trying to reply. They seem to vanish, at least on this point.
Bush said what he said. An experienced politician like John Kerry came out and claimed that Bush (that idiot) misled him. The smartest woman in the world, Hillary Clinton, said that Bush (that moron) misled her.
Who wasn't misled? Barack Obama. He stands alone. He was against the whole thing from the beginning, as a matter of principle. He may seem young and inexperienced, but he never claimed to have been misled by Bush. Obama is a statesman, and a keen judge of character.
The other subtext is that People with that last name of Romney as more easily misled than anyone else and make really, really bad vice presidential candidates.
This piece in the LA Times is simultaneously attacking McCain's possible choice for VP and boosting Obama as a wise statesman.
It’s in the opinion section.
When I see a similar story in the news section, I’ll count it as a change.
Don't take it as "consolation". Take it as an indication that the MSM is now pursuing another agenda.
Specifically, this smells like an effort to begin convincing their moonbat base that terrorists really do represent a risk to the US. And that, while Bush didn't lie to us, he screwed things up so badly that we'll have to stay in Iraq awhile longer.
They're not giving Bush a clean bill of health, not at all. Instead, they've now set about misleading their base in another direction.
It is odd that they would print a story like this, but it is especially strange that they would print it before the election. This is something I think they would normally wait until Obama was safely inagurated to release.
John Kerry came out and claimed that Bush (that idiot) misled him. The smartest woman in the world, Hillary Clinton, said that Bush (that moron) misled her.
Just a couple of the many morons in Congress that had access to research the issue, but, instead blame Bush for their own laziness.
"Ugh... Agh... Eh...."
I think I actually felt sorry for the guy.
This guy is an important New Republic staff member as well.
What amazes me is the news media barely even mentioned the report June 5.....I thought they would hammer it to McCain.
The Opinion section.
The perfect place for a trial balloon.
Uh, Too little to late.
The MSM has already damaged this country enough by selling out their own country for the instant gratification by selling out to the Soros/Moore coalition and their prevaricated talking points that they supplied to the enemies of the west.
And what has the LA Times been doing all these years to right the situation? Until today, NOTHING. If they knew all along this was the situation, then the LA Times was lying by omission. Guilty.
BTW, they weren't supposed to give away the liberal secret that mistakes equal lies.
Now let’s see if the L.A. Times apologizes to the American public..They say Pres. Bush was misled by the intelligence, so he did not lie to the public...Misled!...But the Times said he lied all these years..
Did we not all know that Sadam Hussein had gassed and killed 40,000 Kurds, that he sadistically tortured and killed his own people, and that he was a brutal dictator?...That was common knowledge, no one ‘misled’ the American public about that...But Pres. Bush also had information about WMD and to this day no one has proven that they did not have any WMD, so who is to say if he was misled?.....But that’s what the press used to skewer him on....By saying he was misled, the L.A. Times is obfuscating..
Rarely did the MSM say Yes, Hussein was another Hitler who deserved to be taken out...Dame right he was a dictator and the lousy MSM never went to Bush’s aid to defend him or thank him for taking out that bum...The MSM lied to the public, and covered up, and obfuscated all these years, so it is the MSM that should apologize to the American public...The L.A. Time’s duplicity is just one thing that is helping to kill the MSM in this country and i say GOOD...Go to blazes and take your filthy leftist ideas and journalists with you...
Yes, it is, isn't it? I would love to believe that this individual and his publication were actually trying to rise above the muck of "Bush lied" - if, in fact, they're going to be taken seriously in the very near future by people less desperately committed to blaming Bush for the fact that the cat had kittens than most of the left today, then it's a pretty good essay in that direction. And, in fact, the Rockefeller report pretty much admits that everything your liberal parrot commentator posted was, in fact, justified by contemporary intelligence.
What I'm wondering is qui bono? Why, in the midst of a Presidential campaign based in part on "Bush lied" is TNR now issuing a corrective? Who would want that mantra broken, except perhaps someone who had voted in favor of intervention? Someone now suggesting broadly that she be considered for the VP slot...or else?
I might, of course, be entirely wrong about that, but you know the people we're dealing with. BTT.
but, but, but... it’s still Bush’s fault.
I’ve often wondered how the dumbest man in the world has outfoxed the brilliant left for years.
I guess they’re dumber than him?
Always appreciate your commentary. Keep up the good work!!
Yep, we did find WMD. Some 400 pre-gulf war shells that were supposed to have been destroyed but never were in violation of the UN resolution. Unusable, old, blah blah blah, they had them, we found them, they were WMD, they failed to destroy them. To say no WMD was found is BS.
Doubled up his lithium suppository dosage on this news.
Never thought Bush was lying at any time. This was a mantra started back in the time of Nixon, where people were going around, moaning about why Nixon “lied” about the Watergate coverup. Nixon didn’t lie, he took the heat for a bunch of overenthusiastic operatives who MAY have exceeded their orders just a tad, and later revelations made it LOOK like Nixon had lied.
Fact of life, Presidents are in no position to share the daily workings of the inner circle with persons who are merely nosey, or have malicious intent on their minds. Nobody is under unending obligation to offer up every detail of their daily lives, and most people would not tolerate it for a day, let alone a term in office. So “lying” is an entirely separate issue from keeping a little private space and counsel in your life.
Now if you do something, and explain that you did it based on the information you had at the time, and it turns out the information was incomplete or wrong, it was not a lie when you decided to follow that course of action. It might turn out to have been a wrong call, but still, not a lie.
And sometimes, the right thing ends up happening anyway, even with erroneous information. Maybe Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction, and the basis for invasion and removing him from office was based on this error, but the end result, he was still removed from office and the military threat posed by Saddam upon his neighbors was neutralized. The alternative course of doing nothing could just have well ended up in Saddam re-emerging as a far more grave threat, and he would STILL have to be taken out today - after visiting many more atrocities upon his own people, and inflicting enormous economic damage on the world economy.
More importantly, America, if only for a few years, was not paralyzed by their own internal doubts and misplaced empathies.
Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a winner!
It is safe to assume that every word published by the MSM between now and the election is calculated to help elect B.O.
It was the very misreporting and sloganeering of the left that emboldened and gave aid and comfort to the enemy. How much blood is on the hands of the left.
It is vital to the left that Bush lied. They are desperate to justify their treason against the country in a time of war. If he did not lie history will view them for what they really are - traitors.
The left has a proud history of drenching every country they've ever run in rivers of blood.
See USSR, PRC, NKPR, Cuba, Southeast Asia, etc.
It's what leftists do!
And they feel good about it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.