So, Now It's "Bush Didn't Lie"

Bob Parks: Black & Right ^ | 6/16/08 | Bob Parks

[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

[Billthedrill]

The perfect place for a trial balloon.

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.

[Kevmo]

but, but, but... it’s still Bush’s fault.

[Tzimisce]

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?

[A message]

Always appreciate your commentary. Keep up the good work!!

Thanks

[OrioleFan]

Usually the lying Democrat media comes out and says they were wrong after the election of their guy... I still believe they found WMDs and neither the intelligence community or the President lied.

[originalbuckeye]

I always come back with ‘so it would be better for the Iraqi people for Saddam Hussein to still be in power? Because you can't have it both ways. We stay home and Hussein is still in power, we go in and the Iraqis have the opportunity to govern themselves and (hopefully) stop being a threat to their neighbors and other countries around the world’. They usually have no comeback to that.

[icwhatudo]

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.

[VRWC For Truth]

Doubled up his lithium suppository dosage on this news.

[alloysteel]

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.

[BIGLOOK]

I'll skip any accolades to the Time revelation. Bob, and cut to the chase.

Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration spent the better part of a year analyzing old intelligence and gathering new, comparing it with foreign intelligence and preparing a case to be presented before the United Nations as Causus Belli. A lot of parlays were done with the UN prior to the presentation of our argument and our intentions. That's a long time....and the wrong place to trust with sensitive intel.

While we were successful in persuading the UN to accede to our plans and eventually successful in toppling Saddam's regime, we were fooled by an anti-American organization and a tyrant, who tipped off, benefited from the "No WMDs found" news briefly. It became America's black eye in world opinion and the raging news item on US soil.

Though the Saddam regime had been given time to sanitize its stockpiles of forbidden weaponry or time to relocate them to other areas, our great success in the region were the elections, the blue stained fingers and the installation of a new democratically elected government.

The capture of Saddam by US troops, his trial and conviction by an Iraqi justice system speaks volumes to his criminality and cruelty to his own people and the when the US delivered him to the Iraqi authorities for final dispensation in his case, gave the Coup d' Grace.

Time, telegraphing intentions are perilous in war.

[TBP]

How long before the libs decide that the Los Angeles Times lies and has sold out?

[Bubba_Leroy]

This piece in the LA Times is simultaneously attacking McCain's possible choice for VP and boosting Obama as a wise statesman.

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.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Yes, Liberalism is a mental disorder, and they lay their emotions, thinking , conscience , on their basic primal animal instints, and yes, their slogans are so stupid.
Their classic mumbo jumbo chant, hey hey ho ho ,, hey hey ho ho.
Isn't amazing, their belief is that we came from apes, but, if you were to call them a monkey or ape, they get so mad.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" They usually have no comeback to that. "
Then they go huff off in there hissy fit and later come back with some irrational anti-logic rant lie.

[Mike Darancette]

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.

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.

[sazerac]

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.

[okie01]

How much blood is on the hands of the left.

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...