Hey, guess what? It’s getting closer and closer and closer and closer to the White House’s expected announcement of their nominee for the recently-vacated Supreme Court seat.
Whew! Just in time!
GOP Allies Say Bush Is Close to Court Pick; Choice May Be Announced This Week, the Washington Post, July 18, 2005
10 replies on “Wow, it’s getting hot in here. Is it just me? Rove, Wilson…whaaaat?”
Cmon, JP. My idea was so much better!!
That’s right. He will announce his SCOTUS nominee this week to detract from the ridculous Rovegate. And Bush certainly is the first president to try to draw attention away from something else. Clinton didn’t bomb a Sudanese aspirin factory the same week of his grand jury testimony and three days after admitting to the American public that he lied to everyone. No. That never happened.
And Bush & Co. never lied us all into a bullshit war either. A war they didn’t even bother to plan for. A war that has done just the oposite of ‘making us safer’. A war that we now can’t get out of. Man, I wish they just bombed an aspirin factory. I have a headache.
Yes Clinton’s lie about a bj in the white house is certainly as bad as Bush’s lie about the justifications of going to war. After all we are far more interested in our president’s personal life than the nations security and reputation.
Bush lied…Bush lied…Bush lied. God, you all are tiresome. Get some new and true talking points and maybe you’ll start winning some elections. Yawn.
even without WMDs he made a strong case to oust a brutal tyrant who had the keyts to the worlds third largest miltary and openly suported terrorism and terrorists.
those facts still aren’t lies and still hold water.
when i think of a lie i think of Bill lokking DIRECTLY into the camera, raising his finger in gesture and without batting an eye stating
“i did not have sexual relations with that woman!”
i voted for him to – he woulda went down as the coolest president ever if he said “unfortuantely i have some marital problems that involve infidelity, but it won’t affect my perofrmance as your leader”
Ken Starr’s balloon would have deflated
What were those other reasons to invade? All I remember hearing before the war started was WMD and terrorism. In Bush’s defence, I never heard him say outright that Iraq was connected with Al Qaeda, that would have been an outright lie, but he definately left that impression. He wasn’t about to stand up for the truth when Hannity and O’Reilly claimed that there was a connection. As to WMDs, we’ve all heard that debate and are probably tired of it, so I’ll be brief. At best, he exaggerated intelligence and ignored the stuff that didn’t support his cause. At worse, he lied outright. The Niger plutonium sure looks like a lie to me, but what do I know? I’m just the guy he sends in to fight for his lies.
Since the initial thrust, Bush has come back with all sorts of reasons for why we invaded: human rights abuses, spreading democracy, etc., etc. But those weren’t the reasons he gave before the war. That means that he led America into a war based on little more than false pretenses. Does anyone here thank the American people would have stood behind a war of this magnitude for little more than an effort to save the Kurds? I’m sad to say it, but I don’t think so.
the 9-11 comission found that Iraq had a working relationship to Al Qaeda. numerous meetings between high level Iraqi officials and Al Qaeda members occured. they found no conclusive evidence that Iraq had a hand in 9/11, but that does not mean we can let a renegade nation with a massive military stockpile have ongoing contact and shared interest with Al Qaeda. NS, you should take a look at what the 9/11 comission uncovered.
British Intelligence and US Intelligence(and French Intelligence) all documented evidence that Iraq sent officals to Niger to work out a deal to buy yellowcake uranium.
one man named Joe Wislon (whose tenure as an ambassador was so esteemed that he ended up in Gabon and was asked to retire at the earliest age possible) reported that he did not feel that Iraq was seeking uranium.
You’re right about the 9/11 commission’s findings, of course. They also found that bin Laden was looking for a closer relationship and was rebuffed by Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a horrible man, that’s for certain, and he ran with a rough crowd, but he wasn’t involved with 9/11. And when you’re average American thinks about terrorism, he’s not thinking about Belfast. He’s thinking about the WTC, which Hussein had no involvment in. When people made links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, they were talking about 9/11.
As far as Joe Wilson goes-and this brings us back to the original post-he posed enough of a threat to stop him. Maybe it was Rove, maybe not, although it’s looking more and more like Rove, but somebody in the whitehouse leaked his wife’s name at right about the same time as he reported his feelings about Niger’s uranium.
And, for the record, you’re right about Clinton. He would have had such a good legacy if not for the bj incident. And he did lie under oath, and he probably should have been punished more severely for that. Regardless, his misleading didn’t cost any American lives.