Bush goes on a lying campaign

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Nov 10, 2005.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #1
    Apparently the White House has tired of all the recent setbacks and is seeking to go on the offensive:

    Link

    Sounds like desperation to me. Frankly, I don't know what they hope to accomplish by repeating old lies more loudly and more often. Josef Goebbels' philosophy aside, I just don't think people believe the talking points anymore.

    Personally, I relish seeing what they plan to trot out. I have a feeling it'll be ineffective and Harry Reid & co. will have a lot of fun with it.
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    yeah, sounds like they're really feeling it. what they're risking is keeping in the forefront of everyone's minds that the iraq intelligence was indeed wrong. w/ the way things are going, i'd think they'd want to change the subject.
     
  3. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    Another Spin campaign, I wonder what the new spin slogan will be?................ Dont pay attention to that man behind the curtain?

    I have to admit i have never seen a President Spin so much, Iam still waiting for more spin on torture and secret prisons. A very solid foundation to build a police state i must say. 911 = Iraq still works in the red states.:rolleyes:
     
  4. rdowns Suspended

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #4
    I think this cartoon sums up recent events well, even though it is from a local Long Island paper.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #5
    Yeah, desperate, but maybe sly enough to pull it off. If they pull out those quotes from (gullible, which-way-is-the-wind-blowing) Democrats, they'll muddy up the waters enough to save their asses from the worst of it.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    Not if evidence is being talked about in either a Libby trial or a Senate 'Phase 2' investigation that the WH only passed along evidence that supported their viewpoint. And that's a distinct possibility at this point.
     
  7. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #7
    it does sound like they're going court... link
    and my favorite bit...
    also:
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    Yeah, I'd love to see the list of names supporting the defense of a man accused of outing a CIA agent... I don't suppose it will be made public in it's entirety.

    I'd wager it would contain some of our most vocally patriotic Americans...
     
  9. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #9
    Yeah, cuz that's much better. I don't really care who supported it, and what happened to get us into it. What really pisses me off is what we did when we got there, and the fact that we're still there losing troops proves we didn't do such a good job. Though, the administration lying about why we were going and their cronies trumpeting the lie long after we knew it was is also on my list of stuff that pisses me off.

    But yeah, Dems are wishy-washy. They should have gone with Dean. A little nutty, but at least he would have been a discernible voice.
     
  10. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #10
    This, this is why we need to raise the minumum wage! The poor man. He was the aide to the Vice President of the United States, and apparently he made but a pittance. :(
     
  11. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #11
    Somebody please save us from this jerk-off...
     
  12. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #12
    He's just following the basic precept of his administration: screw up royally, and never ever take responsibility for it.
     
  13. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #13
    It's the "Believe the Lie" strategy. Just repeat a lie over and over again until people start to believe it's true. McCain has a black baby. Kerry didn't deserve his medals. Clinton did something wrong in Whitewater and Travelgate. Social security reform will save social security. Etc etc.
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    This is the current administration,just repeat the mantra over and over and over and soon people will take it as truth. Why is this president going to Mongolia???:rolleyes: To get away from the homeland ?:cool:
     
  15. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #15
    Bush, standing atop the Great Wall: "Mr. Jiang Zemin, tear down this wall." :rolleyes:
     
  16. Advance The Man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #16
    Looks like another red/blue opinion.

    As a conservative, I look at it as the President finally defending the opinion that democrats had before they made it a political issue. Everyone from Clinton, Gore, to current democratic senators agreed that Iraq had wmd's and they agreed to go to war.

    Democrats have become revisionists to try to regain the house, senate and White House. And I have to say, it is working. The President appears to be on the defense and opinion polls are way down on him. He has the right approach to attack the revisionists and make them explain why they have flip-flopped on their original opinion. I prefer we work together, win the war on terrorism and get our troops home.
     
  17. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #17
    The difference is Clinton didnt take us to war in Iraq,,George did after a year of repeating his WMDs line. There wasnt any WMDs? We cant ever win a war on Terrorism as long as extreme Islam is being taught all over this planet. Now how do you get into every extremist mosque? This president took us into Iraq knowing he didnt have diddly squat so here we are. Bin Laden is still free, The Border is still open after 5 years Bush & the Republican Gang. Solution is to boot the Neocons out and do the same to the Democrats if they arent doing the will of the PEOPLE! Its a sad shame that Corporations so clearly run our Govt and Both Party's.
    On working together this president has done more to divide people, and is more partisan then any president in recent history. Working together isnt his cup of tea.
     
  18. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #18
    With all due respect, that's the kind of nonsense I expect to hear from a neo-con clone. Word for word the Bush & Co party line. And it's wrong in fact & in analysis.

    1) The Dems DIDN'T see all the intelligence that Bush, Rumsfeld did.

    2) Bush & Co sifted & slanted the intelligence shown to the Dems, Congress , the UN & the public.

    3) The Dems didn't start the war when they were in power, Bush did.

    Bush is down in the polls because the public have finally seem through his nonsense, nothing to do with Dem "revisionist" smear campaigns. If anyone can be accused of revisionism it is the Bush camp. No longer removing WMD but regime change - no mention of that to the UN by Colin Powell!
     
  19. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    Funny thing is, Clinton et al. thought that Saddam had WMD programs operational prior to 1998 -- when Clinton bombed Iraq and Republicans objected, thereby playing politics with our nation's security.

    After 1998 (and the subsequent bombing that the GOP tried to say Clinton was doing to take the spotlight off his impeachment woes) Saddam's programs were never brought back to their pre-1998 levels.

    So yes, Clinton thought Saddam had WMDs and he did something about it that didn't involve thousands of US troop deaths. After Clinton left office, Democrats didn't see the same intelligence BushCo. saw. Did Congress get to see the PDBs? Was Congress in general, not to mention Democratic leaders, given the raw data that the WH had access too? Did Congress have an 'Office of Special Plans' to do intelligence analysis? No, no and no. Congress and the American people were given worst-case analysis of Saddam's WMD programs and best-case scenarios of how the war would go. Remember when BushCo mouthpieces were out there poo-pooing the idea that the war would cost $50 billion? Yeah, me too.

    The idea that Congress sees all the same data as the President is preposterous. (And growing more ludicrous by the day as more evidence emerges.)

    And while you can say that Democrats were convinced Saddam had WMD prior to 1998, they all seemed convinced that Clinton had taken care of the problem for the foreseeable future. Then they all got nervous when Bush and Cheney started to tell us that there was going to be a mushroom cloud over a US city if we didn't go to war in Iraq RIGHT NOW. So while you can fault them for not having a spine, you can't say they were given all the same data as the President.

    Remember, the GOP wanted to impeach a sitting president while US troops were in harm's way. They undercut the troops by attacking the President during missions in both Kosovo and Iraq. And now they want to say that one shouldn't do those things? Puhleeze.
     
  20. Advance The Man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #20
    PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 1998
    If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
    clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
    weapons of mass destruction program. We want to seriously reduce his
    capacity to threaten his neighbors.

    PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 1998
    If he refuses or continues to evade his obligations through more tactics of delay and deception, he and he alone will be to blame for the consequences. … Now, let’s imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction…? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who’s really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too.
     
  21. Advance The Man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #21
    What he did was NOTHING. And that nothing killed many people on 9/11 and has killed over 2,000 of our soldiers. President Bush is left to clean up the terrorism mess that Clinton didn't take care of.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    Oh? So why were there WMD in Iraq in 1998 and none in 2003?

    And are you seriously still banging that '9/11 = Iraq' drum?
     
  23. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #23
    OK - I've heard enough. You are talking absolute ****. I'm not sure where you came from or what your intentions are in this forum, but repeating proven lies isn't likely to ingratiate you with anyone here, of any persuasion.

    Let's get some things straight:

    1) Saddam WASN'T responsible for 9/11

    2) 2000 US troops are dead BECAUSE YOU INVADED IRAQ.

    Excuse me - I don't usually capitalise, but at times like this it's hard to control.
     
  24. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #24
    At this point I've got to post two articles in response to Bush's "Attack the Democrats" strategy. The first is an editorial from the New York Times, the second is a recent blog by Kevin Drum over at Washington Monthly.

    New York Times
     
  25. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #25
    Here is the second.
    Kevin Drum
     

Share This Page