Newsweek’s Howard Fineman didn’t wait long to file his disdain for President Bush’s speech to the nation about Iraq Wednesday night. In fact, according to the timestamp at MSNBC.com, his “A Crisis of Confidence” article was posted at 7:43 PM Pacific Time, or a little over an hour after the president finished. I guess Howard was anxious to tell his readers that “George W. Bush spoke with all the confidence of a perp in a police lineup.”
The article, which read as if it had been written well before the speech was given, continued (emphasis mine throughout):
I first interviewed the guy in 1987 and began covering his political rise in 1993, and I have never seen him, in public or private, look less convincing, less sure of himself, less cocky. With his knitted brow and stricken features, he looked, well, scared.”
Scared? Really? I must have had the wrong station on. Alas, Fineman continued:
But if he was trying to assure the country that he had confidence in his own plan to prevent that collapse, well, a picture is worth a thousand words. And the words themselves weren't that assuring either. Does anyone in America or Iraq , or anywhere else in the world for that matter, really think that the Sunnis and Shia will make peace? Does anyone think that embedded American soldiers won't be in danger of being fragged by their own Iraqi brethren? Does anyone really think that Iran and Syria can be prevented from playing havoc in Iraq and the rest of the region by expressions of presidential will?
Hmmm. Some of Howard's questions make one wonder if anyone at Newsweek really thinks. Sadly, Fineman was just getting warmed up:
George Bush had the look of a man who knew he had made a royal hash of things in reaching for what most enlightened people would say was a noble goal.
[…]
Problem was, Bush had long since forfeited the political credibility that FDR was able to maintain through his presidency. Roosevelt made huge mistakes, and the rules of the times allowed him to hold back much information. But the public believed him in his role as a leader of the Western World. Luckily for Roosevelt, he was on the radio for the most part.
Is it possible, Howard, that the public believed FDR despite his huge mistakes because the press back then didn’t undermine him 24/7 the way you and your colleagues have this president for more than three years now? Regardless of the answer, Fineman continued:
Bush's political problem is not so much that he has lied to the American people—though he may well have done so—but that he seems for years to have been lying to himself.
What the voters saw on TV just now was a man struggling to come to grips with his own unwillingness to face facts. It's still a struggle. His acknowledgement of mistakes was oblique and not as brave as it sounded at first blush. Mistakes were made, and he said. "The responsibility rests with me," he said. What he meant to convey was that others had made the mistakes, but that he was stepped up to take the hit. Hoo-aw! He said that he had "consulted" congressional leaders of both parties before he came to a decision on sending more than 20,000 additional troops. He didn't really consult with members of Congress, and certainly not with Democrats, unless you consider Sen. Joe Lieberman a Democrat.
Fineman concluded:
The president's chances of success, such as they are, now rest with the reasonableness and details of his plan. Will it work? His says that his generals "report" that it will. Do the American people believe that it will?
I'm not sure that they are really listening, but if they were watching, they can't have been reassured by the man they saw in the basement of the White House.
Actually, Howard, given how quickly this piece was posted, and its contents, I’m not sure you were watching either.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.















Comments Policy
Call a doctor!
January 11, 2007 - 11:55 ET by Jimbo“George W. Bush spoke with all the confidence of a perp in a police lineup.”
I am about to lose it. How can this be allowed??? This is our President for God’s sake! We are in a war! Something must be done about these traitors!
“…he looked, well, scared.”
I repeat – WE ARE AT WAR!! These people have no morals and don’t care about our country. These people must be held accountable for their traitorous behavior.
The only people who are scared are the MSM, the liberals, and the terrorists because they know this new plan presents the possibility of victory.
I think my blood pressure is dangerously high right now. Seriously.
Total disrespect! I can onl
January 11, 2007 - 12:10 ET by rimskyTotal disrespect! I can only repeat Jimbo.. THIS IS OUR PRESIDENT FOR GOD'S SAKE!
To portray him as a perp is beyond contempt.
Mr. Fineman - will you and others of your ilk EVER realize what is at stake here? We need to SUPPORT our President in this effort, even if we don't agree with all aspects of the plan. But to just blow off and show utter contempt is WAY out of line!
They've never accepted him as
January 11, 2007 - 12:41 ET by Prester JohnThey've never accepted him as President. The Supreme Court "selected" him after Gore was cheated in Florida, and any Democrat but Kerry (who was cheated in Ohio) would've beaten him in 2004.
That's their story and they're going to stick with it until 20 January 2009.
I hate to admit it, but I thi
January 11, 2007 - 13:43 ET by mattmI hate to admit it, but I think Fineman's statement is right. But then, Bush always speaks that way. He's not a slick use-car salesman (no offense to you used car salesmen) like Clinton... Frankly I'd like it a little better if he was a better speaker, but then it's the content that should matter... Too bad libs care more about style than substance.
On the content side, I think there should have been better details as to what specifically we're going to do and why. And more emphasis on getting the Iraqis to take more of the responsibility. He also should have detailed the reasons for the limited success - he said "too many restrictions"...what were/are they? and how is removing them going to help?...etc.
I trust the President. I believe in the goals of the WOT and that Iraq is a vital part of it. But one of my biggest beefs with Bush is his bad PR capabilities. It doesn't help when the MSM bashes him every day, or when politicians criticize his plan before even hearing it, etc. But he could do much better....
Speech grade: Content: B- Delivery: D- Overall grade: C- Good story.
This new plan has no posable
January 11, 2007 - 12:12 ET by blingbling65This new plan has no posable chance at success, zero.
Putting 5000 troops on the ground in Baghdad with a population of 7 million is like spiting in the ocean.
If you truly buy the bull that "WE ARE AT WAR" then YOU should be the president strongest critic, because he is F'en this whole thing up.
We need 100,000+ troops in Baghdad now to crush this uprising, it would be a could start putting in as many cops there are in New York 50,000.
This new plan is a nonevent, its pathetic.
Thank you Mr. Bling.
January 11, 2007 - 12:29 ET by acaiguanaThank you Mr. Bling.
Bling Bling, gets to sing. Warble garble, post and gargle.
Aside from your advanced education in Military Tactics, War and being a graduate from West Point, having served many years in the Infantry and taught at the Command College; what else did you have to make this profound pronouncement?
Or is KOS filled up with users today?
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Respectable Response
January 11, 2007 - 12:38 ET by JimboI’ll try to respond to this trash in a respectable manner.
Mr. Bling – I respectfully disagree with your assertion that the President’s determination to win this war is “pathetic”.
The additional troops will be deployed in strategic areas around Bagdand and Anbar province which will result in a 50:1 ratio, which is an ideal ratio for the mission at hand. So your comment about needing 100,000 troops is based on a lack of understanding about well… just about anything.
To answer your question about whether or not I believe we are at war, well, yes, I do think so. Ask the rest of the lucid people in the country the same question and I suspect you will get the same answer.
I also request that you break ranks with the rest of your liberal conspirators and present an alternative plan to the President’s instead of calling his plan pathetic and walking away.
I’ll wait.
Jimbo, question.
January 11, 2007 - 12:42 ET by acaiguanaJimbo, question.
I’ll try to respond to this trash in a respectable manner.
Why?
ACA...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
1. To show that we are bett
January 11, 2007 - 12:47 ET by Jimbo1. To show that we are better than he is.
2. Becasue I'm a fool.
Naw, you just ate your serious Wheaties today.
January 11, 2007 - 12:50 ET by acaiguanaNaw, you just ate your serious Wheaties today.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
I never said Bush's determina
January 11, 2007 - 13:21 ET by blingbling65I never said Bush's determination to win the war is pathetic, I said his reasoning and judgment is horrible. How can anyone after four years of witnessing his incompetence could disagree with that assessment.
And your numbers are all wrong, it won't be 50:1 more like 200:1(badgdad is a city of 7,000,000 and even if it was 50:1 thats still way to high. We need 20:1 at a minimum. We are not even close.
But hows this for a plan get rid of the incompetent leadership that is George Bush, call a draft and send in 300,000 troops to retake Iraq. (half as many troops that we had in Gulf war 1 I might add)
Its time for real leadership, its time to remove the President and get some in there who can do the job.
Why dont you join up and help
January 11, 2007 - 13:29 ET by 1sttofightWhy dont you join up and help out?
With your superior knowledge and experience I am sure they would make you at least a General .
Do you really want him istofight?
January 11, 2007 - 13:32 ET by acaiguanaDo you really want him istofight?
I know a Sgt. Major who could introduce him to his 'favorite' hole in the ground, you know the one someone covered up with dirt and planted grass on?
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
There is no danger of him d
January 11, 2007 - 13:43 ET by 1sttofightThere is no danger of him doing that.
He is way to smart to do that. After all, only a fool wants to defend his country, at least according to Kerry
And blingboy has already shown us he is one of the Super Intelligent Libs who us ordinary folks need to listen to in order to make it through life.
I already did join up LINKI s
January 11, 2007 - 13:33 ET by blingbling65I already did join up
LINK
I suggest you all do the same
bling...let me ask, just what
January 11, 2007 - 13:41 ET by bassndudebling...let me ask, just what is your tactical background? You teach at West Point? For someone that has no clue what tactics are, you sure do rattle alot. Kinda like a little bitty pebble in a great big ole box. You roll around and make alot of noise but you really dont amount to much.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
On your own...
January 11, 2007 - 14:54 ET by UnsanePlease tell us on your own why you think Bush should be impeached. Let's see some articles of impeachment of your very own.
Why, because he isn't spoon-feeding you three times a day and changing you, as you demand government do?
Are you enraged that we have a military and use it on occasion?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
My Friend Bling
January 11, 2007 - 13:35 ET by JimboWell, allow me to respond again. As to my friends here at NB will ask me “Why??”, My response will be that Bling has simply fallen under the MSM’s spell and has lost his way. My tolerance for turning you around however, will all but be exhausted by the end of this post, so please listen carefully Bling.
You did say that the President’s plan to win the war is pathetic. You did. And I disagreed then, as I do now, with that assessment.
And as for my numbers, they are correct, and yours are wrong. As I wrote previously, and you either ignored or didn’t understand, is that the 50:1 troop ratio will be obtained by deploying them in the problem areas of Baghdad. Your disagreement on this point shows that you are calling the President’s plan pathetic, without really understanding what it entails. Note to Bling: You should educate yourself on a topic before you call it “pathetic”
As for your desire to remove the duly elected President from office, as I have stated before, I welcome your attempt to do so. Contrary to what you believe right now, I’m sure, there is nothing the President has done that even remotely calls for the invocation of the Article of Impeachment. Such an attempt by you and the rest of the lost left would expose a fundamental flaw in your position. That flaw is that your arguments are baseless, your representation of the facts are either completely wrong or misleading, and there is actually good resulting from our efforts in the Middle East.
So to understand your point correctly, the “Change in Iraq” the Democrats were talking about during the election is to “Impeach Bush”? Now that isn’t really new, is it.
So Bling, – I have attempted to show you the light, but I am betting my last dollar that a sarcastic, change of direction post is about to come.
I’m waiting for that and I’m still waiting for your alternative plan to win the war on terror other than “Impeach Bush”.
You're one hell of a compassionate guy, johnbo.
January 11, 2007 - 13:39 ET by acaiguanaYou're one hell of a compassionate guy, johnbo.
Hat's off to ya.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
It's Jimbo. Johnbo's a left w
January 11, 2007 - 13:42 ET by JimboIt's Jimbo. Johnbo's a left wing nut!
Sorry, Jim, I hate that when it happens.
January 11, 2007 - 13:45 ET by acaiguanaSorry, Jim, I hate that when it happens.
What's with the 'bo' everyone seems to tack on here anyway. It's all their fault I tell ya. I'm a 'bo' victim.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
All right first math is not s
January 11, 2007 - 14:00 ET by blingbling65All right first math is not subjective like you use of the facts, your either right or wrong in math and your wrong. There are only 14000 troops in Baghdad even with the added 16000 we won't get anywhere near 50:1 with a city of 7,000,000 people.
And if we can impeach a man for getting a BJ, then I think we could find a way to impeach a man for lying to us to go to war.
You are such an ignoramus.
January 11, 2007 - 14:11 ET by kathleenirishYou are such an ignoramus. Clinton did not get impeached for a BJ!
He lied under oath. UNDER OATH. He was disbarred for it, too. And, if the sexual predator hadn't sexually harrassed Paula Jones in the first place and lied about that, he would have been able to continue on his scumbag ways with impunity in the oval office, and everywhere else, for that matter. He has quite the track record. What a hero.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
AND??Your not possibly saying
January 11, 2007 - 14:26 ET by blingbling65AND??
Your not possibly saying that LYING about a BJ is the same as lying to the American people to get us in a war that has killed 3018 Americans, mutilated 50,000 more not to mention the 100,000's of Iraqis that have been killed?
This guy has got to go
Facts - Troll
January 11, 2007 - 14:35 ET by JimboIf you are going to call the President a liar, you can have the courtesy to support that with cold hard facts. And by the way - pulling nonsense out of your empty head and calling them facts doesnt count. I'm talking about documented facts. Surely you must have them at your fingertips.
If not, please refrain from posting anything else on this site.
And while you are figuring ou
January 11, 2007 - 14:40 ET by JimboAnd while you are figuring out how you can best change the subject instead of providing me with facts, answer me this. Assuming your logic is correct, which it clearly isn’t, that would mean that it is ok to break some laws, but not others. So I can grow marijuana, but not manufacture cocaine? So I can beat the crap out of someone but not kill them? Jeeze – do you libs ever listen to yourselves??
Laws are laws, I didn't say i
January 11, 2007 - 15:00 ET by blingbling65Laws are laws, I didn't say it was a bad thing to have impeached Clinton, I said if we can impeach a man for lying about a BJ, then we can certainly impeach a man for lying to get us into war.
Who can disagree with that?
Still waiting for proof that
January 11, 2007 - 15:08 ET by JimboStill waiting for proof that the President lied Bling........
WHAT'S THE FUCKING LIE THAT B
January 11, 2007 - 15:11 ET by TruthMongerWHAT'S THE FUCKING LIE THAT BUSH TOLD, ASSHOLE?!?!?!
HABLA ENGLISH, YA DUMBFUCK?
...dumbfuck must be googling
January 11, 2007 - 15:14 ET by TruthMonger...dumbfuck must be googling "his" answer...
TM
January 11, 2007 - 15:17 ET by Noel SheppardTM,
C'mon. As Esterhaus used to say, a modicum of decorum please. ns
Yeah, maybe 'dumbass' will su
January 11, 2007 - 22:52 ET by kathleenirishYeah, maybe 'dumbass' will suffice? t.m. is right, whatever words get used.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Come on TM...although I agree
January 11, 2007 - 15:18 ET by bigtimerCome on TM...although I agree with you heartfelt posts,and feel the same way, with all your anger, quit using the full four letter word here, there are other ways to put F'ing, please F'en quit doing that.... I am as angry as you.
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
...all right...but you may h
January 11, 2007 - 15:21 ET by TruthMonger...all right...but you may have no idea how much restraint I'm already using : ) !
big hearted bigtimer
January 11, 2007 - 15:22 ET by tumbler_2007Who's your disgusting friend, BT? Haha!
Heartfelt posts ! Oh, be still my heart!
...oooh, am i being libsmacke
January 11, 2007 - 15:33 ET by TruthMonger...oooh, am i being libsmacked?! it kinda tickles...
"haha"
fumbler aka senor coyote
January 11, 2007 - 16:08 ET by misterbillstronzo== attacks everyone and doesn't know why no one likes him!!!!!
tumbler does NOT attack everyone
January 11, 2007 - 16:20 ET by tumbler_2007Sorry to conradict you, your divinity. But I save my "attack" for blowhards and imbeciles. You're one of each, but even you are never "attacked". I only reduce you to absurd level; where you came from.
I call you "divinity", because you speak as if you're God. Are you God? You think you are, because you say No one likes him. Now, if tumbler says --No one likes this cornuto, --I would have to know what every heart feels. I don't. In this world there are doubtless many good people who like you. (Don't ask me why; um not God.)
What a pompus twit. Save a Se
January 11, 2007 - 16:23 ET by bassndudeWhat a pompus twit.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Bassndude
January 11, 2007 - 17:55 ET by misterbillgrazie mio amici. Twit he is!!!!!!
You foolish mortal
January 11, 2007 - 16:29 ET by misterbillYou foolish mortal-yes , I am a supreme being. But to be modest, only when I am compared to a self appointed apologist for Hispanics like you. Those who he keeps identifying as non-whites, which no other blogger on this site does. But he may be right. I cannot truthfully say that he has attacked EVERY person on this site. So, I apologize. What I should have said is (from my absurd level, which is called sanity, but not by el coyote), a large number of people appear to dislike him. Not only is he an apologist but his fallback on Christian references and God are extremely hypocritical and will not earn him a place in Heaven.
Arriverderci, Stronzo!
poor mortal tumblero
January 11, 2007 - 16:42 ET by tumbler_2007Yes, thank you, cornutino. I'll take that humble pie. You see; I was just falling back on the Christian megillah hoping you would forgive my many sins. I'm guilty of calling you impotente and cornuto, on account of my hurt feelings. You gave me a name, stronzo.
You, who never attack anybody! Have your own children called you stronzo; and were they even your children? I hope they are, since it would be unchristian to doubt it. And, by the way--
I'm not an apologist for hispanics. They need no defense from your hatred, or the few other stragglers here who clamor for their white supremacist society. I defend those who cannot defend themselves. Or; I defend their right to exist. They may be lawfully deported to please YOU. That's fine, cornuto.
But they're human beings. Each one is a child of God. As even YOU are. (You've just had bad luck; I know.)
Silly, prejudiced man
January 11, 2007 - 17:02 ET by misterbillSilly, prejudiced man, I am a Latino. To me the ethnic groups of Italians, Portugese,Spaniards, Ctalans and Romanians are all from the same ethnic branch of the human tree. Thus, the sons and daughters of Mexico are from that same branch. They all speak a Romance language. It is you Signor Coglione who keeps creating a prejudicial difference. You are the most bigoted person that I have encountered on this site. I feel those who come to this country illegally, including the 30% of illegals who are Mexicans are violating our laws and hurting our country.You sir, are a hypocrite. So go back to your van with the false bottom and make your weekly trips across the border to supplement your retirement income. Then come here and attack those who love this country and recognize the harm that is happening. Count your ill-gotten gains.
missbill descends into lunacy
January 11, 2007 - 18:13 ET by tumbler_2007Hey, bestia,
How do you now figure I'm a smuggler of illegals? I have a very GOOD income, Sir. Better than yours. Now you'll cover your sorry ass accusing me of a crime? I dismiss your impotent attempt at making me angry. You aren't big enough.
However; Is nothing too low for your bottom-feeding? Eating barnacles off the pier isn't dirty enough? You can't even speak the truth anymore?
"I feel those who come to this country illegally, including the 30% of illegals who are Mexicans are violating our laws and hurting our country." So says the impotent liar.
Prove it, imbecile. Hurting our country because??? --It's ignorance that hurts this country. You're not even as intelligent as some morons on our Left. You're the Sean Penn of this side. And anyhow; who cares what you "FEEL"--?
misterb... He enjoys being d
January 11, 2007 - 16:52 ET by bigtimermisterb...
He enjoys being disliked and the attention he gets.
Sad, pathetic, lonely, miserable life he must have eh?
I pity his poor wife...that is if he really has one.
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
I truly do not understand the
January 11, 2007 - 17:09 ET by paperheadI truly do not understand the left in this country. They don't care that we are in a state of war with an extremist religion that launched the deadliest attack ever on U.S. soil. We can't appease them or negotiate with them. Our only choice is to defeat them. Our military is made up of brave men and women who volunteer to join. No one is forcing them. They do it because they love this country and want to protect the freedoms we enjoy. Imagine how much more difficult it would have been for the United States to win WWII if the right were acting like the left is today. No doubt many would have been put in prison or worse for treason.
come now, smalltimer
January 11, 2007 - 17:13 ET by tumbler_2007I don't enjoy it when some dislike me. (That's mild, some hate me.)
You think my aim is getting attention? No, but I want to draw attention to the seeming ignorance of many who disparage and demonize illegals. It's something really, which is NEVER given attention here or in the other places news is reported. Well, not never we saw Kondrake & Barnes; Dick Morris and Geraldo --they expressed close to my opinion too.
But very little effort is made in our society, watching with unbiased emotion, the way Mexican illegal immigrants are bashed every day from --are you ready? --FROM THE RIGHT.
And I'm a conservative Republican willing to face YOUR outrage here in NewsBusters, a conservative site. My admiration for Mr Bozell is enormous, yet I'm sure he disagrees with my stands against you howling mad conservatives. Would I "enjoy" being disliked by him? Hell no I wouldn't. My intent here is to reach hearts. To open your cheesey eyes, smalltimer. Even against your will! Are you ready now, for a spoonful of sugar to help you get this medicine down?
I love some members of this blog community. I want them to like me. It's very important to me. Even you; instead of baiting me like some dirty old cur; just once treat me with respect. Respect for the strength of my convictions. Nobody enjoys being the punching bag all the time. Thank God you're wrong; my life is NOT lonely, pathetic or miserable. And my wife? A truly LOVELY woman who shares the principles I express here. I hope you can forgive her.
BT you are correct
January 11, 2007 - 17:13 ET by misterbillBT you are correct--perhaps I should be kinder. He seems so desperate for attention. He may not have received a lot of love growing up. He amy be one of those children who so craved attention that bad attention was better than none.He asked me if I was God today--another indication of instability.I should stand down and leave him in peace. I will let him vent his spleen on people with more patience than I. But a little part of me would like to get behind the facade and see the true Tumbler.
Hey now, careful with that
January 11, 2007 - 17:20 ET by Uncle JohnHey now, careful with that touchy-feely stuff... Hey, let's keep stretching this part of the thread until it's a one letter column!
S
o
u
n
d
s
f
u
n
,
h
u
h
?
Liberalism ≠ liberty.
misterbill and his psychobabble
January 11, 2007 - 17:23 ET by tumbler_2007Hold on, corny;
I'm not venting my spleen. I'm always on the defensive haven't you noticed?
And this "patience" of yours. Patience? You coulda fooled me. You're running up on my heels every time I post. You can't WAIT to insult old tumbler. I guess you didn't have enough love as a boy from Daddy. You see me as your father figure? Piangi, ragazzo! Piangi, piangi!
buon pomeriggio
January 11, 2007 - 17:51 ET by misterbillbuon pomeriggio tu pappone. Forse Dio tu aiutare.
misterb,Good luck, and I do u
January 11, 2007 - 17:24 ET by bigtimermisterb,
Good luck, and I do understand, I was one of the few who tried to extend some kindness, and a semblance of trying to understand his views to him long ago...it is useless...he enjoys the attention...he is a troll as far as I am concerned, he just does an excellent job covering it with his other posts, but he is amusing, if you do not get mad.
Enough from me...carry on, I understand you and wish you the best.
I got to get for a few and make dinner and put in oven...
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
awake, misterbill?
January 11, 2007 - 21:28 ET by tumbler_2007That's fine, cornuto.
But they're human beings. Each one is a child of God. As even YOU are.
signed,
True Tumbler
go to hell, stupid
January 11, 2007 - 15:14 ET by tumbler_2007Haha! No need for bold type or uppercase. We know who um talkin about.
blingleftwingwhacko,I have to
January 11, 2007 - 16:01 ET by paperheadblingleftwingwhacko,
I have to disagree with you on Bush lying to get us into war. Bush clearly stated that Iraq was part of the "axis of evil" after 9/11. We gave Saddam too much time to move the WMDs into Syria prior to the start of the war. Go back to your patron saint Clinton and review his words in late '98 after bombing Iraq and tell me that the WMDs never existed. You can't. I believe the history books will vindicate Bush and thank God we had him as our President and not Al Gore. President Bush is a man of principle and does not care about polls.
A catalog of some Bush lies (
January 11, 2007 - 15:13 ET by blingbling65A catalog of some Bush lies (about Iraq):
"Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites." Bush speech to the nation – 10/7/2002
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people
now in custody reveal that
Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
All false and I believe that in the coming congressional hearings, it will come out that Bush KNEW they were lies when he said them. If that’s true we are all morally obligated to remove him from office.
Again, this might be very pai
January 11, 2007 - 15:18 ET by UnsaneAgain, this might be very painful to accept, but Abu Nidal was found dead in Baghdad as our tanks approached. Do you know who Abu Nidal was?
If you cannot accept that freedom comes at a price, you are morally obligated to walk north across the Bridge of No Return to your brethren.
(P.S. If you want to impeach Bush for lying, I would suggest that many presidents before him needed to go for that as well.)
(P.P.S. Read the 22nd Amendment. Carefully.)
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
...as suspected the dude is
January 11, 2007 - 15:26 ET by TruthMonger...as suspected the dude is desperately "hoping" Bush lied - but doesn't know for sure...and in typical leftard fashion it's guilty EVEN IF PROVEN INNOCENT...good one, blinkdink...
Let us help you out here - how about at least just some evidence that Bush knew these were lies...also along with all of the other governments that said the same things, and the Clinton admin before him, of course...anything at all there...? Come on, there must be something for you to go and set up a whole web site?!!
(crickets chirping in anticipation)
"The British governmen
January 11, 2007 - 15:24 ET by Jack Bauer"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."
Both true. The British government did claim that. So Bush was correct.
Not only did Hussein aid and abet terrorists, including Al-Qaeda, he also paid the families of the Palestinian entity terrorists who blew up Jews in so-called "suicide" bombings.
So it turns out you're the liar. Or ignorant. Probably both.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Alright I think we're getting
January 11, 2007 - 15:46 ET by blingbling65Alright I think we're getting somewhere,
No BOTH of those assertions are false, and Bush did know they where false when he said them.
the british government never told bush that Iraq was looking for uranium if Africa Link
And Hussien never had a working relationship with Al qaida
Link (in fact he hated Al qaida more then we did)
now I'm begining to understand why you continue to think the way you do, your just uninformed. If you want more information then just ask.
See you all later
January 11, 2007 - 15:56 ET by JimboFor my own health, I think I need to take this moment to log off. I am confident that my bretheren can continue this on my behalf.
Yes, now we're getting somewh
January 11, 2007 - 16:03 ET by TruthMongerYes, now we're getting somewhere...the links don't work : ) ! Care to try again...?
Waiting breathlessly for more of this "proof..."
The links are PDF files Here
January 11, 2007 - 16:17 ET by blingbling65The links are PDF files
Here are the websites where they can be found
link1 http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
link2 http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/docs/memotext.pdf
...fixed them myself - same
January 11, 2007 - 16:18 ET by TruthMonger...fixed them myself - same old stuff - no proof of lies, not even evidence of lies...just evidence of mistakes in communication, or understandings, or opinions of bureacrats...is this the best ya got, bling?
Is this the basis for your formidable web site...? It seems you're the one who is mis-informed about what a lie is...or more likely you know what a lie is and you're actually the one lying about Bush lying...how humorously ironic you are...
I'm not sure what your saying
January 11, 2007 - 16:31 ET by blingbling65I'm not sure what your saying,
The 911 commission PROVED that there was no connection between Hussein and Al qaida, and the British memo PROVES that Bush intentionally lied about Iraqis effort to attain nuclear material.
And even if your twisted logic is correct, how can you defend a man so incompetent that he would lead us to war because "mistakes in communication"
Don't you want to hold him accountable for his failure to make the effort to know the truth BEFORE he sent us to war.
aaaahhh blingbling
January 11, 2007 - 16:35 ET by misterbillyou are an agent provocateur. Are you tumbler's agent for anti Bush discourse? Or are you just so darned positive that you are right? Do you believe the government was actually behind tyhe collapse of the Towers????
Mr Bill, he's 21 frickin ye
January 11, 2007 - 17:03 ET by MightyMouthMr Bill, he's 21 frickin years old! He learned how to properly masterbate just a few years ago! He can barely drink for cripes sakes. The punk is a total loser and doesn't have a clue about life. He is spewing talking points from KOS, hufftards and the MSM. Just ignore this jerk and guys like him. I have, and since then have dropped one blood pressure pill :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
The British memo does not pro
January 11, 2007 - 16:41 ET by JimboThe British memo does not prove that the President lied. YOU are lying by making that claim.
And I refuse to buy into the MSM hype that the President is incompetent. I just don't beleive that to be true.
...these leftoids either don
January 11, 2007 - 16:51 ET by TruthMonger...these leftoids either don't understand WHAT A "LIE" IS...OR WHAT "PROOF" IS...or else they really do and THEY'RE LYING ABOUT HAVING PROOF THAT BUSH WAS LYING...
...so what's really behind all of this lying about lying we wonder? Why so desperate to pin Bush down on some sort of lie? All while the terrorists plot our distruction...
...what sort of twisted stupidity and/or evil drives these people, anyway?
the only thing that the 9/11
January 11, 2007 - 17:10 ET by kathleenirishthe only thing that the 9/11 proved was that Clintonites will stop at nothing to make sure certain events are portrayed in certain ways. Jamie Gore-lick? It was nearly a total joke.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Lest we forget... Sandy &quo
January 11, 2007 - 17:53 ET by JerryLest we forget... Sandy "docs in my pants" Burglar.. talk about corruption.
Bling is like a hog who rolls in his own feces all day and then calls the white horse out in the pasture a "filthy animal".
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
If anyone is uninformed and o
January 11, 2007 - 16:06 ET by UnsaneIf anyone is uninformed and overwhelmingly naive, it is you. Perhaps you can explain how Iraq was not a terrorist state, even as Saddam was handing $25K to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Is that why we went to war?If
January 11, 2007 - 16:20 ET by blingbling65Is that why we went to war?
If it is that's fine with me, but your admitting that Bush lied to get us into war. Given that there is plenty of evidence to impeach him.
Typical Leftist. Putting wo
January 11, 2007 - 16:32 ET by UnsaneTypical Leftist. Putting words into my mouth, or onto my keyboard.
Fact of the matter is that Bush was very up front about the war, it was voted on by both parties, and the UN supported it. You can't handle it because the government is not here to defend you from people who want to kill you. Government to you is a Big Nanny that is here to feed, clothe, and shelter you and otherwise spoil and pamper you. Fact of the matter is that we had ever right to invade Iraq for less: the moment one of our planes patrolling the no-fly zone on behalf of the U.N., we could have gone in for a violation of the original ceasefire. You MIGHT want to study that sometime.
Your last sentence betrays your illiteracy. Or your stubbornness, or both. I want you to, on your own, supply the Articles of Impeachment you would file against Bush. Put up or shut up time. No links, no cut and pastes. You, and you alone.
Finally, read the 22nd Amendment for homework tonight. There is a passage in there you will find quite interesting I am sure. I would quote it for you and put two and two together for you, but I am tired of doing the heavy lifting for whacked-out, spoiled brat Leftists. Do your own research and draw your own conclusions.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Answer the question, Did we g
January 11, 2007 - 16:44 ET by blingbling65Answer the question,
Did we go to war in Iraq because they were paying Palestinian suicide bombers?
And it may help to think that only Liberals think Bush is crazy, but the numbers are growing everyday from all across the political spectrum. Your backing the wrong horse, come on over to the right side. We need you.
Bush is for winning. You gu
January 11, 2007 - 16:46 ET by JimboBush is for winning. You guys are for losing. Who's backing the wrong horse?
Iraq was a terrorist state wh
January 11, 2007 - 17:17 ET by kathleenirishIraq was a terrorist state who sponsored terrorism and terrorists. That was only a part of the equation. Why don't you focus a little on the loser UN, their ridiculous 'resolutions', their pact-with-the-devil and the Oil-for-Food debachery (never reported on by UN-friend and lover, MSM) and their tacit support of Saddam and other despots around the world. That's never been a problem for the dumbass-left, though.
It's high time to drain the swamp, reptile.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Bling won't answer our questi
January 11, 2007 - 17:26 ET by TruthMongerBling won't answer our questions - but he demands answers to his...
The answer is yes, that was part of the reason...so what ya got next bling?
Why I will never join bling in being a Leftist
January 11, 2007 - 17:30 ET by UnsaneNo, bling. I think freedom is worth fighting for. I also believe in free markets, and that when I earn money, bling isn't supposed to steal it from me to give it to someone who is lazier than I. Therefore, I will never, ever join your side. You will always be an enemy, for your side induces ROT in societies for the sake of coddling the lowest common denominator.
I also believe that the United States, being the beacon of hope that it is to millions around the world, should by right be the baddest motherf$#!er on the block.
You are very much on the wrong side, but then, you are not as familiar as I am with the annals of history, the rotting EU, or other areas of the world.
I did answer the question; you fail miserably, and intentionally, to see it. Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism (unless of course you don't think that Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists, which wouldn't surprise me in the least). We took them out. They violated the ceasefire the moment they tried to shoot down some of our fighters. The end.
I am still waiting for your alleged Articles of Impeachment. Or are you scared of yet another intellectual beat-down?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Nicely put, Unsane.I would ad
January 11, 2007 - 17:40 ET by kathleenirishNicely put, Unsane.
I would add that Bling doesn't mind the beat-downs, he must like them or he wouldn't keep coming back for more. C-Ya.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Hey Bling, Bling's profile:
January 11, 2007 - 16:44 ET by paperhead