QandO
Questions and Observations| « Good Government in the Garden State | Main | The "Cambodia Man" weighs in » |
|
August 13, 2004 Bush Lied: The meme that will not die The "Bush Lied" meme is a firmly fixed star in the heavens of the Left. H.D.S. Greenway, writing in the Boston Globe, repeats it again. Iraq is an area of Republican vulnerability, however. The Iraq war has gone just about as badly as possible. The Bush administration misled the nation on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the Al Qaeda connection. No amount of factual or documentary evidence will kill it. It's like a belief in astrology, or young-earth creationism. It's now an authoritative statement, and anything that contradicts it is automatically ignored. Not content to end there, Greenway continues: Kerry doesn't do yes-or-no answers, any more than Bush does nuance. So Kerry asked in return why Bush had rushed to war on the basis of faulty intelligence, misleading the American people, without a plan to win the peace, and without sufficient allies? All good questions. The deep dishonesty of this kind of stuff is just disturbing. No one is being "misled" about going to war if the President actually believes what he's telling us. After all, his own CIA chief—who was also Bill Clinton's CIA chief1—told him the WMD question was a slam-dunk. The president might be wrong, as were the presidents/prime ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Russia, et al., but no one seriously questioned whether Iraq had WMDs or was preparing to use them. But "Bush Lied" will be with us forever. Sure, you can always reason with a Leftie who espouses it. You can always reason with a brick wall, for all the good it'll do you. |
No one is being "misled" about going to war if the President actually believes what he's telling us.
I hear many Democrats using the "misled" word but I don't hear them defining it. I think they want the ambiguity. If pressed, they would probably say that to "mislead" is to lead the wrong direction, even if the leader believes it was the correct direction. If they actually said this, the position would be debatable but defensible. However, I believe they want people to think "lied" when the word "misled" is used, so the accusation seems stronger to many people.
Of course, the left still has people like Michael Moore trying to redefine "lied" so Bush can be accused of that.
Posted by: Rory Daulton at August 13, 2004 10:42 AM
I'm convicned however that the "Kerry Lied, millions Died" response will seriously injure this nonsense.
Posted by: Bithead at August 13, 2004 10:50 AM
why Bush had rushed to war on the basis of faulty intelligence,
How many months did we spend dickering at the UN again? Slowest rush to war ever.
misleading the American people,
Um....no he didn't. He acted on the info he had.
without a plan to win the peace
Yup, amazing how well things are going without that "plan"
, and without sufficient allies?
Define "sufficient" - who do you feel is missing- and realistically, what could they have contributed?
All good questions
All ignorant talking point questions parroted by a hack partisian intellectually lazy biased piece of crap writer.
Posted by: shark at August 13, 2004 10:52 AM
I always enjoy reading Shark's comments. Bill O'Reilly did a pretty good job of addressing the "Bush Lied" nonsense when he bitched up Krugman on Russert. I'm surprised no one at QandO mentioned it, unless of course I missed it. Here is a link to poor and stupid that has the whole transcript:
http://www.poorandstupid.com/2004_08_08_chronArchive.asp#109206746155113133
Posted by: Mark at August 13, 2004 01:21 PM
Hmm...Democrats redefining words...remind anyone of this: "It depends on what the definition of "is" is..."
Posted by: Chris at August 13, 2004 03:46 PM
The whole quote:
"It depends upon what the meaning of the word is means. If is means is, and never has been, that's one thing. If it means, there is none, that was a completely true statement."
Posted by: Chris at August 13, 2004 03:47 PM
I would love to see the "plan for post-war {insert name of country}" from any past war that was developed prior to and implimented after any given conflict in history.
It sure is easy to quarterback a war from newsrooms in NYC, Boston, LA, SF, Seattle, . . . .
Posted by: jcrue at August 13, 2004 06:07 PM