Rev. Erudite Redneck, B.S., B.S., M.A., M.Div.

I do NOT accuse the president or anyone in the administration of intentionally misleading us. Nope. Everybody in the free world believed Saddam had WMD.

Sorry, but not true. Scott Ritter was saying no WMDs and so was Hans Blix. At the time, I believed them because they were on the ground and didn't have a clear political agenda to argue otherwise.
 

Point taken. You're right.

"Almost" everybody in the free world believed Saddam had WMD.

Truth be told, most people in this country, I think, myself included, were wired to believe our own leaders above all otherrs.

Were.
 

Exactly. And I do, very much, blame the Bush administration for not only taking advantage of that fact, but *themselves* not listening to the evidence against what they wanted to believe, and in fact going out of their way to suppress or dismiss it.

Average individuals might be forgiven for wanting to believe their elected leaders; leaders cannot be forgiven for failing to put reality above politics.
 

I've got a sketchy memory on this, but wasn't Bush going to go kick some butt right after 9-11, and then there was something about international law saying you can't just go assassinate somebody you think torched some of your airplanes. So the Bush admin went out and looked for an excuse and came up with WMD, except that the UN inspectors kind of didn't find any. There was a waiting period, then that State of the Union address in which he lied or misled, and then there was a news conference at the White House in which he chastised some reporter for asking him how it would look, when history takes that look back like it has with Vietnam, for the U.S. to have been wrong (no wonder the admin is all cranky about rewriting history). It all seemed a desperate sendup to doing what Bush seemed like he couldn't back down from doing since he'd threatened it a few days after 9-11. Whup some ass.
 

Hey, I'll tell him all you want is a "Hey guys, I Fucked up", and you'll like him again.
 

MY wife and youngest son joined Peace marches in Oklahoma City in November 2001 and January 2002.
They weren't protesting the war in Afganistan, they were protesting the yet to be started war in Iraq. The banners and signs basically all said NO to War In Iraq. It was abundantly clear from the statements eminating from the White House as early as October of 2001 that Bush was going to war with Iraq. They were lying about the connection to 9/11 and Iraq and the news media were just barely contridicting them. It was no secrete that we were going to war with Iraq long long before the first shot was fired, long long before the first word about WMDs was spoken. This has been documented over and over and over.
If you don't know it by now you wouldn't believe it anyway.
But wait there's more:
In several instances Bush told private audiences that God, that is the LORD-GOD-JEHOVA guys, wanted him to go to war with Iraq.
It went almost unreported in the press.
Now a man who has been sent to war by the LORD-GOD-JEHOVA can not compromise,or negotiate on his war position much less leave early or cut and run. He is in it for the long haul, until the LORD-GOD-JEHOVA tells him personally that it is time to pull back or he has won. That's why he doesn't have a real plan. Are you going to tell the world that you are waiting for devine guidance to know what to do. He would, if his handlers would let him. It is no accident that Bush started out the war calling it a Crusade.
There is no sane solution left to this.
This can not but end badly.
 

And that's why he can't say, "Hey, I effed up."

Hey, I still "like" him, in the sense that he'd probaboy be fun to chop brish with, hunt birds and drink a beer with, if(?) he still(?) drank.

But like Toad says he would trust Clinton with the world but not his sister, I'd trust Bush with my pickup truck but not the world.
 

Oh, Anon, if you got THAT kind of access to the man, let us come up with some other things you can tell him, OK?

I mean, you know, since he doesn't read books and doesn't read the news and just trust God, his "gut" and what people tell him and all.
 

Come on folks, Presidents do not admit mistakes!!!!! Name the last time one did. We're still waiting on Billy Boy to say "scuz me" for the whole Monica thing. Wasn't Scott Ritter arrested at a McDonalds when he went there to meet (he thougth) a 14 year old girl he had been chatting with on the web? But it turned out to be a cop. Yep, I'd believe that sack of s---. Hans Blix, works for the U.N., nuff said.
 

No, Clinton acknowledged his wrong actions, his sin, and trying to cover it up YEARS ago, for God's sake. The righty rights can't stand that fact any more than they can stand anything else about him. So they keep rewriting history just like that.
 

I actually heard that about Ritter. BUt consideing the timing of the leak of a case from 2001, a sealed case, as part and parcel of the damn-all-detractors, full-speed-ahead to war in Iraq in early ought-3, and absent any other evidence, you think I'm going to believe that?

Here's a good long read that puts the Ritter smear -- if that's what it was since I don't know but it sure smells it -- in the context of the times in early 2003:

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m18137&l=i&size=1&hd=0

Oh, again, the not-top-secret, over-the-counter even BOOK "Bush at War" makes it perfectly clear that W. was going to go to war in Iraq come hell or high water.

Now comes hell.
 

Dang it. I meant "I cactually had not heard that about Ritter ..."

I just now read some stuff about the deal.
 

Correction: the peace marches mention above were November 2002 not 2001, and January 2003 not 2002.
 

CBS has done it this time. They have blown the lid off the biggest story of the year. This is worse than the lies that were told about the war in Iraq. This is happening in this country and all around the world right under our noses. We’ve heard rumors about things like this happening mostly at big corporations like Wal-Mart but it runs deeper than that. Millions were show the truth of what has taken over our country and is spreading across the world because of the Republican rule. This didn’t and couldn’t happen when the democrats were in power. TONIGHT on “Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer”, Santa’s sleigh was shown being pulled by 3 teams of 2 reindeer with Rudolph pulling out front. Everyone knows that 8 tiny reindeer pull Santa’s sleigh. After only 5 years of the Bush administration 7 are doing the work of 8. We have to all pull together and get this country back on track. Please help.
 

Damn straight.

But then, the Island of Misfits just sounds like a Republican idea for dealing with the "differently abled," doesn't it?

Oh, and over in the other show, I hear that that pick-lickin' Yukon Cornelius is on food stamps.
 

If Scott Ritter fucks five-year olds, it doesn't bear on his ability to assess the WMD situation in Iraq.

And anyway, if we're going to start the fun ad hominem game, what about Bush's arrest for drunk driving, or his youthful cocaine habit, or his alcoholism?
 

Following up on bitchphd,.... or his branding fellow fraternity members with a hot coat hanger, or his jerking off in a coffin during the skull and bones intiation, or his dating the wives of fellow airforce officers while their husbands were in Vietnam. (yes I know Kerry did the same thing for skull and bones, and yes I gaged then voted for him)
And now not only has God forgiven him but, talks directly to him. Well Saul turned into Paul on the road to Damascus, maybe Bush...nawh.
 

ER, go thru the records and POST here what Clinton said after the Monica crap. Show me where he said "scuz me". Then show me where Carter said "scuz me" for letting this country go to pot for 4 years. Then show me where LBJ said "scuz me" for the little war in Southeast Asia. Scott Ritter is a prevert, pure and simple. Can't you at least find a decent person to use as a sample?
 

Bill Clinton's August 17, 1998 speech to the American public re: Monica Lewinsky

`` Good evening.

This afternoon in this room, from this chair, I testified before the Office of Independent Counsel and the grand jury.

I answered their questions truthfully, including questions about my private life, questions no American citizen would ever want to answer.

Still, I must take complete responsibility for all my actions, both public and private. And that is why I am speaking to you tonight.

As you know, in a deposition in January, I was asked questions about my relationship with Monica Lewinsky. While my answers were legally accurate, I did not volunteer information.

Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. In fact, it was wrong. It constituted a critical lapse in judgment and a personal failure on my part for which I am solely and completely responsible.

But I told the grand jury today and I say to you now that at no time did I ask anyone to lie, to hide or destroy evidence or to take any other unlawful action.

I know that my public comments and my silence about this matter gave a false impression. I misled people, including even my wife. I deeply regret that.

I can only tell you I was motivated by many factors. First, by a desire to protect myself from the embarrassment of my own conduct.

I was also very concerned about protecting my family. The fact that these questions were being asked in a politically inspired lawsuit, which has since been dismissed, was a consideration, too.

In addition, I had real and serious concerns about an independent counsel investigation that began with private business dealings 20 years ago, dealings I might add about which an independent federal agency found no evidence of any wrongdoing by me or my wife over two years ago.

The independent counsel investigation moved on to my staff and friends, then into my private life. And now the investigation itself is under investigation.

This has gone on too long, cost too much and hurt too many innocent people.

Now, this matter is between me, the two people I love most -- my wife and our daughter -- and our God. I must put it right, and I am prepared to do whatever it takes to do so.

Nothing is more important to me personally. But it is private, and I intend to reclaim my family life for my family. It's nobody's business but ours.

Even presidents have private lives. It is time to stop the pursuit of personal destruction and the prying into private lives and get on with our national life.

Our country has been distracted by this matter for too long, and I take my responsibility for my part in all of this. That is all I can do.

Now it is time -- in fact, it is past time to move on.

We have important work to do -- real opportunities to seize, real problems to solve, real security matters to face.

And so tonight, I ask you to turn away from the spectacle of the past seven months, to repair the fabric of our national discourse, and to return our attention to all the challenges and all the promise of the next American century.

Thank you for watching. And good night.''
 

Good job, Drlobojo.

Note: Judging from his past comments, Drobojo is no fan of "Slick Willie." But Drlobo is no fan of perpetuators of untruths, either.

On Carter: I personally think the post-Vietnam economy and post-Watergate mood would have eaten alive whoever was president, and I don't think anybody, then, could have dealt much better, if at all, with the hostage crisis.

On LBJ: He quit over a war he inherited. That counts as "scuz me" in my book.
 

In what was termed an October surprise, Johnson announced to the nation on March 31, 1968 that he ordered a complete cessation of "all air, naval, and artillery bombardment of North Vietnam" effective November 1 citing progress with the Paris peace talks. And at the end of his speech he shocked the country by telling them he would not run for re-election, by saying: "I shall not seek, and I will not accept the nomination of my party for another term as your president."
 

Well, dang it, I knew LBJ didn't *quit* as in resign. I meant he quit as in decided not run again against all expectation.
 

So you agree with what I've said all along. No difference between (R)'s and (D)'s. The world just shifts back and forth from time to time like it's doing a "I gotta PEE" dance.
 

Don't be so defensive ER.
Let's look at how this blog has gone. The an Anon has taken it over by insulting and assaulting the "morality" and "character" of Bushes apponents and prior Democratic administrations. Bitch used the shorthand term, ad hominem, which is a favorite tactic of those who have no other argument left.
 

Anon. Obvious,l no, I do not agree with that. Policy matters.

Drlobo: Didn't mean to appear defensive.

You mean to credit Bitch with caling Anon on having no argument, I hope. Can't tell from the way you phrased it.

This Anon, whoever it is, is the one that is always on my ass for something.

If it's someone I know in the real world, I don't want to ever know who it is, because it's gotten so damn personal it probably would damage a real world relationship for me to learn his-her identity.

If it's not someone I know, it's just some random jerk who is living vicariously through my unparalleled brilliance and ability to express myself, while gleefully trying, and failing, to tear me down at the same time.

Go fricking figure.

Gotta get a tie on and go to work.
 

ER said: You mean to credit Bitch with calling Anon on having no argument, I hope. Can't tell from the way you phrased it.

Yes, exactly, I credit Bitch with exactly that, but I wasn't sure that Anon translated what she said.
 

That was deep.
I've been called an asshole.
I've been called a Jerk.
I've been called Bastard.
And I'm the one that makes the personal attacks.
My problem is I like to make people laugh or at least smile all I can. I look at a blog as I do sending a funny email, a cartoon or even in my younger days writing on a bathroom wall. In fact in some of my replies it's just a good thing I couldn't work in, "There once was a man from Nantucket". Shit nothing personal, just, you take everything to damn serious. You're going to split right down the middle one of these days if you don't calm down. And I'd hate to wager a guess as to whether The Doctor or Mr. Hyde would win out.
P.S. That was meant to be FUNNY
 

Damn it, you're tone deaf.

If it's a funny post or thread, be funny.

If it's a serious one, don't.

This form of communication is difficult enough without someone who really doesn't give a shit barging in and jacking around, being a class clown, with people who do.
 

Actually no, not everybody thought Saddam had WMDs, including the UN and our weapons inspectors.

Now Germany, France, Russia and China all had economic interests in not supporting the war so what they had to say about it was essentially irrelevant.

I even believe that Saddam himself thought that he had a weapons program but all his military personnel knew they didn’t have the resources or capacity for one and let him believe what he wanted out of fear for their life.

So did the President just use WMDs and Terrorism as an excuse to get us into Iraq and show the world what a cowboy he was and that no one can try to kill his daddy? Of course, lets not forget how Halliburton (Cheney), Carlyle Group (Bush SR., James Baker), and all the Texas oil companies stood to benefit from this war.
 

Bitch done reminded me, Toad!
 

CAUTION:
Bloggers Saving World
 

Do any of you people remeber Billy Boy putting 180,000 of our troops in Saudi after Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors? He put 'em there and then didn't have the cojones to do the job. The polls told him that a war in Iraq would not be popular with the public. So, true to form, he chicked out. He fired off a few guided missles and loaded the troops up. My guess is that most of you folks hate the President, have hated since 2000 and will hate him until the day you die. Whatever, whenever, however he does ANYTHING, you will bitch about it.
 

It was 1994 when Bubba sent 60,000 troops (not 180,000) to Kuwait (not Saudia Arabia) to counteract moves by Sadam towards invading Kuwait again.

An Anon said:
"My guess is that most of you folks hate the President, have hated (him) since 2000 and will hate him until the day you die."
Wrong! I only plan to hate him until the day he dies.
But then again if only the good die young he and I will have a long time together.
 

Say anon at 1:54pm, I've got an old Urdu saying that might be useful for you, given your world view. It is: "Kooie baat nahi" or in English, "It sums to nothing". I have found it comforting myself at times.
 

Somebody who uses Haloscan for comments tell me: When you convert, does it change all previous comment fields to Haloscan, or just all future ones?
 

Stand back! When Drlobojo starts talkin' in Urdu, it can't be good!
 

Muji apki mohabat chatta hey,
mera dost.
Actually when drlobojo starts talking in Urdu it isn't good because it isn't good Urdu.