A list of Bush admin lies

“hyway, you bad boy. Keep saying TRUTH like that, and the libbies will have the vapors. LOL”

“That "moron" has kept you alive.”

“Let's not impeach him;   there's no time left for that anyway.   Let's just audit him for the $4 million he unlawfully claimed as a capital gain from the Texas Rangers.”

“Great idea, Tilt!

Kinda like the way Al Capone was nailed or tax evasion instead of for all the killing.”

“That "moron" has kept you alive.

Haaaa hahahahahaha. Oh man, that is really great Sarge. Haaaahahahahaha.

Well, as the saying goes, moronic minds think alike! Your last name wouldn't be Bush, would it?”

“Well, as the saying goes, moronic minds think alike!

As they other saying goes, takes one to know one.”

“This impeachment talk is so funny. The republicans pushed for the impeachment vote and the democrats had to scramble to keep their people from voting to let it happen. DC is a funny place.”

“rosey, Bush appears to be smarter, sharper and clever than you. With all your assuredness of how stupid and clumsy he is, why do the democrats in washington fall in line for him and not for you.”

“That's going to leave a mark, hyway.



Quotes:

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"I never believed in the link between Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and Islamist terrorism," -- Madeline Albright, 2003




"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, 1998

"This war has been a grotesque mistake that has diminished our reputation in the world and has not made America safer." -- Nancy Pelosi, 2004




"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, 2002

"[I]t is clear that the Administration's rhetoric played upon the well-founded fear of the American public about future acts of terrorism." -- Robert Byrd, 2003




"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, 2002

"Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one." -- Ted Kennedy, 2003.




"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, 2002

"The absolute cynical manipulation, deliberately cynical manipulation, to shape American public opinion and 69 percent of the people, at that time, it worked, they said 'we want to go to war'... [Saddam] wasn't going to attack us. He would've been isolated there... He would have been in control of that country but we wouldn't have depleted our resources preventing us from prosecuting a war on terror which is what this is all about." -- John Rockefeller, 2006




"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton, 1998

"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done... It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country." -- Bill Clinton, 2005




"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"He [Bush] betrayed this country! He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place." -- Al Gore, 2004




"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation." -- John Kerry, 2003

"Iraq was not a terrorist haven before the invasion... Iraq was not even close to the center of the War on Terror before the president invaded it." -- John Kerry, 2003”

“I love these comments from roseypalmer et al....God if they could have sat in on ONE "what if" briefing.

Hey Rosey want to know what we were hearing was "in the pipeline" until we sent troops into Iraq?

Put it this way, Emergency Services is now carrying the mark I kits to treat for Chem/Bio attacks....know who the kits are for? The crews on the truck.

The amazing thing is everyday we see what happens to the people WHO don't oppose them and yet you idiots still roll over and say,"OH well not our problem." (LOL)”

“Yeah, o'Reilly.... that Wurlitzer Prize Winner.”

“Hyway - it says he overplayed the fear factor and America fell for it. Strangte how those code orange warnings and the chatter seem to have disappeared huh.

The 2004 election was all about cranking up the fear. And it worked.

The campaign also saw some pretty bad lies told about Kerry - as Rove did with McCain in the pre-2000 primaries.

Also Kerry was a weak candidate. I think Edwards would have made the better choice and would have been more likely to beat Dubya.”

“I know, XL. The fear mongering worked. I am sure you helped clear the shelves at Home Despot of plastic wrap and duct tape like a good little automaton.

Code Orange!!! Code XLax!”

“Also Kerry was a weak candidate. I think Edwards would have made the better choice and would have been more likely to beat Dubya.”
Y2
3:22:40 PM

then why'd they pick him?...it's been almost 4 years now and i still don't understand why they put him up against bush...bush was definitely beatable but not by kerry...i guess hindsight is 20/20 though”

“The primaries are a funny beast. Not sure it always produces the best candidate on either side. But - it would seem one of the more 'democratic' ways to choose. I think their staggered nature ends up with too much poll watching though.
last edited: 1/23/08 12:40:47 PM”

“....then why'd they pick him?...it's been almost 4 years now and i still don't understand why they put him up against bush...bush was definitely beatable but not by kerry...i guess hindsight is 20/20 though”
thriftyhiker
2:28:08 PM


Could it be that it's because Democraps are morons?
last edited: 1/23/08 12:50:36 PM”

“I also think Edwards would be a stronger candidate against any of the Republican candidates than Hillary or Obama - who both come with 'baggage' and too much for the Republican attack dogs to go after.”

“Where's Osama????”

“Me, too Y2. I believe Edwards will do as he says and is compassionate.”

“edwards is too nice for them...for some reason they're in a real vile mood right now”

“Bush is also a very good campaigner.
I watched the Democratic debates the other night and they all got bogged down in nuances and details and actually trying to answer the questions.

Bush stayed on message constantly. Simple message on national security - stay the course, fear and terror - and it worked.”

“I'm voting for Sarge. He'll talk the b@st@rds to death.”

“That was GEOBEET ladies and gentlemen, with his bi-weekly Sarge-bash ...

(applause)

Please join us next time as Geobeet makes another "special" appearance and contributes another hit and run to the forum.

(applause)”

“y2 and rosey, I am not talking about how he won the election. I am talking about he wins in between elections. Democrats won congress last election yet Bush still gets what he wants.
Democrats just make themselves look stupid when they call the man that they can't beat a moron.”

“Outlets Disguise Agenda of Ex-Reporter's Group, Hype Iraq 'Lies'

AP, MSNBC, CNN and the New York Times on Wednesday all promoted a "study" by a couple of affiliated far-left groups, supposedly documenting "935 false statements" about Iraq made by Bush officials, but in hyping the proof of "lies" which led to war, the news outlets disguised the ideology of the groups -- led by a former ABC and CBS reporter/producer -- and how many of the "false" statements were about Iraq possessing WMD, which FNC's Brit Hume pointed out was "a concept nearly universally accepted by most of the world's intelligence services at the time."

Keith Olbermann, who in 2006 slammed the Media Research Center as a "rabid right-wing spin group," Wednesday night on Countdown with "935 lies" on screen on top of a picture of Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney, described the Center for Public Integrity and Fund for Independence in Journalism as merely "two non-profit groups" who have "done the algebra" on "the administration's countless lies about Iraq." Last September, CNN's Jack Cafferty accurately described the MRC as a "conservative media watchdog outfit," but he euphemistically tagged the left-wing groups as "two non-profit journalism groups" with a study which "found President Bush led the pack with 260 lies." Cafferty's labeling echoed AP's reference to "two non-profit journalism organizations."

MSNBC's Dan Abrams lent the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) credibility as "a non-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism group." On WashingtonPost.com, Dan Froomkin hailed the "non-profit group pursuing old-fashioned accountability journalism" and a Wednesday New York Times story cited CPI as "a research group that focuses on ethics in government and public policy."

Froomkin's piece: www.washingtonpost.com

(For much more on the January 23 New York Times article, check this posting, "'Remarkable' New Left-Wing Database Shows Bush Lied Us Into War," by Clay Waters on the MRC's TimesWatch site: www.timeswatch.org )

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Thursday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Olbermann on the MRC, as quoted above: www.mediaresearch.org

Cafferty applying a label to the MRC, as quoted above: www.mediaresearch.org

The CPI report, "False Pretenses: Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq," carried the bylines of Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith. CPI's bio for Lewis noted how he founded CPI "in 1989 and served as its executive director until December, 2004. He is now the president of The Fund for Independence in Journalism." The bio also recalled:
"From 1977 through 1988, Lewis did investigative reporting at ABC News, and at CBS News as a producer for senior correspondent Mike Wallace at 60 Minutes."

He may look familiar, since from the late 1990s through 2004, he was a frequent source in TV network stories about money in politics. The screen shot [to be added above to the posted CyberAlert] is from a soundbite on the May 11, 2004 NBC Nightly News.

The report: www.publicintegrity.org

The Lewis bio: www.publicintegrity.org

Home page for the Fund for Independence in Journalism: www.tfij.org

Home page for the Center for Public Integrity: www.publicintegrity.org

FNC's Brit Hume on Wednesday night noted the common belief of many of the statements considered false and how George Soros funds CPI. From the January 23 "Grapevine" segment on Special Report with Brit Hume:

A study by two self-described non-profit journalism organizations accuses President Bush and his advisers of 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following the 9-11 attacks. But a large number of those statements were drawn from repeated assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction -- a concept nearly universally accepted by most of the world's intelligence services at the time. For example, President Bush said of Hussein quote, "He has weapons of mass destruction. He's used them before. He's used them on his own people before." In fact we know now that Hussein had chemical weapons. He was being tried on charges of killing 5,000 Iraqi Kurds with chemical weapons when he was executed for other crimes.

The study was done by the Fund for Independence in Journalism -- which is an arm of the Center for Public Integrity -- which is heavily funded by Bush critic George Soros.

In his "Best of the Web Today" rundown for the Wall Street Journal's Web site, James Taranto critiqued an AP dispatch headlined, "Study: False statements preceded war." Taranto asserted:

Nowhere in the entire dispatch does the AP tell us anything more about the two groups than that they are "nonprofit journalism organizations." In fact, the Center for Public Integrity is a liberal-left group that has taken money from George Soros, who has compared contemporary America to Nazi Germany. The Fund for Independence in Journalism seems to be but a spinoff; its Web site says its "primary purpose is providing legal defense and endowment support" for the center.

Taranto's January 23 posting: www.opinionjournal.com

The AP story, as posted by Yahoo: news.yahoo.com

With "935 lies" on screen in big letters over a picture of President Bush, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney, with "BUSH LIES BY THE NUMBERS: IRAQ UNTRUTHS TALLIED UP" beneath, Keith Olbermann teased Wednesday's Countdown on MSNBC:
"So much for the theory of the administration's countless lies about Iraq: Two non-profit groups have done the algebra and show their math: 935 between 2001 and 2003, 935 false statements to the American people about the threat from Iraq."

In the subsequent segment, Olbermann interviewed Rachel Maddow of Air America.

In the next hour on MSNBC, 9pm EST, Dan Abrams set up a segment on his show: "We have all heard about the lies, the cherry picking, the hyped intelligence in the run-up to the war with Iraq, but now a new study is holding the Bush administration's feet to the fire. The Center for Public Integrity, a non-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism group has compiled a list of the instances the Bush administration made false statements leading up to the war. The magic number, 935..."

On Wednesday's Situation Room, CNN's Jack Cafferty lamented the fact that American troops were still in Iraq and that thousands of them had died: "President Bush said that at the time he and other officials made these statements, the U.S. intelligence community and other nations thought Iraq had WMD. But they didn't. And yet, we're still there, and almost 4,000 of our troops are dead because of it."

Cafferty began his January 23 segment in the 4pm EST hour:

President Bush and top administration officials publicly made 935 false statements -- that's a polite way to say lies -- about the risk posed by Iraq in the two years following 9/11, according to a study done by two nonprofit journalism groups. The study found President Bush led the pack with 260 lies. But he wasn't alone. Other officials include: Vice President Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (before she got promoted), and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, among others. The study points to at least 532 times where officials said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to get them or had links to al Qaeda. They say the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

His question of the hour: "What do you make of a study that shows President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following 9/11?"

Back later in the hour with the posted and e-mailed replies, Cafferty read one message which pointed out the Soros connection, but all the rest of the replies he highlighted condemned the "lies," urged prosecution for "war crimes" or called for impeachment:

The question this hour is: What do you make of a study? It was done by two nonprofit groups of journalist, a study that shows President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the threat from Iraq in the two years following 9/11.

Larry writes: "I don't think anyone would be surprised that they lied, and this often. But, what's going to happen? Nothing. They will get away with this, like they have gotten everything else for the last seven years. What is wrong with this country when we have allowed this to happen? By tomorrow, you will never hear about this story again."

Dave in Brooklyn writes: "If I had any say in the matter at all, I would make a very strong case for impeachment out of it. But my question is, where were these journalists six years ago?"

Nelson in New Jersey: "Quick, someone make a copy of this database, so we'll have a proper backup in the event it disappears, like the administration's e-mails. This will come in handy when they're prosecuted for war crimes."

Vinny writes: "Hey, Jack, you failed to mention that the study was done by the Center for Public Integrity, which has ties to George Soros and which he funds through his Open Society Institute."

Michael writes from Connecticut: "Now that the truth has come out about what we already knew about Iraq, this Congress has a duty to bring impeachment against Bush and Cheney, as this is very serious and they must be held accountable -- billions and billions of dollars spent on top of thousands of innocent people dead because of this Iraq War based on lies. Congress must act."

Ben writes from Louisville, Kentucky: "What is worse, 935 lies or the watchdog press not doing anything about it for seven years?"

And Judy writes: "When I read your blog, my stomach turned: 4,000 kids who will never see the light of day again and their families, all for a pack of lies. Some legacy, this Bush and company."”

“We found out what happened to Saddam's chemicals.   George snorted all the nerve agent when he was on vacation in Dubai..... but because of the tolerance he'd built up, he barely caught a buzz.”

“It's fun for libs to make up stories.”

“its a wonder Bush can even function as a head of state. he should be a cake walk when trying to overrun his agendas. what thats you say, you can't stop his agendas? Dang, how weak are you?”

“hyway - it's not tough. He's only had a democratic congress for about a year now and he uses the veto - and the Democrats don't have enough of a majority to override the veto. The President would have to lose a significant number of Republican votes on ay issue to lose.”

“it's always something with the libs”

“".........and the Democrats don't have enough of a majority to override the veto."

That's a simple concept but some are too simple even to understand that.........or admit the truth of the matter.

Numbskull or dishonest, take your pick.”

“Yeah that's how it works. America has spoken with their votes - they don't want the libs to have that power.”

“LOL..you know I really wish I could get these libbies on one of my Arson Juries....if they believe all this unconfirmed innuendo I could convict ANYONE of Arson...

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I KNOW there is no ACTUAL PHYSICAL evidence linking the accused to this scene, but I Heard from the INTERNET that he did it."”

“Hell libs can't handle the truth. You have to lie to them so thier heads want explode. That make our president a compassionate person.”

“Funny ... I WAS on an arson jury. There was lots of "evidence", but no actual physical evidence linking the accused to the scene. We found him innocent. It was a pretty famous case in Allentown.

The thing was, we all thought he was guilty, but there was no proof.
last edited: 1/24/08 5:51:54 AM”

“Arson is a circumstantial case most times at best.....I have had cases that the Defense Attorney called to plea out...and we had to work to keep out excitement down.

Most jurors are picked to be pliable. And many prosecutors (not the TT member I am sure) are not all that compentent to pursue Arson. It is really a scientific pursuit.”

“Most jurors are picked to be pliable.

Do you really think they used that criteria when picking me?? lol”

“George's idea of "compassion" was to have social services run by the churches..... with less money.   They cash they 'saved' went for Ken Lay's tax cuts.

Robin Hood in Reverse.”

“Why must libbies lie?”

“Still trying to change the thread title?”

“What I want to know is...... How in the world do those people hope to keep up with them all?”

“wait a minute Marko and Y2, I thought Bush poll numbers were in the toilet and the american people hated him and everything he does. Are you trying to tell me that only republicans back their president if it is sure way to not get re-elected. Please tell me why the democrats can't get the repubs to vote against a veto that supposedly goes against everything teh American people want. Or has this 'moron' president also bamboozled them and the American people for 8 years. If so, he doesn't sound much like a moron.”

“It's not GWB, it's really Dick Cheney. Don't you read?”

“Tiltypoo is so silly.”

“my bad, but then, damn fine delegation skills.”

““Most jurors are picked to be pliable.

Do you really think they used that criteria when picking me?? lol”
Sarge
7:20:01 AM
1/24/08

Yes”

“Okay Sarge, I won't vote for you if you think doing so is bashing you.”

“He's really sensitive Geo, back the #&%!$ off.”

““wait a minute Marko and Y2, I thought Bush poll numbers were in the toilet and the american people hated him and everything he does. Are you trying to tell me that only republicans back their president if it is sure way to not get re-elected. Please tell me why the democrats can't get the repubs to vote against a veto that supposedly goes against everything teh American people want. Or has this 'moron' president also bamboozled them and the American people for 8 years. If so, he doesn't sound much like a moron.”
hyway
7:03:09 AM
1/24/08

Not sure what you're trying to say Hyway - you don't really make any point there.

There's a whole host of reasons out there. Good campaings, weak Dems, incumbant advantage, people not wanting to go against President in 'war' - (see support troops oppose war thread).

The administration as a whole has a whole lot of smart people - but they seem to be following flawed policies.

It was billed as the CEO administration - the trouble is that they seem to be only concerned, like many other CEOs, with enriching the boardroom.”

“Geobeet - Do you have another alias on here, or are all of your posts directed at insulting me?”