0
   

In liberals' eyes, Bush's black hat permanent

 
 
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 12:08 pm
In liberals' eyes, Bush's black hat permanent

On cue, liberals and Democrats across the country spontaneously arose yet again to declare the war in Iraq a miserable failure with grimmer prospects down the road. They got the memo.

The "Downing Street Memo" flap first surfaced in the Sunday Times of London on May 1, five days before parliamentary elections. It was based on a meeting among British government officials on July 23, 2002.

Though the American left saw the memo as the smoking gun ?- evidence that President Bush knew a year before the invasion that Saddam Hussein posed no threat, but was determined to oust him anyway ?- there was nothing particularly newsworthy in it. It got little coverage in the mainstream press.

According to the memo, "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD (weapons of mass destruction). But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC (the U.S. National Security Council) had no patience with the U.N. route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record."

Earl Tilford, former resident of Decatur, who is a professor of history at Grove City College in Pennsylvania, author of three books on the Vietnam War, and former director of research at the U.S. Army's Strategic Studies Institute in Carlisle, Pa., has examined the memo.

"The phrase 'but the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy' does not mean that intelligence was being manufactured," writes Tilford. "In simple terms, the Bush administration was making its case for the forcible removal of Saddam." He continues: "It's very difficult to fix intelligence. If they were told to make it up, a lot of people would just resign. If you tell lies, you are going to get caught."

As has been well established, Bush and his predecessor, Bill Clinton, members of Congress and the intelligence community shared the same view of Saddam and weapons of mass destruction: He either had them or was working aggressively to acquire them.

Likewise, Tilford says, the phrase in the memo that military action would be justified "by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD" is not news. "The phrase was drawn almost verbatim from the National Security Strategy of the United States, which states the U.S. will take action against 'state sponsors of terrorism which attempt to gain or use weapons of mass destruction or their precursors.' "

What you're reading, seeing and hearing now about the memo is the work of half-a-dozen obsessed liberals marketing their take on the memo to the news media. In the two weeks after the memo was first published, it was mentioned fewer than 100 times, according to a search of newspapers, magazines and television news-program transcripts by the Wall Street Journal. After the targeting effort, the phrase has appeared 800 times.

The idea of targeting the media came from a professor of ancient history in Pennsylvania, Michael Clark, the Journal reports. His plan was to contact three media outlets a day, starting with the majors. After some success, the campaign spread to smaller chains and newspapers.

It worked. British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Wednesday he was "a bit astonished" at the second-life play in the United States. "What people forget about the memo," he told the Associated Press, "is that [it] occurred nine months before the conflict" and that after it was done, the allies went to the United Nations in an effort to avoid war.

By Tuesday, President Bush was at Fort Bragg, reminding the nation that Iraq "is a central front in the war on terrorism." and success is "vital to the future security of our country." The nation should prepare for periodic assaults on the home front. The left cannot let it go.

Since well before the start of his administration, Bush has fallen into that class of villains in liberals' eyes, which commonly includes police, conservatives and corporations. A rule applies: If there are two or more ways to interpret an act, word or deed, choose the most venal. Ergo, Bush lied. Bush deceived. Bush connived, conspired and corrupted. Bush evil.

Those are recurring themes in the liberal rant. Brace yourself. Every few months, for as long as we are in Iraq, you'll hear them. Again and again and again.

source
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 819 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 12:16 pm
Quote:
Since well before the start of his administration, Bush has fallen into that class of villains in liberals' eyes, which commonly includes police, conservatives and corporations.


And for conservatives, Hillary Clinton, scientists, liberals, and professors. Please. There's no moral high ground here. Bush's black hat is permanent because he refuses to take it off. And it's more than "liberals" who can see that.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 01:31 pm
Disagree....The liberal elite and the media are still "pissed" about AlGore and 2000 and will never warm up to GW no matter what he does.

Have they ever mentioned the security lapses during the Clinton era and criticized Gore while he campaigned?
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 01:31 pm
McG...this sentence is so ludicrous I can't take the rest of the opinion at face value.

"Since well before the start of his administration, Bush has fallen into that class of villains in liberals' eyes, which commonly includes police, conservatives and corporations."

That may be how the media caricatures liberals...
but it doesn't have any resemblance to the liberal platform.

As a good little liberal I'll change George's hat color to white when:

1)He abandons Bolton and appoints someone who will work towards UN reform without undermining the whole organization

2) Fires Rumsfeld and owns up to the fact that the Donald put our soldiers in jeopardy by downplaying the Pentagon's needs.


3)Stops wrapping himself in the American flag and saying liberals are traitors because they ask questions about policy.

4) Quits using 9/11 as a motive for our Iraqui adventure.

And finally...admits that the Iraqui war has been a fiasco so far. But asks all Americans to help him bring it to a positive conclusion...in other words: stop bull shytting the American people.

Is that too much to ask?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 01:33 pm
I've missed you, panzade.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 01:39 pm
awwww

I only come out for McG; he's a favorite from way back
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 01:49 pm
1. Bolton hasn't made his intentions known. So far, all we know about Bolton is that the liberals in Congress find him unappealing. I believe undermining the UN would be far from the Bush agenda as, so far, the UN has presented little blockage moving forward. If nothing else, perhaps Bolton can bring the US back to the UN and once again make it a worthwhile organization for American interests.

2. Rumsfeld has made a few mistakes. I do not believe any of them to have been worthy of his dismissal. Neither has Bush apparently.

3. That's not Bush, it's the conservative media and pundits doing the name calling and the liberal traitors performing the stunts deserving the title.

4. Bush has never used 9/11 as a motive for the war in Iraq. It has been used as a motive for the global war of terrorism. Iraq is just one of the stages the war is taking place on. It also happens to be the largest stage.

5. Fiasco? Maybe. Maybe not. I can imagine it being a whole lot worse than it really is. But, at any rate, are you actually asking an Anerican politician to stop BSing the American populace? LOL! Laughing

Like that will happen...
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 02:58 pm
George Bush is a goddam moron...and the incredibly stupid mistakes this administration has spewed out onto the world will haunt our planet for decades to come.

McG...how you can defend this pathetic excuse for a president is beyond me. You are allowing your hatred for liberals to short-circuit your logic.

This man is a loser...and his administration is a disaster not only for our country....but for the world.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 03:03 pm
I've missed you too, Frank. It's just like old times....
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 03:08 pm
Hey Duck. Hope all is well.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 03:11 pm
Sending Bolton to the UN is akin to having come down with the flu and your mum sends for the doctor (Kevorkian). The conservative agenda re the UN as far back as I can remember is to get the US out, period. Since that is the case why all ther pretense about bringing the UN in line with US interests? Rumsfeld has been the worst war secretary since McNamara. The image makers hired by Bush have repeately demonstrated adolesecesent "gang colours" out of the american flag. Bush can't make a speach about Iraq without mentioning 9/11, coincidence? McG reasoning on Iraq-well yes the number of insurgent incidents as well as the number of casualites has consistently increased which is proof we are winning. Bush wears a black hat? Yeah he does and I think he his not likely to change. Frankly I don't give a damn, he's just paving the way for the people who vote to get sick and tired of the "conservative" agenda and elect people slightly to the moderate-left in both the white house and congress. Eventually the US may even elect a liberal.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 03:17 pm
Yeah, the tide is turning. When Bush makes the same speech about Iraq that he always does, and public opinion doesn't budge, you know the game is up.

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the insurgents are kidnapping diplomats from Arab countries. Maybe it's time for one of those thread about all the good news in Iraq that we're not hearing about...
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jul, 2005 04:00 am
"Rumsfeld has made a few mistakes"

And lied about them, don't forget he lied and lied and lied and lied about them.



Did you actually know that the death toll for US servicemen (and women) is more like 9,000 - but the DOD are deliberately reducing the reported number by not including:

Quote:
U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals have not previously been counted. They total about 6,210 as of 1 January, 2005.
source
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jul, 2005 07:17 am
McGentrix wrote:
1. Bolton hasn't made his intentions known. So far, all we know about Bolton is that the liberals in Congress find him unappealing. I believe undermining the UN would be far from the Bush agenda as, so far, the UN has presented little blockage moving forward. If nothing else, perhaps Bolton can bring the US back to the UN and once again make it a worthwhile organization for American interests.


The UN isn't supposed to be a worthwhile orgainsation for American interests. It is supposed to be a worthwhile organisation for world interests to prevent things like World War II from happening again.

Quote:
4. Bush has never used 9/11 as a motive for the war in Iraq. It has been used as a motive for the global war of terrorism. Iraq is just one of the stages the war is taking place on. It also happens to be the largest stage.


Maybe not, but he and his administration keeps making claims that there are links between Al Qaeda and Iraq:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3816963.stm

When the 9/11 commission states:
"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."

Quote:
5. Fiasco? Maybe. Maybe not. I can imagine it being a whole lot worse than it really is. But, at any rate, are you actually asking an Anerican politician to stop BSing the American populace? LOL! Laughing

Like that will happen...


A poiltician not BSing the populace. Hm, no that doesn't seem very likely, does it?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jul, 2005 03:35 am
dyslexia wrote:
Sending Bolton to the UN is akin to having come down with the flu and your mum sends for the doctor (Kevorkian).


Loved it!


:wink: :wink: :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » In liberals' eyes, Bush's black hat permanent
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/12/2026 at 09:33:37