The Democrats have finally found something that G.W. does really well....he fools them. In fact, by putting together an administration that's absolutely brilliant in comparison to what the Democrats can put together to counter, he's managed to completely fool the Democrats on just about everything they've ever believed. It's not their fault really, all they did was completely trust him. They had absolutely no reason to believe he was up to no good, that's clear from the way they treated him in the run-up to the 2000 elections. (Sarcasm added for flavor). And what did they get for their trusting ways? A war in Iraq, a ballooning Federal deficit, and faulty intelligence that the Democrats had no way of knowing was wrong. Pa-leeeaase.
First, let me go back to what the Democrats were saying about attacking Iraq way back before the reign of G.W..
"There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us." Bill Clinton-February, 1998 speech - Sounds to me like Bill believed his intelligence, was that the same intelligence that Bush inherited?
"If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons. He poison-gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors."-Al Gore Dec. 1998 on Larry King Live- Gee, Bush was convincing these people that Saddam was a problem even before he was in office.
O.K., so maybe the Democrats had a little help from their own, but Bush still used his conniving brilliance to falsify the urgency of the threat, right? Yeah, I suppose you could use that argument, but didn't the Democrats have enough evidence to doubt Bush's honesty? Here's some of the things they were saying Bush lied about way back before he was even President.
G.W. was AWOL from the Nation Guard for 18 months.
G.W. hid a D.U.I. he got back in 1976
And then they claimed he lied all through the election debacle
Now, what I'm not understanding is this; If Bush was such an outright liar all through the run up to the elections, (According to the Democrats themselves) lied about most of his life, and then cheated and lied to steal the election, why would any self-respecting Democrat believe him when he inflated the facts on why we should go to war with Iraq? The way I see it, if John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and the rest of the Democrats supported the war before they were against it because they believed anything that came out of Bush's mouth, does that make them naive at best or stupid at worst? How can we trust them to deal with the real bad guys who are going to lie their asses off when they trusted a guy they themselves claimed was nothing but a liar?? Maybe the Democrats should take some of Bush's advice, "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." or something like that. H.C.
First, let me go back to what the Democrats were saying about attacking Iraq way back before the reign of G.W..
"There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us." Bill Clinton-February, 1998 speech - Sounds to me like Bill believed his intelligence, was that the same intelligence that Bush inherited?
"If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons. He poison-gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors."-Al Gore Dec. 1998 on Larry King Live- Gee, Bush was convincing these people that Saddam was a problem even before he was in office.
O.K., so maybe the Democrats had a little help from their own, but Bush still used his conniving brilliance to falsify the urgency of the threat, right? Yeah, I suppose you could use that argument, but didn't the Democrats have enough evidence to doubt Bush's honesty? Here's some of the things they were saying Bush lied about way back before he was even President.
G.W. was AWOL from the Nation Guard for 18 months.
G.W. hid a D.U.I. he got back in 1976
And then they claimed he lied all through the election debacle
Now, what I'm not understanding is this; If Bush was such an outright liar all through the run up to the elections, (According to the Democrats themselves) lied about most of his life, and then cheated and lied to steal the election, why would any self-respecting Democrat believe him when he inflated the facts on why we should go to war with Iraq? The way I see it, if John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and the rest of the Democrats supported the war before they were against it because they believed anything that came out of Bush's mouth, does that make them naive at best or stupid at worst? How can we trust them to deal with the real bad guys who are going to lie their asses off when they trusted a guy they themselves claimed was nothing but a liar?? Maybe the Democrats should take some of Bush's advice, "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." or something like that. H.C.
2 comments:
Very good.
Hey Alpha,
Thanks, I appreciate your comments.
Post a Comment