Bush didn't lie. He was listening to Dems.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Bergler, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"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."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains 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 capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

I beleive the Dems got that impression from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

THEY were listening to the president of the United States of America. In turn Bush was getting "intelligence" from the world. Why? You'd think we had our own intelligence to tell us the truth..hmm?

Since when do we listen to other countries intelligence? Since we in the future will be pinning the blame on them. Very convenient.

Bill Clinton got info from Bush in 1998?

This could have been taken care of in 1998 when Saddam kicked out the inspectors. Clinton as usual did nothing. If Clinton would have done his job, I doubt the the 9/11 attacks would have happened.

[edit on 6-11-2005 by Carseller4]

Originally posted by dgtempe
I beleive the Dems got that impression from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

Well Dg Bush followers has to find somebody to blame and they refuse to blame their god send.

So hey the invasion of Iraq is Clinton's fault .

Everything that is going wrong in the US now is Clinton's fault

The Bush administration is Innocent of any wrong doing. because is all Clinton's fault

Marg,

I just cant beleive it, but there are still some that will go to their death defending Bush and damning Clinton.

The bad intelligence came from Clinton
The war wouldnt have happened if Clinton hadnt been president at one point.
Thousands of dead soldiers wouldnt be dead if it werent for Clinton
The White House scandals (current), wouldnt be there if not for Clinton
Clinton trashed the White house upon the end of his presidency
Hillary sucks

Why dont we blame our founding fathers? Might as well go all the way up the food chain here...

Carseller, you are a die hard Republican , unlike other Republicans who can see that Bush and his administration ARE the problem. There is a problem with corruption, lies, and its so much worse than Clinton and his sexual habits...
Funny it was ok to bash Clinton 24/7 but its not ok and its unAmerican to bash Bush.

Its not like there wasnt any terrorism around when Clinton was president. Why must we whisper that we're not satisfied with Bush?

For your information, 9/11 was a documented well known fact that the Bush administration KNEW, even to the day and the time when it would happen and decided to create the alibi of going to the school for black children to "read" to the kids.

Oh, please...

You started the thread, i hope you can deal with the come backs, its nothing personal towards you, but you need to open your mind and do a little research.

Here's something from a credible source:




Updated: 10:04 a.m. ET Nov. 4, 2005
For the first time in his presidency a majority of Americans question the integrity of President Bush, and growing doubts about his leadership have left him with record negative ratings on the economy, Iraq and even the war on terrorism, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

I don't think anybody is trying to blame Clinton...or at least I'm not. The point here is that the very people who are screaming the loudest that Bush is a liar all had the exact same evidence and believed it. Look at the names on these quotes...Levin, Daschle, Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy, Clinton. These are all people who are very vocal against Bush...yet they had the same opinion on the matter and vocalized it. Hindsight is always 20/20, calling somebody out later for having the same opinions you had...that's called a hypocrit.

And why would Mr Bush have to listen to the dems, hahaha...


whew boy that was a good one.



It's great to see bush still has cheerleaders!

I am blaming Clinton! For doing nothing.

Clinton policy of tracking down terrorist and prosectuting them to the fullest extent of the law was ludacris, and directley led to 9/11.

The Clinton administration had the same intelligence on Iraq and Osama (bin Laden, not Barrack) yet did nothing.

Some of you democrats need to look a little closer at the quotes at the beginning of this thread. It was a serious problem. Clinton did nothing and that led to 9/11. Bush is only doing in Iraq what Clinton wished he could have done but had no "will power" to do.

I just knew when the bottom started to fall out, when they were holding on by the last thread, when the excrement hit the fan, that people would find a way to blame this whole freaking disastrous mess - on the Democrats! I JUST KNEW IT!!!

That's hilarious! Go team go! Yeeeeaaaah... Team!

You seem to forget a littler detail Carseller, Clinton was smart enough not to invade Iraq.

Bush and his cohorts and war pushers with Cheney at the top were more than willing to get into Iraq even before 9/11.

Smell the reality Car is not healthy to be stock in the Bush administrations lies.

It was a done deal by the time Bush got hold of being the president.

He got his wish of being a war president and Cheney fulfilled his promise to haliburton.

Originally posted by marg6043
You seem to forget a littler detail Carseller, Clinton was smart enough not to invade Iraq.

Smart enough or not Brave enough?

Let's not remove Sadamm. So terrorist worldwide can see that the United States won't remove a dictator that laughed at UN resolutions, and supports and harbors terrorists. That way after we pull off 9/11, we can start planning our next attack with impunity, because the US will do nothing about it.

Don't forget about Clinton administration holdover George "Slam-Dunk" Tenet...Bush was listening to a Dem there.

That's the fun of partisan politics--if you screw up, blame it on the other party, never mind that that's where you got your information from!

Me, I recognize that it's basically one party anyway, so I blame them ALL!

Car Seller has a good point. They all agreed with Bushes decision to use force in Iraq, and when it turns out they were "wrong", what do they do? They try to place all of the blame on President Bush. Personally, I believe Saddam was trying to pull something over on us. Most politicians thought that as well. Some of them even BEFORE Bush jr. took office, as Car Seller pointed out.

And BH, I don't believe anything is "Crumbling". This is just a new tactic of the anti-Bush people. If they act like this is happening, it's eventually going to happen, because people enjoy jumping on bandwagons.

And personally, I'm not BLAMING anyone (Although I do agree part of the "blame" of some of these things might belong to Clinton), I'm saying that these people basically supported Bushes actions before he went in, and then they turned tail and ran.

My point is, they're all a bunch of NWO shills no matter what party, so it's really useless to try to blame just one "major" party. They're all at fault. And I'm getting tired of their "it's the other party's fault" song and dance.

Originally posted by Amethyst
My point is, they're all a bunch of NWO shills no matter what party, so it's really useless to try to blame just one "major" party. They're all at fault. And I'm getting tired of their "it's the other party's fault" song and dance.

what she said, but people want to defend them to the bitter end, and for what?

Originally posted by Amethyst
My point is, they're all a bunch of NWO shills no matter what party, so it's really useless to try to blame just one "major" party. They're all at fault. And I'm getting tired of their "it's the other party's fault" song and dance.

I second this statement as well. Why back either party? They're useless and they don't need any help blaming or with whining.

Well actually it isn't Bush's fault, he is awlays on vacation when something bad happens.

9/11-Vacation, when he was given documents on August 6th telling him that OBL was going to attack with planes he was on vacation, when the attack happened he was on vacation.

Katrina- Again he was on Vacation, along with the FEMA screw up.

Badly Forged Documents from Rummy- Bush again is on vacation.

Libby/Rove/Cheney expose a CIA agent- Again on Vacation.

See, it isn't Bush's fault, he is on vacation!

If a cop is on vacation and the place he usually patrols has a riot, is it his fault?

If a firefighter is on vacation at his ranch when a building catches on fire and burns down in his district, is it his fault?

No, so why is it Bush's fault that whenever anything bad happens? He is ALWAYS on vacation.

So, your arguement is he wasn't telling a lie because he was listening to the democrats?

It that right Carseller4?

Doesn't it worry you that Bush listens to the Democrat party when he is a Republican President?

Also just because someone you know tells a lie, if you repeat it you are still telling a lie.

The blame game doesn't work for my 4 year old brother, I do not see how it works for the President of the United States.

He said it.
If he didn't know it was true - he shouldn't have.
If he knew it was false he should be thrown out of office for lying to the people.