Some of GWB's ardent supporters are discussing how he could finish out his presidency "golden" (on a high note), in the face of all the problems and possible scandals he has faced this term.

One of their suggestions was to do a major shake-up of the administration. Not to get rid of the bad apples and less competent people, but to deflect attention away from other problems.

Their idea is to try and get the media attention focused on things like appointments and confirmation hearings that would tie up business until the end of GWB's time in office.

For example, they suggest that GWB should groom a successor by replacing Dick "The Rifleman" Cheney with Condoleeza Rice as Vice-President.

Move the former VP to Defense (even though he announced his planned retirement next year, he could still be useful until then).

Rumsfield would move to a new position, along with others such as Karl Rove. (I didn't write down all their suggestions).

What gets me, is how open and blatant they are about it. Instead of trying to make things right, they are openly suggesting using tactics to deflect attention away from all the things that are wrong, in order to protect GWB's "legacy".

This approaches a fanaticism that one usually only sees in small, corrupt, 3rd world dictatorships.

Maybe Orwell had it right, except for the date. Stay tuned for the Revisionist History Channel, coming soon to a democracy near you !

Bush himself is where he is due to a spiderweb of connections, relations, favours granted, and favours owed going back to the 70s. I don't see him firing any of his top people. I've always thought of Cheney as the real power anyway. Sort of like a mentor/safety net.

Something big will be needed to avoid a backlash that puts Hillary in office.

cv

What may be even sadder is the fact that the American public puts up with it. Doesn't appear likely that will change much in the future, either.

This approaches a fanaticism that one usually only sees in small, corrupt, 3rd world dictatorships.

Maybe Orwell had it right, except for the date. Stay tuned for the Revisionist History Channel, coming soon to a democracy near you !

Amazing isn't it ? how individuals would surrender their better judgement for a little bit of confort and security. Amazing how Nazi Germany was able to "master" mass manipulation with a few unsophisticated techniques. And they still work. The Bush administration will become a text book case of a deceptive and manipulative administration. It makes the Nixon administration and WaterGate looks like a silly rehersal. We are witnessing a turning point in history, an era historians will remember as the US turning into a former glorious European empire. This is indeed the beginning of the Europeanization of the US.

What may be even sadder is the fact that the American public puts up with it. Doesn't appear likely that will change much in the future, either.

It's just part of growing up as a nation. The US has reached its teenage years and the Bush administration is just the first eruption of acnae. More will come before the US becomes a full grown-up.

The American public wants to become more like the Euros, and to do so, they will need to follow the same painful path: wars, colonization, de-colonization, dictatorships, and limits to their freedom.

I agree with the first of your two posts, Butterfly. I don't quite understand where you're coming from when you suggest America is "growing up as a nation." I would think a 230 year-old nation has already grown up. Deteriorating seems more likely.

In my opinion the problem the U.S. is presently facing is the bastardization of "The American Dream." Money mistakenly means everything these days, most of all it has become the sole definition of happiness, and greed seems rampant. The dream has gone from cutting out your own slice of the pie to grabbing as much of it as you possibly can. Everything and anything is for sale, including jobs, as long as it makes money in the short term. Housing prices have become totally out of line with their true value.

Another burgeoning attitude, which so far has mass acceptance and giddy support among the public, is the exchange of freedoms for safety. It's a complete and utter fallacy that safety can be purchased with anything, money or freedom. But it's costs will become unbearable sooner or later. It simply does not work and cannot work.

Fear is a major commodity in the U.S., as it is in European nations, too. The news media sells it on every page. Advertising uses it extensively. America, Land of the Brave. Bullshit. I've never seen so many people pissing in their pants, scared to death of anything and everything, feeling completely at odds with the sense of self-trust they're born with. But fear churns out huge profits for those who market it.

My rant is over.

The American public wants to become more like the Euros

Best line I've seen all week!

'Bout blew my coffee all over the monitor!

Perhaps a few Americans want to be like Europe. Those people would be the bleeding heart liberals. No one in their right mind would want to pay HUGE taxes and see even more people on the socialist welfare schemes. I know one European here who gets a disability pension from his country. His hobbies are riding bicycle, playing tennis and keeping fit.

Some of GWB's ardent supporters are discussing how he could finish out his presidency "golden" (on a high note), in the face of all the problems and possible scandals he has faced this term.

One of their suggestions was to do a major shake-up of the administration. Not to get rid of the bad apples and less competent people, but to deflect attention away from other problems.

Their idea is to try and get the media attention focused on things like appointments and confirmation hearings that would tie up business until the end of GWB's time in office.

For example, they suggest that GWB should groom a successor by replacing Dick "The Rifleman" Cheney with Condoleeza Rice as Vice-President.

Move the former VP to Defense (even though he announced his planned retirement next year, he could still be useful until then).

Rumsfield would move to a new position, along with others such as Karl Rove. (I didn't write down all their suggestions).

What gets me, is how open and blatant they are about it. Instead of trying to make things right, they are openly suggesting using tactics to deflect attention away from all the things that are wrong, in order to protect GWB's "legacy".

This approaches a fanaticism that one usually only sees in small, corrupt, 3rd world dictatorships.

Maybe Orwell had it right, except for the date. Stay tuned for the Revisionist History Channel, coming soon to a democracy near you !

sorry guys who is GWB? someone important?

sorry guys who is GWB? someone important?

I think he is a good friend of Tony Blair.

Here is a quote from the Secretary of Defense that moonbats love to hate:

“Consider that in three years Iraq has gone from enduring a brutal dictatorship to electing a provisional government to ratifying a new constitution written by Iraqis to electing a permanent government last December. In each of these elections, the number of voters participating has increased significantly -- from 8.5 million in the January 2005 election to nearly 12 million in the December election -- in defiance of terrorists' threats and attacks.”

Butterfly's next reading assignment: Three Years of Dragging Democrats Through Their Iraqi Quagmire

The American public wants to become more like the Euros

Best line I've seen all week!

'Bout blew my coffee all over the monitor!

After a comment like that, I am not surprised.

The American public wants to become more like the Euros

Best line I've seen all week!

'Bout blew my coffee all over the monitor!

Well, rednecks and trailer trash can keep living their dreams in their trailer park for all we care. They are a minority. It's a question of time before the US becomes like Europe, with a socialized healthcare and a socialist government. It's coming wethere you want it or not. It's evolution, you can't stop it, unless you want your fellow citizens and country to still live in the bayou for centuries to come

sorry guys who is GWB? someone important?

No just a clown who happened to have hijacked the WH with the help of smarter clowns

[upload failed]

###### can't upload show

Here is a quote from the Secretary of Defense that moonbats love to hate:

“Consider that in three years Iraq has gone from enduring a brutal dictatorship to electing a provisional government to ratifying a new constitution written by Iraqis to electing a permanent government last December. In each of these elections, the number of voters participating has increased significantly -- from 8.5 million in the January 2005 election to nearly 12 million in the December election -- in defiance of terrorists' threats and attacks.”

Butterfly's next reading assignment: Three Years of Dragging Democrats Through Their Iraqi Quagmire

And I'm sure that when the last casket gets shipped out Iraq is going to be buddy-buddy with the U.S., right? How long do you think before they revert back to what they were before once the U.S. is gone? An island of democracy in a sea of religious fanaticism? Does Iran ring a bell?

The end result will be wasted lives; no different than 'Nam. Hope you plan on contributing to the next wailing wall.

I think a lot of US citizens would appreciate Health care accessible to all (even Thailand got this one going now) and other social and community programs as practised in grown-up European nations.

I suggest Hilary will get some French and German advisers in, when she will be in charge of rescueing the country from the damage done by that brainless dwarf and his greedy entourage.

I think a lot of US citizens would appreciate Health care accessible to all (even Thailand got this one going now) and other social and community programs as practised in grown-up European nations.

I suggest Hilary will get some French and German advisers in, when she will be in charge of rescueing the country from the damage done by that brainless dwarf and his greedy entourage.

Man...the Trolls are out today!

Here is a quote from the Secretary of Defense that moonbats love to hate:

“Consider that in three years Iraq has gone from enduring a brutal dictatorship to electing a provisional government to ratifying a new constitution written by Iraqis to electing a permanent government last December. In each of these elections, the number of voters participating has increased significantly -- from 8.5 million in the January 2005 election to nearly 12 million in the December election -- in defiance of terrorists' threats and attacks.”

Butterfly's next reading assignment: Three Years of Dragging Democrats Through Their Iraqi Quagmire

And I'm sure that when the last casket gets shipped out Iraq is going to be buddy-buddy with the U.S., right? How long do you think before they revert back to what they were before once the U.S. is gone? An island of democracy in a sea of religious fanaticism? Does Iran ring a bell?

The end result will be wasted lives; no different than 'Nam. Hope you plan on contributing to the next wailing wall.

Read the below for a clue, bud!

IRAQ & WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION:

WHAT THE DEMOCRATS SAID AND WHEN THEY SAID IT

(This document was distributed today at the Senate Republican Policy Lunch.)

Video

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY: "What Was Said Before Does Matter. The President's Words Matter. The Vice President's Words Matter. So Do Those Of The Secretary Of State And The Secretary Of Defense And Other High Officials In The Administration." (Sen. Edward Kennedy, Congressional Record, 11/10/05)

Executive Summary:

Democrats Consistently Warned The Nation Of The Threat Posed By Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction

Democrats, Circa 1998

-- President Bill Clinton: "[M]ark my words, [saddam] will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them."

-- Vice President Al Gore: "Saddam's ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat ... to the security of the world."

-- Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright: "[W]e are concerned ... about [saddam's] ability in the long run ... to threaten all of us with weapons of mass destruction."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger: "[saddam] will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, and someday, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again."

-- U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson: "Facts are facts. Iraq has been deceiving the international community with the weaponization of nerve gas. It's that simple."

-- Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.): "[saddam] is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche with weapons of mass destruction."

-- Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.): "[saddam's] chemical and biological weapons capabilities are frightening."

Democrats, Circa 2002

-- Former Vice President Al Gore: "We know that [saddam] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country."

-- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.): "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.): "Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow."

-- Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.): "These weapons represent an unacceptable threat."

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.): "Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON

President Bill Clinton Called Iraq "A Rogue State With Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Ready To Use Them Or Provide Them To Terrorists..." CLINTON: "In the next century, 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, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program." (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)

Clinton, On Saddam's WMD: "Some Day, Some Way, I Guarantee You He'll Use The Arsenal. And I Think Every One Of You Who Has Really Worked On This For Any Length Of Time, Believes That, Too." CLINTON: "[L]et's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too."

(Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)

Clinton, On Saddam: "[M]ark My Words, He Will Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction. He Will Deploy Them, And He Will Use Them."

(Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)

In November 1997, Clinton Directed Then-Secretary Of Defense William Cohen To "Raise The Profile Of The Biological And Chemical Threat." "Cohen, meanwhile, was arguing that a true U.S. vital interest -- and one that could easily be explained in public -- was Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, often referred to in abbreviated terms as WMD. Clinton directed him on Nov. 13 to raise the profile of the biological and chemical threat. The following day, the former senator from Maine held a five-pound bag of sugar on ABC's This Week Sunday program and said the same quantity of anthrax could kill half the population of Washington." (Barton Gellman, Dana Priest and Bradley Graham, "Diplomacy And Doubts On The Road To War," The Washington Post, 3/1/98)

Cohen, Following Clinton's Orders On ABC's This Week: "What Is On The Horizon Is Anthrax, VX, Sarin, And Other Types Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction." COHEN: "All of his neighbors in the region, I think, are fearful of what Saddam Hussein has done in the past and apprehensive of what he might do in the future. We intend to intensify that apprehension on their part by showing it's not invasion of Kuwait, it's not invasion of Saudi Arabia that's on the horizon. What is on the horizon is anthrax, VX, sarin, and other types of weapons of mass destruction." (ABC's This Week, 11/16/97)

Clinton: "I Have No Doubt Today, That Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Use These Terrible Weapons Again." CLINTON: "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again." (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)

Clinton Insisted Saddam Sat Atop The List Of "Predators Of The 21st Century." CLINTON: "[T]his is not a time free from peril, especially as a result of reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals. We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century, ... [T]hey will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. 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, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)

FORMER VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE

Vice President Al Gore Claimed "Saddam's Ability To Produce And Deliver Weapons Of Mass Destruction Poses A Grave Threat ... To The Security Of The World." GORE: "There should be no doubt, Saddam's ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat to the peace of that region and the security of the world. His defiance of the will of the international community to allow UNSCOM to do its job cannot and will not be tolerated." (Al Gore, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)

Gore: "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…?" GORE: "f 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. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people." (CNN's Larry King Live, 12/16/98)

When Discussing Saddam's Iraq, Gore Invoked The Specter Of "Ballistic Missiles, Nuclear Weapons, Chemical And Biological Weapons." "Remember, Peter, this is a man who has used poison gas on his own people and on his neighbors repeatedly. He's trying to get ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons. He could be a mass murderer of the first order of magnitude. We are not going to allow that to happen." (ABC News' "Special Report," 12/16/98)

Gore, In 2002: "We Know That [saddam] Has Stored Away Secret Supplies Of Biological Weapons And Chemical Weapons Throughout His Country." (Al Gore, Remarks To The Commonwealth Club Of California, San Francisco, CA, 9/23/02)

FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT

Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright Said Saddam "Had The Capability With The VX Agents To Destroy Every Man, Woman And Child On Earth." ALBRIGHT: "Weapons of mass destruction are the threat of the future. I think the president explained very clearly to the American people that this is the threat of the 21st century. It's hard to control, hard to get at, that we need to – you know, Saddam Hussein had the capability with the VX agents to destroy every man, woman and child on earth. So we have a serious problem here. He is a threat." (PBS' The Newshour With Jim Lehrer, 12/17/98)

Albright: "[W]e Are Concerned, As The President Said, About [saddam's] Ability In The Long Run To Threaten His Neighbors, And Frankly, To Threaten All Of Us With Weapons Of Mass Destruction." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/16/98)

Albright Accused Saddam Of Pursuing Dual Threats To International Peace: Terrorism And Weapons Of Mass Destruction. ALBRIGHT: "Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein's Iraq encompasses both of these challenges, while posing yet a third. .. As we look ahead, we will decide how and when to respond to Iraq's actions based on the threat they pose to Iraq's neighbors, to regional security and to U.S. vital interests. Our assessment will include Saddam's capacity to reconstitute, use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction." (Madeleine Albright, Remarks At The American Legion Convention, New Orleans, LA, 9/9/98)

Albright: "[saddam] Has Chosen To Spend His Money On Building Weapons Of Mass Destruction And Palaces For His Cronies." (Madeleine Albright, Remarks To The Chicago Council On Foreign Relations, Chicago, IL, 11/12/99)

Albright Justified A December 1998 Attack On Iraq As A Way To Increase America's Security And "Deal With The Threat" Of Saddam's Weapons. ALBRIGHT: "President Clinton felt very strongly that it was in our national security interest to deal with the threat that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, their capability, their future capability of threatening us, the neighbors, the regional stability with them, and that we had a responsibility as the United States to deal with a threat of this kind." (CNN's "Early Edition," 12/18/98)

Albright Argued Saddam's Pursuit Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Insistence On Lifting Economic Sanctions Was An "Incompatible Position." ALBRIGHT: "The purpose of it ... is to degrade Saddam Hussein's ability to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. And the targets are related to that. They're going after weapons of mass destruction facilities, after military facilities, command and control security. ... [T]his is because Saddam Hussein has insisted that he wants to keep his weapons of mass destruction and have sanctions lifted, a clearly incompatible position." (NBC's Today, 12/18/98)

Albright Said The Risk That Rogue State Leaders Like Saddam "Will Use Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat We Face." ALBRIGHT: "Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk 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. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people." (CNN's "Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting," 2/18/98)

FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER SANDY BERGER

National Security Adviser Sandy Berger Said Saddam "Will Rebuild His Arsenal Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, And Someday, Some Way, I Am Certain, He Will Use That Arsenal Again." BERGER: "Some have suggested that we should basically turn away. We should close our eyes to this effort to create a safe haven for weapons of mass destruction. But imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, and someday, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again as he has 10 times since 1983." (CNN's "Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting," 2/18/98)

Berger: "In The 21st Century, The Community Of Nations May See More And More Of This Very Kind Of Threat That Iraq Poses Now, A Rogue State With Biological And Chemical Weapons." (CNN's "Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting," 2/18/98)

Berger Claimed It Was "Up To Saddam To Decide Whether He Wants Sanctions Relief By Giving Up His Weapons Of Mass Destruction." BERGER: "n December, Saddam Hussein once again broke his commitment to cooperate with the U.N. inspectors, ignoring our warnings. The United States, together with our British allies, responded with military force. We attacked Iraq's program to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction and his capacity to threaten his neighbors, but we have not eliminated the danger and our resolve to curb the threat Saddam poses will not diminish. … It is up to Saddam to decide whether he wants sanctions relief by giving up his weapons of mass destruction." (Sandy Berger, Remarks To Carnegie Endowment Non-Proliferation Conference, Washington, DC, 1/12/99)

Berger: "I Think The Question Is Whether, Ultimately, Iraq Will Get Rid Of Its Weapons Of Mass Destruction." (CBS' This Morning, 11/16/98)

OTHER HIGH OFFICIALS IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

Former Secretary Of State Warren Christopher Said Saddam Developed And Used WMD And Sponsored "Countless Acts Of Terrorism." "The record is, unfortunately, all too clear. Saddam has threatened and invaded his neighbors, developed and used weapons of mass destruction, sponsored countless acts of terrorism, and for the last two decades, he has relentlessly persecuted the Kurds and the Shiites. When Saddam tests the will and resolve of the international community, our response must be and will be forceful and immediate." (Warren Christopher, Remarks In Washington, DC, 9/3/96)

U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson Linked Saddam To Anthrax, VX And Botulism, Warning Those Weapons Might "Get In The Hands Of Terrorists That Saddam Is Supporting." RICHARDSON: "We're [sic] what the American people want: contain Saddam Hussein from going after his neighbors, but also, go after these deadly weapons of anthrax, VX, botulisms, some that are very, very big threats to future generations of children, not just in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, but around the world, if they get in the hands of terrorists that Saddam is supporting." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 2/18/98)

Richardson: "Facts Are Facts. Iraq Has Been Deceiving The International Community With The Weaponization Of Nerve Gas. It's That Simple." (Michel Leclercq, "UN Inspector Says Iraq Equipped Weapons With Lethal Gas," Agence France Presse, 6/24/98)

State Department Spokesman Jamie Rubin: Saddam Had "Relentlessly Deceived And Obstructed Efforts ... To Identify And Destroy Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction." RUBIN: "[W]e have a lot of experience dealing with Saddam Hussein. For over seven years, their leadership has relentlessly deceived and obstructed efforts by the international community to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein has misled fellow Arab leaders about his intention to invade Kuwait. He lied to UNSCOM when he said that he did not weaponize VX ... Iraq's leadership has never expressed regret or remorse for his past actions, which include gassing his own people and invading Kuwait. We do not believe he has renounced his aggression or using the most ruthless and barbaric means to achieve it." (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)

Rubin: "If We Fail To Act, He Will Feel Emboldened To Threaten The Region Further, Armed With Weapons Of Mass Destruction." RUBIN: "Saddam Hussein is not an abstract threat. He has fired Scuds at his neighbors, attacked Kuwait, used chemical weapons on Iran and his own people. UNSCOM has shown, through its work, that he developed massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons and weaponized those weapons for delivery by Scud missiles. He has still not accounted for all these dangerous weapons. ... f he continues to block UNSCOM and we do not respond, he will be able to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction in a matter of months, not years. And if we fail to act, he will feel emboldened to threaten the region further, armed with weapons of mass destruction." (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)

Former Clinton Adviser Rahm Emanuel Called It "Insulting" That Anyone Would Question Clinton's '98 Airstrikes "Given Everything Saddam Has Done." EMANUEL: "And I think that if you really look at this, Larry, that it is wrong, and I think it's insulting to the American people's intelligence, insulting to the men and women and professional professors [sic?] in our country, and I think it's detrimental to our foreign policy to really kind of question why we would go, given everything that Saddam Hussein has done over the years. We gave him one last chance." (CNN's Larry King Live, 12/16/98)

DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, LEADING DEMOCRAT SENATORS CAUTIONED AMERICANS ABOUT THE THREAT POSED BY IRAQ'S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

In 1998, Sen. Carl Levin And Twenty-Six Other Senators Urged President Clinton "To Take Necessary Actions" In Response To Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction Programs. LEVIN: "Mr. President, today, along with Senators McCain, Lieberman, Hutchison and twenty-three other Senators, I am sending a letter to the President to express our concern over Iraq's actions and urging the President '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.'" (Sen. Carl Levin, Congressional Record, 10/9/98)

Fourteen Democrats, Including Then-Senate Democrat Leader Tom Daschle And 2004 Presidential Nominee John Kerry, Signed The Letter To President Clinton: ("Letter To President Clinton," as Entered Into The Congressional Record By Sen. Carl Levin, 10/9/98)

Carl Levin (D-Mich.) Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.)

Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) Chris Dodd (D-Conn.)

Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.)

John Breaux (D-La.) Tim Johnson (D-S.D.)

Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) Mary Landrieu (D-La.)

Wendell Ford (D-Ky.) John Kerry (D-Mass.)

Former Senate Democrat Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) Warned Of The Danger Of Saddam's Weapons Of Mass Destruction. DASCHLE: "Iraq's actions pose a serious and continued threat to international peace and security. It is a threat we must address.... Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people. It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction." (Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)

After The 1998 Bombing Of Iraq, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Warned Against "Partisan Finger-Pointing" And Said Saddam Was "Too Dangerous ... To Be Given Carte Blanche With Weapons Of Mass Destruction." "We had to attack. [President Clinton] had to do what his military advisors told him he should do,' said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. ... [A]dded Reid, 'Now is not the time for second-guessing or partisan finger-pointing. National security concerns must come first.' Saddam Hussein �is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche with weapons of mass destruction,' he added." (Brendan Riley, "Nevada Leaders React To Iraq Bombing," The Associated Press, 12/26/98)

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) Argued That Saddam "Obviously" Was Working, "Secretly And Otherwise," On Weapons Of Mass Destruction. KERRY: "Mr. President, over the years, a consensus has developed within the international community that the production and use of weapons of mass destruction has to be halted. We and others worked hard to develop arms control regimes toward that end, but obviously Saddam Hussein's goal is to do otherwise. Iraq and North Korea and others have made it clear that they are still trying, secretly and otherwise, to develop those weapons." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/10/98)

Kerry Said Saddam Used Weapons Of Mass Destruction In The Past And Wanted "To Try ... To Continue To Do So." "Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. ... It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis." (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)

Following A Briefing By Clinton Administration Officials, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) Said Saddam's "Chemical And Biological Weapons Capabilities" Were "Frightening." "At a Capitol Hill briefing Tuesday night, administration officials showed that �Saddam Hussein continues to be clear threat to the security of the region and to many of our allies,' Durbin said. �His chemical and biological weapons capabilities are frightening. We have to take his refusal to allow inspections very seriously.'" (Dori Meinert, "Durbin To Support Limited Approval For Military Force Against Iraq," Copley News Service, 2/4/98)

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) Believed The Peace Of "Much Of The World" Was At Risk If Iraq Was Allowed To Protect Its "Biological, Chemical And Nuclear Weapons." "'Time and time again Iraq has flouted the efforts of our nation and the international community to bring peace to the Persian Gulf,' said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. �With the peace of the region and, and in fact, much of the world at risk, we cannot allow Iraq to continue its maneuvers designed to protect such a dangerous buildup of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.'" (John Raby, "Congressmen Support U.S. Bombing Of Iraq," The Associated Press, 12/16/98)

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.): "Saddam Hussein's Weapons Of Mass Destruction Programs And The Means To Deliver Them Are A Menace To International Peace And Security." LEVIN: "Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction programs and the means to deliver them are a menace to international peace and security. They pose a threat to Iraq's neighbors, to U.S. forces in the Gulf region, to the world's energy supplies, and to the integrity and credibility of the United Nations Security Council." (Sen. Carl Levin, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)

Levin Spoke Of Gallons Of Anthrax And Tons Of VX, Noting Iraq Had Denied Possessing Such Weapons. LEVIN: "t was only after there was a defector, Saddam Hussein's own son- in-law defected and said, look here, here, here, and here that then Iraq said oh, yes, we have 2100 gallons of anthrax. By the way, one spore, less than a drop of anthrax kills within days. 2100 gallons and then the U.N. went in and destroyed that. Same thing with the chemical VX; 3.9 million tons of this chemical. One drop kills instantaneously -- was denied by Iraq. The U.N. ... believes that he has 20 tons plus more of VX and six thousand gallons more of anthrax." (CNN's Larry King Live, 2/16/98)

Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) Issued Grave Warnings About Iraq's WMD, Citing Chemical And Biological Weapons As Well As Anthrax-Tipped Missiles. "First and foremost, an Iraq left free to develop weapons of mass destruction would pose a grave threat to our national security. The current regime in Iraq has ... displayed a callous willingness to use chemical weapons to achieve its aims. Recently, we have heard chilling reports of possible biological weapons experiments on humans. An UNSCOM Inspector has spoken of information that points to a secret biological weapons production facility. And Ambassador Richard Butler has told us that Iraq could well have missile warheads filled with anthrax capable of striking Tel Aviv. An asymmetric capability of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons gives an otherwise weak country the power to intimidate and blackmail." (Sen. Joseph Biden, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)

Due To Saddam's Efforts To Assemble Biological, Nuclear And Chemical Weapons, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) Argued In 1999 That Clinton "Ended The Bombings Too Soon." "Senator Schumer is taking issue with several recent decisions of the Clinton administration on Middle Eastern affairs, despite his close association with the president and first lady. ... Schumer said America should renew its bombing campaign against Iraq ... A renewed bombing campaign against Iraq would show Saddam Hussein the price he must pay for his lack of cooperation and would inhibit Iraq's ability to assemble biological, nuclear and chemical weapons, Mr. Schumer said. 'The president ended the bombings too soon.'" (Uriel Heilman, "Schumer Says Clinton Should Resume Bombing Targets In Iraq," Forward, 1/29/99)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) Warned That Military Action Against Saddam's Regime "Must Deal A Major Setback" To Iraq's "Weapons Of Mass Destruction Program." "Feinstein also said that for the attack against Iraq to be successful, the air strikes must �destroy the weapons of mass-destruction facilities and supplies that the thwarted inspections were designed to find...' �At the very least,' she added, �Operation Desert Fox must deal a major setback to the weapons of mass destruction program that has been in development by Saddam Hussein.'" (Stephen Green, "Feinstein Initially Questioned Attack's Timing," Copley News Service, 12/17/98)

DRAWING UPON INTELLIGENCE PROVIDED BY TWO ADMINISTRATIONS, DEMOCRAT SENATORS CONTINUED TO OPENLY DISCUSS THE DANGER POSED BY IRAQ'S WEAPONS

Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Acknowledged Iraq Breached The 1991 Armistice Agreement By Refusing To Destroy Its Stockpiles Of Weapons. REID: "We stopped the fighting [in 1991] based on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict." (Sen. Harry Reid, Congressional Record, 10/9/02)

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.): "We Have Known For Many Years That Saddam Hussein Is Seeking And Developing Weapons Of Mass Destruction." (Sen. Edward Kennedy, Remarks At Johns Hopkins School Of Advanced International Studies, 10/27/02)

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.): "Saddam's Existing Biological And Chemical Weapons Capabilities Pose Real Threats To America Today, Tomorrow." ROCKEFELLER: "We must eliminate that [potential nuclear] threat now before it is too late. But that isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow. … [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. He could make these weapons available to many terrorist groups, third parties, which have contact with his government. Those groups, in turn, could bring those weapons into the United States and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly." (Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Congressional Record, 10/10/02)

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) Believed Saddam's "Arsenal Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction" Represented "An Unacceptable Threat." KERRY: "The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and, obviously, as we have said, grow it. These weapons represent an unacceptable threat." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02)

Kerry: "According To The CIA's Report, All U.S. Intelligence Experts Agree That Iraq Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons. There Is Little Question That Saddam Hussein Wants To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02)

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) Warned That -- If Left Unchecked -- Saddam Would Continue To Increase His Unconventional Weaponry And Even Develop Nuclear Weapons. CLINTON: "In the four years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02)

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) Said Saddam Was A "Terrible Danger" To America Because Of His "Vigorous Pursuit" Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction. SCHUMER: "[it] is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States." (Sen. Charles Schumer, Congressional Record, 10/10/02)

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) Claimed To "Understand The Grave Danger Posed To America ... By Weapons Of Mass Destruction In The Hands Of A Reckless Dictator Like Saddam Hussein." "Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator, who has brought nothing but pain and suffering to the Iraqi people and threat and instability to his neighbors throughout the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. ... I understand the grave danger posed to America and the whole international community by weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a reckless dictator like Saddam Hussein." (Sen. Tom Harkin, Congressional Record, 10/10/02)

Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) Announced In 2002 That Within Five Years Saddam Would Possess "Tactical Or Theater Nuclear Weapons." BIDEN: "My view is if five years from now Saddam Hussein is in power, left unfettered with $5 billion to $7 billion a year to pursue his weapons, he will be a grave danger to us, in the sense that he will intimidate the area and we will be unwilling to go after him because he'll have tactical or theater nuclear weapons." (CNN's Larry King Live, 10/9/02)

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) Simply Stated: "There Is No Question That Iraq Possesses Biological And Chemical Weapons." DODD: "There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. I also agree with President Bush that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must be disarmed, to quote President Bush directly." (Sen. Chris Dodd, Congressional Record, 10/8/02)

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) Felt Saddam's Chemical And Biological Weapons Posed "A Considerable Threat To Us." NELSON: "Well, I believe he has chemical and biological weapons. I think he's trying to develop nuclear weapons. And the fact that he might use those is a considerable threat to us." (CNBC's "Tim Russert," 9/14/02)

Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) Listed The Weapons At Saddam's Disposal: "Ballistic Missiles, Anthrax, Sarin Gas, VX And Smallpox." BAYH: "Today, Hussein already has ballistic missiles, anthrax, sarin gas, VX and smallpox, and he could someday soon have nuclear weapons at his disposal. As much as I wish we could ignore this threat, it is my heartfelt conviction that we cannot." (Sen. Evan Bayh, Op-Ed, "Bayh Justifies The Need For Using Force Against Iraq," The Indianapolis Star, 10/10/02)"

Yipper! It's all Dubya's fault - Yes Sir!

Yipper! It's all Dubya's fault - Yes Sir!

Well, I must say. If Saddam was really that bad, why didn't George Bush Sr take him out when he had the chance in '91 ?

Or did Saddam only become "bad" while there was a Democrat in the White House ?

Yipper! It's all Dubya's fault - Yes Sir!

Well, I must say. If Saddam was really that bad, why didn't George Bush Sr take him out when he had the chance in '91 ?

Or did Saddam only become "bad" while there was a Democrat in the White House ?

And don't forget that Saddam got his WMD thanks to Clinton

And don't forget that Saddam got his WMD thanks to Clinton

Well, that's not quite true now is it ?

After all, he had WMDs back in the 80's, and used them during the 8 year Iran-Iraq war, long before Clinton became president.

That was kind of a longish post by anyone's standards, Boon Mee!

The highly intelligent introduction and commentary provided by you for this collection of quotes is impressive:

"Read the below for a clue, bud!"

"Yipper! It's all Dubya's fault - Yes Sir!"

P.S. - of course everybody was concerned about Saddam developing and willing to use WMD. Remember the reason the U.N. inspectors were there?

A war, billions of collateral damage and thousands of deaths later, the US couldn't find them any better than the UN.

And don't forget that Saddam got his WMD thanks to Clinton

Well, that's not quite true now is it ?

After all, he had WMDs back in the 80's, and used them during the 8 year Iran-Iraq war, long before Clinton became president.

Maybe he bought them from Arkansas.

cv

Actually Clinton is the one responsible for the missing WMD in Iraq. He personally removed them from Saddam palace and went to hide them in Syria and Iran.

Ok I just made that up, but it could be true, right ?

That's just the sort of thing these moonbat lefties get up to all the time!

Actually its the UN's fault if they'd put some force w/their resolutions, stopped being bribed by Saddam I doubt this would have ever happened in the first place.

Actually Clinton is the one responsible for the missing WMD in Iraq. He personally removed them from Saddam palace and went to hide them in Syria and Iran.

Ok I just made that up, but it could be true, right ?

Not true ! Ronald Reagan was responsible ! He waited until Clinton was the president, then he snuck over there and removed the WMDs.

Why ? To cover up the fact that his administration helped Saddam get those WMDs in the first place !

That is why old Ronald's health took a dive after he left office (and how he suddenly couldn't remember anything). The Parkinson's disease story was just a cover-up.

Actually Clinton is the one responsible for the missing WMD in Iraq. He personally removed them from Saddam palace and went to hide them in Syria and Iran.

Ok I just made that up, but it could be true, right ?

Not true ! Ronald Reagan was responsible ! He waited until Clinton was the president, then he snuck over there and removed the WMDs.

Why ? To cover up the fact that his administration helped Saddam get those WMDs in the first place !

That is why old Ronald's health took a dive after he left office (and how he suddenly couldn't remember anything). The Parkinson's disease story was just a cover-up.

Actually think it was FDR fault, if we hadnt won WWII, yanks would have never been in Iraq.

Perhaps the title of this thread is more apropos that you imagined, Boonie. They've got you hoodwinked most of all.