Shrub - the liar - has been caught --- now blames Iraq on previous admin

[cthrumatrix]

Furor Follows O'Neill's Kiss-And-Tell Book

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

snip


Asked specifically whether O'Neill was correct in saying that planning for the war had begun far ahead of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Bush said that when he had become president he had inherited a policy of "regime change" from former President Clinton (news - web sites) and had decided to adopt it as his own.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=5&u=/ap/20040113/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bush_o_neill


Even if that were true (which he is just lying again). What about the terrorist's threat that Clinton gave to his admin as well?

What happened to those warnings he blew?

[leftchick]

1. The Big Dog needs to....

Have a press conferance and call dumbass* out on this LIE!!!

[ima_sinnic]

2. I so agree! perfect opportunity for Clinton to add a double whammy

to the rain of body blows falling on The Glorious Chimp

[magnolia]

20. Me too...

...how great it would be if Clinton spoke up now! I mean...if Bush followed Clinton's policy regarding regime change in Iraq...then what about Clinton's policy of getting Osama Bin Laden...or his environmental policies, financial, economic, health care, etc....

And...although regime change was Clinton's policy HE didn't attack Iraq. Because part of the policy was to completely exhaust doing it through diplomacy, with a real coalition and full UN support!

[LunaC]

4. Now THAT would be sweet!

on soooooooo many levels! This has given me the first feeling of "hope" for the future I've had in a loong time considering how much/often W deflects the shit.

If the possibility of the Big Dawg taking center stage to set the facts straight lies in the wings, it certainly would be advantageous to let enough time pass so the Admin can get the Keystone Cops/Liar Club up to full throttle before being deflated. What irony.....what Justice! What a damn good set-up to nail their asses!

Oh, be still my heart, you've just made my day with that thought........

[htuttle]

16. I bet Clinton doesn't say anything

Why not? Hell if I know -- I'm just judging by what I've seen since he's been out of office so far. Bill Clinton has let the Bush administration get away with blaming all sorts of things on his administration without debunking them. The warnings given about Al Queda are a good case in point.

Perhaps it's not his style, or he's worried about interfering with Hillary's carreer, or..? Who knows, but I stopped expecting much assistance from Clinton (politically speaking) some time ago. I hope I'm wrong at least once about this before 2004, but I don't expect much out of him at this point.

[rasputin1952]

17. It has been a long standing tradition...

that the previous administration(s), not criticize the current admin.

I believe that Clinton will adhere to this tradition; but, if he is personally attacked, all bets are off. Previous admin's have criticized their successors, but it only after attempts to discredit them personally, and this hasn't happened since the early 1800's.

The Office of the President, until recently, (i.e., the cheap shot impeachment), was considered too important for serious attack. Most attacks are verbal and although the intensity of those attacks may seem radical, they are generally banal.

Clinton, regardless of what people think of him, (and I think he handled himself very well), has too much class to stoop so low. I would not be surprised if he is laughing himself silly about what bush is going through.

O8)

[htuttle]

19. True, but screw traditions

We used to have some other quaint traditions in this country, like the Bill of Rights. If he's worried about his legacy, he better think about what 4 more years of Bush would do to it.

It's later than you think.

[lcordero]

3. If the "regime change" part was true then they would have

let Hussein go on exile, which he was quite willing to do.

[cthrumatrix]

5. So...the question...will Clinton abandon the Dem party in time of need?

THIS question gets at the larger question for Americans.

Are we fooled by a two party system...is there ONE corporate agenda and we are played for fools with the ILLUSION OF CHOICE.

On important matters such as this...this is the time of "truth".

[SoCalDem]

6. If it's Bad for Bush, it was Clinton's fault

If it's Good, Clinton had NOTHING to do with it..

Selective amnesia.. Nothing new here.. Remember how they tried to claim that the economic boom during the 90's was Reagan's Blessing??

But if no one calls them on it, people will believe it :(

[cthrumatrix]

23. where is Clinton on this mess...he could step in and add clarity

to shrubs "lies"

[patricia92243]

7. Every thing that is bad is Clinton's fault> If Bush has an ingrown tow-

nail, somehow it would be Clinton's fault.

[Zech Marquis]

8. the evil smirk on his face said it all

first he faked that" Paul O Neill has served his country well" line--and the pure EVIL expression on his face spoke volumes :wow:, and then * went on about Big Dog wanting to do th same thing. Well he didn't send 100,000s of GIs to be sitting ducks in a big ass shooting gallery, did he? Nope!


If he can't handle THIS, I imagine he WILL snap during he debates, stay tuned!

[tinanator]

10. what debates?

does anyone really expect those (that) to take place?
No stinkin way. Only need debates if there is going to be a real election.

[Q]

9. If so...it's the only Clinton policy the Bushies adopted...

- Too bad they didn't take the warnings about terrorism seriously and make them policy.

[OneTwentyoNine]

11. LOL,guess Bush didn't want to adopt Clinton's economic policy did he? eom.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

12. Clenis! Clenis! Clenis!!!!!

oh the penis did it...i love the smell of repuke desparation in the morning

wasn't it PNAC that sent that letter to President Clinton making a case for Iraq???

[ima_sinnic]

13. and Clinton had the ethics and good sense . . .

to tell PNAC to go pound sand with their warmongering bloodthirst.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. yuppers!.....breathe deep the sweet aroma of bushco desparation!

edit: t

[Matilda]

15. Whatever happened to "The Buck Stops Here"?

This is truly pathetic.

[rman]

21. well i don't think the buck stops there;

Where do bucks come from?
Right, and they want it back to - with interest.

The buck starts and stops at international financial institutions.

"... more dangerous then standing armies..." - Jefferson

[Dissenting_Prole]

18. Write two letters

When Nikita Krushchev left office he gave his successor two letters, with instructions to open the first when he got into his first tight spot and the second when he got into another. The first said, "Blame everything on me"; the second, "Write two letters."

- James Brolin as the outgoing drug czar in Soderbergh's "Traffic"

[kentuck]

22. Just because there was a policy for "regime change" in Iraq.....

does not mean that Clinton or any other president would interpret that as a pre-emptive, illegal invasion. A "regime change" would be brought about by different means, from inside and outside, covertly. I do not discount that Clinton had those plans. That is very possible. Bush's "regime change" included lying to the people and the world and invading a country that was not an immediate threat to us or his neighbors.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[newyawker99]

34. Hi dustypen!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Cannikin]

25. It was presented to Clinton by PNAC! He turned it down!

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/pnac_timeline.htm

[tom_paine]

26. Totalitarian Scum ALWAYS respond to being caught in a lie

by telling six new lies.

Hitler, Stalin, Marcos, Amin, Baby Doc, and Bush...all cut from the same cloth.

[LeahMira]

27. It should be easy enough...

Bush said that when he had become president he had inherited a policy of "regime change" from former President Clinton ... and had decided to adopt it as his own.


... to find public statements that President Clinton made about his plans for dealing with Saddam Hussein and Iraq during his administration. I am confident that President Clinton would never have started a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, and that he was working "behind the scenes" with other Middle East nations to keep Saddam under control. Clearly, though, the present administration has no respect for diplomacy and patience. Buncha cowboys!

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[underpants]

29. They were wrong or misinformed apparently

I don't see calls for occupation. Kerry sticks an "if necessary" in there too which would go in line with the fact that W&Co. promised to exhaust dilomatic means before not just military action but occupation, which of course they didn't. And now ~500 Americans are dead and thousands wounded (many amputees).

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[underpants]

31. No it isn't, not the same, no we didn't, no need to, not a threat

Try again

[KayLaw]

32. I disagree

Here is a link for an article in which Bill Nelson says that he and other senators received inaccuate information. Read it yourself. Like many people, they didn't know they were being duped.

http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/localstoryN1216NELSON.htm

Yes, Saddam would still be in power, and all the people who were killed or maimed would still be alive and whole. Saddam couldn't live forever you know, and if it was so important to certain people that he be captured, if it was worth all the lives and money it cost, Bush should have been honest and foreward and said so in the first place.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Triana]

35. little man bush needs to just grow up