Hardball: Tweety calls Rudy a Liar

[MiaCulpa]

Run time: 01:58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C1eczxIdmQ   Posted on YouTube: May 31, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: June 02, 2007 By DU Member: MiaCulpa Views on DU: 2370

 

[mirrera]

1. "Your fact based now...you've been reading Al Gore's book" OMG

That was something...he is pissed off, and that line was not appreciated. LOL

bigger:
www.NoBullshiRt.com

[MidwestTransplant]

3. She won't be on again for a while.

[wryter2000]

12. The ultimate put-down

"You're fact-based."

:banghead:

[JAbuchan08]

2. What is with tweety these days

He was holding Rudy's feet to the fire, but really, hasn't just about every Republican been using virtually the same talking point since 2001? Where was Tweety then? Further Tweety seems to be just as eager to run over Anne Kornblut as he is to "get" Giuliani on his lie. It's like he asked his question of her just to hear himself talk?

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. Her point exactly: where has tweety and the rest of the media been

They have not been called on their lies.

[Rydz777]

6. Earlier this week

Tweety told a guy from New Republic to shut up when he (Tweety) was interrupting. He said that was a rule on the program and the guy needed to remember it if he ever wanted to come back. No one is allowed to talk when Tweety is interrupting.

[Bucky]

7. Silence!

Don't mean to be rude, but Tweety was talking while you were typing. You're not allowed to type or think when he's interrupting someone.
.

[williesgirl]

5. Love how she smacked him down - recommended

[orleans]

8. way to go anne! n/t

[progressoid]

9. It's better than calling Rudy a liar - Anne Kornblut smacks down Mathews!

[DeeDeeNY]

10. Tweety should think about his outrage

He's acting as though Rudy is the only Republican who doesn't know his facts.

[deweyp]

11. Tweety had better check his own thruthiness

Or learn to use Google.

From the "Iraq Liberation act" of 1998:

SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ.

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

It was the clearly stated intention of the US government to support the removal of Saddam Hussein in 1998.

The "Iraq Liberation Act" was cited among other things in the "AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002
":

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed
the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United
States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi
regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to
replace that regime;

So one can very plausibly make the statement that the war that that was authorized by the 2002 act was implementing, among other things, the intention of the 1998 Liberation act.

Sorry Tweety. There are just so many things wrong with this war and Guiliani, but this doesn't appear to be one of them.

[mr1956]

13. The intention was assistance not invasion

I googled the "Iraq Liberation act" of 1998 and my reading of it doesn't give a sense that this act was intended as a pretext to a war. I suggest everyone read it for themselves and come to their own conclusion.

In my reading of it, Rudy was wrong.