Bush and Wagging the Dog

I thought the thread was going to about using the war to distract from the economy, not bin Laden. I wager this will be the key point to the Democratic challenger’s platform. It could be argued that a president can’t do much to change the economy, but one the things I see in many news articles is that lots of people expect an Iraqi war to have at least a minimal negative impact. (Do a news.google.com search to see what I mean).

I wouldn’t be surprised to see dems making political hay with the notion that not only is Bush distracting people from the bad economy with the war, he’s even making it at least a little bit worse.

It will be interesting to see if W falls into the same trap as his dad did.

Minty supported his or her claim with reputable source. If you claim it’s fake, then please support your claim. I don’t recall anyone in the administration ever denying it wasn’t genuine, but I admit I didn’t really follow the story closely.

Scylla, excellent debate strategy.

Question: Is the upcoming war on Iraq a mistake given the continuing threat from Osama bin Laden?

Answer: Bill Clinton was a scuzbag!! He’s a liar!

Truly insightful.

Your power to deny the undeniable continues to amaze me, Scylla.

Here’s a story from CNN in which the White House admits it’s true. And if you have Power Point, that page links you to CNN’s reproduction of the exact same material I linked you to earlier.

Give?

FWIW, it looks like he’s still alive.

If you ask me, we have way more enemies (and ideologically, if not materially more dangeorus) in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia than in Iraq.

Well shit! Double shit! You mean that thing is really real? Some idiot actually made that and left it in the park?

Well, the thing looks so half-assed and the story about finding it in the park is so stupid (yeah, like Rove was practicing in the park,) that it seemed almost surely fake.

Damn! Why do the Republicans have to be so honest and admit every mistake?

It would have been so easy to lie and deny.
Well, I’m wrong. Too bad for me.

Thank you. Starting yesterday I adopted the tactics of my opposition.

Who knew Scylla was opposed to Rush Limbaugh, huh?

Well, yes and no. The administration seems to have admitted that they made the PowerPoint presentation. OTOH they didn’t acknowledge that anyone left in in the park.

My guess is that someone sympathetic to the Dems got a copy somehow and gave it to them. Maybe the means of acquisition was embarassing. The explanation that it was found on a park bench sounds more like a cover story to me.

Damn. Now I know you don’t know what you are talking about. For the record. The word ‘is’ is the present tense of the verb ‘to be’. Remember, present tense, try to hold that in your mind, because its going to be important in just a few seconds… [sub]present tense… present tense[/sub].

Still got it? Ok…

When Bill was asked “is there a relationship”, the only truthful answer would be “NO” if the relationship was over.

Is that what happened? Yep…
Check the transcript if you don’t belive me.

Discussions on the meaning of the word ‘is’ would be unnecessary, if you, like most other Republicans didn’t need remdial 3rd grade english lessons. You ought to find it deeply embarrassing that Bill Clinton had to point out such a basic mistake to the prosecutors, but aparently not.

Lies? Lies you say?

Little fibs, big fat whoppers. Puppy dog lies, with big moist brown eyes, gazing up at you imploringly from your cold, rain soaked porch. Scaly, squamous, gila monster lies that clamp down on your ankle and chews it’s venom into your bloodsteam.

Polite, discreet lies that sip tea with pinkies akimbo, murmuring softly. Gross, greasy, Jabba the Hut lies slobbering and belching thunderously. Lies organized in platoons to bridades, to divisions and legions, marching crisply in perfect cadence, hup tup trip forp, hup tup trip forp. Lies spread chaoticly across the landscape, like great migratory herds of cats.

But I must say something positive. The Democrats told less than half as many lies. But then again, they had half as much money.

That depends on how you look at it:

Was there a romantic relationship at the time of the question? No?

Was there a relationship? YES.

As Tejota has quite accurately pointed out, that was not the question Clinton was asked. Present tense and all that.

**

And then once in a while elucidator writes something brilliant.

Well, Minty, apparently he lied quite enough to be disbarred for it by SCOTUS.

Wrong.

Twice in one day?

Inconceivable!

It says right here on page 63 of Slander by Ann Coulter that Clinton was held in contempt by a Federal Judge and disbarred by the Supreme Court.

So there.
(I’m going to be using Coulter as a cite whenever possible until you say your sorry)

Scylla, when I was a newbie to SDMB a couple of months ago, you (rightly) excoriated me for continually taking off-topic pot shots at GWB in an unrelated thread. Now you’re doing the same thing.

The OP is asking if there is a political motivation to invading Iraq. Minty submitted the PowerPoint story as evidence of the administration basically ADMITTING that there is (at least some) political motivation.

To keep saying “oh, yeah, well Bill Clinton got a blow job and lied about it” may be true, but it’s not really pertinent.

No. Being an ex-sexual partner is still a personal relationship, just not a romantic relationship.

Clinton questioned the meaning of ‘is’ when he should have questioned the meaning of ‘relationship’.