# This just in: most Bush supporters too stupid to breathe, much less vote **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 22, 2004, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590 "2004-10-22T13:22:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/61 "2004-10-22T17:35:22Z")
> [@Mtgman](#): > > This is true IFF “having something under wraps” necessitates “regime change”. I believed, and said so at the time, that “something under wraps” was properly handled with “inspections/sanctions”. Saddam’s “ouster” was unnecessary and the “fault” for it lies on those who took drastic action in response to meager indicators. > > Enjoy, > Steven If you had bothered to read further, you would have noted that I condemned Bush’s dishonesty in starting the war under false pretenses. ’ Your post, however, is utter lefty wank. Sanctions only served to enrich Saddam and impoverish his people. All you would accomplish is to starve innocent people. I think Bush jumped to war way too soon and based it on deceitful premises, but that’s not to say that getting rid of Saddam was wrong. If the war had been conducted wisely, with proper attention paid to the realities of the region and an exit strategy in mind, I’d think differently about Dubya. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/62 "2004-10-22T17:46:34Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > I think Bush jumped to war way too soon and based it on deceitful premises, but that’s not to say that getting rid of Saddam was wrong. So you think that murdering someone is not wrong and the mass murderers are not wrong, that invading and occupying sovereign nations is not wrong. Nice to know, but what puzzles me is why you nevertheless think you have reason to find Hussein “wrong”. > [@](#): > > If the war had been conducted wisely, with proper attention paid to the realities of the region and an exit strategy in mind, I’d think differently about Dubya. So you do not think that murdering thousands of innocent people is wrong if done “wisely” = when the murderers can run away safely after the killing is done. Nice to see it so clearly spelled out. I wonder if you would reason the same if the same happened to your nation, its leadership, its citizens while your family got killed and was denigrating considered to be neglectable “colateral damage”. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/63 "2004-10-22T17:47:19Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > If we continue to attack each other instead of tackling the crises at home and abroad, if we cannot find a way to live with each other amicably, if we allow our fear to destroy our democratic system, then I suggest we just hand the keys to the country over to Bin Laden right now, because he will have won. Look around, he’s _already_ won. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/64 "2004-10-22T17:48:32Z")
> [@blowero](#): > > To be accurate, it threw _the U.S. and the U.K._ a curve. Everyone else had seemed prepared to handle it properly. Point conceded, with caveats. There is little doubt that the general perception, among the world community, was that Saddam Hussein was, to some degree, in non-compliance with the arms restrictions imposed by the 1991 cease-fire agreement. Exactly how far his non-compliance extended, and how much of a threat this made him, was a point of contention. And, yes, the U.S. and the U.K. got it wronger, both materially, and in terms of the appropriate response, than just about anybody else. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/65 "2004-10-22T17:59:02Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Point conceded, with caveats. There is little doubt that the general perception, among the world community, was that Saddam Hussein was, to some degree, in non-compliance with the arms restrictions imposed by the 1991 cease-fire agreement. Exactly how far his non-compliance extended, and how much of a threat this made him, was a point of contention. And, yes, the U.S. and the U.K. got it wronger, both materially, and in terms of the appropriate response, than just about anybody else. Let’s just say the U.S. and the U.K. _swung_ at the curve, which was obviously high & outside. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/66 "2004-10-22T18:00:07Z")
[QUOTE=Aldebaran] So you think that murdering someone is not wrong and the mass murderers are not wrong, that invading and occupying sovereign nations is not wrong. Nice to know, but what puzzles me is why you nevertheless think you have reason to find Hussein “wrong”. And why do you find him right? \*\*Aldeberan, I don’t pay much attention to you because, frankly, you’re an idiot. But I’m dying to know how you equate military action with the insanity of Iraq’s erstwhile dictator. > [@](#): > > So you do not think that murdering thousands of innocent people is wrong if done “wisely” = when the murderers can run away safely after the killing is done. The US has not “murdered thousands”–war is horrible, but sometimes it’s necessary. And war isn;t murder–you asct ias if the intent of the Uinvasion wwas to kill as many people as we could. But your blindness to context and nuance is why you are a fool. > [@](#): > > I wonder if you would reason the same if the same happened to your nation, its leadership, its citizens while your family got killed and was denigrating considered to be neglectable “colateral damage”. And again you dishonestly use loaded rhetoric. Did I justify “collateral damage”? No. The killing of innocents? No. You are a liar as well as a contemptible fool. If Bush were a dictator who built palaces whilke his people starved, if his daughters ran all of the profitable businesses in the US and committed rape and murder with impunity, if speaking one’s mind were punishable by death, I’d pray for Canada to invade us and overthrow Dubya. What I wouldn’t want would be a clueless, incompetent army who treate every American as an enemy, who arrested innocent Americans and torutured them in a notorious prison, who overthrew all our institutions but refised to act as police and instill law and order, who installed a puppet government of collaborators and weasels. America’s occupation of Iraq has been a horrible failure, but getting rid of Saddam, by itself, was good. Was it worth the tremendous damage done to Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/67 "2004-10-22T18:09:46Z")
An issue that is the heart of the invasion’s self-defense motif that to this day receives play is the assessment of the **_likelihood_ of Hussein initiating an attack** (directly or by proxy) with these banned weapons. That Hussein had some banned weapons did not in itself justify the “quickly before it’s too late” aspect assigned to the invasion. The best estimates were that the threat of ‘[national obliteration](http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20000101faessay5-p50/condoleezza-rice/campaign-2000-promoting-the-national-interest.html)’ among other things was sufficient to keep the probability of Hussein launching such an attack low for the foreseeable future. This is all covered in this from DCI Tenet: \*\*[DCI Tenet Declassifies Further Information on the Iraq Threat\*\*](http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2002/10/dci100702.html) - October 7, 2002\* Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States. \*\* Senator Levin\*\*: . . . If (Saddam) didn’t feel threatened, did not feel threatened, is it likely that he would initiate an attack using a weapon of mass destruction? **Senior Intelligence Witness** : . . . My judgment would be that the probability of him initiating an attack–let me put a time frame on it–in the foreseeable future, given the conditions we understand now, the likelihood I think would be low. **Senator Levin** : Now if he did initiate an attack you’ve . . . indicated he would probably attempt clandestine attacks against us . . . “One thing is clear: the United States must approach regimes like North Korea resolutely and decisively. The Clinton administration has failed here, sometimes threatening to use force and then backing down, as it often has with **Iraq**. These regimes are living on borrowed time, so **there need be no sense of panic about them**. Rather, the first line of defense should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence --\*\* if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration.\*\*” –[Dr. Condoleeza Rice](http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20000101faessay5-p50/condoleezza-rice/campaign-2000-promoting-the-national-interest.html) ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/68 "2004-10-22T18:17:31Z")
The point was been nailed earlier. _Becoming_ the president and _being_ the president are two totally different things. ---
**Author:** ![Astroboy14](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/df705f/32.png) [@Astroboy14](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astroboy14)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/69 "2004-10-22T18:19:41Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > Was it worth the tremendous damage done to Iraq? That’s a question that I’m afraid won’t be answerable any time soon… ask again in maybe 50 years. I hope and pray that the answer is “yes” but it depends entirely on how the US leaves Iraq. If we just cut and run, the answer will probably be “no”. If we are successful in establishing a real, and lasting, democracy in Iraq, then IMO the answer will be “yes”. As an aside: > [@gobear](#): > > Everybody, including Clinton, Bush, and every poster here if they’re honest, thought that Saddam had something under wraps. We didn’t know quite what, but we had suspicions that Saddam did nothing to discourage; to a great degree, Saddam’s ouster was his own fault for playing games with the UN for so long. > > But the crucial difference between Bush and everyone else, including Clinton, is that Bush sent Colin Powell to the UN with what were supposed to be photos of mobile chemical weapons labs and exact numbers of Saddam’s CBN cache. Bush claimed that Saddam was buying uranium ore from Niger. Bush claimed that Saddam had collaborated with Al Qaeda in unleashing 9/11. Bush did not say he “thought,” or “suspected”–he claimed that he KNEW, that he had absolute proof of all his allegations. Everyone else suspected Saddam had weapons, but Bush calimed to have absolutely conclusive evidence to that effect. > > Bush either deliberately lied or he declared war based on the lies of others. Bush apologists simply lack the honesty to say the yes, Bush was wrong, he didn’t know what he claimed to. **gobear** , you and I differ on some basic issues, but I gotta say that you sure have a knack for cutting through the bullshit and objectively getting to the heart of the matter. Kudos to you! I wish more posters could divorce their hatred for Bush from their logic; of course, the Pit would be ever so much less interesting to read! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/70 "2004-10-22T18:23:23Z")
The point _was_ nailed earlier.\* ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/71 "2004-10-22T18:42:53Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > If you had bothered to read further, you would have noted that I condemned Bush’s dishonesty in starting the war under false pretenses. ’ Again acting as if the war was a foregone conclusion. The war never needed to be started at all, regardless of the pretenses used. > [@gobear](#): > > Your post, however, is utter lefty wank. Open up sweetcheeks, here comes some more of it. > [@gobear](#): > > Sanctions only served to enrich Saddam and impoverish his people. All you would accomplish is to starve innocent people. Firstly, sanctions crippled Saddam’s ability to produce actual weapons of mass destruction. Or have you not heard of the Duefler report? Seondly, it is disengenous to say sanctions “only served to enrich Saddam”. I say that because I generally respect your ability to think and you have shown yourself to be reasonably well informed, so the normal conclusion that you were ignorant of the situation probably doesn’t apply. This leaves me with “disengenous” as a descriptor of your behavior. Distribution of the resources allowed in through the sanctions being skewed by Saddam and the Sunni minority was a human rights issue. If it is your contention that this issue required aggressive war to resolve then you are at odds with [Amnesty International](http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE140112002?open&of=ENG-IRQ) who wrote in September of 2002 > [@](#): > > Sanctions have jeopardised the right to food, health, education and, in many cases, life of hundreds of thousands of individuals, many of them children. There are claims that the Iraqi regime is deliberately manipulating the sanctions regime for propaganda purposes - but that does not absolve the United Nations Security Council from its own share of the responsibility for failing to heed the calls to lift all sanctions provisions that result in grave violations of the rights of the Iraqi population. > > As the Council deliberates on the use of military force, it must consider not only the security and political consequences of its action, but also the inevitable human rights and humanitarian toll of war: civilians who will be killed by bombing or internal fighting, children who will die because sanctions will make access to basic necessities and humanitarian assistance even more difficult. Yet, concern for the life, safety and security of the Iraqi people is sorely missing from the debate, as is any discussion on what would be their fate in the aftermath of conflict - and even less, what will be the knock-on effect on the human rights of the people of neighbouring countries. > > As the keeper of international peace and security, the UN Security Council has the responsibility under the UN Charter to seek a solution through peaceful means first. It must remind its most powerful member that force is the last resort and only to be carried out in full compliance with international law. It must ask if we have really reached that point of imminent danger which leaves no other choice. It must never forget that the United Nations was created to preserve peace and promote human rights, not encourage war. And now for some more liberal wanking! Hope you saved some room. > [@gobear](#): > > I think Bush jumped to war way too soon and based it on deceitful premises, but that’s not to say that getting rid of Saddam was wrong. If the war had been conducted wisely, with proper attention paid to the realities of the region and an exit strategy in mind, I’d think differently about Dubya. Except the method used for “getting rid of Saddam” happens to have [had at least 13,296](http://www.iraqbodycount.com) bodies worth of overkill so far. One can believe that getting rid of Saddam was a good thing and the war(which has done far more than “get rid of Saddam”) is still a net evil. Much like one can reasonably believe that leaving Saddam and re-working the sanctions, inspections, and Oil for Food program could have the evil consequence of leaving Saddam in power but be a net good when everything is taken in context. If the war had not been conducted, I would think differently about Dubya. There was no aspect of the realities of the region which justified even a well-planned, conducted, and wise war. “Wise war”, that’s gotta be an oxymoron. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Opus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/858c86/32.png) [@Opus1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Opus1)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/72 "2004-10-22T19:04:37Z")
As to the only response directed toward me, I most certainly do not support an intelligence test for voting. (Note, however, that in this case, the problem is likely ignorance, not stupidity, despite the slight misnomer in my thread title.) The problem lies at the other end: educating people on both critical thinking and on substantive issues. Any effort in this direction will be massive, starting from elementary schools up through viewers demanding that news stations show more on world affairs and less on the Scott Peterson trial. I have no particular suggestions at this point, just massive despair and disappointment at the millions of people who will cast their votes in two weeks based on rampant misinformation. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/73 "2004-10-22T19:17:15Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > True, but once you (not necessarily YOU, but a general you for Bush haters) decide to proclaim a person (Bush) a dirty fucking liar over statement X, you don’t get to call other people (Clinton) “wrong” when they say statement X. Statement X being both about links to Al Qaeda and WMD programs, which both presidents said at various times. > > The implication is that Bush knew there were no WMD or links when he said it, but Clinton was just ignorant, and that’s just partisan crap, unless you can prove it. I’m not a Bush-hater. I, however, don’t happen to be a Bush supporter. There’s a nuance you’re missing here. At any rate, deflecting the issue onto Clinton, as seems to be the standard Republican response to most arguments, doesn’t satisfy because _we’re not discussing Clinton._ I don’t give a crap whether Clinton was wrong, stupid, lying, or acting with deliberate malice in an attempt to destroy the nation, because he’s not running for president. Stop trying to trap me into defending Clinton. He wasn’t a particularly good president, and he’s not a particularly good person. So the fuck what? Get over it, moron. That was four fucking years ago. And yeah, even if Bush made an honest mistake, I don’t understand how it excuses it. Think of it this way: he made a statement, it ended up being incorrect, and that statement had a profound impact on the nation. He bet his presidency on finding WMDs, in my opinion, and he shouldn’t get another term because he bet wrong. It’s a natural consequence at most jobs that if you profoundly fuck up, you get canned, no matter how innocent the mistake was. Bush should have to face the music. And for future reference, _tu quoque_ is the term used to describe a particular _logical fallacy_ - which means a wrong form of argument - that involves, essentially, responding “so did you!” You can chant Clinton’s name all night, but it still doesn’t address the fact that Bush told the nation, falsely, that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and used that falsehood to inspire the nation to war. If you lead a nation to war, you make damn sure you’re right about it, and if you’re wrong, you’re out of the job. Simple as that. If you can come up with a reasonable response (i.e. one that doesn’t mention Bill Clinton, or make vague personal attacks on John Kerry’s character or ketchup fortune) then awesome. Otherwise, well, I can’t claim to be surprised when Bush supporters can’t come up with reason and logic to support their vote, but it still is a little disappointing. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/74 "2004-10-22T20:36:48Z")
> [@Opus1](#): > > The continued ignorance of his supporters is astounding. What would the press say if 47% of Democrats continued to believe that Clinton did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky? I know it was said many times before, but apparently it bears repeating: the uproar about Iraq invasion is NOT about sex, but about deceiving the Public. On a related note, how many Democrats continue to believe that Clinton didn’t break the law when he lied under oath? ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/75 "2004-10-22T20:47:44Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > I know it was said many times before, but apparently it bears repeating: the uproar about Iraq invasion is NOT about sex, but about deceiving the Public. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. Even though the Republicans were completely outraged over the Gennifer Flowers, and the other one with the big nose that got plastic surgery, and even before Clinton went on the stand about Monica Lewinsky they were outraged over it. No, it was about sex. Have to feed the religious right, y’know. > [@](#): > > On a related note, how many Democrats continue to believe that Clinton didn’t break the law when he lied under oath? I’m sure he did. Just not a grave enough crime to remove him from office. As the Senate agreed. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/76 "2004-10-22T20:56:56Z")
> [@Neurotik](#): > > I’m sure he did. Just not a grave enough crime to remove him from office. As the Senate agreed. _di minimus_ ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/77 "2004-10-22T20:58:07Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > And yeah, even if Bush made an honest mistake, I don’t understand how it excuses it. Think of it this way: he made a statement, it ended up being incorrect, and that statement had a profound impact on the nation. It’s the difference between a sad accident, manslaughter, and murder. If Bush had “good” information that a reasonable person would interpret as proving Saddam had WMD programs, then Iraq is a sad accident. If Bush (or his team) recklessly overinterpreted lousy information, then you’re talking manslaughter (or something along those lines). If Bush knew for a fact that Saddam had no WMD and sent tens of thousands of people to their deaths in a war over nothing, then he’s the equivalent of a mass murderer, and should spend the rest of his life in prison. That is the difference between being “wrong” and being a “liar”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/78 "2004-10-22T20:58:25Z")
> [@Neurotik](#): > > Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. > > Even though the Republicans were completely outraged over the Gennifer Flowers, and the other one with the big nose that got plastic surgery, and even before Clinton went on the stand about Monica Lewinsky they were outraged over it. > > No, it was about sex. Have to feed the religious right, y’know. **Neurotik** , you may want to reread the post you were responding to–either you just got royally whooshed, or we just saw a lovely Freudian slip on **Iskander’s** part :D. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/79 "2004-10-22T21:02:59Z")
Oh, and Clinton matters not because he’s “Clinton” but because he was the last president that had to deal with Saddam. His impression of the situation should give us insight into what the US intelligence community thought. If Clinton also thought there were WMD, it would suggest that it was a conclusion with some data and history behind it and not just the whimsical invention of Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590/80 "2004-10-22T21:04:29Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > An issue that is the heart of the invasion’s self-defense motif that to this day receives play is the assessment of the **_likelihood_ of Hussein initiating an attack** (directly or by proxy) with these banned weapons. That Hussein had some banned weapons did not in itself justify the “quickly before it’s too late” aspect assigned to the invasion. You sound like a high spirited, lofty well informed young man. Is it true that if I vote for John Kerry I will be **eaten by _wolves_**? I had planned on voting for the democrat, but this wolf business has got me more than a little worried. What’s the Straight Dope on Kerry’s plan to open America’s borders to ravening carnivores? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-just-in-most-bush-supporters-too-stupid-to-breathe-much-less-vote/270590.md?page=5)