# Why do people forgive Bush's lies? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2005, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205 "2005-01-11T13:55:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/41 "2005-01-11T15:40:46Z")
> [@Jake the Plumber](#): > > Bush’s lies aren’t limited to WMDs. That’s just the biggest one. Check my Slate link for a direct WMD lie. > > _yawn_ Whatever. So I guess the answer to my question is “denial” This is the _only_ time I am going to do this Jake. Just to show the idiocy of your arguments, I’m going to respond to each of these claims. I won’t do it again because _anyone_ can google up a million quotes and make retarded associations with them. Trying to prove “Bush didn’t lie” is trying to prove a negative and it’s not an argument tactic or even a victory to tell someone to do that. > [@](#): > > “I don’t believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.” Rumsfeld said this, not Bush. And he said “to his knowledge.” Not proof, try again. > [@](#): > > “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.” You’re purporting to know whether or not Bush _believed_ this? Wow. Still isn’t a lie, not proof. > [@](#): > > On April 26, President Bush said in his weekly radio address, “My jobs and growth plan would reduce tax rates for everyone who pays income tax.” Even if he was wrong about this (and he wasn’t, tax rates have been decreased across the board) it wouldn’t mean he lied, it would just mean he couldn’t deliver or execute the plan, that isn’t an act of lying. > [@](#): > > “There was only one problem with President George W. Bush’s claim Thursday that the nation’s top economists forecast substantial economic growth if Congress passed the president’s tax cut: The forecast with that conclusion doesn’t exist.Bush and White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer went out of their way Thursday to cite a new survey by “Blue-Chip economists” that the economy would grow 3.3 percent this year if the president’s tax cut proposal becomes law. That was news to the editor who assembles the economic forecast. “I don’t know what he was citing,” said Randell E. Moore, editor of the monthly Blue Chip Economic Forecast, a newsletter that surveys 53 of the nation’s top economists each month. “I was a little upset,” said Moore, who said he complained to the White House. ‘It sounded like the Blue Chip Economic Forecast had endorsed the president’s plan. That’s simply not the case.’” 2.24.03 Need some more backing for this quote, a quote in a void proves nothing. And even so, it could easily be a distortion of a report. So it would be the first remotely “untrue” thing you’ve said yet. But again, the quote is saying Bush said something, not direclty quoting him, need more proof. Try again. > [@](#): > > “45 percent of all of the dividend income goes to people with $50,000-or-less incomes, family incomes. Nearly three-quarters of it goes to families with $100,000 or less family income.” Quote by Karl Rove, not George Bush. Show the lie, again, nothing. > [@](#): > > "Not exactly. It is true that 43.8 percent of tax returns with dividend income are from households with less than $50,000 in income and 73.8 percent of such returns are from households with less than $100,000. But that doesn’t mean the little guy earning less than $50,000 gets ‘45 percent of all the income’ or that the Main Street earners below $100,000 get ‘three-quarters’ of dividend income. Statistical argument, again doesn’t show a direct lie. Also of cousre it’s the analysis of one person from what I can see. > [@](#): > > Blix again denied an allegation by Secretary of State Colin Powell that inspectors knew of cases in which Iraq had moved banned items around before inspectors arrived on the scene. “I am sure that Colin Powell speaks on the basis of notes given to him, but this is not correct. Our inspectors have not seen that the Iraqis were moving anything away from the sites that we are visiting,” he said. --Reuters. Colin Powell’s intelligence was wrong, so Bush was lying? That makes sense. > [@](#): > > Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated in mid–September that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key US oil supplier. Yeah because some independent analysis of shitty Soviet satellites = proof. ---
**Author:** ![Jake\_the\_Plumber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@Jake\_the\_Plumber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jake_the_Plumber)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/42 "2005-01-11T15:46:31Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > This is the _only_ time I am going to do this Jake. Just to show the idiocy of your arguments, I’m going to respond to each of these claims. I won’t do it again because _anyone_ can google up a million quotes and make retarded associations with them. > > Trying to prove “Bush didn’t lie” is trying to prove a negative and it’s not an argument tactic or even a victory to tell someone to do that. > > Rumsfeld said this, not Bush. And he said “to his knowledge.” > > Not proof, try again. > > You’re purporting to know whether or not Bush _believed_ this? Wow. > > Still isn’t a lie, not proof. > > Even if he was wrong about this (and he wasn’t, tax rates have been decreased across the board) it wouldn’t mean he lied, it would just mean he couldn’t deliver or execute the plan, that isn’t an act of lying. > > Need some more backing for this quote, a quote in a void proves nothing. > > And even so, it could easily be a distortion of a report. So it would be the first remotely “untrue” thing you’ve said yet. > > But again, the quote is saying Bush said something, not direclty quoting him, need more proof. > > Try again. > > Quote by Karl Rove, not George Bush. > > Show the lie, again, nothing. > > Statistical argument, again doesn’t show a direct lie. > > Also of cousre it’s the analysis of one person from what I can see. > > Colin Powell’s intelligence was wrong, so Bush was lying? > > That makes sense. > > Yeah because some independent analysis of shitty Soviet satellites = proof. Deeeeeniiiiiiaaaaaaalllllllll Seriously? Your rebuttal is “Statistical argument, again doesn’t show a direct lie.” and “Quote by Karl Rove, not George Bush.” and “Yeah because some independent analysis of shitty Soviet satellites = proof”? I love this one. Quote: “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.” **Martin** “You’re purporting to know whether or not Bush _believed_ this? Wow.” Dear Leader can do no wrong! Only his staff… and horribly innaccurate and unconfirmed intelligence… and assumptions… and economic statistics… only that stuff is lies. But Dear Leader is lie-free. Yep. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/43 "2005-01-11T15:49:22Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > If I could find a quote from the man himself regarding the levels of access and co-operation he encountered, would you retract your accusation of revisionism on my part? No, because Hans Blix wasn’t a neutral party and was ardently opposed to U.S. efforts to remove Saddam Hussein, he opposed the war openly right as it began. Hans Blix had quite some time to do his work in Iraq, and his progress there was hindered on and off throughout the situation. Just because he later said “I received full cooperation” means nothing, I doubt Hans Blix really believes that himself though he may have said it for his own personal reasons. Right before the war Blix did receive a level of cooperation that was unparalleled over the last few years, but it still wasn’t complete cooperation. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/44 "2005-01-11T15:52:09Z")
> [@Jake the Plumber](#): > > Deeeeeniiiiiiaaaaaaalllllllll > > Seriously? Your rebuttal is “Statistical argument, again doesn’t show a direct lie.” and “Quote by Karl Rove, not George Bush.” and “Yeah because some independent analysis of shitty Soviet satellites = proof”? > > I love this one. > > Quote: “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.” > > **Martin** “You’re purporting to know whether or not Bush _believed_ this? Wow.” > > Dear Leader can do no wrong! Only his staff… and horribly innaccurate and unconfirmed intelligence… and assumptions… and economic statistics… only that stuff is lies. But Dear Leader is lie-free. Yep. Again YOU ARE PURPORTING TO KNOW WHAT SOMEONE BELIEVED? If I believe the moon is made of cheese and then go to the moon and find it is not that doesn’t make me a liar, it makes me WRONG. Secondly, Karl Rove is NOT George W. Bush _PERIOD._ And the issue on tax cuts is a contentious issue on which there is little agreement. The statistics involved mean nothing because you’ve provided no significant sources with them. I can show you statistics that can be said to mean ANYTHING. If you’ve ever taken a statistics class you learn from day one how statistics can’t be taken at face value. Again, a Soviet satellite picture doesn’t = U.S. satellite picture, the image quality is probably not as good, and there’s not even any proof the groups involved had access to every square inch of the border, it’d be very easy for amateurs to miss tanks on a satellite photograph, sat photos aren’t like the movies everything isn’t labelled for you. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/45 "2005-01-11T15:54:02Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > I wanted Saddam taken down in 1998 as well, and I wanted him knocked out in 2003 as well. WMD was seen as a smoking gun and a requirement for invasion by many, I don’t get why. This guy was a huge threat to global security and America has long upheld the burden of _being_ the global policeman. Saddam was a paper tiger after Gulf War I. He was no threat to the world after that. The WMD were cited by Bush as _the_ compelling reason to go in. Yes, Clinton also thought Saddam had weapons. But the degree of cooperation that Saddam was giving the inspectors then was nowhere near as good as during Bush’s early term. So Clinton bombed Iraq to take out suspected weapons. He didn’t go in. And if he was in Bush’s shoes and Blix was getting the cooperation that he was, he wouldn’t have gone in then either. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/46 "2005-01-11T15:55:19Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > It was the _administration_ which forwarded this justification time and again. Time and again, they _shied away_ from setting the precedent of ‘humanitarian regime change’. The reasons you think it right is not what they _actually said_, and is rather a non-sequitur here. > Or “myopic thug”, as many Americans and the rest of the industrialised democratic world might say. You asked me personally was it justification for war, so acutally I guess you forgot the entire context of the thread. The last time I checked you didn’t say “that’s what Bush said to justify the war?” You just said "and that justifies war? Since you directly asked _me_ the question _I_ responded. As it is Bush actually did talk about the humanitarian issues in Iraq. WMD was again, the evidence needed to get support. Personally I don’t care if Bush _did_ lie to the moronic vox populii, I don’t think he “constantly lied over the last four years” and considering the level of stupidity in the quotes I’ve seen no one can show _that._ To me getting Saddam out of power easily justifies propaganda. The public doesn’t have a right to know everything, whatever they may think. And even still Bush _hasn’t_ directly lied, he’s always added qualifiers like “reports show”, “we believe” et cetera. As for myopic thug, eh who cares. When someone else becomes a superpower they can bitch about it. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/47 "2005-01-11T15:56:42Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Saddam was a paper tiger after Gulf War I. He was no threat to the world after that. The WMD were cited by Bush as _the_ compelling reason to go in. Yes, Clinton also thought Saddam had weapons. But the degree of cooperation that Saddam was giving the inspectors then was nowhere near as good as during Bush’s early term. So Clinton bombed Iraq to take out suspected weapons. He didn’t go in. And if he was in Bush’s shoes and Blix was getting the cooperation that he was, he wouldn’t have gone in then either. There’s a lot of things Bush did that Clinton wouldn’t have. Doesn’t say a damn thing about either of them other than they are different men. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/48 "2005-01-11T15:56:58Z")
Bush, in effect, promised not to invade Iraq if Saddam got rid of his WMDs. When Bush went to the UN, it is quite clear that he had already made up his mind to invade and was just going through the motions. People said, “Give the weapons inspectors time to work”, but the Bushies kept saying “We _know_ he’s got them, they’re just hidden really well”. Well, if you know you don’t know something and you say you know it, that’s a lie. But the whole issue of WMDs was a big fat lie, because that’s not the reason Bush decided to invade Iraq. He did it to pursue the neocon vision of transforming the Middle East by esablishing democracy in Iraq. Bush lied about his reasons for going to war to forstall a national debate on the issue, and instead kept insisting he was “defending America”. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/49 "2005-01-11T15:58:48Z")
> [@](#): > > No, because Hans Blix wasn’t a neutral party and was ardently opposed to U.S. efforts to remove Saddam Hussein, he opposed the war openly right as it began. How can one possibly _debate_ such blatant paranoia? Is there _anyone_ whose word you would have taken that Iraq was in fat **not** the imminent threat it was made out to be? ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/50 "2005-01-11T16:02:41Z")
> [@](#): > > Personally I don’t care if Bush _did_ lie to the moronic vox populii I cannot condemn such despicable Straussianism strongly enough. If you say you advocate _democracy_, it is _you_, sir, who are the liar. > [@](#): > > When someone else becomes a superpower they can bitch about it. Then, let the superpower not bitch when it is attacked by other thugs in hijacked planes. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/51 "2005-01-11T16:05:30Z")
**Jake** , thank you for an actual, compiled list of allegations. It sure helps to inform a debate when you back up your OP with facts, rather than hurling epithets at conservatives, or saying that a good liberal like me is in denial because I think that your rhetoric might not be backed up by facts. I’ve done a quick look at the list, and a couple of things pop to mind. First, that Dick Cheney quote about reconstituting nuclear weapons: it is very clear in my mind that Cheney meant to say “nuclear weapons **program** ,” but he didn’t. Even Tim Russert, who knows how to grill politicians, brought this up in a subsequent interview on 9/13/03: > [@](#): > > MR. RUSSERT: … Eight days after that, you were on MEET THE PRESS, and we… > > VICE PRES. CHENEY: Right. > > MR. RUSSERT: …talked about that specifically. Let’s watch: > > (Videotape, March 16, 2003): > > MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree. > VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree, yes. And you’ll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community, disagree. > > And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons… [snip] > > (End videotape) > > MR. RUSSERT: Reconstituted nuclear weapons. You misspoke. > > VICE PRES. CHENEY: Yeah. I did misspeak. I said repeatedly during the show weapons capability. We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon. Now, I have no doubt in my mind that the Administration wanted to scare the pants off of the American people by hyping visions of mushroom clouds. It is dispicable. It is outrageous to me that Condi Rice, who first used that phrase about “the smoking gun shouldn’t be a mushroom cloud,” is up for a promotion to Secretary of State. She, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush should be kicked to the curb for all that they have done wrong. But the facts indicate that Cheney had been speaking about nuclear weapons programs during that interview. A misstatement in a quote that is taken out of context is not a lie. People sometimes slip up while talking on live TV. Surely you have better evidence of lies relating to pre-war intelligence on Iraq, don’t you? Second, it appears to me that both sides here are warping what Hans Blix actually said and did. He stated on several occasions in late January and early February 2003 that Iraq was cooperating on process, but not on substance. He repeatedly decried the fact that Iraq was not willing to answer key questions about what happened to their WMD programs, despite the fact that they were opening doors and allowing access. Blix also wanted more time, which he certainly should have had. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/52 "2005-01-11T16:16:25Z")
There’s no way Bush could have known, unequivocally _ **known** _, all the things he said he _ **knew** _ about WMDs in Iraq, the threat of Iraq’s regime, and terrorist activities in the region (such as Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, etc.). Jesus, people. If you want to defend Bush’s lies by saying saying they were necessary for the nation’s security, that might be one thing, but to continue to assert against all evdience that Bush is an honest leader…well…all I can say it that it defies credulity. > [@George W. Bush](#): > > Our discoveries in Afghanistan confirmed our worst fears and showed us the true scope of the task ahead… We have found diagrams of American nuclear power plants and public water facilities, detailed instructions for making chemical weapons, surveillance maps of American cities, and thorough descriptions of landmarks in America and throughout the world. > [@The Wall Street Journal](#): > > **White House Admitted “No Basis” For Bush Claim On Nuclear Plants.** On February 9th 2004, the White House admitted that “no plant diagrams were actually found in Afghanistan. ‘There’s no additional basis for the language in the speech that we have found,’ a senior administration official said.” The Wall Street Journal reported that “the suggestion that plant blueprints might have been in the hands of terrorists sparked concern among environmental activists and local communities near the country’s 103 nuclear stations, according to Greenpeace…The White House was forced to comb back over Mr. Bush’s 2002 speech…after Greenpeace released a letter from a senior official at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that cast doubt on Mr. Bush’s claim.” The letter, by NRC commissioner Edward McGaffigan and dated February 4, 2002, noted that “he had testified two years ago in ‘one or more’ closed-door Congressional hearings and told lawmakers that he ‘was aware of no evidence’ that plant diagrams had been found in Afghanistan. The NRC is responsible for maintaining security at the nation’s nuclear power plants.” > [@George W. Bush](#): > > The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his “nuclear mujahedeen,” his nuclear holy warriors. Despite Bush’s allegation that Hussein met often with Iraqi scientists: > [@Washington Post](#): > > [Bush] did not disclose that the known work of the scientists was largely benign. Iraq’s three top gas centrifuge experts, for example, ran a copper factory, an operation to extract graphite from oil and a mechanical engineering design center at Rashidiya. > [@George W. Bush Bush](#): > > Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. > [@Washington Post](#): > > Gas centrifuge experts in the United States told the government "repeatedly for more than a year [before the war began] that the aluminum tubes were not suitable or intended for uranium enrichment. By December 2002, the experts said new evidence had further undermined the government’s assertion. The Bush administration portrayed the scientists as a minority and emphasized that the experts did not describe the centrifuge theory as impossible. > [@The New Republic](#): > > One intelligence analyst complained, “You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that’s just a lie.” > [@George W. Bush](#): > > We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas. We’re concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States. > [@Wall Street Journal](#): > > In making its case for war with Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration painted a much more threatening picture of Iraqi drones than was justified, according to Air Force intelligence estimates now coming to light…The Air Force, which has expertise in designing such unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, was never convinced Baghdad had developed drones capable of effectively distributing chemical and biological weapons as the White House claimed. But the Air Force dissent, attached to a classified report last October on the Iraqi threat, was kept secret even as the president publicly made the opposite case last fall before a congressional vote on the war resolution." Air Force Senior Intelligence Analyst Bob Boyd said of the drone, "We just didn’t see anything we regarded as credible evidence. Do you folks have any idea how many examples of this sort of thing there are? I could go on for pages and pages, just quoting Bush himself and easily finding refutation of it for a recognized media source. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/53 "2005-01-11T16:21:57Z")
> [@Jake the Plumber](#): > > Bush’s lies aren’t limited to WMDs. That’s just the biggest one. Check my Slate link for a direct WMD lie. > > > [@](#): > > > > “I don’t believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.” > > —Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, at a hearing of the Senate’s appropriations subcommittee on defense, May 14, 2003 > > > > “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.” > > —Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC’s Meet the Press, March 16, 2003 How do you reconstitute a nuclear weapon? Is it freeze dried? Do you just add water? This quote only makes sense if what you’re talking about is a reconstituted nuclear weapons **program**. And this transcript of the _Meet the Press_ interview, placing the quote into context, indicates that that indeed was what was being discussed. [Link.](http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/cheneymeetthepress.htm) On preview I see that **Ravenman** has made a similar point. Now, I could cherrypick some quotes from you on this board and build a case against you if I so chose. That, however, wouldn’t be an honest and truthful thing to do, and we both know it. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/54 "2005-01-11T16:31:01Z")
By screaming BUSHLIEDBUSHLIEDBUSHLIED!!! so loudly at every mistake, misstatement, ambiguity or policy disagreement, the Left has essentially immunized Bush administration against charges of lying. When he tells an actual lie (and, make no mistake, all politicians do at some point), and somebody calls him on it, even if they do so in a restrained and civil manner, many (perhaps a majority) will just roll their eyes and think “there they go again”. I guess this more or less answers the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/55 "2005-01-11T16:51:33Z")
Knorf: another good list. I agree with you about the first issue, the plans of nuclear plants. Looks to me like that was, indeed, a fabrication. That’s the first smoking-gun evidence I’ve seen in this thread of rabid hysteria. On the meetings with nuclear scientists one, it’s clear to me that Bush was wrong. It’s not so clear to me whether the WaPo has evidence that Bush knew at the time that the work was benign, or whether subsequent intelligence discoveries cast that claim in new light. I say needs more evidence before this can be called a lie, but certainly possible. On the tubes, it’s clear that there was a dispute among experts about their use, and some experts were wrong. If Rice indeed claimed that the only possible use of the tubes was for a nuke program (I vaguely recall such allegations, but it’s not quoted in your post, and my memory may be faulty), then she was either misinformed or lying. I don’t think there’s enough evidence to decide that one. Same thing on the drones. There was a dispute, and some experts were wrong. That makes Bush wrong. There is nothing to prove that Bush KNEW that there were no UAVs, but said there were, anyway. All of this is kind of beside the point for me, anyway. Bush and his crew have been wrong on so many things that they should be ashamed of themselves, and the American people would have been wiser to send him packing for his obscene lack of judgment and his constrant record of being wrong. This obsession with calling Bush a liar is an ad hominem distraction from his record of running the most bumbling, error-prone Administration in many decades. On preview, I see that BrotherCadfael has made this point better than I. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/56 "2005-01-11T16:53:50Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > By screaming BUSHLIEDBUSHLIEDBUSHLIED!!! so loudly at every mistake, misstatement, ambiguity or policy disagreement, the Left has essentially immunized Bush administration against charges of lying. > > When he tells an actual lie (and, make no mistake, all politicians do at some point), and somebody calls him on it, even if they do so in a restrained and civil manner, many (perhaps a majority) will just roll their eyes and think “there they go again”. > > I guess this more or less answers the OP. Ding! There’s the answer in a nutshell. Among contributors to this thread alone, I can’t even keep track anymore of which people routinely and blithely compare the President of the United States to a chimpanzee, to Hitler, or to the genocidal dictator of North Korea. On the national level, too, the _New York Times_ continues to run idiots like Krugman and Dowd and the former Vice President of the United States refers to Bush supporters on the internet as “digital brownshirts.” No sane person is going to take seriously anything such a person has to say on any subject. Persons who are sane and who have differences with the president, whether on a policy matter or on his truthfullness on this issue or that, are oftentimes drowned out by the clutter. It’s a pity, really, that those sane people don’t tell their alleged fellow travellers to STFU much more often. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/57 "2005-01-11T16:54:47Z")
**BrotherCadfael** , that isn’t the topic here. It’s about why “many (perhaps a majority)” \*accept \* that they’re being lied to. Got any ideas? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/58 "2005-01-11T17:05:33Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > If I could find a quote from the man himself regarding the levels of access and co-operation he encountered, would you retract your accusation of revisionism on my part? I’d like to see the quote about him getting “cooperation at every turn”. Not that I think you’re lying, but my memory is differnent from yours. What I remember was Blix saying that S.H. was NOT fully cooperative, but that he his cooperation had improved enough (once the US up’ed the ante for war, btw) so that his team could get the job done if they were given more time. Anyway, that’s about as much as I’m willing to wade into this morass. Show us the quote about “cooperating at every turn” if there is one. I’m genuinely curious. From my own perspective, I think speculation about “lying” is pointless. We’ll never what was in Bush’s head. The point is that he made a huge blunder by going into Iraq, and that cost him my vote in November. Why so many seem bent on pursuing this “lying” issue is beyond me. Is it because Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, and now the other side wants retribution? Well, Bush isn’t going to be impeached. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/59 "2005-01-11T17:21:55Z")
I have no report (nor did I claim any) of Hans Blix literally uttering the words “co-operation at every turn”, no **John**. But he maintains that [no instance](http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/31/1043804520548.html?oneclick=true) of US claims of misdirection or concealment occurred. The best direct [quote] ([http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0409lostpatience.htm](http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0409lostpatience.htm)) is merely that > [@](#): > > **Hans Blix** : The American Government lost patience when the Government of Iraq began to collaborate actively with us as we asked…When on January 27, I denounced Iraq in the Security Council of the UN for not cooperating in an immediate, complete and unconditional way to fulfill the terms of resolution 1441, the American Government, including the hawks, applauded me. However, it was a great paradox, because from then on, the Government of Iraq began to cooperate actively. And then the Americans began to criticize me. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/60 "2005-01-11T17:32:33Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Why so many seem bent on pursuing this “lying” issue is beyond me. Is it because Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, and now the other side wants retribution? Is it that mysterious? Ever hear of hypocrisy? It’s about helping the hypocrites realize their hypocrisy, learn from it, and become better and more responsible citizens and humans for it. It would be _nice_, sure, if their claims to moral superiority were backed by any sort of evidence at all, in fact the reverse is true. It would even be nice if more than a few were able to say “I guess we got carried away with partisanship in trying to get Clinton for something”, but we can’t expect that. The hypocrisies were clear at the time, too, but had no more effect then than now. You know damn well why Bush won’t be impeached, and that his lies and the deaths they have caused are irrelevant to that decision. Or are you asserting that it \*just doesn’t matter \* if the President who works for us habitually lies to us? I hope you don’t mean that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205.md?page=4)