# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/101 "2005-01-12T01:25:47Z")
> [@Kanicbird](#): > > …again the lie you are depending on doesn’t appear to be a lie, all parties, even before W left TX, agreed that there were WMD in Iraq and S.H. had to be delt with… Just this one. It matters little how many other people believed, or did not believe, that Saddam had nasty stuff. They didn’t pull the trigger. The responsibility is not distributed, it rests with him. He had access to all the available information, available information that demanded the acceptance of a credible doubt. He ignored that doubt. He told us he was right to do so, that is duty as president demanded it. It was not true. No one else bears the same reponsibility to go the extra mile, to be certain of one’s facts. This is true of any presidential function, but moving the nation to war is the gravest of all such functions. It is, literally, life and death. For thousands. Every move the President makes is a statement, it reflects on his oath of office. Whether or not he precisely said "I am entirely certain about this " (point of fact, I think he did…) is only of interest to those who would fashion a defense from the sophistic parsing of words. It does not depend on the meaning of “lie”. By leading us to war under false and misleading premises makes a triviality of “lie”. It is far more than a lie, far worse. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/102 "2005-01-12T01:33:10Z")
And don’t forget, the man himself said that he never made a mistake–oops, sorry, that is not quite accurate. He said that he couldn’t recall any mistakes–not a one. He is amazing! To never set a foot wrong–no wonder folks support him… :rolleyes: ---
**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 12, 2005, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/103 "2005-01-12T01:48:54Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Originally Posted by Fearless Misleader > > ``` > * "Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons." -- United Nations Address > September 12, 2002 > * "Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons." -- Radio Address > October 5, 2002 > * "Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons." -- Cincinnati, Ohio Speech > October 7, 2002 > * "Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." -- State of the Union Address > January 28, 2003 > * "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." -- Address to the Nation > March 17, 2003 > > ``` Yes, he said those things. Now show that they are lies, as opposed to huge mistakes. And answer me this, too: since Hillary Clinton also stated that Iraq had WMD, and supported the invasion of Iraq, is she a liar, too? In my book, no. She was just as wrong as George Bush. **brickbacon** : You’ve made the most intelligent point in the last three pages of this thread. However, I’m not inclined to call someone a liar because they do not lay out every part of an issue. If, for all this energy and heat being generated here, someone cannot point out clear cases of Bush saying “X”, but knowing “not X,” then I think the liar label doesn’t stick well. ---
**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 12, 2005, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/104 "2005-01-12T01:57:27Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > And answer me this, too: since Hillary Clinton also stated that Iraq had WMD, and supported the invasion of Iraq, is she a liar, too? > > In my book, no. She was just as wrong as George Bush. There is a slight difference. George Bush knew exactly how reliable the information was, and chose to go along with it (it was spoon fed to a willing Bush by Chalabi). Hillary knew there was evidence, and made her statements. She didn’t make a motion to invade Iraq based on it. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/105 "2005-01-12T01:57:49Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > And don’t forget, the man himself said that he never made a mistake–oops, sorry, that is not quite accurate. He said that he couldn’t recall any mistakes–not a one. Under the standard being advocated in this thread (and which I disagree with), [that’s a lie](http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/08/debate.transcript3/index.html). From the second debate: > [@](#): > > BUSH: I have made a lot of decisions, and some of them little, like appointments to boards you never heard of, and some of them big. > > And in a war, there’s a lot of – there’s a lot of tactical decisions that historians will look back and say: He shouldn’t have done that. He shouldn’t have made that decision. And I’ll take responsibility for them. I’m human. > > \ > > Now, you asked what mistakes. I made some mistakes in appointing people, but I’m not going to name them. I don’t want to hurt their feelings on national TV. And, of course, from the [April press conference](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040413-20.html): > [@](#): > > I hope I – _I don’t want to sound like I’ve made no mistakes. I’m confident I have._ I just haven’t – you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I’m not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one. So your suggestion that “the man himself said he never made a mistake” isn’t just “not quite accurate,” it’s the exact opposite of what actually happened. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/106 "2005-01-12T02:33:56Z")
:d ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/107 "2005-01-12T02:49:33Z")
I have no idea what that’s supposed to mean. Is that l33t-speak for “I retract my obviously false prior statement?” ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/108 "2005-01-12T03:26:39Z")
> [@Age Quod Agis](#): > > Errr, not really. > > Your article says that the Bush admin. “embraced” an estimate that their Welfare bill would cost about $395 billion. However, one actuary from the Welfare Office alleges that he estimated that a similiar plan pending in the Senate would cost $551 billion. The actuary alleges he was told not to disclose “numbers related to this higher estimate” or he’d be fired. The reason that the White House allegedly suppressed the numbers is that it didn’t want to lose the votes of 13 conservative Republicans who threatened to vote against any Medicare bill over $400 billion. > > However, the head of the Welfare office disputes the actuary’s account of events:This raises a few points on which I think your account of the article is incorrect: > > First, the $395 billion estimate came from the Congressional Budget Office, not the White House. So it wasn’t the Bush admin’s “report,” at all. > > Your article alleges the White House “embraced” the $395 billion number, but it doesn’t provide any quotes or examples of how they “embraced” it. Did the White House tell everyone that $395 billion was correct? Did they merely fail to dispute it? So I’m not sure what this means. > > Second, at the time the Medicare bill was pending in the Senate, there doesn’t appear to have been a White House report on the costs. At most, your article says there was an estimate on the costs of a similar bill in the Senate. > > Third, the White House’s eventual estimate was $17 billion less than Foster’s estimate. So it’s disengenuous to equate possession of Foster’s supposed estimate and an official White House estimate. > > Fourth, the Congressional Democrats appeared to know about the estimate. They might have known because this same guy had already estimated that a similar plan in the Senate would cost $150 billion more than the CBO’s estimate. Or they might have known because somebody told them about it. Why couldn’t these conservative Republicans have known about it, too? > > Fifth, despite the fact that the numbers were released, Foster was not fired. In fact, the only one with a new job appears to be _Foster’s boss, who admitted to refusing access to Foster on (at least) one occasion_. > > Sixth, I can’t find anything in the article that supports your assertion that “Four months later, the Bush administration _admitted_ that the 540 billion figure was _the correct one_” (emphasis added). I do see where the White House budget director gave his estimate, but nowhere that the Bush administration said that they knew the CBO was wrong all along, or that Foster’s number was right (especially since they seemed to disagree with Foster). Could you please point out your source for that statement? This tactic of pouncing on word choice and other minor details and trying to twist them far enough to make it look like there might not have been any intentional dishonesty doesn’t seem likely to convince to many people. According to [this article](http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_3984.shtml) , we have: “Bush just signed the Medicare measure into law last month. While it was moving through Congress, Bush, White House officials and congressional Republican leaders had assured doubting conservatives that the bill’s costs would stay within the $400 billion estimate.” That takes care of points one and two. On point three, a 17 billion dollar difference doesn’t matter. The issue, for this thread anyway, is whether Bush lied about the accuracy of the 400 billion figure. He said it was true when he knew it wasn’t true. On point four, there was a controversy at the time of the vote as to the cost. There was some evidence supporting both sides of the controversy, Bush as his pals withheld an estimate, by threat of firing, that would have alerted some conservatives to the fact that the higher figure, not the lower, was the truthful one. On point six, try [here](http://www.parapundit.com/archives/001917.html) . Note that Congressional Pubs themselves accuse their leader of “lying through his teeth” on this one. Point five isn’t relevant to the question of Bush’s honesty. The threat accomplished the purpose of making the guy stay quiet until the vote was through; after that there wouldn’t be any reason to fire him. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/109 "2005-01-12T03:40:41Z")
Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, even France all believed that lower figure was the truth. George Tenet assured him it was (who was a _Clinton_ appointee…not suggesting sabotage, but you can draw your own conclusions…) There were credible reports from British Intelligence that the lower figure was the truth. So really, it was all just an honest mistake. Could happen to anyone. ---
**Author:** ![ZombiesAteMyBrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b4bc9f/32.png) [@ZombiesAteMyBrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZombiesAteMyBrain)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/110 "2005-01-12T04:12:35Z")
> [@Jake the Plumber](#): > > Since you asked for some cites, and me saying “um, the past 4 years” probably not encapsulating it enough for your blinded eyes, I did up a nice little [google search](http://www.google.com/search?q=Bush+lie&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official) But there were **only** 2,820,000 hits - and they were about stupid things like war, national security, etc. That’s small potatoes, obviously, to the ‘most powerful man in the world’. I really don’t understand why the American people aren’t crying out for his impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/111 "2005-01-12T04:39:58Z")
Honest to God, people. We have done this to death. We have used the word “lie” and every euphemism and variant on the idea. When Bush was elected in 2000 I said to myself that we were going to have to put up with a center rightist government that might just put the breaks on the radicals in Congress. I remembered his father. What I had no appreciation of is the lengths these people were willing to go to obtain and retain power and the objects of their ambitions to power. This government in the pursuit of its objectives, from the take over of Iraq, to the reduction of the tax burden on the wealthy, to the evisceration of the social security system, to the elimination of environmental restraint on business, to the imposition of restraints on access to the courts, to the curtailment of competitive forces, to pandering to social puritans, to generally comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted has followed a Chicken Little policy. It is not that the President and his government lies. It is that the President and his government does not care what the truth is. We have now been subjected to four years of special pleading, manipulation of factoids, part truth, conjecture presented a verity, suppression of dissenting views, evasion of responsibility and deliberate and calculated misrepresentation. Any one who does not realize that is just not paying attention or is so invested in this bunch of happy warriors as not to be capable of paying attention. Don’t tell me that the President really and sincerely did not appreciate that it was an acorn not the sky that was falling. If the President had bothered to look he would have known it was an acorn. However, it served the President’s purposes to think and say that the sky was falling. This is government by deception. This is outcome based analysis. You my put lipstick and a calico dress on a pig and call it Florence but it is still a pig. I ain’t buying it. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/112 "2005-01-12T04:48:31Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Yes, he said those things. Now show that they are lies, as opposed to huge mistakes. Go nuts: [**Claims vs. Facts Database**](http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/apps/custom/cap/findorg.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=124702) And what **Spavined Gelding** just wrote. The End. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/113 "2005-01-12T04:55:40Z")
Wow! They got all of that on one server? Must have a heck of a data compression software! ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/114 "2005-01-12T05:06:35Z")
> [@ITR champion](#): > > This tactic of pouncing on word choice and other minor details and trying to twist them far enough to make it look like there might not have been any intentional dishonesty doesn’t seem likely to convince to many people. What about inaccurately portraying the content of an article? Will that convince lots of people? The differences between your story and your cite that I pointed out were not minor details. They go to the crux of your claim that the White House lied about anything. > [@ITR champion](#): > > According to [this article](http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_3984.shtml) , we have: “Bush just signed the Medicare measure into law last month. While it was moving through Congress, Bush, White House officials and congressional Republican leaders had assured doubting conservatives that the bill’s costs would stay within the $400 billion estimate.” So let me see if I’ve got this straight – cite to Fox News = bad (bringing about calls of “Faux News,” etc.); cite to Capital Hill Blues (site motto: “Nobody’s life liberty or property is safe while Congress is in session”) = A-OK. Come on! Let’s try and maintain some semblance of objectivity here. Surely we can do better than citing to an anti-government blog. And keep in mind that your cite is to _the author’s characterization of events_. The author has not provided us with any details or quotes regarding what the admin actually did, which would allow us to make up our own minds; he’s just characterizing what they did, and hoping that we mindlessly accept that. Your 2nd cite is to a blog that quotes Capital Hill Blues. So it’s no better. [Let’s try this](http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A64627-2004Jan30¬Found=true): > [@](#): > > Bush administration officials had indications for months that the new Medicare prescription drug law might cost considerably more than the $400 billion advertised by the White House and Congress, according to internal documents and sources familiar with the issue. > > The president’s top health advisers gathered such evidence and shared it with select lawmakers, congressional and other sources said, long before the White House disclosed Thursday that it believes the program will cost $534 billion over the next decade – one-third more than the estimate widely used when Congress enacted the measure in November. Well, now they just had _indications_ that the number may be higher. And they shared those indications with “select lawmakers” long before the White House came out with its own estimate. It’s also kind of silly to characterize the White House’s estimates (especially their preliminary estimates) as the “true” number. First, it appears that the White House didn’t form an opinion until _after_ the bill was passed. Moreover, it appears that the CBO is standing by their conclusion that the bill will cost $395 billion. The article even goes into the myriad reasons for why there might be such significant differences in the estimates, meaning that neither figure is “true.” And let’s take a look at what the Bush admin supposedly did that was wrong: > [@](#): > > “Apparently, the administration has played hide the ball on their cost estimate for the Medicare prescription drug bill,” said Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.), ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee. “Their failure to provide information that was available to them has done a serious disservice to Congress and the American people.” “Hide the ball” implies that they didn’t share all facts with everyone; lying would mean that they misrepresented those facts. Nobody (credible) appears to be contending that the admin lied about anything. I’ll leave the rest out to save the hamsters, but suffice it that there are 4 rather large problems with your assertion that Bush was lying about the lower figure: 1) it doesn’t look like Bush ever represented that the lower figure was the correct one; 2) it’s impossible for Bush to know that the lower figure was incorrect; 3) it doesn’t look like Bush ever had knowledge that the higher figure was the correct one; and 4) Bush shared the higher figure with some lawmakers, and other lawmakers knew about it. ---
**Author:** ![Puffs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c77e96/32.png) [@Puffs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Puffs)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/115 "2005-01-12T06:49:41Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Go nuts: [**Claims vs. Facts Database**](http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/apps/custom/cap/findorg.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=124702) > > And what **Spavined Gelding** just wrote. > > The End. Despite the provacative opening statement of the database you loinked to, > [@](#): > > This new database charts conservatives’ dishonesty and compares it with the truth. I decided to overlook it and see what they had. I chose the obvious selections in the database. Topic: Iraq - Al Qaeda Links Speaker: Bush, George - President Now remember that the database is there to point out **dishonesty** comparable to the truth. Dishonesty, to me, is to lack sincerity or what you know to be truthfulness, or to lie and intintionally decieve. > [@](#): > > Date: 2/8/2003 > Quote/Claim: > “Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in acquiring poisons and gases.” [Source: White House Web site] > > Fact: > “The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no ‘collaborative relationship’ between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration’s main justifications for the war in Iraq.” - Washington Post, 6/17/04 > > “We simply did not find any evidence of extensive links with Al Qaeda, or for that matter any real links at all.” - Bush Weapons Inspector David Kay, Boston Globe, 6/16/04 Pretty compelling isn’t it? I even checked the source links and sure enough, everythign quoted there is pretty much verbatim. SO why would he out right lie like that? What woudl make him say such. What was his references? Of course the meme complex of the site forbade it to supply such links directly. [http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.alqaeda.links/](http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.alqaeda.links/) > [@](#): > > Also, said Powell, a senior Iraqi defector, one of Saddam’s former European intelligence chiefs, said Iraqi agents were sent to Afghanistan in the mid-1990s to train al Qaeda members in document forgery. Seems they say they get their information from things like defectors, detainees, and Intelligence services. Seeing as how the President cannot verify every peice of information he gets personally, how else is he to get such information on an inaccessible regime? So where is the blatant dishonesty? Also, > [@](#): > > Date: 6/17/2004 > > Quote/Claim: > "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda.” [Source: White House Web site] > > Fact: > “Bush and Cheney also have sought to tie Iraq specifically to the 9/11 attacks. In a letter to Congress on March 19, 2003 — the day the war in Iraq began — Bush said that the war was permitted under legislation authorizing force against those who ‘planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.’” - USA Today, 6/16/04 > > “The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001.” - President Bush, 5/1/03 > > “[Iraq is] the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.” - Vice President Dick Cheney, 9/14/03 [http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.alqaeda.links/](http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.alqaeda.links/) > [@](#): > > After al Qaeda and the Taliban were ousted from Afghanistan, Zarqawi, a Jordanian national, established a camp in northeastern Iraq to train terrorists in using explosives and poisons, Powell said. > > The camp is in the northern Kurdish area of the country, outside the control of the Iraqi regime, but Iraq has kept track of events there by infiltrating Ansar al-Islam, a radical Islamic group that controls the area, Powell said. Well we know the Jordanian is there now. We know he has ties to Al-Qaeda. We know the coalition bombed [several](http://www.islam-online.net/english/News/2003-03/26/article06.shtml) camps in northern Iraq. [http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh03032001.html](http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh03032001.html) > [@](#): > > (Says use of force is consistent with international efforts against terrorism) > > March 20, 2003 > > President Bush formally informed the U.S. Congress of his determination that diplomatic and peaceful means alone would not lead to Iraqi compliance with United Nations demands that it would disarm. > > In a March 18 letter to Congressional leaders, Bush said that his use of the Congressional authorization to wage war against Iraq is consistent with the international effort against terrorism, “including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” > > Following is the text of Bush’s letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate: > > (begin text) > > THE WHITE HOUSE > Office of the Press Secretary > March 19, 2003 > > TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE > > March 18, 2003 > > Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:) > > Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that: > (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and > > (2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. If the terrorists were in Northern Iraq, then that would make (2) true. But it seems that the database you linked to wants to infer that Bush was refering to Saddam being linked to 9/11 only. Who is being dishonest on that point? Afetr ferreting out those first two sophisms, I gave up on thinking maybe the database listed had an agenda but the facts may speak for themselves. They did. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/116 "2005-01-12T07:42:20Z")
There is one point of view that the President’s exaggeration was trivial. It follows, in this point of view, that rather than a lie, what the President committed was allowable exaggeration. This is specious. It bears repeating why: 2 Policy options on the table: - Violent Invasion; or - Continued Weapons Inspections. Had the President dispassionately presented the evidence known to him, in all its heavily caveated glory, what would the result have been? **Spavined Gelding** and others: I dip my lid. **Bricker** : sleazy rhetorical trick. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/117 "2005-01-12T07:51:17Z")
**Puffs** , I’m not sure what you’re getting at, but we been through most of this in agonizing detail. The camp “in northern Iraq” was in the section of Iraq not under Saddam’s control. Technically, it was in Iraq proper, but in what you might think of as “rebel held” territory. They were not pals. Most of the dishonesty foisted upon us by the Bushiviks took the form of innuendo and insinuation, leaving a bit of room for deniability. Cheney carried the ball mostly when it came to outright bullshitting, except for Colin Powells festival of crapola celebrated at the UN two years back. Aside from corrrectly identifying the assembled members, not one word…repeat, not one word!..of his subsequent presentation has been corraborated. It was, as the French say, _le croque du merde_. Now we have people here who want to believe that deliberately misleading by insinuation and suggestion is not the same as lying. They are welcome to that, as they are clearly beyond convincing anyway. If the Finger of God pointed GeeDubya out and the skies boomed out “Lying Sack of Shit!”, they would wonder how the liberals subverted Jehovah. ---
**Author:** ![Puffs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c77e96/32.png) [@Puffs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Puffs)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/118 "2005-01-12T08:20:10Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > **Puffs** , I’m not sure what you’re getting at, but we been through most of this in agonizing detail. The camp “in northern Iraq” was in the section of Iraq not under Saddam’s control. Technically, it was in Iraq proper, but in what you might think of as “rebel held” territory. I think the quote I posted from Powell says just that. > [@elucidator](#): > > except for Colin Powells festival of crapola celebrated at the UN two years back. Aside from corrrectly identifying the assembled members, not one word…repeat, not one word!..of his subsequent presentation has been corraborated. Now that is a lie. It’s not misleading, or aform of innuendo and insinuation, leaving a bit of room for deniability. Not one word!? Shall I directly link much that was corraborated? Allot hasn’t been, true. But you saying not one word! as if it was all pulled out of the Administrations ass is what makes all of you wolf cryers so damn hard to even empathise with. Intelligence services and defectors and such is where they got their information. The whole world was on the same page. They corraborated each other findings. You tell me how Bush was being dishonest, as my orginal post was replying to, when the entire world’s intellence confirmed his statements? Soe of the intellegence was wring, yes. But not all of it. Some people may have deliberately misled and others definately lied in reports and such, but you cannot prove Bush or anyone was anything but duped in those occassions. You people want everyone to believe as you. He is a big liar and all he does is lie. YOu can’t prove the lies, but those are the conclusions you are happy with. Thats fine. Many people believe Bush honestly felt the threat was real. They feel that under that percieved threat he did the right thing. Without evidence of him being a liar, and just innuendos and accusations, you can yell LIAR all you want. Its what you believe, thats fine. Doesn’t ake it fact. But what is so mind boggling as that you people have the audacity to be outraged others don’t have the same bias and political preferences as you to come to same unproven conclusion. Get over yourselves. You are apparently in the minority. ANd if you want to accuse of hypocracy, where is the database of all of the liberal lies that have gone on? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/119 "2005-01-12T08:30:03Z")
It is hardly worth mentioning that Intelligence services the world over have been haemorraging people since day 1, each of whom have declared that _their_ intelligence doesn’t say anything like what Mr Bush so forcefully asserted. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205/120 "2005-01-12T08:40:42Z")
_haemorrhaging_ that is. Includes the US btw. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-forgive-bushs-lies/284205.md?page=7)