Bush has his own way of seeing things

[Donutboy 0]

Bush has his own way of seeing things

By MAUREEN DOWD

SYNDICATED COLUMNIST

WASHINGTON -- I think President Bush has cleared up everything now.

The United States invaded Iraq, which turned out not to have what our pals in Pakistan did have and were giving out willy-nilly to all the bad guys except Iraq, which wouldn't take it.

Bush officials thought they knew what was going on inside our enemy's country: that Iraq had WMD and might sell them on the black market. But they were wrong.

Bush officials thought they knew what was going on inside our friend's country: That Pakistanis were trying to sell WMD on the black market. But they couldn't prove it -- until about the time we were invading Iraq.

"The grave and gathering threat" turned out to be not Saddam's mushroom cloud but the president's mushrooming deficits.

The president is having just as hard a time finding his National Guard records as Iraqi WMD -- and those pay stubs look as murky as those satellite photos of trucks in Iraq.

Bush said Wednesday that smaller, developing countries must stop developing nuclear fuel, even as the United States develops a whole new arsenal of smaller nuclear weapons to use against smaller, developing countries that might be thinking about developing nuclear fuel.

After he weakened the United Nations for telling the truth about Iraq's nonexistent WMD, Bush now calls on the United Nations to be strong going after WMD.

Gen. Pervez Musharraf pardoned the Pakistani hero and nuclear huckster Abdul Qadeer Khan after an embarrassing debacle, praising the scientist's service to his country. Bush pardoned George Tenet after an embarrassing debacle, praising the spook's service to his country. (So much for Bush's preachy odes to responsibility and accountability.)

The president warned Wednesday that "the greatest threat before humanity" is the possibility of a sudden WMD attack. Not wanting nuclear technology to go to North Korea, Iran or Libya, the White House demanded tighter controls on black-market sales of WMD, even while praising its good buddy Pakistan, whose scientists were running a black market like a Sam's Club for nukes, peddling to North Korea, Iran and Libya.

Bush likes to present the world in black and white, as good and evil, even as he's made a Faustian deal with Musharraf, perhaps hoping that one day -- maybe even on an October day -- the cagey general will decide to cough up Osama.

The president is spending $1.5 billion to persuade more Americans to have happy married lives, but plans to keep gay Americans from having happy married lives.

Bush said he wouldn't try to overturn abortion rights. But John Ashcroft is intimidating women who had certain abortions by subpoenaing records in six hospitals in New York, Philadelphia and elsewhere.

The president set up the intelligence commission (with few intelligence experts) because, he said, the best intelligence is needed to win the war on terror. Yet he doesn't want us to get the panel's crucial report until after he's won the war on Kerry.

Bush said he had balked at giving the 9/11 commission the records of his daily briefings from the CIA until faced with a subpoena threat because it might deter the CIA from giving the president "good, honest information." Wasn't it such "good, honest information" that caused him to miss 9/11 and mobilize the greatest war machine in history against Saddam's empty cupboard?

Bush says he's working hard to create new jobs in America, while his top economist says it's healthy for jobs to be shipped overseas.

The president told Tim Russert that if you order a country to disarm and it doesn't and you don't act, you lose face. But how does a country that goes to war to disarm a country without arms get back its face?

Bush said he was troubled that the Vietnam War was "a political war," because civilian politicians didn't let the generals decide how to fight it. But when Gen. Eric Shinseki presciently told Congress in February 2003 that post-war Iraq would need several hundred thousand U.S. soldiers to keep it secure and supplied, he was swatted down by the Bush administration's civilian politicians.

Yes, it all makes perfect sense, through the Bush looking glass.

[War Eagle 96 10]

The United States invaded Iraq, which turned out not to have what our pals in Pakistan did have and were giving out willy-nilly to all the bad guys except Iraq, which wouldn't take it.

Bush officials thought they knew what was going on inside our enemy's country: that Iraq had WMD and might sell them on the black market. But they were wrong.

Bush officials thought they knew what was going on inside our friend's country: That Pakistanis were trying to sell WMD on the black market. But they couldn't prove it -- until about the time we were invading Iraq.

The problem with this kind of finger-pointing is that it doesn't work. See, Clinton, Dean, Kerry and many others on your side of the aisle saw the same intelligence. And, they came to the same conclusions as the president. Many were even stronger than Bush in the case they made for war.

People remember that stuff. And now they see the people on your side changing their stories and attitudes now that it is politically expedient.

"Change your views with the winds of convenience." The Democrat strategy.

Say what you want about Bush, he says what he does and does what he says. Even when it could have dire consequences for him politically. People see that too. That's why the Democrats are about to spend their second 4-year-term watching from the sidelines. Only this time, it will be with a smaller minority in the House and Senate.

[Tiger Al 0]

One-You're dead wrong on Dean. Good try, though.

Two-Maybe they did see the same info that Bush did, but, there was also intel that Bush saw that they didn't get to see.

Three-Bush said that he would exhaust all remedies, to include letting the UN conduct its' inspections, BEFORE going to war. He clearly did not honor his word. Remember, and this is a magic marker moment, UNMOVIC was in Iraq, unfettered (which means unconfined) for three months and was sent to repeated locations by the US and found nothing. This should've been a tip-off to Bush that maybe we didn't know as much as we thought we did. You'd think that if you accused someone of having something and it turned out that they didn't have it then you'd decide to look further before your military on a decrepit country.

[War Eagle 96 10]

What about that letter from Dean, as the VT Gov., to Clinton in the late 90's concerning Sadaams weapons of mass destrucion?

BTW Sadaam DID have weapons of MD, NO ONE disputes that. The thing is, the liberals are running around saying "Bush lied, Bush lied" there were no WMD before the war, "Bush lied, Bush lied" is all they can come up with.

The thing you don't even think about, in your power-hungry rage is, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE WMD?

Cause I'm sure Sadaam properly destroyed them per UN mandate, right? He just didn't say so, cause he wanted us to oust him from power.

[Tiger Al 0]

BTW Sadaam DID have weapons of MD, NO ONE disputes that. The thing is, the liberals are running around saying "Bush lied, Bush lied" there were no WMD before the war, "Bush lied, Bush lied" is all they can come up with.

Of course he did. We helped him get them and looked the other way when he used them. Do you really think that this war was because he had WMD's at some point in time? Bush said he was in possession of them at the time we invaded, not ten years ago.

The thing you don't even think about, in your power-hungry rage is, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE WMD?

You haven't paid attention. Many former weapons inspectors from UNSCOM, UNMOVIC and the IAEA have said, BEFORE THE WAR, that they were certain that Iraq had been disarmed by and large. Were they absolutely, positively, unequivocally sure that he was 100% disarmed of 100% of ANY WMD that may have ever been in Iraq? No. It was a matter of accountibility that was being addressed in the three months prior to attack.

On the other hand, the Bush administration was going around telling everyone everyday that Saddam, in FACT, DID have them and we knew right where they were. The Bush administration WAS, they said, absolutely, positively, unequivocally sure that he was in possession of massive stockpiles of WMD's. No doubt whatsoever and anyone, especially the UN, who dared say any different was branded as un-American and a terrorist sympathizer.

If no one of any knowledge or authority had spoken up BEFORE the war and challenged what Bush said, then I'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt. That, however, is not the case. Many, both within the administration and outside of it, were vocal about the accuracy of the claims and they were bullied down in the name of "Patriotism."

Now, you and I have the benefit of hindsight to judge who was right in their PRE-WAR claims. You continue to defend Bush despite any evidence that WMD's were present at the time we said they were. If they were as abundant as he said they were then we should've found them. To date, not one single drop of chemical agent has been found. To date, not one single germ has been found. To date, not one single nuclear weapon has been found. To date, not one single long-range missile to deliver any of those unfound WMD's has been found, either.