This morning he defended his Niger uranium lie included in his State of the Union address by declaring that the information had been cleared by the CIA. That is pure b.s. CBS.com ran a headline this morning that said "BUSH KNEW IRAQ INFO WAS FALSE" and has since changed it to "BUSH KNEW IRAQ INFO WAS DUBIOUS", but their lead paragraph still reads: (CBS) Senior administration officials tell CBS News the President’s mistaken claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa was included in his State of the Union address -- despite objections from the CIA. DESPITE ! CBS, however, is not the only news source exposing Bush's lie. It's all over the net: BBC, Guardian, Post, and on and on and on. Our young men were sent over to Iraq to risk their lives. They and their parents deserved the truth, not deliberate falsehoods. The State of the Union address is a Constitutionally-required function, delivered unde the oath Bush took at his inauguration to uphold the Constitution and faithfully perform his duties. He lied under oath, on a matter of grave national importance, and should be impeached.
Sign the national petition for a bipartisan investigation Is Bush accountable for the things he says? http://mfile.akamai.com/8082/wmv/democratic1.download.akamai.com/8082/video/read_his_lips_hi.asx
Even though I can't stand Shrub, I'm giving him a free pass, because it's possible the real reason was legitimate but was something he couldn't say openly. I can think of two possibilities, but there are certainly others as well. One is that we had to make an example of someone in the Middle East--but saying so openly would inflame the Arab world. The other is that removing Saddam allowed the spiritual center of Shi'a Islam to return to its true capital, a city whose name I can't remember, but it is in Iraq. The idea may have been to undermine the Iranian ayatollahs by strengthening the religious influence of their Iraqi counterparts, who are less militant and more wary of government power. To say so openly would have undermined the reformists in Iran.
This is not a question of the wisdom of the war. This is a question of honesty and presidential obligation. I think the invasion, in the long run, was a good move. However, this is a nation of voters, whose sons and daughters are sent off to war, who deserve the TRUTH. Just because I favored an invasion doesn't mean America would have, given the TRUTH. We need good information upon which to assess the actions of our leaders, and now Bush has jeopardized the credibility of any future information that comes down the pike. He is not to be trusted on Iran, North Korea, or on anything else.
Positively NOT Because lying about a blow job with a consenting adult is not an urgent national matter. Now, turn the question around. Did you call for Clinton's impeachment? And, if so, why aren't you doing the same for Bush?
I never considered sex with a pig to be an impeachable offense. Hell, if that was the case, Hillary would have gotten him tossed.
I'll sign your petition when somebody puts a pen between my cold dead fingers and forges my signature.
Lied Lied Lied, thats all you hear and nothing but this one issue to go on. He used bad intel on this one item, it's not like this is the only thing we based a war on.......Geez. Anyone and I mean anyone who thinks Saddam didn't have WMD's or the stuff to make it are fools.......And I sure hope that does not include any LSU fans, sure would hate to think we have stupid people in purple and gold.
