Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice, Pelosi, et al all believed there were WMDs. It wasn't a lie. It was misinformation that was believed to be correct (which I still believe to be the case but that's a whole 'nother thread). Obama said under his stimulus plan, unemployment will not exceed 8.5%. It's now approaching 10% and his response is that they were given "misinformation" or something along those lines. Biden says they "misread" the information. Please, what's the difference?
continuing with my "random thoughts" 1. the city of nola code enforcement is as inept in person as on the phone. 2. rita (last name withheld only because i am not sure of the spelling) with the lakeview civic association is a royal c... with a broomstick up her ass. she must have slipped getting off of said broom. that bitch is on my sh*t list! 3. now i have to log off, check out of my hotel, pack up my truck, and drive 10-10.5 hours. oh joy. after only 3-4 hours sleep, that is gonna be fun.
The WMD's didn't exist. He either lied or he was lied to by his own people. Is he a liar or is he stupid? Believing his own propaganda is a poor excuse. An extra percent exists. He either lied or he was lied to by his own people. Is he a liar or is he stupid? Believing his own propaganda is a poor excuse. Scale. One "misinformation" started an unnecessary war that has cost us 30,000 casualties, national credibility, and a Trillion dollars. The other did not.
Exactly. No difference 100% Bullsh1t. Scale has nothing to do with it. It's either a lie or it isn't a lie.
Sure, its a lie, I said that. But you also asked what the difference was and there was a big difference in the scale and the consequences of the lie. Once was underestimating an employment statistic resulting in a loss of credibility but the other was overestimating an enemy resulting in a war.
100% correct! 100% incorrect! The most authoritative study on this issue was conducted by the Senate Intelligence Committee. The report is located here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2004_rpt/ssci_concl.pdf Lets look at the few conclusions. Conclusion 83. The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities. Conclusion 84. The Committee found no evidence that the Vice President's visits to the Central Intelligence Agency were attempts to pressure analysts, were perceived as intended to pressure analysts by those who participated in the briefings on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, or did pressure analysts to change their assessments. Conclusion 85. The Committee found that none of the analysts or other people interviewed by the Committee said that they were pressured to change their conclusions related to Iraq's links to terrorism. This report was UNANIMOUSLY approved by the committee. Lets look at some of the Bush fan boys who signed off on this report. Jay Rockefeller (WV, Vice-Chair) Carl Levin (MI) Dianne Feinstein (CA) Ron Wyden (OR) Richard Durbin (IL) Evan Bayh (IN) John Edwards (NC) Barbara Mikulski (MD) The analysts were simply wrong in their conclusions and the report goes into great detail about how it happened. Nobody lied about anything.
Scale had absolutely nothing to do with my question. That was just your continuing to beat on the dead horse that was George W. Bush.
Where is the money coming from? Every day there is a new headline that reads, "Obama pledges $$ billion for ???"
