Whopper: George W. Bush
Oh, that letter to Congress linking Saddam and 9/11 ...
By Timothy Noah

"This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda."
—President Bush, in an exchange with reporters, June 17, 2004

"[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] 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. [Italics Chatterbox's.*]
—President Bush, in a letter to Congress outlining the legal justification for commencing war against Iraq, March 18, 2003

From Slate Magasine

Rob

Whopper: George W. Bush
Chalabi? The president can't quite place that name ...
By Timothy Noah

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Chalabi is an Iraqi leader that's fallen out of favor within your administration. I'm wondering if you feel that he provided any false information, or are you particularly—

A: Chalabi?

Q: Yes, with Chalabi.

A: My meetings with him were very brief. I mean, I think I met with him at the State of the Union and just kind of working through the rope line, and he might have come with a group of leaders. But I haven't had any extensive conversations with him.

—President Bush, in a Rose Garden exchange with reporters, June 1, 2004.

Q: If the Iraqis choose, however, an Islamic extremist regime, would you accept that, and would that be better for the United States than Saddam Hussein?

A: They're not going to develop that. And the reason I can say that is because I'm very aware of this basic law they're writing. They're not going to develop that because right here in the Oval Office I sat down with Mr. Pachachi and Chalabi and al-Hakim, people from different parts of the country that have made the firm commitment, that they want a constitution eventually written that recognizes minority rights and freedom of religion.

—President Bush, in an Oval Office interview with NBC's Tim Russert aired Feb. 8, 2004

From Slate Magasine

Rob

Whopper: Condoleezza Rice
Oh, that non-historical new threat information …
By Timothy Noah

Q: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6th [Presidential Daily Briefing] warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?

A: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside the United States."

Now, the ...

Q: Thank you.

A: No, Mr. Ben-Veniste ...

Q: I will get into the ...

A: I would like to finish my point here.

Q: I didn't know there was a point.

A: Given that—you asked me whether or not it warned of attacks.

Q: I asked you what the title was.

A: You said, did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States [italics Chatterbox's].

—Exchange between Richard Ben-Veniste of the 9/11 commission and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, April 8, 2004.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [text deleted] service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar' Abd-al Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

—Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks. …

—The Presidential Daily Briefing for Aug. 6, 2001, made public by the White House on April 10, 2004.

From Slate Magasine

Rob

Whopper: President Bush
Dubya Agonistes.
By Timothy Noah

"My tax relief plan is a fair one, lowering the rate for all taxpayers."

—President Bush's weekly radio address, Feb. 17, 2001.

[Author Ron] Suskind also writes about a White House meeting in which he says the president seems to be wavering about going forward with his second round of tax cuts. "Haven't we already given money to rich people. ... Shouldn't we be giving money to the middle," Suskind says the president uttered, according to a nearly verbatim transcript of an Economic Team meeting he says he obtained from someone at the meeting.

—CBS teaser for the Jan. 11, 2004 edition of 60 Minutes, which will preview Suskind's forthcoming book, The Price of Loyalty, relating the experiences of Paul O'Neill as Bush's treasury secretary. According to the Washington Post, O'Neill "offered up 19,000 documents, including private White House transcripts and personal notes, for the book," which will be published Tuesday.

From Slate Magasine

Rob

Past Bush Statement: We will never win the war on terror.
Present Bush Statement: We will win the war on terror.
Future Bush Statement: What war on terror?

I will not use the US military for nation building.

I will bring dignity and integrity back to the Oval office.

I will be a uniter, not a divider.

I will not govern based on polls.

...compassionate conservatism...blah,blah,blah...no child left behind...blah,blah,blah...power to local governments...blah, blah...

He's not using the US military for nation building. He's paying Haliburton for that.

[ September 05, 2004, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: jqueer ]

Hey guys, not that I've given up hope, but you know, it's like none of W's lies or misstatements or half-truths or ANYTHING--the AWOL year, the SEC violations, the bilking of the Texas taxpayers for the Rangers' stadium, his awful record in Texas government, his poor stewardship of the economy, etc.--ANYTHING sticks to this creep. Nothing. And the media are utterly complicit.

I saw almost ZERO criticism of all W's claims about his accomplishments the past four years AND his projected plans for the future. HOW is he going to pay for all this stuff? What about all he failed to do, even with an all-Republican Congress?

Why should we believe ANYTHING he says, ever, given how repeatedly and actively he lies about EVERYTHING and refuses to take responsibility (except in extremely rare moments of lucidity), from the "mission accomplished" sign down to his ties to the Swifties?

So what do we do? I'm trying to keep the faith, but it's so dispiriting. It's as if the majority of the public just forgets everything that he does a day later, and I personally do NOT want there to be a new outrage daily to wake them up. I don't want more soldiers to be blown to smithereens (as happened to 7 marines today) for them to remember the ongoing debacle in Iraq; or more spies to emerge for them to recall the incompetency of the Department of Defense; or some new scientific study to be issued for them to recall how bad W's environmental policy has been.

But what do we DO??? Why can't Kerry keep the public's mind focused on how awful W really has been for MOST of us (not just the corporations and the top 1%), and how much better he and Edwards would truly be?

[ September 06, 2004, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Fan. I know what you are saying. There are lots of ups and downs when politics are going on. I also agree with just about everything you have said. I know it can be easy to sometimes have a little less faith, a little less hope, but there is still alot of time before the election, and the debates are still going to happen. I remain confident, that on Nevember 2nd, we will prevail. The Repugs. have proven masterful in their smears, attacks and negativity, just makes me want to work harder to make sure that our candidates prevail.Hang in there! wink