Posted on 03/22/2006 10:15:47 AM PST by Gargantua
No Iraqi WMD’s Proves Bush’s Integrity
March 22, 2006 by Gargantua
The Democratic drumbeat, stale and tired though it may be, not only continues, but is likely to intensify as we approach the 2006 mid-term elections. Their favorite mantra?
“Bush lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction.” “Republicans can’t be trusted!”
After eight long years of Bill Clinton’s Oval Office sexcapades, Vince Foster’s suspicious death, Ron Brown’s suspicious death, Betty Currie’s brother’s suspicious death, etc., and the way that these crimes (widely acknowledged though often never proven or admitted to) turned the stomachs of the vast majority of American voters, the Republicans were granted both Houses of Congress and the White House by the people of this great country.
The Democrats know what it was that turned America against them. The blatant dishonesty and disregard for the Law or even any remotely moral consideration made the Donkey’s undeserving of the power which they had so long held—and had even taken for granted.
Their ploy this time around is to smear everything Republican that they can find with their own fecal filth. Accuse Tom DeLay of crimes and unethical behavior, accuse Bill Frist of crimes and unethical behavior (hmm… what a coincidence—both GOP House and Senate Leaders…), and keep repeating this filth via the Liberal Lapdog Media in an attempt to convince the American voter that “Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats.”
This would give the Dem’s equal footing leading up to the 2006 election cycle, if only they could convince America that their partisan accusations equal Republican guilt.
Their single-biggest hurdle in accomplishing this smear mission, however, lies not with DeLay or Frist, but with President George W. Bush. Their whole game plan relies heavily upon continually reminding America that the leader of this Republican slime brigade, George W. Bush, is the biggest, most dishonest and deceitful criminal of all.
The problem is that no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found in Iraq.
I’ll repeat that: The Democrats’ biggest hurdle in proving their GOP criminal conspiracy claims is that NO biological or chemical weapons were found in Iraq.
Were President Bush the Machiavellian liar which Democrats would love to paint him as, we most assuredly would have found WMD’s in Iraq. We would have found Botulism in Baghdad, Ebola in Basra, Mustard in Fallujah, Anthrax in Tikrit, the stuff would have been everywhere we looked. Because so deceitful a mastermind as the great deceiver Bush would have had his Haliburton minions planting the stuff everywhere. But that didn’t happen, did it? When no WMD’s were found, the honest. integrity-bound president admitted the truth instead of scurrying to cover up the truth. How novel. What a breath of fresh air after eight years of Clinton.
The simple truth is that our not finding WMD’s in Iraq is the single-most convincing proof of the absolute integrity of this President and his Administration. They should make more of a point of this as November approaches, and the Dem Slime Machine ramps up the volume.
It would have been the easiest thing to do. Just as easy as wagging a finger at the TV cameras and saying with a venomous sneer, “I did NOT have sex with THAT WOMAN.”
Deceit is easy. The Democrats are betting their political future on it. Thank God we have a president who knows the difference between expediency and integrity.
great point. the diseased mind of the left used to swear up and down Lord Bush would plant the evidence if it wasn't there.
I've said this before here, and I repeat this to my liberal family and friends. IF Bush and company were as vile and evihl as they say, they would have planted WMD somewhere. It would have been easy enough to bring in a few capsules, heck, a sealed bucket of Anthrax hidden somewhere in Saddams closet would have been enough (said bucket containing enough Anthrax to kill hundreds of thousands)..
I know what you mean - if Bush had KNOWN they were not there and had been evil enough to lie, then certainly he would have deen dishonest enough to plant them, or attempt to. But if they had been found, no doubt the moonbats would have said they were planted anyway. They say Bush was behind 9/11 already, so what would stop them? The fact that neither plot could possible be kept a secret, considering the number of actors needed, makes no difference to them.
But I agree with your point.
"Were President Bush the Machiavellian liar which Democrats would love to paint him as, we most assuredly would have found WMD’s in Iraq."
I've said the same thing - If I were in charge and had ordered this invasion we WOULD have found WMDs.
I noticed that X42 never said that Bush lied. Is that because his administration turned over eight years of Intel that stated Iraq did have WMD's?
PS Part of the "Bush did 9/11" lunacy also somehow states that Bush allowed the attacks to happen (or was even the prime force behind them) so as to have an "excuse" to attack Iraq. But then why didn't he just go ahead and BLAME 9/11 on Iraq, instead of al-Qaeda? DUH!
Again, I don't like to waste too much time on these idiot theories, but unfortunately we need to know what's out there, since some of these wackos have actually been elected to office.
That is a good point. Recently Blowzo the Clown said something to indicate that Iraq was a mistake, but generally he has been supportive of the effort and said he thought the WMDs were there too. Interesting how his "wife" has not thrown in 100% with the anti-war crowd, although she certainly has done her share of bashing the mission.
In a perverse way, it gives me hope that we will not cut and run, if these two opportunists still see advantage in not going the Murtha route.
But he surely would KNOW that is what they would think. So in fact there WERE WMD found, but he HID THEM, so he could say they didn't find any, to prove how honest he was. Because if he just said they found WMD, the left would argue that they were planted.
:->
When and what happened to Betty Currie’s brother?
Never thought of it that way. Slick was not straight with the American People and would have found a way to prove his claims.
However, I can't see this theory helping W.
A passing car hit the brother of Presidential Secretary Betty Currie after his own car had somehow run off the road.
Bill Clinton called Monica Lewinsky at 2:00 AM the next morning to tell her of the death and alert Monica that her name appeared on the Paula Jones witness list
Betty's brother had also been beaten shortly before Betty testified in a previous matter
Using the lefts philosophy, the firemen who show up for a false alarm are liars.
Excellent commentary, Gargantua...Thanks for that!
Thank you, ravingnutter. Is his name on "the list?"
I didn't know about that one either.
What a great point, Gargantua. BTTT
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x725968
You might want to check this out...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.