Bush Never Lied to Us About Iraq ( In the L.A. Times no less! )

Los Angeles Times ^ | June 16, 2008 | James Kirchick

[fso301]

I’m thinking this is intended to be supportive of Obama

I agree and add to that, a shot against Romney as McCains VP on the theory that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

[mimaw]

When did the New Republic become a Conservative source? Who were the Republicans that signed off on the senate report?

[LibertyRocks]

Apologies, I was confusing it with another site...

[Clint Lippo]

If you mean by TNR The National Review then its a conserv. publication.The New Republic is liberal and left.

[Incorrigible]

Bump!

[rhombus]

I’m thinking this is intended to be supportive of Obama

I agree and add to that, a shot against Romney as McCains VP on the theory that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree

That's pretty much the way I see this... this op-ed is more about painting George Romney (and thus his son) as a cowardly flip-flopper. This New Republic writer has the foresight to see that Bush is history so it's no big deal to admit that he might have got some things right. This is more about reviving anti-Romney mistrust among conservatives than cutting Bush any slack.

[Mere]

More than that. Saddam wanted to destablize the entire region and try to take over Saudi.

[browardchad]

this particular writer does work for a Conservative source

The New Republic is classified as liberal, or, on some issues (such as support for the initial invasion of Iraq), as "center left." It definitely can't be classified as conservative.

[kalee]

bttt

[LibertyRocks]

Yep, that was my mistake. I was confusing it with a different site - sorry about that!

[School of Rational Thought]

The writer is from the New Republic, not the LA Times, although printed.

The pieces’ content will be ignored due to the usual anti-rationalism, or truthism for you gen Xers.

[purpleraine]

I would add that Saddam harbored terrorists in Baghdad (was it Abu Nidal?) and he plotted to kill an ex-president on his trip to Kuwait.

I think the congress came up with 23 charges to grant the president war power.

[kellynla]

“The writer is from the New Republic, not the LA Times, although printed.”

I never said the writer was from the L.A. Times now did I...
let me know when you people complete your reading comprehension course...

Now can we get to the subject matter of the article which is that BUSH DID NOT LIE ABOUT THE WAR AS CLAIMED BY THE LEFT AND ADMITTED IN THIS ARTICLE BY A LEFTIE...FINALLY... SEVEN YEARS AFTER THE FACT!

shezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[DocRock]

bookmark

[jackv]

bttt

[Skooz]

bump

[The Wizard]

excellent post.......excellent

[ETL]

Thanks. I got the quotes off the site I mentioned at the bottom, but had to do quite a bit of reorganizing to post it all here in html.

[The_Reader_David]

FReepers are amazed by the LA Times getting things right so often that it should cease to be a cause of amazement.

Truth be told, because of their penchant, both on the opinion page and in news reporting, for getting things right on a fairly regular basis, the LA Times has become my favorite old media outlet. (Yes, I know they are reliably in the tank for the CA demonRAT party, but they seem to have some of the last journalists who actually believe in objectivity working for them, and an editorial page editor that thinks something more than a token ‘conservative’ columnist is needed for balance.)

[The_Reader_David]

FReepers are amazed by the LA Times getting things right so often that it should cease to be a cause of amazement.

Truth be told, because of their penchant, both on the opinion page and in news reporting, for getting things right on a fairly regular basis, the LA Times has become my favorite old media outlet. (Yes, I know they are reliably in the tank for the CA demonRAT party, but they seem to have some of the last journalists who actually believe in objectivity working for them, and an editorial page editor that thinks something more than a token ‘conservative’ columnist is needed for balance.)