There's a perception in this country that we were lied to about the
run-up to the war in Iraq. Maybe we were and maybe we weren't, but
there are a lot of people who think we were. And a half a trillion
dollars and 2,000 of our kids later, we're still there. We're mired in
a thing that has no visible end.
If it was necessary and if the threats were real, fine and dandy. But
if they lied to us, if there was some kind of intent to deceive, then
they ought to find out who did it and tear their fingernails out and
then get rid of them.
And it's not about being on, you know, one side of the political
spectrum or the other. It's about what's right and what's wrong and
what people who are entrusted to govern this country do with the power
we give them. If it's being abused, we damn well have a right to know,
and something should be done about it -- Wolf.
"Today is an ominous day for the country, signifying a new low since Watergate in terms of openness and honesty in our government. This is far more than an indictment of an individual. In
effect it’s an indictment of the vicious and devious tactics used by
the Administration to justify a war we never should have fought.
It’s an indictment of the lengths Administration officials were willing
to go to cover up their failed intelligence, their distortion on Iraq’s
weapons of mass destruction, and their serious blunders on the war. It
is an indictment of their vindictive efforts to discredit anyone who
challenge their misrepresentations.
The American
people know the high cost of this misguided war – 2,000 U.S. soldiers
dead, more than 15,000 wounded, hundreds of billions of dollars spent
with no end in sight, and a
continuing shameful effort by the White House to silence those who try
to tell the truth about the war. Dissent is the ultimate form of
patriotism, and it’s time we return to having an honest
discourse in this country about changing direction and paying attention
to the needs of the American people.
The President should take
this opportunity to do everything he can to heal the country by not
interfering with the prosecution of this case or the continuing
investigation, and by cleaning house at the White House to immunize the
country against any further corruption and dishonesty. As
the President promised, anyone still in the White House who had
anything to do with this scandalous plot or the cover-up should be
dismissed immediately, whether or not they have been indicted.
Something has to give — America can’t stand three more years of this
failed Bush presidency. " --Senator Kennedy
"It
"These are very serious charges," Reid said. "They suggest that
ASSOCIATED PRESS
RENO, Nev. (AP) -
The charges against Vice President Dick Cheney's top adviser are "very serious" because they suggest a senior White House aide put politics ahead of national security, Sen. Harry Reid said Friday.
Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, announced his resignation Friday
shortly after he was indicted on charges of obstruction of justice,
making false statements and perjury in the CIA leak case.
Reid, the Senate Democratic leader from Nevada, said the case is bigger than just the leak of classified information.
is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated
intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to
discredit anyone who dared to challenge the president," the senator said in a statement from Washington.
Friday's charges stemmed from a two-year investigation by special
counsel Patrick Fitzgerald into whether Rove, Libby or any other
administration officials knowingly revealed the identity of CIA officer
Valerie Plame or lied about their involvement to investigators.
If convicted on all five counts, Libby could face as much as 30 years in prison and more than $1 million in fines.
a senior White House aide put politics ahead of our national security
and the rule of law."
"It's now time for President Bush to lead and answer the very serious questions raised by this investigation. The American people have already paid too steep a price as a result of misconduct at the White House, and they deserve better."
In a speech yesterday, President Bush made statements that "ignored
elements of Mr. Kerry's record and stated positions in a way that paints
an incomplete or distorted portrait of his approach."[1]
Here are two examples:
Yesterday, Bush said, "Senator Kerry's approach would permit a response
only after America is hit."[2] In fact, Kerry has explicitly said that
he would use preemptive force when necessary. During the first
presidential debate Kerry said, "The president always has the right, and always
has had the right, for preemptive strike...No president, through all of
American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt
in any way necessary to protect the United States of America."[3]
Bush also said Kerry was "against vital weapon systems during his
entire career."[4] According to the non-partisan Factcheck.org, the Bush
campaign "bases its claim mainly on Kerry's votes against overall Pentagon
money bills in 1990, 1995 and 1996, but these were not votes against
specific weapons."[5] Nonetheless, since Kerry has been in Congress he
has voted for 16 of the 19 overall Pentagon funding bills. Therefore, "even by the
Bush campaign's twisted logic, Kerry should - on balance - be called a
supporter of the 'vital' weapons."[6]
Sources:
1. "Bush Adds Teeth to His Attacks on Kerry," New York Times, 10/19/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63708.
2. "Transcript: Bush Attacks Kerry's Security Proposals," Washinton
Post, 10/18/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63709.
3. "Debate Transcript: The First Bush-Kerry Presidential Debate,"
Commission on Presidential Debates, 9/30/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63710.
4. "Transcript: Bush Attacks Kerry's Security Proposals," Washinton
Post, 10/18/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63709.
5. "More Bush Distortions of Kerry Defense Record," FactCheck.org,
4/30/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63711.
6. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63711.
The president has told the American people that he expected persistent
violence in Iraq. On Feb. 8th, 2004, Tim Russert asked President Bush:
"Are you surprised by the level and intensity of resistance?" Bush
replied, "No. I'm not."[1] According to Pat Robertson, there is no way that
could be true.
Appearing yesterday on CNN, Robertson said that just before the war he
"warned him about this war...I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you
had better prepare the American people for casualties.'"[2] Bush then
told Robertson, "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."[3] More
than 1,100 U.S. troops have died in Iraq and another 8,000 troops have
been wounded.[4]
Sources:
1. "Transcript for February 8th 'Meet the Press'," MSNBC, 2/13/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63938.
2. "Robertson: I warned Bush on Iraq casualties," CNN, 10/20/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63939.
3. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63939.
4. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3453460&l=63939.
Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion.
>
"It doesn't matter that Bush scares the hell of me,"
"What
matters is that he scares the hell out of a lot of very important people in
Washington who can't speak out, in the military, in the intelligence
community. They know in ways that none of us know, the incredible gap
between what is and what [Bush] thinks."-
-Seymour Hersh .
# George W. Bush
Our current president was born on July 6, 1946, under
the Sun sign of Cancer -- a friendly sign, but one
that tends to be more of a homebody than a social
butterfly. Much of Bush's birth chart also reflects a
strong focus on the self -- so he doesn't really
differentiate between himself and his country. He
likely has a deep love for the United States, wants
the best for it and will do whatever he feels is
necessary to make the country as strong and successful
as possible. The downside is that he can develop a
very narrow focus, and disregard other opinions and
points of views. His tight focus can help when one
specific idea or event requires his complete
attention, but it can also prevent him from being able
to see the big picture. On the whole, Bush is a very
open-hearted and optimistic man who looks toward the
future. He has a stubborn streak, however, and he
needs to beware his pride -- it could be his undoing.
John Kerry
John Kerry was born on December 11, 1943, which makes
him a Sagittarius -- a much more social, yet
thoughtful sign. His chart also implies a larger focus
on others rather than himself, and he feels a strong
connection with the people around him. He won't commit
to an action until he's considered all possible
outcomes -- he can easily see both the forest and the
trees. Kerry can appear to be indecisive, so the
accusations about him 'flip-flopping' are not
surprising. However, this actually reflects one of his
greatest strengths -- he forms decisions based on the
information presented to him, but he is always
open-minded about new data -- he won't stick to an
idea simply because it was his first. Most
importantly, Kerry's chart shows a man with strong
leadership skills. Kerry's greatest weakness, though,
is his outward persona. He appears indecisive, and
though he loves people, he tends to have a frosty
attitude around them -- if he's going to succeed, he
needs to avoid getting in his own way.