The Command Post
2004 US Presidential Election
October 27, 2004
Bush | "Wild Charges" Leveled In Desperation

Agence France-Presse reports that President Bush responded to Kerry’s attacks about missing Iraqi explosives calling Kerry’s explosive claims “wild charges” levelled in desperation.

“The senator is making wild charges about missing explosives,” said Bush. “Think about that: The senator is denigrating the action of our troops and commanders in the field without knowing the facts.”

“Unfortunately, that’s part of a pattern of saying almost anything to get elected,” said the president, whom Kerry has accused of incompetent war planning in the wake of media revelations that the explosives went missing.

“America is now investigating a number of possible scenarios, including that the explosives may have been moved before our troops even arrived at the site,” said Bush.

“This investigation is important, and a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not the person you want as your commander in chief,” said Bush.



Posted by Dan Spencer at October 27, 2004 12:57 PM | TrackBack
Comments

“I can not vote for John Kerry. If for no other reason, it would be spitting in the faces of all our Veterans, past, present, and future.”

Posted by: No Party [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 02:42 PM


…a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not the person you want as your commander in chief

Ha-ha, Pot meet kettle.

ok, ep

Posted by: elvispresley2k [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 04:12 PM

EP The guy knows the facts - he just enjoys nuancing them to death. Either that or he lies about them. BTW - I’m talking about the Pathologic Liar of ‘Christmas Dinner in Cambodia’ fame, in case you were drawing the wrong inferences…

Posted by: Cap'n DOC [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 04:26 PM

Yeah, I mean, his own CIA director, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, MI6, KGB, the Mossad, most Arab governments, and just about everybody else all thought Saddam Hussein had illegal weapons.

-300,000 chemical containment suits.
-UN inspectors thwarted at every turn in their “inspections”.
-Failure to comply with simple UN requirements.
-Failure to document unaccounted for weapons.
-Obvious attempts at bribery of UN officials.
-Previous use of weapons of mass destruction in the past..on his own people. And on his enemies, resulting in thousands dead.
-Extensive attempts to get them and research them in the past
-Evidence of ongoing attempts to circumvent the sanctions in search of weapons.
-Satellite evidence of reconstituted sites.
-Failure to give unfettered access to UN inspectors.

Yeah, hell, why would anyone jump to the conclusion that Saddam might have weapons of mass destruction? I can’t imagine.

Pot meet kettle, my ass. You’re the old, fat Elvis, aren’t you?

Posted by: Ebonic Plague [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 05:17 PM

Gosh Ebonic….what about in 2000 when Rice, Rumsfield, Powell and Bush all said they had every confidence that Iraq in fact had NO wmd’s at all? They’re all on video saying it…until they flip-flopped after 9/11.

Posted by: Jatsby [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 05:38 PM

So you agree that he didn’t jump to conclusions, Jatsby?

Posted by: Ebonic Plague [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 05:43 PM

By the way, I hope you’re planning on providing citations for these comments you’re making, and if you do, I hope your argument for Dr. Rice’s etc “flip-flopping” is constituted by more than this flimsy argument:

“February 2000: Condoleeza Rice : “if they [Iraq] do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration.”

One would hope, anyway.

Posted by: Ebonic Plague [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 05:56 PM

Plus, I would appreciate a citation of any statement anywhere using the term (or its equivalent)

“I have every confidence that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction”

Hey, I’m always willing to listen to an opposing side, but you’re going to have to do better with your arguments than the “Clip and Save WMD lies” pamphlet from the DNC.

Posted by: Ebonic Plague [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 06:00 PM

Ebonic, that’s perfectly fair. The easiest source is Michael Moore’s ambitious if flawed movie, wherein they are each shown on film making the statements I cited above. If I have to track down the individual sources for each of those, then I will endeavor to do so. But suffice it to say, you can go to your local Blockbuster and see the same thing; they are all very confidently stating that there’s just no way the wmd’s could exist. I believe Dr. Rice goes so far as to say that it’s impossible, because “we have successfully suppressed any opportunity” that Saddam might have had to make them.

Posted by: Jatsby [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 06:11 PM

In fact, EP, let me point you back to the quote you cited: “February 2000: Condoleeza Rice : “if they [Iraq] do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration.”

…She was referring there, if you’ll notice the tense, to there not being any in the first place.

Posted by: Jatsby [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 06:52 PM

..if its a wild charge you are looking for..check this out..
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/AndyWilcoxson41025.htm

Posted by: Rob_NC [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 27, 2004 10:03 PM

Almost sounds like the Viet Kong there, Rob…

Posted by: Cap'n DOC [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 28, 2004 06:52 AM

Jatsby,

Yes, by all means let’s use Fahrenheit 9/11 as our source. Because, you know, Moore is the zenith of objectivity. Let’s take this quote, for example:

ROLL FILM: (Condoleeza Rice)
“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.”
CUT.
Pretty damning stuff, isn’t it? But that was the truncated, Michael Moore version, Jatsby. Now for the full, unexpurgated quote:
“Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York.”

Well that’s a different quote, Jatsby. So why is Big Mike editing?

I think we know why.

Any comparison of intentionally abridged quotes, or misunderstood excerpts like the one I gave you pre 9/11 to John Kerry changing his positions like he changes his underwear is silly. 9/11 required a reevaluation of all current and potential threats. As I pointed out above, the idea, with all the info then currently and subsequently available, that we somehow “jumped to conclusions” in Iraq is absurd. What other conclusion could reasonably have been drawn? The President was nearly lynched for “failing to act” on the nebulous Aug 6th PDB memo.

Still waiting for those links. Make sure you get all quotes in their entirety.

Posted by: Ebonic Plague [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 28, 2004 11:55 AM

Ebonic Plague It is useless to be waiting on the likes of Jatsby. DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT hold your breath.

BTW, Jatsby… You jumped overboard prematurely on the thread regarding all those lies that Mr. O’Neill was spreading like butta, how’s about you cough up what you found in that regard? Pretty slim pickin’s? How about if we just play turnabout, and you come up with a couple of statements that Kerry has made that have proven to be TRUE?

Nah. Ya can’t do it, can you? That’s what I like about Liars. Thicker’n Thieves.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 28, 2004 03:01 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)