Makes sense to me.
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/05/2...orge-w-bush-smartest-human-who-has-ever-lived
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members."-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), October 10, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime.... He represents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation.... And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.... The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."-Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), January 23, 2003
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), December 16, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."-Pres. Bill Clinton, February 17, 1998
In a recent interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, 2016 presidential hopeful Jeb Bush was asked whether, knowing what he knows now, he would have still invaded Iraq if he were president after 9/11. Bush appeared to answer the question as if he were asked what he would have done given the intelligence at the time. Mr. Bush said he, too, would have invaded Iraq and reminded everyone that Hillary Clinton would have done so as well.
Bush later revised his answer to fit the proper context but his initial response to a question no one asked was the correct response to a question not enough people have asked in the aftermath of the Iraq war.
It is obvious to anyone with common sense that any man or woman who was elected President of the United States in 2000 would've reacted the exact same way. And this is not just speculation. Almost every prominent politician and possible presidential candidate supported President Bush and the overall consensus was that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.
When Bush defenders and fair-minded people point out the fact that Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and most senators and congressmen all agreed that something needed to be done in Iraq, Bush haters, left with no legitimate response, can only muster up one reply - Bush lied and manipulated them to go along with his evil scheme.
Let's not forget about British Prime Minister Tony Blair and much of the international community as well. They too were duped by Bush's lies. If this is their only defense, how well does this speak to the intelligence and integrity of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and countless others?
Barack Obama, apparently the most brilliant president we have ever had, must use executive action because he cannot convince his opponents or the American people to go along with most of his proposals. But an idiot like George W. Bush can convince the entire world to do his biddings? Those people with the most intense hatred of George W. Bush have always tried to have it both ways when it comes to the former president. Depending on their agenda, he’s a blue-blooded, Harvard-Yale elitist one day and a moronic, unstable wanna-be Texas cowboy the next.
Talk to anyone with an abnormally irrational hatred for George W. Bush and they are certain of two things: (1) Bush is evil, a liar and murderer and (2) He is a moron. A blundering idiot with the intelligence of a developmentally-challenged earthworm. To these folks, these two things are indisputable. However, there is a major problem with their assessment.
We could never convince the true haters that Bush did anything right or that he is not pure evil, but even those people in the most advanced stages of irrational Bush hatred must learn that they cannot have it both ways. The aforementioned characteristics are mutually exclusive and simply cannot coexist.
If President Bush lied about WMDs and tricked the American people, the United States Congress and many of the world's leaders, then I think we must take the moron label off the table. In fact, not only can a man who manipulated the world’s elite and even possibly masterminded 9/11 not be a moron, it is fairly safe to say that he may be the smartest human being who has ever lived. A man with intelligence so unfathomably vast it surpasses the collective brainpower of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Tony Blair and all others he was able to manipulate combined.
I don't think any of us believe George W. Bush is the smartest human being who's ever lived. So, that only leaves one possible scenario - the truth. And the truth is that George W. Bush reacted to Iraq based on the intelligence he received combined with the fact that Saddam Hussein was restricting access to weapon’s inspectors.
You don’t have to like George W. Bush. You don’t have to believe he was a good president. But you do need another excuse to support your bizarre and unfounded hatred of the man. The fact that he did what anyone else in his shoes would have done just doesn’t cut it.
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/05/2...orge-w-bush-smartest-human-who-has-ever-lived
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members."-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), October 10, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime.... He represents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation.... And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.... The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."-Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), January 23, 2003
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), December 16, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."-Pres. Bill Clinton, February 17, 1998
In a recent interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, 2016 presidential hopeful Jeb Bush was asked whether, knowing what he knows now, he would have still invaded Iraq if he were president after 9/11. Bush appeared to answer the question as if he were asked what he would have done given the intelligence at the time. Mr. Bush said he, too, would have invaded Iraq and reminded everyone that Hillary Clinton would have done so as well.
Bush later revised his answer to fit the proper context but his initial response to a question no one asked was the correct response to a question not enough people have asked in the aftermath of the Iraq war.
It is obvious to anyone with common sense that any man or woman who was elected President of the United States in 2000 would've reacted the exact same way. And this is not just speculation. Almost every prominent politician and possible presidential candidate supported President Bush and the overall consensus was that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.
When Bush defenders and fair-minded people point out the fact that Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and most senators and congressmen all agreed that something needed to be done in Iraq, Bush haters, left with no legitimate response, can only muster up one reply - Bush lied and manipulated them to go along with his evil scheme.
Let's not forget about British Prime Minister Tony Blair and much of the international community as well. They too were duped by Bush's lies. If this is their only defense, how well does this speak to the intelligence and integrity of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and countless others?
Barack Obama, apparently the most brilliant president we have ever had, must use executive action because he cannot convince his opponents or the American people to go along with most of his proposals. But an idiot like George W. Bush can convince the entire world to do his biddings? Those people with the most intense hatred of George W. Bush have always tried to have it both ways when it comes to the former president. Depending on their agenda, he’s a blue-blooded, Harvard-Yale elitist one day and a moronic, unstable wanna-be Texas cowboy the next.
Talk to anyone with an abnormally irrational hatred for George W. Bush and they are certain of two things: (1) Bush is evil, a liar and murderer and (2) He is a moron. A blundering idiot with the intelligence of a developmentally-challenged earthworm. To these folks, these two things are indisputable. However, there is a major problem with their assessment.
We could never convince the true haters that Bush did anything right or that he is not pure evil, but even those people in the most advanced stages of irrational Bush hatred must learn that they cannot have it both ways. The aforementioned characteristics are mutually exclusive and simply cannot coexist.
If President Bush lied about WMDs and tricked the American people, the United States Congress and many of the world's leaders, then I think we must take the moron label off the table. In fact, not only can a man who manipulated the world’s elite and even possibly masterminded 9/11 not be a moron, it is fairly safe to say that he may be the smartest human being who has ever lived. A man with intelligence so unfathomably vast it surpasses the collective brainpower of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Tony Blair and all others he was able to manipulate combined.
I don't think any of us believe George W. Bush is the smartest human being who's ever lived. So, that only leaves one possible scenario - the truth. And the truth is that George W. Bush reacted to Iraq based on the intelligence he received combined with the fact that Saddam Hussein was restricting access to weapon’s inspectors.
You don’t have to like George W. Bush. You don’t have to believe he was a good president. But you do need another excuse to support your bizarre and unfounded hatred of the man. The fact that he did what anyone else in his shoes would have done just doesn’t cut it.
