If Bush lied, Clinton lied 2


By Tom Quiner

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

“Bush lied” was once again invoked in the letters to the editor in the Des Moines Register this morning.

For the record, here is specifically what the President said:  “Saddam Hussein has huge stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons.  And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal.”  Only it wasn’t President Bush who spoke it. Thus spoke then President Clinton.

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

President Clinton’s thoughts on Mr. Hussein are worth revisiting in light of countless assertions that “Bush lied”.  Before the U.S. invaded Iraq, most of the world, including Kofi Annan (then the Secretary-General of the United Nations) and John Kerry, believed Iraq housed weapons of mass destruction.  To think otherwise, one had to assume Mr. Hussein destroyed the weapons, but didn’t report it to U.N. inspectors even though it would’ve gotten sanctions against Iraq lifted.  That doesn’t make sense.

Hussein encouraged the belief that he possesses such weapons with statements like this, made in 20o0:

“Iraq will not disarm until others in the region do. A rifle for a rifle, a stick for a stick, a stone for a stone.”

Believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs

Finally, in 2004 after his capture, Hussein acknowledged the truth about WMDs to FBI interrogator, George Piro.  He said most of the weapons had been destroyed by United Nations weapons inspectors in the 90s.  Iraq destroyed the rest themselves.  But Hussein pretended he still had them. In his mind, that perception was critical to deter Iran from attacking Iraq:

“It was very important for him to project that because that was what kept him, in his mind, in power. That capability kept the Iranians away. It kept them from reinvading Iraq,” said Agent Piro.

Why, then, didn’t Hussein ‘fess up when he saw U.S. forces preparing to attack Iraq because of this very perception he had so carefully inculcated?

“… he told me he initially miscalculated President Bush. And President Bush’s intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 under Operation Desert Fox. Which was a four-day aerial attack. So he expected that initially,” Piro says.

Bush-haters are uninterested in such evidence.  Their mind is made up.  But think about the logic they must employ.

In their mind, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair launched a war based on a lie (no weapons of mass destruction) that would soon reveal the lie when no such weapons were found.  Doesn’t make sense.

If weapons HAD been found, the same people would probably have said that Bush planted the weapons to justify going to war against Iraq.

There are certainly honorable differences of opinion on whether the U.S. should have gone to war with Iraq.  Let’s debate the merits of the war honestly and can the phony argument that President Bush lied.  If he did, so did President Clinton.

“Have you figured out what’s causin’ them babies yet?” 1


By Tom Quiner

My friend, John, is the proud daddy of eleven children.  He is also a proud Catholic. As his bounty grew, he heard the question above with increasing frequency.  Here is what he told me about how he handled the question:

The best comeback line I ever found to defend the fact that we had 11 children came from the movie “Roxanne.”  Steve Martin plays a bright, intelligent man who is cursed with an abnormally long, Pinnochio-like nose.  Naturally, this has always made him the butt of jokes and bullying his entire life.  However, he has developed a great sense of humor and sarcasm as a “defense mechanism.”  In the pertinent scene, Martin walks into a bar to get a drink.  After a few minutes of awkward silence in the room, finally one local wisenheimer blurts out the predictable rude remark about his nose.  Steve Martin gets up from his seat at the bar and launches into a series of self-deprecating one-liners.  The “crown jewel” of the monologue for me was his rationale for why he had such a long nose:  “The Lord gave…and He just kept on giving!” So, whenever we had a new baby and someone would say the classic line, “Have you figured out what’s causing them yet?” I had my perfect answer in Martin’s line.

Take five minutes and watch the great Steve Martin in action above.  Life is better when we laugh.  It’s even better when we laugh out loud!

Shame on Dick Morris 4


By Tom Quiner

Dick Morris

Dick Morris is an interesting guy.

He was a political consultant for Bill Clinton who is credited with salvaging the Clinton Presidency through a political strategy characterized as “triangulation.”

Essentially, he convinced Mr. Clinton to move toward the center politically, embracing the best of Democratic and Republican ideas, after HillaryCare had damaged the President politically by pulling him too far to the Left. As a result, President Clinton eventually signed into law the NAFTA trade agreement and welfare reform legislation that his own party didn’t fully embrace.

From a conservative viewpoint, Dick Morris deserves behind-the-scenes credit for these legislative successes.

Mr. Morris was eventually disgraced and forced to resign after he let a prostitute, whose services he had engaged, listen in on his telephone conversation with the President.

Following his fall from grace, Morris emerged from the ashes as a conservative, becoming a fixture on the Fox network.  He can be seen on Sean Hannity’s show as well as The O’Reilly Factor on a regular basis.  He has been a vocal critic of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in recent years.

I know conservatives who love him … and loathe him. Some call him brilliant.  Others call him “sleazy.”

Dick Morris has a keen political mind.  He articulates his positions in a highly entertaining way.  Love him or hate him, it’s hard not to listen.

That brings me to an e-mail I received today from Human Events.  The subject line was: “Dick Morris:  Do you hate Harry Reid as much as I do?”

It was an appeal to raise money for Sharron Angle who is running against Harry Reid for the Senate.  The letter, from Dick Morris, began:  “Dear Friend who Hates Harry Reid as Much as I do.”

Please.

I don’t hate Harry Reid.  I don’t hate Barack Obama.  I don’t hate Nancy Pelosi.  I disagree with them politically.  I will do all I can to see them defeated.  Their ideas on what is best for America are not mine.  Even more, I think their policies hurt this country I love.

But hate them?  No.

Morris sounds like a typical angry Liberal using rhetoric like that.  Have we come to the point where we have to hate someone if they don’t agree with us politically?

Shame on you, Dick Morris.  Republicans are better that.

Should morality be the basis for legislation? 1


By Tom Quiner

Judge Walker imposes his private morality on America

Judge Vaughn Walker says no.  He’s the judge in California who struck down Proposition 8 which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The openly gay jurist said; “A private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples is not a proper basis for legislation.”

It’s not?  Since when?

Why have we passed capital punishment laws?  On the basis of morality.

Why do many, including me, oppose capital punishment?  On the basis of morality.

Why did many fight for the passage of ObamaCare?  Because they believe healthcare is a fundamental moral right.

Why did so many oppose ObamaCare?  Because the inclusion of abortion is so repugnant to the moral sensibilities of the majority of Americans.

Why did 45 states make abortion illegal prior to Roe v Wade?  On the basis of morality.

Why do liberals demand unfettered access to abortion?  On the basis of women’s “reproductive health”, a moral issue in their eyes.

Why have we passed minimum wage laws?  On the basis of morality.

Why is pedophilia illegal?  Morality.

Why is torture illegal?  Morality.

And the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman is certainly not private.  It has been the basis of public policy of every nation, of every civilization, of every religion, of every culture in recorded human history.

Are homosexual couples inferior to heterosexual ones?  That’s not even the point of proposition 8.  The point is all about definition.  Society defined marriage accordingly to protect women and their children from commitment-wary men.  It was in the best interests of society.  Marriage was not defined on the basis of the “relationship” between the partners.

At the foundation of American government is morality.  Judge Walker says that is no longer acceptable, unless it is his private morality, that is.