I happened to be flipping channels this morning and saw Santorum talking about the
. It's not exactly a fat man and little boy pointed straight at NYC, but it's something at least worth talking about. The Fox and Friends people asked Santorum why Bush isn't shouting this from the rooftops, and he said that the White House is no longer interested in debating the reason we went to war in the first place. And the Fox people simply reamed the president. They said that he has a duty to discuss this because most of the country is still discussing it, and that since we as a country are paying for this war, we deserve to still talk about the reason it happened. They went off, and I think they have a point.
I personally believe that history will be on President Bush's side. No one liked Lincoln at the time, but now he's the only president many people can name, and I have a feeling that history could treat Bush similarly. But sometimes I get annoyed that he seems to be sitting back and letting history take her sweet time. 500 sarin shells isn't all we expected Iraq to have, but I think the American public needs to know it was found. Santorum shouldn't have to go on a crusade to present information that most Americans would be interested in hearing. I don't think it should be a "ha, we told you so" revelation, but the info should be put out there. I think those Fox people were right: much of the country is still quite wrapped up in the WMD debate, and they need all the facts in order to hold informed opinions. And this fact somewhat justifies the president; I have no idea why he wouldn't want to put it out there.
But what I don't understand could fill a warehouse.
I agree. The President's job is to keep the country as informed as possible in time of war. Talking to the people of the country is one of his jobs. Whether or not he uses the correct and fancy words - he needs to talk. This has always bothered me about Mr. Bush. It seems as if he is of the opinion - I've already said this, I shouldn't have to repeat myself. He's very wrong in that regard.
Posted by: Teresa at June 22, 2006 11:11 AM (jgXyO)
If I recall correctly there were both sarin and mustard agents.
Question: Do you still have a copy of that report I e-mailed you and the pics about the exposure to a single half-century old mustard artillery round that I sent you waaaaaay back in the day?
Posted by: Kalroy at June 22, 2006 06:00 PM (9RG5y)
Yes, Kalroy, it was both sarin and mustard agents. The only talk I heard was "Yeah, but they were old, some being pre-Gulf War I." It still doesn't matter; Saddam said he got rid of everything, and obviously he didn't. I also think Bush should address the issue. Anytime there's a revelation such as this, it gets swept under the carpet, and then half of the US doesn't learn the truth.
Posted by: Nancy at June 22, 2006 08:40 PM (Dbnx3)
A desperate political stunt by "Dead Fetus in My Bed" Santorum. Have some more koolaid http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13480264/
Posted by: question at June 25, 2006 01:23 PM (n17hK)
Since you posted the same comment on two posts, I'll post the same response...
Question -- how is this statement, taken from your link, different from the quotes I provided?
"We were able to determine that [the missile] is, in fact, degraded and ... is consistent with what we would expect from finding a munition that was dated back to pre-Gulf War," an intelligence official told NBC. "However, even in the degraded state, our assessment is that they could pose an up-to-lethal hazard if used in attacks against coalition forces."
Your link just said the exact same thing my post said...
Posted by: Sarah at June 25, 2006 02:24 PM (YL5y0)
This is just more of the wanting to have it both ways that the anti-Bush crowd seems to be so fond of.
It should be quite plain that there's a movement in this country that would find fault with this administration if they figured out a way to run automobiles on water, found a cure for cancer, and developed better head protection for NHL players. While I do agree that Bush needs to communicate more effectively than he does at times on a number of different issues, I can understand the hesitancy to throw raw meat to his detractors.
I find it interesting that Gore's movie backed by questionable scientific research gets "rave" reviews and attention while Mr. Bush's claims go mostly unnoticed. Guess that's just the way things are going to be until we get some balance out there...or until the media chooses to go back to reporting news in stead of spinning it.
See you on the high ground.
Posted by: MajorDad1984 at June 28, 2006 01:56 AM (j7S/Q)
Exactly! Thank you,Sarah!
Posted by: MaryIndiana at June 30, 2006 06:15 AM (kQJht)
I'm with MajorDad on this one.
Posted by: Kalroy at June 30, 2006 08:49 PM (9RG5y)
| Add Comment