In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

  Right. It's all Obama's fault when House Republicans have the power to block a bill if they want.It's all Obama's fault that House Republicans refuse to pass a bill that extends the payroll tax cut

Just another lying dumb@ss conservative (.....who thinks he's funny even though he's the only one laughing at his jokes?)   Sad sad sad.  

Seriously. Stick to other things. Cat juggling has wiped out far too many brain cells.

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

Well of course it doesn't matter that Bush told them that there were WMDs in Iraq that posed an imminent security risk to the United States.

Of course it doesn't matter that Bush had everyone else in his administration tell them the same thing.

It's still exclusively the Democrats fault. See they should have known better than to trust a Republican. They should have immediately passed a bill that unconstitutionally gave them direct top-down control of the CIA and personally vetted all the intelligence.

But no, they had to believe the President was accurately and truthfully recounting intelligence without any omissions or embellishment.

Much unlike Republicans when a D's in the house.

Nice try:

Weapons of Mass Destruction: Who Said What When by CounterPunch Wire

Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-CT, September 4, 2002

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

Dick Cheney August 26, 2002

If we wait for the danger to become clear, it could be too late.

Sen. Joseph Biden D-Del., September 4, 2002

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush September 12, 2002

If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.

Ari Fleischer December 2, 2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there.

Ari Fleischer January 9, 2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.

George W. Bush January 28, 2003

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.

Colin Powell February 5, 2003

Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, February 5, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons — the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003

So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment has to be clearly not.

Colin Powell March 8, 2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

George Bush March 18, 2003

We are asked to accept Saddam decided to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd.

Tony Blair, Prime Minister 18 March, 2003

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher March 21, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks March 22, 2003

I have no doubt we’re going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.

Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board , March 23, 2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.

Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark March 22, 2003

We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.

Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003

Saddam’s removal is necessary to eradicate the threat from his weapons of mass destruction

Jack Straw,
Foreign Secretary 2 April, 2003

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find — and there will be plenty.

Neocon scholar Robert Kagan April 9, 2003

I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.

Ari Fleischer April 10, 2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.

George Bush April 24, 2003

Before people crow about the absence of weapons of mass destruction, I suggest they wait a bit.

Tony Blair 28 April, 2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld April 25, 2003

We’ll find them. It’ll be a matter of time to do so.

George Bush May 3, 2003

I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction.

Colin Powell May 4, 2003

I never believed that we’d just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld May 4, 2003

I’m not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein — because he had a weapons program.

George W. Bush May 6, 2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.

Condoleeza Rice May 12, 2003

I just don’t know whether it was all destroyed years ago — I mean, there’s no question that there were chemical weapons years ago — whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they’re still hidden.

Maj. Gen. David Petraeus,
Commander 101st Airborne May 13, 2003

Before the war, there’s no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.

Gen. Michael Hagee,
Commandant of the Marine Corps May 21, 2003

Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we’re interrogating, I’m confident that we’re going to find weapons of mass destruction.

Gen. Richard Myers,
Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff May 26, 2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I don’t know the answer.

Donald Rumsfeld May 27, 2003

For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.

Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003

In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

  Right. It's all Obama's fault when House Republicans have the power to block a bill if they want.It's all Obama's fault that House Republicans refuse to pass a bill that extends the payroll tax cut

Just another lying dumb@ss conservative (.....who thinks he's funny even though he's the only one laughing at his jokes?)   Sad sad sad.  

Seriously. Stick to other things. Cat juggling has wiped out far too many brain cells.

In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

Ah, well if it makes you feel better to believe you "rile" people "up" on an anonymous internet backwater, that's perhaps even more pathetic than being a washed up drunk sshole.

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

I think jmel somehow utterly missed the boat.

All these politicians making statements about WMDs in Iraq? They're making these because the administration is telling them that based on what the agencies were telling the administration.

If I'm a congressman, and the President says "I have proof Iraq has WMDs," I couldn't dial up the CIA and get all the intelligence even if I wanted to.

The fact that Democrats voted for the war is completely f**king irrelevant if their vote was bought with sh!tty intelligence.

It was a war of choice, fought for the wrong reasons, and f**ked up so massively by the administration that it's just downright pathetic watching you try to blame Dems.

1.     "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

Quoted on CNN

2.     "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 program." — President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Quoted on CNN

3.     Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." — Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio — from USIA

4.     "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio — From USIA

5.     "We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." — Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D — MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

See letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others

6.     "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), Dec. 16, 1998

Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi — House of Representatives website

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

I've always said BOTH sides are to blame. 

In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

I think jmel somehow utterly missed the boat.

All these politicians making statements about WMDs in Iraq? They're making these because the administration is telling them that based on what the agencies were telling the administration.

If I'm a congressman, and the President says "I have proof Iraq has WMDs," I couldn't dial up the CIA and get all the intelligence even if I wanted to.

The fact that Democrats voted for the war is completely f**king irrelevant if their vote was bought with sh!tty intelligence.

It was a war of choice, fought for the wrong reasons, and f**ked up so massively by the administration that it's just downright pathetic watching you try to blame Dems.

1.     "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

Quoted on CNN

2.     "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 program." — President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Quoted on CNN

3.     Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." — Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio — from USIA

4.     "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio — From USIA

5.     "We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." — Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D — MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

See letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others

6.     "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), Dec. 16, 1998

Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi — House of Representatives website

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

I've always said BOTH sides are to blame. 

Clinton was wrong also. Iraq wasn't a national security threat to us or our allies.

Rather, Saddam was a threat to his people and surrounding arab countries. Iraq was a multi-faceted seat of genocide and attempted genocide run by a meglomaniac mass murderer. I would have far fewer gripes with the war if:

1. It was argued and its merits were judged on what they were: A humanitarian mission. An intervention. (Nevermind that we were far too late for the Kurds, by and large); more importantly

2. If it wasn't f**ked up so massively by the complete failure to consider the need to provide basic security in a country whose  entire governmental apparatus just vanished. Starting with not dissolving the entire Iraqi army and turning 400,000+ pissed off people with weapons loose.

3. We didn't cut taxes then launch a war of choice. Taxes should have been raised before such a war of choice.

Instead, votes were bought with the WMD line, which proved to be false. Saddam used to have WMDs, yes, but we were two decades too late to stop his use of them.

And, as noted, the Bush administration utterly blew it from the get-go.

Wow!  Clinton, Kerry, Dodd, Lieberman, Edwards, Daschle, Waxman, Rockerfeller, Byrd, Levin,............all sold their votes to that "really dumb guy", GWB?  And, he was soooooooo dumb he convinced the world with his unreal art of persuasion that we had to go to Iraq immediately......hmmmm?

He was one goooood liar!  (eye-roll)

No, there are a lot of important issues; but without a vibrant economy the other issues play second fiddle because government can't afford them.  Unless you can pay the bill you can't do it.

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

No, there are a lot of important issues; but without a vibrant economy the other issues play second fiddle because government can't afford them.  Unless you can pay the bill you can't do it.

Re: the environment...the government cannot afford NOT to pursue alternative energy strategies.  Point of fact, they are already doing this on the military side.  They're not waiting.  And concerning our outdated, inefficient grid, that bill will come due sooner or later - the longer we wait, the more it will cost.

Re: immigration...same freakin' thing.  The current system is way too inefficient and arbitrary and puts too many good, hard-working people at risk.  A stable workforce will contribute to a stable economy.

It's still not clear what you want congress or potus to do about jobs.  A service/consumer economy like ours is based upon demand for services and products.  Without demand, these businesses can't grow.  Environmental/energy and immigration issues create demand for products people will need.

In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

Well, if we had let tax rates just sit at the Clinton rates.....

Yes for our defense we need relaible energy sources but then for defense the overriding issue isn't the cost its the reliability of operation and logistical control of supply.  This development will bleed over into our daily life when its cost effective; but we can't rush it with subsidies we can't afford.  It makes no sense to provide tax incentives for general consumption of electric cars like those subsiidies offered on the Volt and others.

Immigration needs to be fixed and the second issue behind boarder control is work visa's for in demand skills, followed by severe penalties for employing undocumented workers.  Oh and no amnesty; if they get out and get back in line I wouldn't hold their prior illegal stay agaisnt them but no in country path to citizenship.

For the eonomy; how about policies that support entreprenuership like tax policies that don't change all the time and then let's look at government over regulation.