Bush lied??

[one...two...tree 2,762]

More Lies from Bush:

Lie: The Bush administration has categorized its 2004 tax cut as a “middle-class tax cut.”

Fact:

The top 1/5th of earners receive 2/3rds of all benefits and the bill excluded extending the child tax credit to 4 million low income families who do not qualify. Middle class earners will receive an average cut of $162 in 2005.

Lie: “If you look at the appropriations bills that were passed under my watch, in the last year of President Clinton, discretionary spending was up 15 percent and ours have steadily declined.”

Fact: Not even close. During his eight years, President Clinton increased domestic discretionary spending by 10 percent. In his last year, discretionary spending was up only 3 percent.

Under Bush discretionary spending has increased every single year and is now 31 percent higher than when he took office. He has increased domestic discretionary spending by 25 percent – or 2 ½ times the increase under eight years of Clinton.

Lie: “We cut taxes, which basically meant people had more money in their pocket.”

Fact: While Bush is cutting taxes for the rich he also is raising fees for government services ($5.9 billion in FYE 2004 alone) and states have been forced to do increase taxes and fees as a the impact of the tax cuts, cuts in aid to states and new unfunded mandates have added a $39 – 98 billion burden to the states. For example:

(1) Since Bush took office states have raised taxes $20.2 billion annually (after 7 consecutive years of tax cuts)

(2) Tuition at state colleges and universities have increased 35% since 2001 while the administration is cutting education aid.

(3) Property tax collections rose more than 10% last year alone to pay for under-funded schools and services.

(4) Increased fees for a variety of programs from small business loans to national parks. Under Bush, veterans’ co-payments for prescription drugs are to rise from $2 in 2002 to $15 in 2005.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Are you sure?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

Yes, I am. No other than Bush and his blood thirsty administration have hindered the US weapons inspectors in completing their assignment. He called the UN and told them to pull their guys out before we are going in. What did the UN inspectors not do at the time? They didn't find the weapons that weren't there.

Saddam and 9/11 link, anyone? Among others, VJ's own ual777 still believes this fairy tale that has been quite professionally planted into the heads of many Americans.

Oh don't get me stated on this lying sack of #######...

Thanks for putting words in my mouth. While you are at it, do you care to tell the audience how many times I have said I DONT support Bush?

Putting words in your mouth? Well, well. It was no other than you that tried an re-connect our illegal act of aggression in Iraq with what happened here five years ago on 9/11. There is NO connection. Once you stop suggesting otherwise, I'll stop pointing out that you still try an sell that non-existent link that the Bush administration invented to get their motherfcuking war.

Your Post

P.S. and that means stacking terrorist bodies on the OTHER side of the atlantic.

You're really still falling for that nonsense, aren't you? Jeez.

So...if we don't fight them over there, they won't come here, they'll just leave us alone??

We're not fighting them over there, we're creating more of them. Iraq was no threat to us. Iraqis weren't coming here to destroy us. Now, more than 2500 of our citizens have died over there. For only one reason: That they were sent where we had and have no business of being. Those 2500+ citizens would be alive and well today had the Yahoo in the White House not sent them there to fulfill his personal wet-dream.

And the 3,000 on Sept. 11th? What about them? Chalk it up to experience?

[KarenCee 3]

the bill excluded extending the child tax credit to 4 million low income families who do not qualify. Middle class earners will receive an average cut of $162 in 2005.

Did I miss something? My husband and I are low income, with a child, and we certainly qualify for this child tax credit. Who are the ones that do not qualify....or did I misunderstand that statement entirely (which is possible for me, since I am working my a$$ off these days and I'm very tired).

[Fischkoepfin 1]

the bill excluded extending the child tax credit to 4 million low income families who do not qualify. Middle class earners will receive an average cut of $162 in 2005.

Did I miss something? My husband and I are low income, with a child, and we certainly qualify for this child tax credit. Who are the ones that do not qualify....or did I misunderstand that statement entirely (which is possible for me, since I am working my a$$ off these days and I'm very tired).

The child tax credit only affects families who earn enough to claim it. Meaning, those families who don't benefit from it are those who are either truly low-income or make more than $200,000.

Here's a report dealing with the problems of the child-tax credit for low-income families.

Also, an editorial on falling wages and salaries which points out that many poor people live on less than half of poverty-line incomes.

Lie: “We cut taxes, which basically meant people had more money in their pocket.”

Fact: While Bush is cutting taxes for the rich he also is raising fees for government services ($5.9 billion in FYE 2004 alone) and states have been forced to do increase taxes and fees as a the impact of the tax cuts, cuts in aid to states and new unfunded mandates have added a $39 – 98 billion burden to the states. For example:

(1) Since Bush took office states have raised taxes $20.2 billion annually (after 7 consecutive years of tax cuts)

(2) Tuition at state colleges and universities have increased 35% since 2001 while the administration is cutting education aid.

(3) Property tax collections rose more than 10% last year alone to pay for under-funded schools and services.

(4) Increased fees for a variety of programs from small business loans to national parks. Under Bush, veterans’ co-payments for prescription drugs are to rise from $2 in 2002 to $15 in 2005.

Thanks for bringing this up. The decrease in federal taxes of course forced the states to get their money from somewhere else. I wonder how this effected those states who constantly rely on funds from DC, like the plain states and the southern states, which, contrary to popular belief,, are the main beneficiaries of federal tax dollars.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Have you all read the article?

No offense, but it is bloody long. Perhaps you could highlight what point you are trying to make. Incidentally,the author is a known member of the PNAC, so he's not just some journalist making a commentary.

The point is he didn't lie about the reasons for the war in Iraq.

The point is, he actually did.

Now, I'm not putting this documentation back together tonight - I had it posted here more than once before. Bottom line of the case was that the Al-Qaida - Saddam link that has been presented by the administration was built on testimony of an Al-Qaida operative that had been refuted by the DIA months before. The administration used that discredited testimony all the same to beef up their case right before having Congress authorize the use of force as a last resort. That connection and the claim that we have established it was a blantant lie. The evidence of that is out there and it is not being refuted. You just refuse to take notice.

Alright, here we go:

Bush in Cincinnati on Oct 7, 2002 (interesting timing): "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

In February 2003, the President said, "Iraq has provided al-Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training."

These claims were based on testimony obtained from Senior Al-Qaida operative Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi in February of 2002. Interestingly, the Defense Intelligence Agency had this to say about the thug's statements back in February of 2002:

This is the first report from Ibn al-Shaykh in which he claims Iraq assisted al-Qaida’s CBRN [Chemical, Biological, Radiological or Nuclear] efforts. However, he lacks specific details on the Iraqis involved, the CBRN materials associated with the assistance, and the location where training occurred. It is possible he does not know any further details; it is more likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers (emphasis added). Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest.

Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.

DIA Letter to Senate Intelligence Committee dated October 26, 2005

And yet, 7-8 months later, after having been provided with this analysis, Bush keeps on claiming that which the intelligence community told him was not only unreliable but actually highly unlikely to be true.

Just so we are clear on what this means: The President chose to take the word of the enemy over the analysis and advice of the DIA. Why? Well, the former got him closer to the war he wanted, the latter would have been a partial blow to his fabricated case. Bottom line, he wasn't provided bad intelligence there (a claim he keeps on making), he was provided good intelligence and simply chose to ignore it.

It's intersting how some people still find that methodology acceptable and keep defending the undefendable - that George W Bush lied this country into an illegal, unneccessary and costly war and destabilized an entire world region in the process.

Edited September 2, 2006 by ET-US2004

[ual777 0]

Are you sure?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

Yes, I am. No other than Bush and his blood thirsty administration have hindered the US weapons inspectors in completing their assignment. He called the UN and told them to pull their guys out before we are going in. What did the UN inspectors not do at the time? They didn't find the weapons that weren't there.

Saddam and 9/11 link, anyone? Among others, VJ's own ual777 still believes this fairy tale that has been quite professionally planted into the heads of many Americans.

Oh don't get me stated on this lying sack of #######...

Thanks for putting words in my mouth. While you are at it, do you care to tell the audience how many times I have said I DONT support Bush?

Putting words in your mouth? Well, well. It was no other than you that tried an re-connect our illegal act of aggression in Iraq with what happened here five years ago on 9/11. There is NO connection. Once you stop suggesting otherwise, I'll stop pointing out that you still try an sell that non-existent link that the Bush administration invented to get their motherfcuking war.

Your Post

P.S. and that means stacking terrorist bodies on the OTHER side of the atlantic.

You're really still falling for that nonsense, aren't you? Jeez.

So...if we don't fight them over there, they won't come here, they'll just leave us alone??

We're not fighting them over there, we're creating more of them. Iraq was no threat to us. Iraqis weren't coming here to destroy us. Now, more than 2500 of our citizens have died over there. For only one reason: That they were sent where we had and have no business of being. Those 2500+ citizens would be alive and well today had the Yahoo in the White House not sent them there to fulfill his personal wet-dream.

And the 3,000 on Sept. 11th? What about them? Chalk it up to experience?

LOL you are twisting what I said. I said that we are stacking terroist bodies over there which is a true statement. I have many friends in OSI and most of the terrorists are actually rich Jordanians literally paying regular Iraqis to fight their private jihad. The more of these chopfcucks we kill the better off we are.

Further, I never said Saddam was involved in 9/11, you just ASSUMED it. I was asking a question, and I guess I will ask you. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE 3,000 PEOPLE WHO LOST THEIR LIVES? BURY THEM AND DONT LOOK ISLAMO FACISTS IN THE EYE? WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT IT?

Learn about the almighty question mark then go comment about what I am suggesting.

Did I say the war was justified? NO

Did I say that I love Bush? NO, in fact I have said I DONT like him many times.

I did say that I support the stacking of terrorist bodies far away from the U.S. Thats all. I also asked what do we do about the 3,000 people that died on 9/11, and the possibility of more deaths.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Are you sure?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

Yes, I am. No other than Bush and his blood thirsty administration have hindered the US weapons inspectors in completing their assignment. He called the UN and told them to pull their guys out before we are going in. What did the UN inspectors not do at the time? They didn't find the weapons that weren't there.

Saddam and 9/11 link, anyone? Among others, VJ's own ual777 still believes this fairy tale that has been quite professionally planted into the heads of many Americans.

Oh don't get me stated on this lying sack of #######...

Thanks for putting words in my mouth. While you are at it, do you care to tell the audience how many times I have said I DONT support Bush?

Putting words in your mouth? Well, well. It was no other than you that tried an re-connect our illegal act of aggression in Iraq with what happened here five years ago on 9/11. There is NO connection. Once you stop suggesting otherwise, I'll stop pointing out that you still try an sell that non-existent link that the Bush administration invented to get their motherfcuking war.

Your Post

P.S. and that means stacking terrorist bodies on the OTHER side of the atlantic.

You're really still falling for that nonsense, aren't you? Jeez.

So...if we don't fight them over there, they won't come here, they'll just leave us alone??

We're not fighting them over there, we're creating more of them. Iraq was no threat to us. Iraqis weren't coming here to destroy us. Now, more than 2500 of our citizens have died over there. For only one reason: That they were sent where we had and have no business of being. Those 2500+ citizens would be alive and well today had the Yahoo in the White House not sent them there to fulfill his personal wet-dream.

And the 3,000 on Sept. 11th? What about them? Chalk it up to experience?

LOL you are twisting what I said. I said that we are stacking terroist bodies over there which is a true statement. I have many friends in OSI and most of the terrorists are actually rich Jordanians literally paying regular Iraqis to fight their private jihad. The more of these chopfcucks we kill the better off we are.

Further, I never said Saddam was involved in 9/11, you just ASSUMED it. I was asking a question, and I guess I will ask you. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE 3,000 PEOPLE WHO LOST THEIR LIVES? BURY THEM AND DONT LOOK ISLAMO FACISTS IN THE EYE? WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT IT?

Learn about the almighty question mark then go comment about what I am suggesting.

Did I say the war was justified? NO

Did I say that I love Bush? NO, in fact I have said I DONT like him many times.

I did say that I support the stacking of terrorist bodies far away from the U.S. Thats all. I also asked what do we do about the 3,000 people that died on 9/11, and the possibility of more deaths.

We're stacking terrorist bodies over there? Yeah, a few maybe. On the other hand, we've gotten tens of thousands of civilians killed. That's the majority of bodies stacked over there: civilians. And that created a huge number of people who then took up the fight against the occupying force. Those are the majority of the "terrorist bodies" we stack over there. Those that we created. That's like a firefighter committing arson and then expect to be hailed for putting out the fire. Great job. Only we're creating more terrorists than we can ever stack. Else, there'd be some sign of progress which there clearly isn't. The situation in Iraq is deteriorating by the minute. All we've accomplished there is make matters worse and increase the terrorist threat against the US and it's people.

What do we do about the 3,000 lives lost? A number of things, I suppose. Go after those responsible first and foremost. What we should not do is illegally attack a country that had nothing to do with their demise. Which is, however, precisely what the administration chose to do. And it used rather questionable tactics to do so.

Every now and then, try and stay on topic. The topic is: did Bush lie us into the Iraq war? The answer is yes. And the 3,000 victims of 9/11, as per your own admission, don't have a first thing to do with it.

[gimygirl 0]

Whether or not there were in fact WMD's in the months leading up to the war, and whether or not Bush and many others believed that there were WMD's are two different questions.

maybe hearing it out of the president's mouth will clear a few things up ... press video (aug 2006) ... it's 6 minutes of your life to watch, but gets REALLY good at 3:10 ...

go on .... give it a watch!

[dalegg 143]

Whether or not there were in fact WMD's in the months leading up to the war, and whether or not Bush and many others believed that there were WMD's are two different questions.

maybe hearing it out of the president's mouth will clear a few things up ... press video (aug 2006) ... it's 6 minutes of your life to watch, but gets REALLY good at 3:10 ...

go on .... give it a watch!

No. That must be a sound overbite! He did NOT actually say do that? Did he?

[gimygirl 0]

No. That must be a sound overbite! He did NOT actually say do that? Did he?

oh ... indeed he did! he also decided to make a mockery(video link) out of the largest tragedy to have befallen america!

but that's ok, guys!! right?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No. That must be a sound overbite! He did NOT actually say do that? Did he?

oh ... indeed he did! he also decided to make a mockery(video link) out of the largest tragedy to have befallen america!

but that's ok, guys!! right?

Thanks for reminding me again what a fcuking moron we have in charge of the country. All those lives he managed to have snuffed out. I am depressed. Need a drink.

[gimygirl 0]

No. That must be a sound overbite! He did NOT actually say do that? Did he?

oh ... indeed he did! he also decided to make a mockery(video link) out of the largest tragedy to have befallen america!

but that's ok, guys!! right?

Thanks for reminding me again what a fcuking moron we have in charge of the country. All those lives he managed to have snuffed out. I am depressed. Need a drink.

*hug*

[incanada1234 0]

Wow, I thought you already know that facts are not vital for leftist propagandists.

Feelings are.

Oh oh oh! Another conservative on VJ??

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Wow, I thought you already know that facts are not vital for leftist propagandists.

Feelings are.

Oh oh oh! Another conservative on VJ??

If you want to associate yourself with someone who flies a racist flag, while calling for a "day without racism and bigotry".

Conservative - No

Arsehole - Yes

[incanada1234 0]

Eh?