February 2, 2006

Bush: If my lips are moving, I'm lying


I'm full of shit!


That didn't take long:

Administration backs off Bush's vow to reduce Mideast oil imports

By Kevin G. Hall
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn't mean it literally.

[snip]

He pledged to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."

Not exactly, though, it turns out.

"This was purely an example," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said.

[snip]

Asked why the president used the words "the Middle East" when he didn't really mean them, one administration official said Bush wanted to dramatize the issue in a way that "every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands." The official spoke only on condition of anonymity because he feared that his remarks might get him in trouble.


Republicans applaude lies.

What else did he lie about?

SOTU: Bush Did Not Inform Appropriate Members of Congress

Bush said: “Appropriate Members of Congress have been kept informed.”

FACT – BUSH BROKE THE LAW BY NOT INFORMING APPROPRIATE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: The non-partisan Congressional research service concluded that the Bush administration broke the law by not informing the full Intelligence Committees. The New York Times reports:
A legal analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service concludes that the Bush administration’s limited briefings for Congress on the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping without warrants are ‘’inconsistent with the law.'’

SOTU: Bush Falsely Claims That Previous Administration Did The Same Thing

Bush said: “Previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have.”

FACT – BUSH IGNORE THE LAW, OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS FOLLOWED IT: The White House has made this claim before and the AP debunked it:
McClellan said the Clinton-Gore administration had engaged in warrantless physical searches, and he cited an FBI search of the home of CIA turncoat Aldrich Ames without permission from a judge. He said Clinton’s deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick, had testified before Congress that the president had the inherent authority to engage in physical searches without warrants.

“I think his hypocrisy knows no bounds,” McClellan said of Gore.

But at the time of the Ames search in 1993 and when Gorelick testified a year later, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act required warrants for electronic surveillance for intelligence purposes, but did not cover physical searches. The law was changed to cover physical searches in 1995 under legislation that Clinton supported and signed.

You can learn about all the lies Bush told during the State of the Union Speech at Think Progress...

...or you can just close your eyes to the truth.




If I close my eyes nobody can see me lie.

3 comments:

  1. Before the Trolls arrive, I want to beat them to it.
    ==========
    Oh, Maria. Why do you hate the greatest country on earth? By your all encompasing hatred of the man who clearly beat Al "I invented the Internet all by myself" Gore in 2000 and John "I shot myself in the foot and lied about my Silver Star to get out of Vietnam" Kerry in 2004, you've allowed all reason to ooze out of your head.

    Normally that would be OK. I mean, who cares when some guy thinks he's Napoleon? Just lock him in a rubber room and let him live out his life in his own lunacy.

    But by making it harder for Our President to win this righteous crusade against the islamofascists, you've proven to us that you indeed are working in conjuction with The Enemy - whether you know it or not.

    Can't you see that since Victory is the only thing we should be focussed on, by pointing us to the lies, deceptions and misinformation of Our Great President, you're only increasing the terror that's sure to come?

    If Patton were alive, he'd slap your face.

    Maybe this is one of those times when ignorance really is strength. So sit down and shut up.
    ==========
    How was that? Did I fully capture the patois of our mindless trolls?

    Dayvoe

    IMPEACH

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dayvoe --

    And Al Gore has to do with the SOTU Address how? That right there shows everyone that you're still sour about the 2000 election. *laugh* You're so predictable.

    You and Maria have nothing positive to say about anything regarding our President. Heck, the man could poop out gold bullion, and hand them out to the poor and you'd still have something negative to say about it. It all boils down to one thing and one thing only, and here it is: you both have a never ending hatred for the man because you lost two elections, so that constitutes a never ending hatred which clearly shows in every unimaginable word possible. Blog troll? Hardly. I've had my share of blog trolls. Funny. You call it a blog troll. When one of you visits, it's not a blog troll. It's someone "expressing" his or her thoughts and attempting to have a "civil" discussion. Again, when a Democrat is involved, it's just different.

    You two are pathetic, absolutely pathetic. Perhaps if you took all the energies you have toward our President and focused them on an idea on how to fight terrorism since you so clearly think George W. Bush is breaking the law, you'd come out and share them with the rest of us. Instead, you claim the "i-word" and bash more in typical, sniveling little liberal fashion.

    Now, that being said, put that in your pipe and smoke it; I am sure other things have been smoked in that pipe; judging by your extreme delusional paranoia. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. By the way, I researched a bit into the "Think Progress" website you mentioned. It's a total liberal website, which by the way is sponsored by an even bigger liberal organization, The American Progress Action Fund. That's like claiming aljazeera's website said Bin Laden's a practicing Christian. Really, don't you people realize how obvious you are with your intentions? Heck, why not post something with a direct link back to moveon.org while you're at it; and then claim it as being nonpartisan as well? Sheesh. You people quote from and claim then as nonpartisan sites. Define nonpartisan. Nonpartisan from a liberal point of view? Nahhhh. You'd never do that, right? *laugh*

    ReplyDelete