PDA

View Full Version : Poll Proves The Right Is Eternally Spoon Licking



Gayle in MD
06-22-2012, 07:33 AM
Yes, Iraq Definitely Had WMD, Vast Majority Of Polled Republicans Insist
by Dan Fromkin

WASHINGTON -- How misinformed are Republicans about world affairs? If presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney's assertion that Russia is "without question our number one geopolitical foe" is any indication, then the answer would appear to be very.

A new poll supports that theory.

The poll, constructed by Dartmouth government professor Benjamin Valentino and conducted by YouGov from April 26 to May 2, found that fully 63 percent of Republican respondents still believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003. By contrast, 27 percent of independents and 15 percent of Democrats shared that view.

Jim Lobe, chief of the Inter Press Service's Washington bureau, reported the finding in his blog on Wednesday.

The Bush administration's insistence that the Iraqi government had weapons of mass destruction and might give them to terrorists was a key selling point in its campaign to take the country to war. It turned out to be untrue.

Debate continues over whether former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and other top officials knew there were no WMD, but intentionally deceived the American people and Congress because they were intent on attacking Iraq for less palatable reasons -- or whether they managed to convince themselves that it was true using cherry-picked intelligence.

There is no reality-based argument that Iraq actually had WMD, after extensive searches found none, but this is hardly the first time many Americans have been certain of something that simply wasn't true.



A Washington Post poll in September 2003 found that nearly 70 percent of all Americans were convinced that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks -- even though he was not.

Bush, Cheney and others consistently linked al Qaeda to Hussein in speeches they gave in the run-up to war, and the media rarely pushed back. But neither Bush nor Cheney continued to claim that there were actual WMDs in Iraq once the searches came up empty -- although they both continued to insist that Saddam had the "capability" to produce them.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Rather than a failure of the media, therefore, this latest poll result seems to indicate a refusal -- unique to the modern Republican Party -- to acknowledge facts.</span>

According to this poll, an even larger proportion of Republican respondents who said Iraq had WMD -- 64 percent -- said they have either always believed (or have come to believe) that Barack Obama was born in another country, which he was not.

Overall, the poll found Republicans to be considerably more militaristic in their worldview than Democrats and independents.

In a finding that would indicate plenty of GOP support for yet another war in the Middle East, nearly two-thirds of Republicans said it's very likely that if Iran produces a nuclear weapon, it would use it against Israel.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21..._n_1616012.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/iraq-wmd-poll-clueless-vast-majority-republicans_n_1616012.html)

I suppose Fromkin wrote this before he read or knew of the recent release of classfied documents which prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, all lied, intentionally, in order to launch war and occupation in Iraq.....and definitely knew there were no WMD's in Iraq, and no actionable intelligence to suggest that Saddam either had them, was any immediate threat to our country, nor had any links to al Qaeda, or 9/11.

Qtec
06-22-2012, 08:16 AM
Like egor once said, "I don't care about the facts."

Watch my next post.

Q

Gayle in MD
06-22-2012, 08:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like egor once said, "I don't care about the facts."

Watch my next post.

Q </div></div>

LOL, I watch every post you write!

Where were you last week? Playing Golf, I'll bet!

Hope you had fun!

G.

LWW
06-23-2012, 02:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't care about the facts.

Q </div></div>

But ... I already knew that.

WHAT THE CABAL FEARS THE MOST ... TRUTH! (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dni/dni_ltr_wmd_21jun06.pdf)

Qtec
06-23-2012, 08:03 AM
Do you know what pre-Gulf War means?
Do you know what degraded means?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">CIA’s final report: No WMD found in Iraq </div></div>

nutjob (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7634313/#.T-XJKpFOKkU)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Simply stated, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>there is no doubt</span> that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends,</span> against our allies, and against us." — Richard B. Cheney </div></div>

No doubt.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged in his new autobiography that he made a "misstatement" in asserting in the early days of the 2003 invasion of Iraq that he knew the location of weapons of mass destruction in the country, the London Guardian reported today (see GSN, Feb. 3).

In his 815-page memoir, "Known and Unknown," Rumsfeld said he erred in a March 30, 2003 interview by disregarding his normal practice of being exact and cautious when discussing intelligence assessments in responding to a question on Iraq's alleged unconventional weapons stocks.

"Recalling the CIA's designation of various 'suspect' WMD sites in Iraq, I replied: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>'We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.'</span> My words have been quoted many times by critics of the war as an example of how the Bush administration misled the public," Rumsfeld wrote.

"I made a misstatement," the former Pentagon chief stated. His intention was to address "suspect sites," he said. </div></div>

Really?

Didn't sound like he wasn't sure.

caught in his own trap (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKGvORyEGHA)

Bingo (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-may-9-2006/the-war-at-home)


Q

Gayle in MD
06-24-2012, 11:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Like egor once said, "I don't care about the facts."

Watch my next post.

Q </div></div>

Neither do the Repiglicans on The Hill, and they act just like Repiglican deniers on internet forums, when they have to face the truth!


You may have missed this example.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">June 8, 2012, 10:51 am

C.B.O.’s Take on the Stimulus
By DAVID FIRESTONE

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/c-b-o-s-take-on-the-stimulus/?src=recg

A certain ritual plays out whenever the director of the Congressional Budget Office testifies before a House or Senate committee. While partisans from each side try to score ideological points about spending or taxes, he has to remain studiously neutral, sticking to the numbers and inevitably frustrating his questioners.

On Wednesday, however, Douglas Elmendorf, the current director, annoyed Republicans on the House Budget Committee a little more than usual when they made several unsuccessful attempts to get him to say that President Obama’s stimulus program was a failure.

First, Bill Flores, Republican of Texas, asked him which was more effective at increasing economic activity, private- or public-sector spending. The congressman clearly wanted the answer to be private-sector, but Mr. Elmendorf wouldn’t help him, saying both would be equally effective. Mr. Flores pushed on anyway, asking why a second stimulus would be any more effective than the first one.

“But Congressman,” Mr. Elmendorf replied, “as you understand –and I recognize you don’t agree with us – but our position is that the recovery act was not a failed program. Our position is that it created higher output and employment than would have occurred without it.”

To which the congressman could only respond, rather sarcastically, “Thank you, that was fascinating.”

A few minutes later, Tim Huelskamp, a freshman Republican from Kansas, made the often-stated point that the stimulus didn’t bring the jobless rate down as low as the Obama administration predicted it would, and demanded to know how that could have happened.

Mr. Elmendorf explained that the recession turned out to be far deeper than anyone had anticipated, but said a University of Chicago survey of distinguished economists showed that 80 percent of them believed the stimulus was good for the economy.

“Because of the recovery act, the unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill,” he said. In fact, he said, it saved or created more than 3 million jobs.

Republicans quickly changed the subject. To them, the Recovery Act will always be the “failed stimulus program,” and they’d rather not hear any information to the contrary. Particularly from someone who knows what he’s talking about.
</div></div>