pudge's Journal: Old News is New Again

Think Progress has a big headline today: Bush Now Says What He Wouldn't Say Before War: Iraq Had 'Nothing' To Do With 9/11.

I draw your attention to September 2003, almost three years ago: "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks," Mr Bush told reporters as he met members of Congress on energy legislation.

So, we can expect . . .

[GMontag]

So, we can expect more of that fantastic Leftist argument technique:

"UBL is not in Iraq, why are we there?"

"Iraq did not attack us on 9/11/01, why are we there?"

"Nixon never went to Iraq, why are we there?"

"Bush stole the Iraqi election, whyy are we there?"

And from the Hon. Sen. John F. Kerry: "Christopher Reeve was never in Iraq, but if I were president he could walk there by now."

Re:

[eglamkowski]

That was John Edwards, not John Kerry... :-)

Words have no meaning

[ellem]

Clearly you are missing the greater Rovian complexities and nuances like all rightwin nutjobs who hate blacks and killed them with AIDS during Katrina which is a direct product of the 2000 elections and the whiterwatering of Clenis.

Buscho SAID Saddam Hussein and 9/11 in the same sentence and the Sheeple understood it to mean whatever I need it to mean in a given internet blog!