Yes, but she relied on information supplied by the government intelligence when talking to the press. Anyone should know better than that. They’re the same ones that told the Shrub about the weapons in Iraq.
Nah, she didn’t lie. She said that preliminary investigations revealed [a series of talking points that preliminary investigations revealed, minus a few things that the investigators wanted to keep quiet to keep from spooking our enemies while they were still investigating], and that a full investigation would show what happened. Everything she said, as qualified in the way she qualified it, was true; and the American public did not need speculation about things that weren’t certain at that point. McCain has ulterior motives, but no actual facts to back him up. It’s a lousy thing to pick a first fight on, he should have picked something he could win using logic and facts.
So if the CIA deliberately wants to hold back information to protect souces on the ground, and a political appointee cooperates, then that appointee is somehow “unqualified”? What if she didn’t cooperate and released classified information that endangered our sources? Would she then be “qualified”?
I’ma troll: We could start with the US head of the UN inspection team that declared the gas had been used up fighting Iran and that there was no nuclear program. Or does your childish memory go back that far?
“Support your Claim, Please.”You really want to re-visit the “did-Bush-admin-lie-on-Iraq” debate? Really?Here’s this . . . And thisand so many more! It’s history now, folks.
This is a valentine to Mr. Danziger, who has wit and sentience. His brilliant line with his pen creates haiku. His political satire is exquisite. I am puzzled by the surprising craziness of the comments. I keep running into an Ima character, infesting every vaguely liberal editorial cartoon commentary and relentlessly whining about something awful that liberals do. It seems a lot like bird droppings. Mr. Danziger, my family, with me, thank you for bringing a graceful, insightful and always Chekhovian image to these topics that daily grieve us.
walruscarver2000 over 11 years ago
Yes, but she relied on information supplied by the government intelligence when talking to the press. Anyone should know better than that. They’re the same ones that told the Shrub about the weapons in Iraq.
ARodney over 11 years ago
Nah, she didn’t lie. She said that preliminary investigations revealed [a series of talking points that preliminary investigations revealed, minus a few things that the investigators wanted to keep quiet to keep from spooking our enemies while they were still investigating], and that a full investigation would show what happened. Everything she said, as qualified in the way she qualified it, was true; and the American public did not need speculation about things that weren’t certain at that point. McCain has ulterior motives, but no actual facts to back him up. It’s a lousy thing to pick a first fight on, he should have picked something he could win using logic and facts.
Marty Z over 11 years ago
So if the CIA deliberately wants to hold back information to protect souces on the ground, and a political appointee cooperates, then that appointee is somehow “unqualified”? What if she didn’t cooperate and released classified information that endangered our sources? Would she then be “qualified”?
hippogriff over 11 years ago
I’ma troll: We could start with the US head of the UN inspection team that declared the gas had been used up fighting Iran and that there was no nuclear program. Or does your childish memory go back that far?
corzak over 11 years ago
"sounds a lot like what corzac calls a “deranged tirade” and “fabricated scandal.”I replied to you on this on Wuerker 11/22.
corzak over 11 years ago
“Support your Claim, Please.”You really want to re-visit the “did-Bush-admin-lie-on-Iraq” debate? Really?Here’s this . . . And thisand so many more! It’s history now, folks.
Justice22 over 11 years ago
Why all the fuss? She hasn’t been nominated for anything new yet.
walruscarver2000 over 11 years ago
corzak &ahab
See what happens when you try to talk sense to them? Feeding frenzy.
Simon_Jester over 11 years ago
ROFL X5: this froma guy who had never , EVER supplied anything to back up his claims but his own say so!
kipeticolas over 11 years ago
This is a valentine to Mr. Danziger, who has wit and sentience. His brilliant line with his pen creates haiku. His political satire is exquisite. I am puzzled by the surprising craziness of the comments. I keep running into an Ima character, infesting every vaguely liberal editorial cartoon commentary and relentlessly whining about something awful that liberals do. It seems a lot like bird droppings. Mr. Danziger, my family, with me, thank you for bringing a graceful, insightful and always Chekhovian image to these topics that daily grieve us.
Newshound41 over 11 years ago
Joseph C. Wilson
Newshound41 over 11 years ago
Rice had nothing to with Benghazi. She spoke about it days after the attacks occurred, using information provided to her by the intelligence agencies.
walruscarver2000 over 11 years ago
Perhaps he realized that if he brought up Rice others might bring up his great taste in female politicians.
babka Premium Member over 11 years ago
the last harrrummph
babka Premium Member over 11 years ago
oh, the old “uppity Negro” argument….yet Condi the shoe maven & her war-criminal/profiteer crew get off scott free.
babka Premium Member over 11 years ago
the guy who thought Sarah Palin was qualified to be Prez.
walruscarver2000 over 11 years ago
Please note the post where onguard appears to argue with himself "your Claim remains unsupported…’ And you expect sensible comment from him?
Call me Ishmael over 11 years ago
if they fooled Powell, they could fool any legislator.
walruscarver2000 over 11 years ago
Do I detect a Mainiac accent?