Flipp and His Magical Rewrite History Machine
At the Republic debate on June 5th Romney stated the following:
If you’re saying let’s turn back the clock, and Saddam Hussein had opened up his country to IAEA inspectors, and they’d come in and they’d found that there were no weapons of mass destruction, had Saddam Hussein, therefore, not violated United Nations resolutions, we wouldn’t be in the conflict we’re in. But he didn’t do those things, and we knew what we knew at the point we made the decision to get in.
In this response, Mitt seems to indicate that Saddam refused to let the inspectors in. Of course, that’s not true. Inspectors were allowed in before the war. It was actually the US that told them that they should get out or risk being “shocked and awed” to death. The inspectors were unable to find any evidence of a nuke program.
Now Mitt has started to spin his answer, saying that Saddam wasn’t happy that the inspectors were there.
Look, I know how important it seems to gloss over the gaffes made by this administration. If the American public really understood the depth to which this administration was willing to stoop in order to get their war, no Republic candidate would ever be elected again. But really, Mitt, old buddy, please don’t try to lie your way out of someone else’s lie. Make a break with this loser President and be your own man.
Tags: 2008 Presidential
Did Hussein not kick inspectors out in late 1998?
Did he not let them back in in 2002? And yes, he gassed people in 1991, and he kicked a dog in 1986. In 1952, he broke a little girls heart.
He was a bad man… I get it. I agree, but we demanded that he let inspectors in, and he did. Are you suggesting that Mitt was talking about 1998?
I think there was some doubt about what happened to the Iraqi WMD stock during the time inspectors were not allowed in.
Fact is, you can’t tell exactly what MR was talking about.
The question is whether Mr. Romney himself knows what he’s talking about.
I would reply with some pithy comment about Mitt’s stupidity, but then I’d be afraid I’d be ignored by Dave Burris’s quill.
Who cares about Manly Mitt’s gaffes and lack of consistency? He’s sooo dreamy and you know he’ll bring strong paternal instincts to the White House. I would absolutely love to have a beer with him, but alas, he’s devout mormon, and beers are verboten. Maybe a tall glass of buttermilk?
Have you ever had buttermilk? Yeech.
Dave, please try to parse the quote above in any way that doesn’t indicate that Romney was either clueless or deliberately trying to mislead. Here’s how I parse it:
Saddam refused to let inspectors in so we attacked.
The truth is:
Saddam refused to let inspectors in. The world demanded that he let them in. He let them in. We attacked anyway.
Can you parse Mutt’s words to fit reality?
Personally, I hate buttermilk, but even drinking dog vomit in the presence of The Mittster would be heavenly!
OMG!! I can’t wait to vote for him!!!! He’s sooo hot and will tell me anything I want to hear!!
So did any of your leftists even read the article all the way through, or did you just stop at the part you liked?
Let’s consider these little gems.
“Iraq had been shown to have biological and chemical weapons before, “and there was no record of either destruction or production; there was this nagging question: Do they still have them?” ElBaradei said.”
You guys insist they never had them or at the very least we KNEW they didn’t have that at the time. But that is not exactly what ElBaradei said, just what you wanted to hear.
“ElBaradei faulted Iraq for “the opaque nature of that Saddam Hussein regime.”
“We should not forget that,” he said. “For a couple of months, their cooperation was not by any way transparent, for whatever reason.”
Even he admits that Saddam was playing games. But you probably didn’t want to hear that.
So we’re quibbling about how far we had Saddam bent over before W “had enough” and launched the war he planned all along?
Saddam was in such a position of strength no?
Had we not invaded he would have certainly invaded us right?
This point is moot. The Decider had already decided.