Bush has stopped saying "weapons of mass destruction."

[Ohio Dem]

Before the invasion of Iraq, "weapons of mass destruction" was Bush's four favorite words. Now, he never says them. His newest favorite four words are "this is just politics," in response to Democratic inquiries into the subject.

I would like to see some study listing the number of times Bush said the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" before the war, and how many times he's said it since. People need to be reminded that WMD's were the "reason" we went to war. Since it now seems that there aren't any such weapons in Iraq, the Democrats running for President need to keep saying this. Run it into the ground. "Friends, the President refered to Iraqi weapons of mass destruction 342 (or however many) times before the war with Iraq, and now he insists they weren't the reason we invaded a sovereign nation. We need an explanation as to why the rationale for this war has changed."

And frankly, I think any of the nine could and should make this point. Even those that voted "for the war" can claim to have been mislead. Oh, I know that not many here would fall for that, but I think the American people would. As long as it gets said, over and over and over, I don't care who says it.

Does anyone know of a study that actually counts the number of times Bush said "weapons of mass destruction" before the war in contrast with how many times he's said it since it has become apparent that such weapons don't exist in Iraq?

[unblock]

1. by any chance

might the number of times bush said 'weapons of mass destruction' before invading iraq equal the number of oil rigs in iraq?

just asking.

[Stephanie]

2. I think you could do a search

at www.whitehouse.gov for that - they leave most every stupid utterance intact, except for cleaning up the grammar etc.

[Ohio Dem]

3. Good idea. I just did that.

894 results found, but not all about Iraq, and not all utterances by our fearless leader.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/query.html?col=colpics&qt=%22weapons+of+mass+destruction%22

[gulliver]

4. Bingo! Evasive language, just like in the SOTU!

Bush no longer says "weapons of mass destruction" at all. He just says "weapons programs." Just like his "the British have learned" phrase in the State of the Union, Bush is trying to be sneaky and legalistic about his language. When asked about WMDs, Bush responds that he is confident that we will prove Saddam had a "weapons program." But that is sneaky and obviously evasive.

It's a pattern with Bush. When Enron went south, Bush said that Ken Lay supported Ann Richards when in fact, Lay had supported Bush (strongly and monetarily) throughout Bush's career as Texas governor. When Bush is cornered, he doesn't bother with mea culpa's, he just says something sneaky and half truthful. How is it some would dare call Bush a straight talker?

[Ohio Dem]

5. Indeed.

Calling Bush a straight talker is like calling Santorum "inclusive." You just can't say that . . . oh . . . the same people that call Bush a straight talker say that, too, don't they? Never mind.

[yella_dawg]

6. Anybody heard any more about

the major breakthrough on the WMD search that we were promised a couple of weeks ago? I thought the announcement was only days away.

yella

[juajen]

7. As you might have read on LBN thread, and one here, I believe

WMD find might have been screwed by a lot of soldiers coming down with "pneumonia", which has actually supposedly been credited to a toxin of suspicious origins, implied attempt to plant WMDs. Interesting and, if true, pretty disgusting.

[robbedvoter]

8. Two LBM threads: one about Powell UN lies and one about "overstatements"

on WMD - Chicago Tribune. Story is out - there were no WMD.

[zbdent]

9. and check that against the number of times

he said "liberate the Iraqi people" prior to the first death in Iraq.

[Robin Hood]

10. The Bush admin is a Wepon of Mass Distraction.

[this_side_up]

11. You might want to ask

Harper's Magazine. They keep track of how many this
and thats on various subjects.