"Ðon ßailey" wrote in message
...

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Bush stated: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein
recently
sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." This statement
was
a
true
statement. The fact that the British government had information proved
to
be
inaccurate does not make Bush's statement a lie. The statement

The fact that the Bush administration believed the information to be a
lie
prior to the SOTU speech cannot be overlooked!

If you said, "I have just learned that the world is flat" and I repeat
"John
has learned that the world is flat, and we should therefore pursue the
following policies".....it is technically true that I haven't lied, only
endorsed a statement made by a third party- but a statement that I know
is
not
at all accurate. No signficant moral difference between telling a lie
myself
and letting somebody else lie for me. Same standards should apply to the
president. Sorry.




Your boy Clinton was a master at this type of *double speak*.


Really, he was.

For example.

After being asked about his alleged underhanded dealings in (place
your favorite BC snafu here),

He would respond with something like this:

"There is no evidence to support that"

Meaning,

Yea, I might have done the dastardly thing but you'll never
find any proof of it.

Should the "Same Standards" apply to ALL presidents?

db

Yes, including impeachment proceedings.