"We can't forget the fact that although at a particular point in time we never found any WMD down there, he clearly had had WMD. He clearly had had the beginnings of a nuclear program,"Gee, this issue is pretty much old news and certainly not the only casus belli available to justify his removal. It's something we've been over and over and over. The fact that he once possessed weapons is indisputable, so why does him saying it qualify as news?
Most likely because the left has been somewhat successful in reshaping public opinion about that fact. Many have long since swallowed the donkey party's unmitigated re-written BS about the WMDs:
Fred Thompson is Gomer Pyle's body double. The "intention" to acquire WMD is not grounds for the invasion of another country known not to be a threat to the U.S. unless it also has the second richest oil reserves.These same people will argue that we gave Saddam his WMDs while saying he didn't have any. But the WMDs are just a tool--the commenter clearly illustrates the emerging attack line on Thompson--he's a big slow dumbass from the south. Why, he's so slow and dumb he didn't realize Saddam didn't have any WMDs!
Yes, he IS slow. Such a thing is common in Tennessee. He's also old and bald. To many these qualities equate to a lack of intelligence, hence the Gomer reference. But the Fredheads shouldn't fret yet--this is all part of the weeding out process designed to magnify flaws to see how people react to bogus stories (even if the left doesn't realize they're part of it). His acumen won't be fully tested and proven until the debates, which he's been rather slow to enter so far. Considering Hillary's performance the other day, just how dumb was that move?
Keith Olberman just confirmed the strategy by snidely mentioning the above story, inserting the dullard perception to his bobbleheaded guest Dana Milbank. Neither bothered to offer the obvious defense. Like he used them.
Hey, at least Fred didn't blame Clinton for lying about the WMDs.