Origin of a Lie

As I am sure most of you have read or heard, BushCo's spin from the debate is to go after the "Global Test" comment made by Kerry. For the sake of honesty, here is the full point Kerry made:

Q: What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war?

KERRY: The president always has the right, and always has had the right, for preemptive strike. That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War. And it was always one of the things we argued about with respect to arms control.

No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.

But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

Now this has been turned into this talking point from BushCo:

Today, Bush-Cheney '04 announced the release of the campaign's newest television advertisement, "Global Test." The ad contrasts the Kerry doctrine that America must pass a 'global test' before defending itself with President Bush's belief that decisions about defending America should be made in the Oval Office, not in foreign capitals.

Now, in Kerry's comment above where does it say anything about a having to go to foreign nations before defending America? It doesn't. That is how political lies are started. Misrepresent the truth, and then the usually idiots will eat up the lies like good brownshirts.

What is truly most disheartening is the lack of respect BushCo has for the telling the county the truth. What Kerry said he would do is if he were to wage pre-emptive war he would make sure that before he started it he would have ready the proof and the rationale to support his actions. That is what BuchCo is mocking. That is what I think is the most important reason Bush is a horrible President. He took us to war without knowing that what he was doing was correct. He wanted to go to war, and grabbed on to any rationale that might give him PR cover to keep us logical people of his back. You know us, the ones, like Colin Powel, who only like to wage wars where the USA is directly threatened or where an ally is directly threatened, or when we have honest purposes and justice on our side. Declaring yourself judge, jury, and revenge seeker in chief is not an honest purpose. "Gathering" threats are something that cause people to be prepared, but not to strike. If you think you are oing to be attacked by Iraq, that is just the cover some other foe would want to have when they come in to get you. But, if you goal is just to control all of the Muslim world, or at least those with oil, then he, nothing matters but the black gold and bottom line. The means are just a way to get what you want, and getting what you want is bedrock dogma for BushCo. Oh, when I say "you" getting what "you" want, you can't be one of "them" as defined by BushCo. "Them" knows what I am talking about.