Friday, March 14, 2008

Gee, why would we have thought that nice Saddam

would have contacts with those religious nuts?

Mike- and a bunch of others, like Ace(here, here, here) have taken note of this. And the way the various media weenies are trying to spin it:
I had meant to post on this earlier. I am tired of the Clintonian claims about "no direct operational connection," which sounds an awful lot like "no sexual relations." Well, what does "sexual relations" mean? And what does "direct, operational link" mean? The very language itself screams there was in fact a link by denying only a specific, and quite unifying link and, by implication, allowing for links short of the "direct, operational" variety.

1 comment:

Fire said...

EXACTLY! It's all according to "word play" with these people.