A lot of people are talking about Jean Schmidt, who's the republican running in the special election in the Ohio 2nd district on tuesday. Crooks and Liars has a hi-fucking-larious interview from last night's Hardball. And if you watch it carefully, you might find that, yes, ladies and gentlemen, that we have a new lie from the republicans! I know we all thought that there couldn't possibly be any more untruths to tell, but Jean Schmidt found one (around 5:40, if you're watching the video):
SCHMIDT: Ya know, the fact of the matter is there are no weapons of mass destruction. And uh we were listening to a thug, uh, Saddam Hussein, who said there was. And he wasn't allowing people to go in and inspect. We called him on it.
Clearly, the antecedent to the highlighted sentence is "weapons of mass destruction." Schmidt is telling us, unambiguously, that Saddam Hussein was saying that there were ("was," as she has it, ungrammatically) weapons of mass destruction.
Let me remind you, this is a person who is running for the United States House of Representatives.
I suppose it's possible she misspoke. But given that the very next sentence is another boldfaced lie, it's hard to give her the benefit of the doubt.
(For what it's worth, surely you all remember when Bush told a lie similar to the second one:
The larger point is and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power.
Which is so obviously untrue as to be laughable.)
Seems like we've come full circle folks. At first the republicans told us that Saddam was lying when he said he didn't have WMD, and was decieving the UN weapons inspectors whom he had admitted. Now they're telling us that Saddam was lying when he claimed that he did have WMD, and wasn't allowing inspectors in the first place.
What can you say to such things?