The I Word

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sirach14
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Sirach14:
:rolleyes:

Didn’t Ralph Nader run against the president in the last election? Not that it would cause any bias, of course. 😛

Also, 89 members of Congress have asked a question? Wow.

As I recall, senator Kerry was among those beating the war drums, was he not? At the time was he falsely interpreting intelligence on purpose so that he could talk Bush into war and then use it against him in the campaign?

Alan
 
Didn’t Ralph Nader run against the president in the last election? Not that it would cause any bias, of course. 😛

Also, 89 members of Congress have asked a question? Wow.

As I recall, senator Kerry was among those beating the war drums, was he not? At the time was he falsely interpreting intelligence on purpose so that he could talk Bush into war and then use it against him in the campaign?

Alan
[/quote]

Really? How did you hear about Kerry doing that?
 
Republican-controlled Congress. Both Houses.
Unless Mr. Bush posts the red-button codes on the Internet, it ain’t gonna happen.
 
40.png
BLB_Oregon:
Republican-controlled Congress. Both Houses. Unless Mr. Bush posts the red-button codes on the Internet, it ain’t gonna happen.
Never us mind that President Bush hasn’t done anything impeachable.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
40.png
mlchance:
Never us mind that President Bush hasn’t done anything impeachable.

– Mark L. Chance.
Mark, Mark, Mark…haven’t we already concluded that the facts do NOT matter? Also as usual the two writers claim that Clinton’s impeachment was due to minor sexual pecadillos, not due to his lying and obstruction of justice. But again, the blue dress caper makes so much better headlines than mundane rules and regulations.

Lisa N
 
Lisa N:
Mark, Mark, Mark…haven’t we already concluded that the facts do NOT matter? Also as usual the two writers claim that Clinton’s impeachment was due to minor sexual pecadillos, not due to his lying and obstruction of justice. But again, the blue dress caper makes so much better headlines than mundane rules and regulations.

Lisa N
Has there ever been any authoritative statistical correlation between the days Clinton attacked other countries, aspirin factories and the like, and the days there was to be front page news on the sex/obstruction scandal? Statistics can be used to indict a company of discrimination, but I’m sure it works differently with presidents.

Alan
 
40.png
Celia:
Really? How did you hear about Kerry doing that?
I don’t remember where I first heard it, but I found a compilation of Democrats, including presidents Bill and Hillary, saying the same sort of stuff on snopes.
Sen John F. Kerry:
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

The real reason the war is “illegal” is that Bush got credit for it because Clinton, though he wanted it badly, did not engage in it.

Oh, before anyone asks about that:

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

I’m not saying Republicans are angels; only that Democrats are not anywhere near honest on this issue.

Alan

Source: snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
 
Actually, a much better resource than snopes.com is this:

factcheck.org/

If you all recall, Dick Cheney quoted this site in the VP debate.

Both sides seem to share equally in lies and/or distortions.
 
40.png
liam1230:
Actually, a much better resource than snopes.com is this:

factcheck.org/

If you all recall, Dick Cheney quoted this site in the VP debate.

Both sides seem to share equally in lies and/or distortions.
What makes factcheck.com better than snopes? Is it more independent?

They may have shared equally, but how come throughout the campaign we never heard any major media attention focused on the fact that Kerry and Clinton were pushing this war? If Bush hadn’t gone in, I have no doubt they’d have creamed him for that. The only thing that really got out was that unfortunate situation with the swift boat dudes – and the media tried its best to ignore them until it was way too late.

Bush single-handedly led us into an illegal war, indeed! Even on factcheck.com, where they are bashing a Bush ad, they confirm that Kerry gave unwavering support to the war.

The fact that the democrats and media have whipped up the populace into a frenzy over an “illegal war” based on information that everybody agreed to has done incredible damage to the country. At least if we’re going to hate the president, let’s hate him for something that actually happened.

Alan
 
Umm… Seems to me like all the stitchings’ beginning to unravel!!

O what a tangled web we weave when first we set out to deceive,

Sir Walter Scott.
 
Lisa N:
Mark, Mark, Mark…haven’t we already concluded that the facts do NOT matter? Also as usual the two writers claim that Clinton’s impeachment was due to minor sexual pecadillos, not due to his lying and obstruction of justice. But again, the blue dress caper makes so much better headlines than mundane rules and regulations.

Lisa N
Bing! Bing! Bing! Give that lady a prize!!!

Two things lead Congress by the nose: Money and the winds of public opinion.
That they can’t respond more to either facts or the demands of justice and common sense is a source of discouragement to more than a few in public office. Considering the concupiscence of the electorate, I believe it is by the work of God that they get any good done at all, and don’t do more harm than they already do.

My suspicion is that there are few presidents, Clinton included, who have not hidden many things they don’t want the voters to know about, some worse than the ones he was caught in. But that is just me. I am convinced that, had you changed Mr. Clinton’s rhetoric and put him in office as a Republican, he’d have had “Tyson” hung on his neck, rather than his personal lapses in character. There are people out there with advertising to sell and their own agendas to promote… you have to send up flags that your target audience will salute.

Ah, well. Democracy sometimes stinks, but it beats all the alternatives! You can’t have a government better than the people being governed are willing to be.
 
40.png
BLB_Oregon:
You can’t have a government better than the people being governed are willing to be.
You hit it right on the head, BRAVO!!! :clapping: :clapping:
 
40.png
Karin:
This seemed like such a promising thread…what happened??
When one calls on us to impeach the president, it kinda falls apart.

Disagree with him, certainly. But don’t use Deaniac rhetoric. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top