Recommended Posts
QuoteQuote
Please defend security leaks under Bush's administration without resorting to, "But Clinton...."
I've seen the lefties go back to the crusades to make their point. Conservatives only have to go back 3 years.
What is that point? That Bush sucks just as bad as Clinton?
My point is that liberals have dig harder for their dirt.
never pull low......unless you are
QuoteMy point is that liberals have dig harder for their dirt.
Yeah...all the way back to, well, current affairs, which is what I thought we were talking about. I'm not trying to dig up dirt, or keep score. I'm trying to point out the problems that exist today. Problems, that when brought up, are rebutted with history lessons.
QuoteQuoteMy point is that liberals have dig harder for their dirt.
Yeah...all the way back to, well, current affairs, which is what I thought we were talking about. I'm not trying to dig up dirt, or keep score. I'm trying to point out the problems that exist today. Problems, that when brought up, are rebutted with history lessons.
Would you be as deligent in pointing out these problems if the administration was democrats?
never pull low......unless you are
QuoteWould you be as deligent in pointing out these problems if the administration was democrats?
99.99% of politicians are in it for themselves. No matter of party affiliation. It is about power. I prefer the democrats because they at least pay lip service to helping people in general.
Republicans want to let business do what ever it wants and control what people do, democrats look at it the other way around.
"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Bush is nothing more than a warmonger - he talks like he has a carrot up his ass which is making him pause to adjust every sentence. a modern day dictator.
QuoteBush is nothing more than a warmonger - he talks like he has a carrot up his ass which is making him pause to adjust every sentence. a modern day dictator.
You give him to much credit. The problem people are Cheny, Rummy, Ashcroft, Karl Rove. Without Rove Bush would still just be the owner of the Rangers.
"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
99.99% of politicians are in it for themselves. No matter of party affiliation. It is about power.
I agree.
I prefer the democrats because they at least pay lip service to helping people in general.
I don't like the way they "help" people.
Republicans want to let business do what ever it wants and control what people do, democrats look at it the other way around.
Repulicans want people to get off their asses and get a job. They don't mind giving to the truly needy, but don't want to be taken advantage of. They don't believe that the government is the answer to all of their problems.
never pull low......unless you are
Quote- he talks like he has a carrot up his ass which is making him pause to adjust every sentence.
Classic Liberalism 101. Too bad he doesn't have any physical defects, you could make fun of them also.
never pull low......unless you are
QuoteWould you be as deligent in pointing out these problems if the administration was democrats?
Yes....I voted for more republicans than democrats in the last election. I vote for individuals and ethics, not party lines and rhetoric, which is what we got with Bush (party lines and rhetoric, that is).
AdD 1
***Find me one terror attack with a higher body count?
You can't. Thats why its such a big deal.***
It was a 'big deal' not only in terms of magnitude but also because of who the victims were. Chomsky argues that Clinton's attack on the Al Shifa plant in Sudan resulted in the preventable deaths of 10 000 people give or take a few, which is a statistic from NGO's and the German ambassador to Sudan. The sanctions on Sudan made it impossible for them to replace the medicines which were produced exclusively by the plant. The administration wasn't sure that the plant produced WMD's, but they did know that it produced something like 90% of Sudan's medications and that these would be impossible to replace. So there's one case. I'd also be happy to refer you to the US code's definition of terrorism if you'd like to see if the attack qualifies as such.
You can't. Thats why its such a big deal.***
It was a 'big deal' not only in terms of magnitude but also because of who the victims were. Chomsky argues that Clinton's attack on the Al Shifa plant in Sudan resulted in the preventable deaths of 10 000 people give or take a few, which is a statistic from NGO's and the German ambassador to Sudan. The sanctions on Sudan made it impossible for them to replace the medicines which were produced exclusively by the plant. The administration wasn't sure that the plant produced WMD's, but they did know that it produced something like 90% of Sudan's medications and that these would be impossible to replace. So there's one case. I'd also be happy to refer you to the US code's definition of terrorism if you'd like to see if the attack qualifies as such.
Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream
QuoteQuoteQuote
I prefer the democrats because they at least pay lip service to helping people in general.
I don't like the way they "help" people.
Republicans want to let business do what ever it wants and control what people do, democrats look at it the other way around.
Repulicans want people to get off their asses and get a job. They don't mind giving to the truly needy, but don't want to be taken advantage of. They don't believe that the government is the answer to all of their problems.
What do you dislike about how democrats help? FDR and the new deal were a good idea. Human nature, laziness, screwed it up.
The government shouldn't provide everything but on the other hand it can't provide nothing. What neither party is willing to do is take the welfare programs and put the systems in place that look at individuals. The programs are also put together in stupid ways. It isn't hard to see why a single mother would choose welfare over work if daycare reduces her income to below the welfare levels. We need graduated levels to help get people of welfare and into work.
My real soapbox is so far off of this thread but here goes. Education is the key. Unfortunately if we can't fix and entire school system we can't try. I say to hell with everyone else just fix kindergarten this year. Next year fix first grade and so on. In 12 years we would have the education system fixed. What is "fixed?" I don't know for sure that is up to the local schools in most cases, although having gone to 12 schools in 12 years I can see a real strong case for a basic national curriculum.
"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
***QuoteQuoteYou really don't remember Janet Reno commiting treason, in many's view, in her efforts to block this investigation? Is your memory really that short?
I'll ask the question I've been implying and you've been avoiding. What does that have to do with Bush? I love the cries of "the liberals didn't say anything when Clinton did" , whenever Bush is criticized about something. Look in the mirror, the conservatives aren't saying anything about Bush doing the same things, other than telling us to look at what Clinton did.
Please defend security leaks under Bush's administration without resorting to, "But Clinton...."
That would be true if taken only in the context in which you frame it. However, if you go back and re-read my responses, you will see initially I was responding to someone who seemed to think the only thing Clinton ever did wrong was to get a blow job. I was simply pointing out some of the bad things that happened during the Clinton Administration.
Too bad your attempt at misdirection didn't work. Nice try though.
Quote***QuoteQuoteYou really don't remember Janet Reno commiting treason, in many's view, in her efforts to block this investigation? Is your memory really that short?
I'll ask the question I've been implying and you've been avoiding. What does that have to do with Bush? I love the cries of "the liberals didn't say anything when Clinton did" , whenever Bush is criticized about something. Look in the mirror, the conservatives aren't saying anything about Bush doing the same things, other than telling us to look at what Clinton did.
Please defend security leaks under Bush's administration without resorting to, "But Clinton...."
That would be true if taken only in the context in which you frame it. However, if you go back and re-read my responses, you will see initially I was responding to someone who seemed to think the only thing Clinton ever did wrong was to get a blow job. I was simply pointing out some of the bad things that happened during the Clinton Administration.
Too bad your attempt at misdirection didn't work. Nice try though.
And if you go back and re-read my responses, you'll see initially I was responding to someone who seemed to think that Clinton's lies "cancelled out" Bush's, not claiming that I felt that was the only thing he ever did that was wrong.
Too bad your attempt at misdirection didn't work. Nice try though.
A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All
kallend 1,647
Quote
Please defend security leaks under Bush's administration without resorting to, "But Clinton...."
I've seen the lefties go back to the crusades to make their point. Conservatives only have to go back 3 years.
Bad things happening in the past are NOT excuses for bad things happening in the present. You guys are like little kids... "Well, he did it first".
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
for every one
My personal opinion is because we/they all wanted to believe he was dangerous on an international level so as to justify screwing with him as much as possible. Do I or have I ever supported SH? Hell no. Was he an evil man? Absolutely. Was he involved with 9/11? Probably not, certainly not at the levels our friends the Saudi's were.
The real thrust of my argument was that people here on both sides of the fence are claiming that the other guys screwed up. One group by ignoring good intel and the other by acting on bad intel. Same intel in all cases. Now it is clear that a lot of the intel was bad or we would have turned something up by now. And if our satellite systems are so good as to tell us what is happening all of the time all over the world then how does a country hide all of there rather large and hard to dismantle WMDs and we didn't see it? The current administration also put a lot of weight on people who had it in their own best interest to see us invade so they could be part of the next group of rulers.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. I understand and support the reason we invaded Afghanistan even if we managed to screw it up in the end. I don't support our reasons for invading Iraq even though I think the world is better off with SH in power.
"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites