0
skyrider

Who "talked" and Who "Acted"?

Recommended Posts

What's new? I've always known Bush and Cheney were lying douchebags who used WMDs as a reason to invade Iraq.

Here's the video condensed:

"
Clinton says...
...Saddam has WMDs
...he will make them
...and use them
...I assure you


One man took action...
[GW's face appears]
...Bush
"

Why did the Bush administration distance themselves from the WMD stance not too long after the war began?

We should have never been there to begin with, but since we're there at least let us know why we're there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We should have never been there to begin with, but since we're there at least let us know why we're there."

Ooh I know that one. (raises his hand) Iraq has oil and Afganistan has Lithium:ph34r:


Gone fishing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


"We should have never been there to begin with, but since we're there at least let us know why we're there."

Ooh I know that one. (raises his hand) Iraq has oil and Afganistan has Lithium:ph34r:


Hi Zepper,
Yeah and in Viet Nam it was the Tungsten conspiracy!! "AND!!" someone gave the Mexicans a bogus map to the "Lost Dutchman!!" Go figure??:ph34r::ph34r::D:D;);)B|
SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


"We should have never been there to begin with, but since we're there at least let us know why we're there."

Ooh I know that one. (raises his hand) Iraq has oil and Afganistan has Lithium:ph34r:



Yea, the real reason is balance of power. Once resources dry up, it may be 20 years of 100's of years, we won't give 2 shits about Palestine, Israel, Saudi or any of the others. I've gone back and forth with this, but I'm now at the position that it's all about resource.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It's another thing when the same is said by the nation's 238 leading presidential scholars, who have been polled annually for the last 28 years.




(Un-named) Presidential Scholars.... Now there's a good unbiased source. :P


Awwww, is this a liberal conspiracy? Remember, the all-time poll has Lincoln or Washington at #1, Pierce, Buchanan and Andrew Johnson at the bottom, so there goes your silly conspiracy. Are you saying Bush shouldn't be 5th from the bottom?
Polls also put Eisenhower in the top 10 with Teddy Roosevelt up around there too. There are plenty of Dems near the bottom too, esp pre-Civil War Dems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It's another thing when the same is said by the nation's 238 leading presidential scholars, who have been polled annually for the last 28 years.




(Un-named) Presidential Scholars.... Now there's a good unbiased source. :P


Awwww, is this a liberal conspiracy? Remember, the all-time poll has Lincoln or Washington at #1, Pierce, Buchanan and Andrew Johnson at the bottom, so there goes your silly conspiracy. Are you saying Bush shouldn't be 5th from the bottom?
Polls also put Eisenhower in the top 10 with Teddy Roosevelt up around there too. There are plenty of Dems near the bottom too, esp pre-Civil War Dems.


No. I'm saying "there's a good unbiased source".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Where would you put a president who inherited a surplus, left a huge deficit, started an unnecessary war, couldn't put together a coherent sentence, and left the economy in tatters? I'd suggest 5th worst is being generous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

It's another thing when the same is said by the nation's 238 leading presidential scholars, who have been polled annually for the last 28 years.




(Un-named) Presidential Scholars.... Now there's a good unbiased source. :P


Awwww, is this a liberal conspiracy? Remember, the all-time poll has Lincoln or Washington at #1, Pierce, Buchanan and Andrew Johnson at the bottom, so there goes your silly conspiracy. Are you saying Bush shouldn't be 5th from the bottom?
Polls also put Eisenhower in the top 10 with Teddy Roosevelt up around there too. There are plenty of Dems near the bottom too, esp pre-Civil War Dems.


No. I'm saying "there's a good unbiased source".


Same as I'm saying; you assume universities are filled with liberals. Furthermore, these so-called libs can't be objective. Make an argument showing that their findings/opinions are flaweed and we can go from there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

Look how Clinton has moved up to 13 and fascist Ronnie moved down to 18; PEOPLE ARE REALIZING HOW CRITICAL THE ECONOMY IS OVER ALL OTHER MORAL ISSUES AND THAT CLINTON MASTERED IT. Reagan will be mid-20's to 30's before it's all done. Of course the ideologues will still praise him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Where would you put a president who inherited a surplus, left a huge deficit, started an unnecessary war, couldn't put together a coherent sentence, and left the economy in tatters? I'd suggest 5th worst is being generous.



Esp considering guys like Will Henry Harrison was lower and his mistake was being too stupid to put on a coat; he never really did anything presidential. UPDATE: I see as of the new 2010 poll that tehy switched places - bout time.

Pierce and Buchannan s/b locks for last or near and they were teh most god-aweful slave-lovers. Harding, of course, the engineer of the Great Depression, what a pig - cut taxes and led to the mess. We really were able to see hisory here, the 5th worst president and sinking, those who voted for him s/b proud.

So as for your conspiracy, quit thinking popular and start thinking functional. Who did teh most for America as it stands? Who was the most harmful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Where would you put a president who inherited a surplus, left a huge deficit, started an unnecessary war, couldn't put together a coherent sentence, and left the economy in tatters? I'd suggest 5th worst is being generous.


It's not a static distinction. Those polls are done continuously. GWB's rating is still heading down ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


Where would you put a president who inherited a surplus, left a huge deficit, started an unnecessary war, couldn't put together a coherent sentence, and left the economy in tatters? I'd suggest 5th worst is being generous.


It's not a static distinction. Those polls are done continuously. GWB's rating is still heading down ;)


Love to see fascist Ronny's heading down too, why did it take so long to figure that one out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0