Edwards, what a jerk.

[Toxick]

ZING! There goes the point...

Originally posted by SmallTown
What does Bush's malice behavior have to do with which political party I follow? I always find that amusing. So you are telling us we can only bring to light bad things that happen in the "opposing party"?

All that crap you just said doesn't respond to anything I said whatsoever.

You may consider yourself to be a right-wing republican ball-o-fire or a Libertarian Freedom-Fighter, or a perfectly centered Independant. Whatever you are politically, everything you have written today has had a left wing slant to it.

I also said this is fine by me - however, it does not make you look like anything other than a left wing liberal democrat. So if you were wondering where I got my impression of you politically, it wasn't the Republicans on this board.

That's all I said. No need to get defensive about it.

Originally posted by SmallTown
And besides, if you read very carefully, you'll see it wasn't I that wrote the article

Really?

And here I thought you did. How foolish am I?


I know that you didn't write the article - however you linked to it, and I assume that you did so because you agreed with it, and you wanted some sort of reply or feedback.

If you post things like that, and you really don't want anyone to respond, perhaps you should add a disclaimer to the bottom of your posts, which indicates
Opinions expressed in my post are not necessarily mine, so back up off me, and I do not wish to discuss, argue, debate, or acknowledge anything anyone has to say on the subject. Smell you jerks later.

Originally posted by SmallTown
And you really meant to say that lying 2-3 years ago was bad, but since this is for such a more noble cause, lying is acceptable?

I said that? I don't remember saying that. I don't even remember implying it. I was pointing out hypocrisy. Not engaging in it.

If Bush is lying, then no, it is not a Good Thing.

I never said it was.

Originally posted by SmallTown
But hey, if posting certain articles means you are a part of that group, maybe I should have been the first to post about the new planets. I always wanted to be an astronomer...

See my remark above about posting certain articles. But, at least I won't disagree with you about cool scientific discoveries.

 

[SamSpade]

Originally posted by SmallTown

And you really meant to say that lying 2-3 years ago was bad, but since this is for such a more noble cause, lying is acceptable?

There's a difference, and one that is being examined - if I tell you there's more hamburgers on the grill - and there aren't any - and I *KNEW* there weren't - I lied. If I thought there was, and there weren't, I'm mistaken. I gave you an answer with what I considered reliable information.

When astronomers concluded that Pluto was approximately the size of the Earth - they were wrong. Their calculations were mistaken. Over time, it has been 1/2 the Earth size, 1/4 the Earth size to .19 Earth size (conjecture is that in 50 years, it will be *gone* ). Their info was just plain wrong. Had they purported it to be any of those sizes, KNOWING it was false, that is what lying is.

Know something else? In court - and in politics - if you can't prove something with evidence - it's also dishonest to assert something as true, even if it IS true. You have to back things up, either on spurious evidence, or credible evidence.

There seems to have been consensus in the world, (and among Democrats in 1998), that Saddam was a credible threat to the world, possessed WMD's (and we KNOW he had them, but we don't know what happened to them, except his word that they are gone, now). He HAD them, he may still. But doesn't it strike you as incredibly stupid to search for something we're CERTAIN doesn't exist? A nationwide snipe hunt?

This is not like searching for the keys to my Porsche and Jaguar - this is like looking for my house keys and car keys. I DO have them. They ARE there, unless they've been destroyed. Not even the stupidest person searches for something they're certain doesn't exist.

 

[Ken King]

Smalltown,

By using the term “malice” you are saying that the President intentionally misled the public. Prove it. I would say that at the most the US intelligence community relied a little too heavily upon information provided by our allies. To date there is no information concerning the origination of these specific documents.

It should be obvious that after 9/11 our intelligence has been proven to be lacking and not treating threats as they should be. Were they more zealous after 9/11? I would say yes. But criminal as you contend is a far stretch.

Thinking about the documents, I wonder if Iraq (or any other country) would use legitimate documentation for the acquisition of a prohibited item? Or would you think that if they were attempting to get the “yellow cake” that they would do it in a clandestine manner such as employing phony documents and credentials?

It’s one thing to lie, but a totally different thing to make an error.

Originally posted by SmallTown
I always wanted to be an astronomer...

Who would have thought that? I figured that since you have your head up your arse so often that you would want to be a proctologist.

 

[vraiblonde]

You all realize, of course, that we are now explaining the difference between a lie and a mistake to a person who is presumably an adult?

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
You all realize, of course, that we are now explaining the difference between a lie and a mistake to a person who is presumably an adult?

I never made that presumption, I always thought that he was Smcdem in drag.

 

[SmallTown]

Re: ZING! There goes the point...

Originally posted by Toxick
You may consider yourself to be a right-wing republican ball-o-fire or a Libertarian Freedom-Fighter, or a perfectly centered Independant. Whatever you are politically, everything you have written today has had a left wing slant to it.

No left wing or right wing slant, just linking to stories. I know hard core republicans and democrats love to be spoon fed things they love to hear, and be blind to the others, but I don't feel that way. I think news from both sides, be it positive or negative, are good to know about.
What scares me is people like you actually do feel that everything is black and white - "right-wing republican ball-o-fire or a Libertarian Freedom-Fighter, or a perfectly centered Independant"
It isn't that simple for most people. It is the partisan person who doesn't recognize faults in one's own party.

My feelings towards this has nothing to do with being left or right wing. if the situation at hand makes you feel I am left wing,so be it. Unlike most on here, I don't find the term "liberal" to be offensive. If Bush was a democrat doing this stuff, I would still be saying the exact same things. Had I been posting here during the clinton years, would I have then been labeled a hard core conservative for blasting all the crap he was doing? Saying someone is doing something wrong has nothing to do with political affiliation (for me anyways).

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Ken King
I never made that presumption, I always thought that he was Smcdem in drag.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by SmallTown
Had I been posting here during the clinton years, would I have then been labeled a hard core conservative for blasting all the crap he was doing?

You wouldn't have blasted the crap he was doing. How I know that is that you don't blast it now that we know for FACT what was going on. You still say it's just sex, even after knowing full well what it's REALLY about. So if you say that now, what should make me think you'd have said anything different then?

That said, I might like you best out of all the libs we get on here. Whenever I think the Democrats might be okay and I might consider voting for one, you come on and get me all fired up about lies and hypocrisy and double-speak.

The VRWC thanks you!

 

[SamSpade]

Re: Re: ZING! There goes the point...

Originally posted by SmallTown
No left wing or right wing slant, just linking to stories.

Well that article isn't exactly the unvarnished truth. It's *quite* biased. Maybe that was your point. But do you ever present the other side?

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
You wouldn't have blasted the crap he was doing. How I know that is that you don't blast it now that we know for FACT what was going on. You still say it's just sex, even after knowing full well what it's REALLY about. So if you say that now, what should make me think you'd have said anything different then?

I don't blast him all the time now because it is over with... I had years of blasting him, but it gets old after awhile. I must say I had a lot more fun with clinton's antics than I do Bush's. Clinton was (IMHO) such a good public speaker, he could really make you convinced he was telling the truth about everything. I think this is what ticked off the republicans more than anything. Not that he did all these things, but that he was able to convince so many followers he was some sort of saint. So whenever someone like that messes up, it is A LOT of fun to harp on it.
With Bush, we don't really expect a whole lot. Quite frankly, we never know what may come out of his mouth from day to day. We know it is the people surrounding him helping him with a lot of decisions, so it is pretty hard to track anything that happens back to him... Clinton, being the "almighty" that he thought he was, just about every decision could be tracked right back to him. So when it was wrong, it was easy to pinpoint.

 

[SmallTown]

Re: Re: Re: ZING! There goes the point...

Originally posted by SamSpade
Well that article isn't exactly the unvarnished truth. It's *quite* biased. Maybe that was your point. But do you ever present the other side?

I think there are enough people discussing the "other side" on here, don't think you guys ened my help with that.

 

[vraiblonde]

Clinton, being the "almighty" that he thought he was, just about every decision could be tracked right back to him.

You may have forgotten that:

• The travel office firings were Hillary's fault
• The liason with Monica Lewinsky was HER fault
• The Bin Laden blunder was the CIA's fault
• Everything else was the VRWC's fault

Wake me up when Bush starts selling missile technology to the Chinese to pay off campaign contributions.

 

[Penn]

Yeah Right!

I just got home from work, and did a little shopping for essentials, so I dialed in SOMD.com to see what was going on.

Suffice it to say that others are catching on to ST's flip-flop journalism.

When it's mentioned that he only linked the site where the biased story originated, he says "I didn't write it". WE KNOW THAT, ST!!

How clever of you. Heck, anyone who can read will have noticed which sort of stories you like to post on this site are, and recognize their origins: straight out of the DU.

Yet you like to cloak yourself as an independent, or a person with no political "agenda", not affiliated with either party, so-to-speak.

I can't buy that. When asked why don't you post stories reflecting the "other side", well, you feel there's enough people offering up that opinion. BS! I WILL be a gentleman and not call you on that one.

Let me put it another way: Posting pro-liberal stories from the bowels of the DU speak volumes more of what your political leanings are - than anything you can possibly say.

 

[vraiblonde]

Well well.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44949-2003Jul11.html

CIA Director George Tenet acknowledged Friday his agency wrongly allowed President Bush to tell the American people that Iraq was seeking nuclear material from Africa when analysts had doubts about the quality of the intelligence.

Of course, Bush was the one who hired Tenet so it's STILL his fault! Oh...wait a minute...BUSH wasn't the one who hired Tenet....

 

[Penn]

Re: Well well.....

Originally posted by vraiblonde
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44949-2003Jul11.html

Of course, Bush was the one who hired Tenet so it's STILL his fault! Oh...wait a minute...BUSH wasn't the one who hired Tenet....

Now hold on, wait a minute; you're not saying that he was hired by you-know-who, are you?

Oh, the irony, the tyranny of it all!

Geez, maybe it's a VLWC! HRC must have been in on it.

 

[vraiblonde]

I loved the front page headline on the Wash Post this morning: "Bush, Rice Blame CIA for Iraq Error" Then they go on to say (after you've digested the headline and moved on) that all Bush said was that the allegation "was cleared by the intelligence services." Right after that, Tenet stepped up to accept responsiblity.

However, your first impression would be that Dubya and Condi are looking for a scapegoat.

Also on the front page was Bush's poll numbers dropping 9 points.

Didn't see a word about the judge finding a link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Guess that's just not "news".

 

[Penn]

Selective Journalism

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Didn't see a word about the judge finding a link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Guess that's just not "news".

It's called "pick and choose"; you lay into it with your Best Bush Bashing Box Office Bombshell that fits the current partyline.

The libs haven't been able to make anything stick to him so far, so they'll go to almost any length to make him look bad.

I guess they are still underestimating Dubya as some sort of country cowboy, and, (whoa!) since the mainstream press is very liberal biased, they'll bite on just about anything.

Read: "We told you so!"

The way I see it, if CIA Director Tenet allowed the President to misspeak at the State of the Union Address, if he knew the facts were inaccurate, he should step up and take the heat.

It's called accepting responsibility for one's own blunder.

Something unheard of on the left side of the aisle. :razz2: