bodypilot90 0 #51 March 16, 2004 Quote...yes...I said it. well we agree on that point! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #52 March 16, 2004 QuoteQuoteA BOSTON GLOBE reporter at the center of a growing controversy over comments made by John Kerry last week in Florida now claims he "screwed-up" -- and John Kerry never bragged how "foreign leaders" privately backed his presidential bid! "I mistranscribed a key word," explains Patrick Healy, a political reporter for the BOSTON GLOBE who covered the event in a pool capacity. "Listening to the audio recorder now, in the quiet of my house, I hear 'more leaders' and I am certain that 'more leaders' is what Senator Kerry said." Got the tape...Or is this a cover up? We know one world leader likes Bush. In November 2002 Canada's Chretien said about Bush "he's not a moron at all".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #53 March 16, 2004 >"No leader would obviously share a conversation if I started listing >them," Kerry told reporters. Right, and that's a statement that makes sense. No one asked him "Did you really say 'foreign leaders'?" They asked him why he wouldn't reveal the names of the leaders. >I tell you what, if someone mis quotes me and i'm questioned about >it - I certainly would tell the truth, or is that above his level? OK. You have a cutaway. Someone says "Why did you cut that away?" and you reply "I had a lineover." Someone thinks you said you had a total. The next day the DZ is all abuzz about your total. Someone asks you "Nasty malfunction, eh?" You say "Yes, it was pretty nasty." Were you lying because you did not deny that you did not have a total? Why did you refuse to fix the error? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #54 March 16, 2004 The 'non-cooperation' myth created by the 'unbiased' really is funny. When those democrats who howled for Hillary to release the minutes of her 'socialize medicine' planning meetings and those same who roared so bravely at the EPA to release its records to Landmark Legal's FOIA requests at the end of the Clinton era come forward, I'll give that party credibility when they scream about Cheney's energy commission. I don't see that happening soon, because there ARE no such democrats. Agreed, though. Kerry is an ass - for far more reasons than this.Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #55 March 16, 2004 Ok...what does Clinton have to do with anything. Oh, I forgot...that's the standard response to defend Bush. I said Kerry was an ass for this. Are you saying that there's nothing wrong with the Bush/Cheyney patterns of non-cooperation? What myth are you talking about? They've been asked by congress to provide information and have refused. What's mythical about that? Is it possible that anything that reflects negatively on Bush is not a left-wing conspiracy? Did you go to a special school to learn your rhetoric, or does your terminology come from Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #56 March 16, 2004 Your response is even funnier. You mentioned the refusal to release the records of Cheney's energy meeting and Bush's refusal[sic] to cooperate fully with the current 9/11 investigation. My response is an OBVIOUS retort to that portion of your post. If you can't see the analogy, go back to school - it's never too late. Since you didn't see fit to enlighten anyone as to exactly what the commission wants that the Administration didn't give them, TheAnvil will do so now so that others too may laugh. The Bush detractors are just all in a tissie because the Administration won't release the ENTIRE content of the daily intelligence briefings to the entire committee. You see, certain members of the committee who hold clearance (or were granted one in order to see the entire briefings) were allowed to view the briefings in their entirety, but not take notes on them and take said notes to unsecured areas. Apparently that's not good enough for the Democrats. It's good enough for me - your non-cooperation myth is hog-dung, hoo-eeey, crap, horse shyte, etc. The democrats are using this as an excuse to play partisan politics using the ignorance of the public -a particular forte of theirs. Keep trying.Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #57 March 16, 2004 BZZZZZTTTTTT WRONGGGG!!!!! "We have yet to receive even the most basic information about the energy task force, like who it met with and what documents it received," Rep. Dingell wrote in the New York Times ("Who Helped Cheney," Jan. 24, 2002). "The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that meetings of nongovernmental advisers be conducted in public, just to avoid the appearance of secret favoritism." They haven't even gotten close to trying to squeeze the ENTIRE contents of the daily briefings from them. Congress has requested a list of private energy company executives that participated in the meetings and haven't even been given that information. For congress, which I'm pretty sure is mostly republican right now, to request information about secret meetings, which by law, are required to be public, meetings which were used to develop national policy....that's what you call partisan politics? Man, I respect you, I respect that you take an interest in this stuff, and many of your opinions on different issues. But I just don't get why you think everything is partisan and a conspiracy. Some of it is part of the checks and balances that were intentionally built into the system. It's why the system works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #58 March 17, 2004 In my last post I wrote with regards to the 9/11 commission you had mentioned previously. You've brought up the Cheney Energy commission in attempt to deflect my point on how goat-f&%# stupid the leftist complaint in the 9/11 commission arena actually is. That aside, I'll address this one too for kicks as it actually is the richer topic bringing interesting questions to mind. First of all, if some of the invitees to the commission's meetings from notoriously left leaning environmental groups had SHOWN UP to the meetings vice scoffed at them, the democrats would have a far better idea of what went on therein - they would have BEEN THERE. Not show up, then complain because you don't know every last detail of what went on=whining jackasses. Kind of like not voting and bitching about the winner. The second point I'd like to make is more of a discussion, rather than spout VinnyOpinion. Should any government entity be allowed to have meetings with private industry on any topic where the attendees' identities are secret? A private brain trust? I have mixed feelings about that. If the attendees are paid, I have a problem with that for certain aspects of govt. However, if I'm the Prez (& I'd like to be someday) I would argue that it is IN everyone's interest that I be able to do so, because leaders who feel free to speak their mind free of public scrutiny are a far better resource than those who know they will be quoted later. It gives attendees the latitude to change their mind, speak free of retribution, and give me unfiltered insight. Mixed feelings on that point from me. My mixed feelings aside, I previously alluded (correctly) that the same voices pontificating about the evils of the Cheney Energy commission's secrecy were some of the staunchest supporters of keeping Madame Clintonista's 'socialize medicine' minutes hidden from public view when Republicans called for their release. I also inferred my confident doubt that you'd find any of the aforementioned supporting the FOIA requests of Landmark Legal ICO the Clinton EPA. They aren't concerned about the issue at hand - they are concerned about partisanship and making GWB look bad in any way possible. I state this with utter confidence due to the reasons detailed above. Their hypocrisy is obvious - as are their motives. Madame Clinton's commission brings up another interesting point to contrast w/Cheney - should an unelected person make public the minutes of meetings used in formulating a proposed public policy? Cheney - elected. First Lady - not elected (though granted title via an election). Interesting difference. Don't think it matters much. Survey says?Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #59 March 17, 2004 Again John quit using Kerry threads to sling Mud at Bush...I expect more from you. You claim to be smart, but you can't defend Kerry....Only slam Bush. Its getting old, and you look pathetic doing it. Thread: Kerry is an ASS Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: Kerry raped small rodents Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: 4way scrambles at Zhills Kallend: Bush Lied! See? IT gets really old."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #60 March 17, 2004 QuoteAgain John quit using Kerry threads to sling Mud at Bush...I expect more from you. You claim to be smart, but you can't defend Kerry....Only slam Bush. Its getting old, and you look pathetic doing it. Thread: Kerry is an ASS Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: Kerry raped small rodents Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: 4way scrambles at Zhills Kallend: Bush Lied! See? IT gets really old. Reminds me of that scene in "Rainman" where Dustin Hoffman keeps saying K-mart......Kmart.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #61 March 17, 2004 Quotebill -- I tried to tell them this yesterday and they simply ignored it. Once they get a notion into their heads . . . it's difficult to change it. Maybe if they read THIS from a known source. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #62 March 17, 2004 QuoteQuotebill -- I tried to tell them this yesterday and they simply ignored it. Once they get a notion into their heads . . . it's difficult to change it. Maybe if they read THIS from a known source. ltdiver Won't do any good. We have tried. Unless it comes from a left wing rag, it never happened. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #63 March 17, 2004 QuoteAgain John quit using Kerry threads to sling Mud at Bush...I expect more from you. You claim to be smart, but you can't defend Kerry....Only slam Bush. Its getting old, and you look pathetic doing it. Thread: Kerry is an ASS Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: Kerry raped small rodents Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: 4way scrambles at Zhills Kallend: Bush Lied! See? IT gets really old. BUSH LIED I am not interested in Kerry. I am in the "anyone but Bush" camp. Oh, did I mention that BUSH LIED... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #64 March 17, 2004 QuoteQuoteAgain John quit using Kerry threads to sling Mud at Bush...I expect more from you. You claim to be smart, but you can't defend Kerry....Only slam Bush. Its getting old, and you look pathetic doing it. Thread: Kerry is an ASS Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: Kerry raped small rodents Kallend: Bush lied! Thread: 4way scrambles at Zhills Kallend: Bush Lied! See? IT gets really old. BUSH LIED I am not interested in Kerry. I am in the "anyone but Bush" camp. Oh, did I mention that BUSH LIED Kmart...Kmart...Kmart........... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #65 March 17, 2004 QuoteBUSH LIED I am not interested in Kerry. I am in the "anyone but Bush" camp. Oh, did I mention that BUSH LIED Ok Rainman...Show your intelect by not debating the topic...but by resulting to 4th grade tactics. Thats cool. You just lost TONS of my my respect. If you can't defend a position it's pretty lame to wave shinny things and try to change the topic. I really did expect more from you. Next I'm gonna be told that the Easter bunny never existed."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #66 March 17, 2004 Yep, the Respect-o-meter has definitley hit it's lowest point for "Rainman" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #67 March 17, 2004 QuoteQuoteBUSH LIED I am not interested in Kerry. I am in the "anyone but Bush" camp. Oh, did I mention that BUSH LIED Ok Rainman...Show your intelect by not debating the topic...but by resulting to 4th grade tactics. Thats cool. You just lost TONS of my my respect. If you can't defend a position it's pretty lame to wave shinny things and try to change the topic. I really did expect more from you. Next I'm gonna be told that the Easter bunny never existed. Your problem, Ron, is that you didn't study the classics enough. Try Googling on "Cato" and the "3rd Punic War".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #68 March 17, 2004 QuoteYep, the Respect-o-meter has definitley hit it's lowest point for "Rainman" Your problem, GM, is that, like most Americans, you didn't study the classics enough. Try Googling on "Cato" and the "3rd Punic War". Sometimes the message just has to be hammered into particulary thick skulls that are in denial. BUSH LIED... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #69 March 17, 2004 QuoteYour problem, Ron, is that you didn't study the classics enough. Try Googling on "Cato" and the "3rd Punic War". Ok John....Er I mean Rainman. One of my problems is this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54569-2004Mar12.html QuoteCongressional Democrats contend that two Pentagon shops -- the Office of Special Plans and the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group -- were established by Rumsfeld, Feith and other defense hawks expressly to bypass the CIA and other intelligence agencies. They argue that the offices supplied the administration with information, most of it discredited by the regular intelligence community, that President Bush, Cheney and others used to exaggerate the Iraqi threat. But interviews with senior defense officials, White House and CIA officials, congressional sources and others yield a different portrait of the work done by the two Pentagon offices. Neither the House nor Senate intelligence committees, for example, which have been investigating prewar intelligence for eight months, have found support for allegations that Pentagon analysts went out and collected their own intelligence, congressional officials from both parties say. Nor have investigators found that the Pentagon analysis about Iraq significantly shaped the case the administration made for going to war. And you have made claims about Bush making groups to create false info. Seems like maybe they were not."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #70 March 17, 2004 QuoteQuoteYour problem, Ron, is that you didn't study the classics enough. Try Googling on "Cato" and the "3rd Punic War". Ok John....Er I mean Rainman. One of my problems is this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54569-2004Mar12.html QuoteCongressional Democrats contend that two Pentagon shops -- the Office of Special Plans and the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group -- were established by Rumsfeld, Feith and other defense hawks expressly to bypass the CIA and other intelligence agencies. They argue that the offices supplied the administration with information, most of it discredited by the regular intelligence community, that President Bush, Cheney and others used to exaggerate the Iraqi threat. But interviews with senior defense officials, White House and CIA officials, congressional sources and others yield a different portrait of the work done by the two Pentagon offices. Neither the House nor Senate intelligence committees, for example, which have been investigating prewar intelligence for eight months, have found support for allegations that Pentagon analysts went out and collected their own intelligence, congressional officials from both parties say. Nor have investigators found that the Pentagon analysis about Iraq significantly shaped the case the administration made for going to war. And you have made claims about Bush making groups to create false info. Seems like maybe they were not. Maybe you can explain just HOW GWB &Co came to "know where they are" when in fact they weren't there, the CIA says they didn't say that, and Hans Blix stated to the UN in his report to the Security Council (March 7 2003), that U.N. inspectors "Did not find evidence of the continuation or resumption of programs of weapons of mass destruction or significant quantities of proscribed items." and the IAEA report found no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. Did Bush make up the stories all by himself? Is that what you're claiming now?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #71 March 17, 2004 >And you have made claims about Bush making groups to create false info. -------------- Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines. . . . Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting." But the production company, Home Front Communications, said it had hired her to read a script prepared by the government. In one script, the administration suggests that anchors use this language: "In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare. Since then, there have been a lot of questions about how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details." The "reporter" then explains the benefits of the new law. ------------------ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #72 March 17, 2004 (sigh) Ron, Gravitymaster, stop calling Kallend "rainman." John, stop saying Gravitymaster has a thick skull. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #73 March 17, 2004 QuoteMaybe you can explain just HOW GWB &Co came to "know where they are" when in fact they weren't there, the CIA says they didn't say that, and Hans Blix stated to the UN in his report to the Security Council (March 7 2003), that U.N. inspectors "Did not find evidence of the continuation or resumption of programs of weapons of mass destruction or significant quantities of proscribed items." and the IAEA report found no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. Did Bush make up the stories all by himself? Is that what you're claiming now? Nope..I think he was feed bad intel...No I don't know if it was to furter an agenda , or if it was just stupidity...And that is a big difference...One is criminal, the other just a mistake. And the CIA is not going to Admit they were wrong. No one really does. If you accuse a student of plagerism...do they usually fess up right there? Nope and niether do most politians. But my point is you said this organization was created to feed Bush the intel he wanted...It is now shown it was not. And I have said it before...If you can prove Bush lied and sent this nation to war for no reason...I will line up with you for his head ot be on a stick.. But so far you have shown no proof. And to be honest I thought they did as well...They did have them...Hell we sold them to them so we knew they had them. They were unable to show how they got rid of them. They CLAIMED to have them still. They at first didn't co-operate with Blix...Blix himself said they were stalling and not totally open. So if you can prove he lied...I'll fight with you...Until then you are on your own. And I would much rather debate you than ignore you."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #74 March 17, 2004 "if you kids don't knowck it off, I'm gonna turn this car right around, you got me?"witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #75 March 17, 2004 QuoteFederal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines. . . . Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting." Source? Any PROOF yet? Like as in smoking gun...Not he said, she said."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
