NCclimber 0 #26 January 10, 2007 QuoteKallend referred to it one way.. BUT remember most of the people voted because they did not want to be against your Imperious Leader( he does not deal well with that).. they voted to use force .. now read this...IF force was needed.. go read the bill they passed.. Imperious Leader has different comprehension skills.. and trouble expressing himself too... but he took that IF and turned it into WOO HOO.. I got my WAR.. so I can be a WAR President... I can go nation building( fuck what I told those rubes who voted for me... I have the POWER) contrary to what he had claimned..But I guess he can be forgiven for all his little red white and blue lies.. by those of you in the Bible Belt who fell for this crap. What's your point? I mean - why are you telling us (yet again) your arguably extremist take on the whole Bush/Iraq piece of history? Does it have anything to do with the other posts in this thread? At least your not blathering on about the RePUBICONs having complete control of the government for ALL of the last six years. That bit was rich. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #27 January 10, 2007 QuoteAt least your not blathering on about the RePUBICONs having complete control of the government for ALL of the last six years. That bit was rich Gee you guys ran things as you wanted for 6 years and fucked it up.. over and over so get over it..Face it the incompetence has reached new levels never before seen in our history.. and you continue to deny it.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #28 January 10, 2007 ***QuoteQuoteAt least your not blathering on about the RePUBICONs having complete control of the government for ALL of the last six years. That bit was rich Gee you guys ran things as you wanted for 6 years and fucked it up.. over and over so get over it..Face it the incompetence has reached new levels never before seen in our history.. and you continue to deny it.. I've never denied any of the claims you try to pin on me. I'm only calling bullshit on the lies you try peddle. Bummer you can't seem to note the difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #29 January 10, 2007 QuoteI'm only calling bullshit on the lies you try peddle. Wiggle wiggle wiggle.. squirm squirm squirm.....So its a lie to say the Republicans have run things the way they have wanted for the last 6 years???? Just about everything you guys have had in your wet dreams you have enacted.... if you could have gotten away with all of the fascist kabalistic crap that this Administration sees as its mandate from the Neo-Cons and the Religeous Wrong.. they would... no restraint whatsoever... DRINK THE RED KOOLAID all you want.. it will not make this a better country to live in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #30 January 10, 2007 I don't think the majority of congress has any such beliefs. (Or to put it more accurately, they research how they should vote based on their chances of re-election, and vote that way instead of how they believe.) Their failure was in not thinking far enough ahead, that their support of the Iraq debacle would later become a liability rather than an asset. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #31 January 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteI'm only calling bullshit on the lies you try peddle. Wiggle wiggle wiggle.. squirm squirm squirm.....So its a lie to say the Republicans have run things the way they have wanted for the last 6 years???? Just about everything you guys have had in your wet dreams you have enacted.... if you could have gotten away with all of the fascist kabalistic crap that this Administration sees as its mandate from the Neo-Cons and the Religeous Wrong.. they would... no restraint whatsoever... DRINK THE RED KOOLAID all you want.. it will not make this a better country to live in. You keep trying to group me in with a pretty scare, mostly ficticious group. Is there any justification for doing so.... other than I disagree with your (arguably) extremist views? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #32 January 10, 2007 QuoteI don't think the majority of congress has any such beliefs. (Or to put it more accurately, they research how they should vote based on their chances of re-election, and vote that way instead of how they believe.) I didn't vote since that was not an option. They either believed, or they ignored their thoughts and voted the popular opinion. I can forgive being wrong. I can't forgive trying to be popular and get re-elected. And as I have said before, if anyone can provide real proof Bush lied...I want him punished. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #33 January 10, 2007 QuoteKallend referred to it one way.. BUT remember most of the people voted because they did not want to be against your Imperious Leader Again, OPINION from you. You have nothing to back that statement up. I think they just voted what was popular so they could keep their cushy job. And that includes Kerry and the others. How you forgive them for it yet put all the blame on Bush amazes me. They could have voted no if that is what they really felt. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #34 January 10, 2007 QuoteYou keep trying to group me in with a pretty scare, mostly ficticious group. Is there any justification for doing so.... other than I disagree with your (arguably) extremist views? I guess it is extremeist since the right wing does not want to hear anything that goes against their beliefs.. if it disagrees with you .. just ignore it. Lets see how that goes in the next couple years as the investigations finally start into how the neo-cons have fleeced our country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #35 January 10, 2007 QuoteHow you forgive them for it yet put all the blame on Bush amazes me. They could have voted no if that is what they really felt And the CIA that provided the information is under which branch of government? And the information was cherry picked to show WHAT conclusion that fit with what the White House was trying to get across to them??? Please.. use just a few neurons of that Renaissance Man intellect to come up with your own conclusion rather than from Lush Rimjob or Savage or some of the rest of the right wing attack radio. Remember now.. you are either with them when they fall or you are part of the solution. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #36 January 10, 2007 QuoteAnd the CIA that provided the information is under which branch of government? And the information was cherry picked to show WHAT conclusion that fit with what the White House was trying to get across to them??? Do you have any proof? Or is it just conspiracy theories again? Like it or not all of your heros Kerry et al, all seemed to think Saddam had WMD. Even Berger did BEFORE Bush was in office. So how did Bush trick Berger into it? "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."--Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998. QuotePlease.. use just a few neurons of that Renaissance Man intellect to come up with your own conclusion rather than from Lush Rimjob or Savage or some of the rest of the right wing attack radio. Ah, there is the attack!!! For your information, I listen to Rush or Savage only long enough to change the channel. In fact I have NPR on my presets, not any of their tripe. So please, start debating with facts, not emotions and not with personal attacks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #37 January 10, 2007 >>And the information was cherry picked . . . >Do you have any proof? No, but the NIE does: -------------------------- Doubts, dissent stripped from public version of Iraq assessment By Jonathan S. Landay Knight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about deposed dictator Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows. As a result, the public was given a far more definitive assessment of Iraq's plans and capabilities than President Bush and other U.S. decision-makers received from their intelligence agencies. The stark differences between the public version and the then top-secret version of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate raise new questions about the accuracy of the public case made for a war that's claimed the lives of more than 500 U.S. service members and thousands of Iraqis. ---------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #38 January 10, 2007 Key points bolded by me. QuoteNo, but the NIE does: -------------------------- Doubts, dissent stripped from public version of Iraq assessment By Jonathan S. Landay Knight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about deposed dictator Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows. As a result, the public was given a far more definitive assessment of Iraq's plans and capabilities than President Bush and other U.S. decision-makers received from their intelligence agencies. The stark differences between the public version and the then top-secret version of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate raise new questions about the accuracy of the public case made for a war that's claimed the lives of more than 500 U.S. service members and thousands of Iraqis PUBLIC. But Congress didn't use the public reports. This could show how the average guy or gal was suckered, but not for Congress. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #39 January 11, 2007 QuoteKey points bolded by me. QuoteNo, but the NIE does: -------------------------- Doubts, dissent stripped from public version of Iraq assessment By Jonathan S. Landay Knight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about deposed dictator Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows. As a result, the public was given a far more definitive assessment of Iraq's plans and capabilities than President Bush and other U.S. decision-makers received from their intelligence agencies. The stark differences between the public version and the then top-secret version of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate raise new questions about the accuracy of the public case made for a war that's claimed the lives of more than 500 U.S. service members and thousands of Iraqis PUBLIC. But Congress didn't use the public reports. This could show how the average guy or gal was suckered, but not for Congress. Morons were suckered. The evidence was clearly flimsy and some of the claims were just absurd.... 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
DaVinci 0 #40 January 11, 2007 QuoteMorons were suckered. The evidence was clearly flimsy and some of the claims were just absurd. Morons as the public who believed the leaders, or the leaders who believed the evidence? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #41 January 11, 2007 Shit poll. Plenty of people don't believe Bush "lied" in the first place, and there's no option for that in the voting. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #42 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteMorons were suckered. The evidence was clearly flimsy and some of the claims were just absurd. Morons as the public who believed the leaders, or the leaders who believed the evidence? Yes.... 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 3,132 #43 January 11, 2007 >This could show how the average guy or gal was suckered, but not for Congress. Keep in mind that we at least claim to live in a democracy. If the voters were suckered, the US government was suckered. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #44 January 11, 2007 QuoteYes. So when people who have more information than you from both sides of the political spectrum tell you something, and you believe them you are an moron? Got it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #45 January 11, 2007 QuoteI dont think Congressmen. or any politician as a matter of fact, are any different or smarter then the rest of the population of their country. Look at the number of people who believed the WMD lie. Evidenced by the geniuses who voted for him..... twice Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #46 January 11, 2007 QuoteI can't vote - it's not like Congress is a single entity. If it was multiple choice, I'd pick all three. Well, when the Senatorial vote was 98-1 in this case, how is it that they weren't lock-stepped? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #47 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNo one but a moron would have actually believed the stuff the White House was telling us. You mean those morons like Kerry, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Pelosi, Albright, Berger, Daschle, Kennedy, Levin, Byrd etc.? http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004-print.htm I have no knowledge of whether they believed or not. Did their lips move? Ignorance is bliss. Did YOU believe him? No. Back to the topic of this thread, how about elaborating on why you think all those Democratic Senators contributed this mess, out of convenience. UH, even Ken Mehlman, RNC chair admitted that Congress didn't have the exact intel reports that your favorite guy did. So they were lied to, next is the question of why they bought it or did they buy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #48 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteBack to the topic of this thread, how about elaborating on why you think all those Democratic Senators contributed this mess, out of convenience. If you think back to the runup to the war.. there was a pervasive... IF YOU ARE NOT WITH US YOU ARE AGAINST US....Guess they decided to get on board for the perception of being with him... at least to the point of authorizing the use of our military .... IF... needed... I think its been shown that it was a war of convienience for the enrichment of the Neo-Con PNAC Administration.. and to support their nation building initiative that they had already told us about.... Right, the 1 Senator from Wisconsin dissented and the rest prolly thought it was his death-blow for not going along. Now he's thought of a genius by all but the few Republicans left. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #49 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteYou can think that if you want, but don't attribute it to me Sheesh.. wiggle wiggle wiggle..... I gues s the republicans bear no responsibility for this war.... you heard it here folks....its all the democrats fault once again. Don;t worry, only a few Repubs in here blame the Dems, the rest of teh country just spoke and added SEVERAL dems to the Congress, as they blame the correct party, the R's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #50 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAt least your not blathering on about the RePUBICONs having complete control of the government for ALL of the last six years. That bit was rich Gee you guys ran things as you wanted for 6 years and fucked it up.. over and over so get over it..Face it the incompetence has reached new levels never before seen in our history.. and you continue to deny it.. I've never denied any of the claims you try to pin on me. I'm only calling bullshit on the lies you try peddle. Bummer you can't seem to note the difference. ***I've never denied any of the claims you try to pin on me. Acqiescence.... nuff said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
