31 replies [Last post]
SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
Good News About Our Right Wing King
CVC wrote:
"I think lying to your wife about a sexual indiscretion is wrong."

He also lied in court.

Yup, that he did about a BJ. A BJ not outing a CIA employee or anything like that. (I am not saying Bush lied about that, but others like Cheney and his stooge did.

"I also believe misleading and or manipulating information to sell a war where thousands have in my opinion needlessly died is wrong."

Can you prove he did that? Was the information wrong - I believe it was, but did Bush manipulate it? I don't think there is any evidence to substantiate that claim. Plus, Congress and other countries had access to the same information. Both Clinton's stated that Iraq had WMD and a threat to our country.

I am critical of Bush's decision to attack Iraq and I will be the first to condemn him if he intentionally mislead us.

I believe he and his admin wanted Iraq for a variety of reasons from day one and when 9-11 happened it gave them the patriotic fervor to push it through Congress without many having the balls to scrutinize the info like it should have been. Stating a Country might have WMD's is different from saying they undisputedly do and attacking them. What do you think of everything Richard Clark has to say about it. I for one believe him.

"A big difference between us and our thinking is this. You hold a belief that your side is clean and if it errors it's totally delt with in an above board and honest way."

One, i really don't have a side. Two, neither party is clean. I state this over and over but you never get it.

You say that but other things you say make me believe you favor and give a pass to one side more so then the other.

Offline
Location: Kingston, MI
Joined: 01/16/2007
Posts: 648
Good News About Our Right Wing King

I'm done. I'm just too angry and sad to debate this topic any further. We ate our last package of venison loin this evening. We still have some venison, but alas there is no more loin or tenderloin left. Now I have to wait until October.

Wow, did it ever taste good though! I cut it as thick as a strip of bacon is wide. I then wrapped the loin in bacon and pinned it with tooth picks. I cooked it on the grill to perfection. I also baked some potatoes on the grill and tried some of the Bush's grillin' beans (also pretty good.) It was an awesome meal and I'm still stuffed.

Sorry, but we all need to lighten up a bit.

I'll still cast my ballot based on a person's merit and voting record. I won't base my decision on a particular political party. Guns, abortion and taxes are important to me. This does cause me to lean to the right. As far as the oil crisis is concerned, neither McCain nor BHO have anything that I agree with yet. They should be listening to Newt Gingrich.

Pulling troops while Patreous is winning would be absurd. You might just see a change or flip/flop from the Obama camp in the near future......maybe not, but don't be too surprised.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
Good News About Our Right Wing King

I grilled Elk Kabobs from some backstrap on Sunday. It was delicious.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Good News About Our Right Wing King

I have neither venison nor kabobs, both bears are at the taxdermist, and caribou and moose seasons are in the future.

So I'd just like to talk about intelligence. First of all, it's interesting that Clinton went to war in the Balkans to stop Serbian genocide, but yet Bush gets no credit for stopping Saddam. The Clinton administration (and Wes Clark) also went on enthusiastically during that campaign about how our airstrikes were decimating the Serbian Third Army.

A funny thing happened, though. When the shooting stopped, TV cameras recorded a very healthy Third Army leaving Kosovo, complete with most of their armor. It turned out that the Serbs had waged a very clever deception campaign to include things like water tanks and pipes that would soak up the sun during the day, and radiate enough warmth during the night to look like a tank. We bombed a lot of decoys.

Meanwhile, there was never any doubt that Saddam once had WMD -- it was documented as being used against Iran during the Iran-Iraq war and against the Kurds. Throughout the 90s, Saddam (by his own admission during his captivity later) perpetuated the belief that he still had those WMD programs to look stronger than he was because he was worried about Iran. He figured the US didn't have the nerve to do anything substantive (again, another Clinton issue), as opposed to Iran -- which had waged a far more devastaing war against him. So he was OK with us thinking he had the WMD if it meant Iran thought so, too. Thus, much of the WMD intel was smoke and mirrors perpetuated by Saddam -- as was his resistance to having the charade exposed by inspection teams. The Soviets have admitted doing much the same thing early in the Cold War -- parading missiles and aircraft through Red Square multiple times to appear stronger than they were.

So if I follow liberal logic, Clinton fell victim to intel led astray by deception in Kosovo, based his reports to Congress and the American people on it, and waged war based on it. And that's OK and understandable. But Bush fell victim to intel led astray by deception in Iraq, and that constitutes lying.

You can't have it both ways. I'm not saying the decisions were correct or that the wars were equivalent (Clinton's horrible management of Kosovo is a study in itself). But what irritates me is the selective way some people base their political opinions and indignation on political affiliation rather than circumstances.

And by the way. the congressman you're thinking of that pursued sexual relationships with underage male pages was Democrat Gerry Studds in 1983. He was caught and censured by Congress, but unlike Republican Mark Foley who quickly resigned, Studds was re-elected six times after the scandal. So much for Republican reaction to moral problems in its ranks as opposed to Democrat reaction.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
Good News About Our Right Wing King

Nope, it was Mark Foley, I was thinking of and if the other guy (hell, I was 13 when that happened so forgive me if it escapes me) did wrong he should have paid for it.

The ultimate end of Kosovo was that helped the cessation of ethnic cleansing with relatively low cost in human life on our end. No stories of WMD's were used to sell the need for it.

As far as the Intelligence goes, I don't have proof, but I so sincerely believe Bush and his admin knew much of the purported intell on Saddam was smoke and mirrors on Saddam's part. I don't think they truly believed he was as dangerous as the story they pushed on the American people and the World.

Rather, I think they pushed our Intelligence Organizations to give them the intell they wanted, Richard Clark has also said this. The people who gave it were rewarded and anyone who disagreed was punished (think Joe Wilson, General Shinseki, and the list goes on).

They assumed scare the public so they feel a threat and need and once we pull the trigger we we'll be greeted as liberators, the oil will flow, and a mini neo conservative democracy will spring up and be a shining symbol of success regarding the Neo Conservative movement. Unfortunately reality got in the way of this dream.

We now have troops on third and fourth tours of duty, wounded veterans with lifelong disabilities, Iraqi's want us out and on and on and on.

Location: Butte, MT
Joined: 01/02/2006
Posts: 234
Good News About Our Right Wing King

Rush Limbaugh is an obnoxious windbag. I don't know if I've ever heard anyone more full of themselves... or for that matter, more full than him. He occasionally makes a good point, however, and is undeniably entertaining. Thus the $38M.

I like Don Imus better.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Good News About Our Right Wing King

Ah, yes...Don Imus: the paragon of tolerance and humility.

The stuff about Iraqi intel is backed by fact, to include statements made by Saddam himself. I'll take that over a belief backed by nothing.

Here's an academic challenge for you: name one Democratic president since the Mexican War in 1847 that hasn't employed military force against a sovereign nation. Good luck -- every one of them has.

While you're at it, I'll admit that Iraq I and II were Republican creations, as were Grenada, Panama, and the airstrike on Libya. However, every other significant military conflict in over 150 years has erupted under Democratic leadership. Republican ventures cost what -- 5,000 lives? 6,000? 7,000? Compare that to conflicts that have broken out under Democratic administrations: Kosovo, Vietnam, Korea, WWII, WWI, and the Spanish American War, for a start. I'm reluctant to address the Civil War, because even though Lincoln was a Republican, Jefferson Davis was a Democrat -- and Davis' people fired the first shot. Also don't forget that the only nuclear weapons ever used in anger were employed by a Democrat, at a cost of over 150,000 lives. And yet the end of the Cold War and the biggest arms reductions in history took place under Republican leadership.

I also might point out that the years of peace between Korea and Vietnam occurred during the administration of a Republican who was a former 5-star general.

So I don't buy the argument about Republicans being warmongers. History clearly shows otherwise. Historically, Republicans prevent wars and Democrats cause them.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
Good News About Our Right Wing King
expatriate wrote:
Ah, yes...Don Imus: the paragon of tolerance and humility.

The stuff about Iraqi intel is backed by fact, to include statements made by Saddam himself. I'll take that over a belief backed by nothing.

Here's an academic challenge for you: name one Democratic president since the Mexican War in 1847 that hasn't employed military force against a sovereign nation. Good luck -- every one of them has.

While you're at it, I'll admit that Iraq I and II were Republican creations, as were Grenada, Panama, and the airstrike on Libya. However, every other significant military conflict in over 150 years has erupted under Democratic leadership. Republican ventures cost what -- 5,000 lives? 6,000? 7,000? Compare that to conflicts that have broken out under Democratic administrations: Kosovo, Vietnam, Korea, WWII, WWI, and the Spanish American War, for a start. I'm reluctant to address the Civil War, because even though Lincoln was a Republican, Jefferson Davis was a Democrat -- and Davis' people fired the first shot. Also don't forget that the only nuclear weapons ever used in anger were employed by a Democrat, at a cost of over 150,000 lives. And yet the end of the Cold War and the biggest arms reductions in history took place under Republican leadership.

I also might point out that the years of peace between Korea and Vietnam occurred during the administration of a Republican who was a former 5-star general.

So I don't buy the argument about Republicans being warmongers. History clearly shows otherwise. Historically, Republicans prevent wars and Democrats cause them.

I've never made an argument that all Repubs are war mongers only that Bush and his Admin started this war for dishonest reasons and used dishonest means to get it started. I agree Vietnam started by Johnson was a blunder and for what we gained never should have been started for the human suffering and loss of life.

Good Golly Miss Molly I feel you are going to start comparing and blaming Democratic Cavemen for starting wars next over hunting grounds. Please I'm not interested in debating American or World history with you. Just the current state of our Country and politics.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Good News About Our Right Wing King

I don't know about Democratic cavemen -- although I believe that if there was such a thing at the end of the Pleistocene, they'd be running around screaming about receding glaciers, the decline of the mammoth, and the coming global catastrophe from global warming since man discovered fire. They'd be demanding limits on cookfire sizes and preaching the importance of eating raw foods.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1772
Good News About Our Right Wing King
expatriate wrote:
I don't know about Democratic cavemen -- although I believe that if there was such a thing at the end of the Pleistocene, they'd be running around screaming about receding glaciers, the decline of the mammoth, and the coming global catastrophe from global warming since man discovered fire. They'd be demanding limits on cookfire sizes and preaching the importance of eating raw foods.

Ha! Laugh

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
The "World Record" whitetailCa_Vermonster506/01/2011 00:38 am
Left Wing Terrorismexpatriate806/20/2009 07:32 am
Opinion's On King Buck.ManOfTheFall306/03/2011 03:38 am
.338x.416RMulhern1003/11/2007 22:56 pm
Red Wing Hunterfuzzybear012/19/2005 23:52 pm