Tonight - Bill O v. Bill M - Page 9

jwd · #**121** 01-11-2004, 08:21 PM

Quote:

strandinthewind:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Sugar
So are we saying that it is not a big deal that Bush overstated reasons to go to war, especially since the administration seems real close to admitting that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not saying that. I think they should be slammed from here to hell for that if for nothing else than for their stupidity in going it. IMO, they did not need to because they could have just relied on SH unwillingness for 11 years to comply with his agreement to demonstrate he had destroyed his WMD. Also, W has already admitted the nuclear thing was a mistake.

Interestingly, the Clinton administration used almost all of the same intelligence to justify its bombing of Iraq and its maintenance of the "no fly zones," which the UN never really officially sanctioned. So, W is not alone in this boat IMO.

I totally agree Jason. I think saying that W. told a flat out lie leading us into war is stretching it a bit. However there's no disputing that Slick Willy LIED UNDER OATH, amongst other things. I could care less if Clinton was getting blow jobs in back alleys or strip clubs or wherever, it's the circumstances that matter to me. It's not just about blow jobs people!

Joe

strandinthewind · #**122** 01-11-2004, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Sorry, he's the sitting president. I don't expect you to agree with my views but I do have a right to state them. The Bush regime bears similarities to that of Nazi Germany. If we want to start criticizing past presidents, we'd be here for a very long time.

I agree. But that is my point. Every human being has imperfections, whether its a wandering eye or a past DUI, both of which were lied about. To me these and the lies that went with them have nothing to do with being the President because I think if they thought they could get away with it, everyone would lie about them. So, I say the relevant things for me are the Iraq lying, the effrontery to appoint Ashcroft as payoff to the religious right, and his wanting to pass a Const. Amendment banning gay marriage (talk about no clue as to the proper use of the Const., which is to grant rights not prohibit them a la Prohibition (boy that sure worked

)). So, the reason I was bringing up Clinton was to show all Presidents are humans.

strandinthewind · #**123** 01-11-2004, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Sorry, he's the sitting president. I don't expect you to agree with my views but I do have a right to state them. The Bush regime bears similarities to that of Nazi Germany. If we want to start criticizing past presidents, we'd be here for a very long time.

Again, the similarities to Nazi Germany are very very vague when you consider the horrible crimes that the comparison is trying to assert.

estranged4life · #**124** 01-11-2004, 08:23 PM

what an interesting topic this has become...

If the current regime bears similarities to that of Nazi Germany than I guess Texas is actually the "Evil Empire" afterall!!!

Brian "Panzer Squad Leader of Okla...err...Poland, Keepin' those DAMN Texas-Nazi's out of my state/country" j.

strandinthewind · #**125** 01-11-2004, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sugar
So does this mean that it's OK that the Bush Administration lied since Clinton did?

No, but the far left complained bitterly when Clinton was taken to task for it - calling it unfair, etc. I say both W and Clinton should be taken to task for their lies.

Sugar · #**126** 01-11-2004, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jwd
I totally agree Jason. I think saying that W made a flat out lie about leading us into war is stretching it a bit.

Joe

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is' is...

Mad4stevie · #**127** 01-11-2004, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
No, but the far left complained bitterly when Clinton was taken to task for it - calling it unfair, etc. I say both W and Clinton should be taken to task for their lies.

Boy, I think I should just keep my hole shut and let you speak for me! Agreed!

jwd · #**128** 01-11-2004, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Sugar:
I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is' is...

Or your definintion of sex.

strandinthewind · #**129** 01-11-2004, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gldstwmn
I'm not asking you to "get it." Do you have any defense of the Bush administration besides former President Clinton?

Every comparison you and Dissention gave for saying the Bush Administration is similar to Nazi Germany just does not make sense to me. Again, Hitler invaded Poland in an attempt to make the Aryan race the only race on earth and for Global domination. While people may not agree with the invasion of Iraq, to say that W is trying to eliminate the Arab people and that W has overt and stated ambitions of Glonbal dominance is simply not supported by any facts I have ever read. Moreover, while citizens are being held without benefits granted in the Const., that is a far cry from being scooped up in the middle of the night and hauled off to a concentration camp. Moreover, the "enemy combatant" philosophy is not unconstitutional per se because the USSC said so in the 1940's. So, other than Bush's grandfather, like the vast majority of the rest of America, making money off the Germans, I just do not see a direct comparison. That is not to say I am saying you shuld not make the comparison, I am just pointing out that I think it is not a correct comparison

strandinthewind · #**130** 01-11-2004, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jwd
Or your definintion of sex.

Its been so long - I've forgotten

(sorry could not resist

)

gldstwmn · #**131** 01-11-2004, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sugar
I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is' is...

I just finished watching 60 minutes with Paul O'Neill and while I had little doubt about the lies and lying liars who brought us to Iraq, let me say I have very little doubt about it now. What I don't think a lot of people understand is, Bush and his administration are by far the most dangerous administration we have ever had. We are watching our freedoms slowly creep out the window, along with all of our money, jobs and foreign allies. If he is reelected, I don't even want to imagine what this country will be like. I can only think it will be akin to the era after Kennedy was shot, only much, much worse.

strandinthewind · #**132** 01-11-2004, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad4stevie
Boy, I think I should just keep my hole shut and let you speak for me! Agreed!

If only OTHER PEOPLE on this thread would do that

(I am just joking

)

strandinthewind · #**133** 01-11-2004, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gldstwmn
I just finished watching 60 minutes with Paul O'Neill and while I had little doubt about the lies and lying liars who brought us to Iraq, let me say I have very little doubt about it now. What I don't think a lot of people understand is, Bush and his administration are by far the most dangerous administration we have ever had. We are watching our freedoms slowly creep out the window, along with all of our money, jobs and foreign allies. If he is reelected, I don't even want to imagine what this country will be like. I can only think it will be akin to the era after Kennedy was shot, only much, much worse.

And I am not disagreeing with you in principle. i am just saying they are far from Nazi's and some of the to me irrelevant points cloud this exact point.
BTW - while I am sure Paul O. is telling the truth, he does come off as a pissed off fired employee. To me, his book would have more apparent credibility if he had toned down the rhetoric.

Sugar · #**134** 01-11-2004, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
No, but the far left complained bitterly when Clinton was taken to task for it - calling it unfair, etc. I say both W and Clinton should be taken to task for their lies.

Point taken. Essentially I posted that because the conversation had gone to, "Well look at Clinton" and Bush had completly gone out of the discussion. The Clinton administration, for good or bad, is over. This is the task at hand. Again the Bush Administration is all but admitting that the truth had been stretched and that things presented as facts were overstated. Like that "What does it matter if he had them or he was trying to get them..." quote. Just trying to see if anyone actually is OK with this. I remember when Clinton's lies were being exposed there were liberals who still defended him and those who were disappointed by him. But it seems no conservative will DARE say a bad word about Bush, and that's more frightening to me that any of gldstwmn's opinions...

estranged4life · #**135** 01-11-2004, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
If only OTHER PEOPLE on this thread would do that (I am just joking )

mmmmm....mmmm...mmmmmm (Translation: Damn gag!)

Brian j.