Teddy Kennedy in hot water for "Vietnam" remarks

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
In my opinion, pointing to "supportive" comments made by other politicians is merely smoke-screening.
Many people made up their minds based on information we were lead to believe, by the Bush Administration, was trustworthy.

So the question isn't whether or not anyone else agreed with the war in Iraq (and need I remind anyone, that voicing an opposing opinion to this "conflict" was being regarded as damn-near treasonous by many, just as recently as last year), but whether or not our involvement in Iraq, as pushed for by the Bush Administration, was/is justified.

AND - it is not even that I do not think ousting SH is or was justified - I do; it was the lying and circuitous route the liar known as W took to get there when IMO and the opinion of the UN for 11 years, he did not have to take it. But, he did. That is why IMO he should not be elected.

[strandinthewind]

Moreover (can you tell I am into it today ) - All politicians use this smoke creen crapola. It is the nature of the beast.

[Rob67]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
True and I think it will hurt some of them. The problem to me is the American public en masse is not in tune enough to catch the difference. Pres. Clinton and his team did not lead us into a war where they knew the most inciting info. (the Niger nuclear stuff) was flatly false. W did this. Without the Niger stuff, no one would have "gone for the war." So, to sell the war as an exigent and necessary one, W lied. That is my problem with W as opposed to Clinton.

I understand that side of it but I still contend that the CIA and other intelligence agencies have to convey the same information to the Legislative Branch as they do to the Executive Branch. If Bush lied purposefully to lead us into war then he should answer for it, I agree. But there is nothing that leads me to believe that this was more then an intelligence lapse. Did the Bush administration act on it? Sure. Was it the only means of justification?? Absolutely not. It was a part of their overall case.

Again, do we not have a current probe into the lack of action leading up to 9/11? Isn’t the main criticism that nobody did anything about the intelligence ahead of time? I would look at Iraq this as preemptive action based on the intelligence at the time. And, I am for it.

I say let us learn from Neville Chamberlain and never fall prey to appeasement again.

Rob

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by Rob67
But there is nothing that leads me to believe that this was more then an intelligence lapse.
Rob

On the contrary, the press has consistently been reporting that Dick Cheney and several other WH big wigs were told the information was false PRIOR to the State of the Union address in which W HEAVILY relied on that bit of false information. The WH admits now, after the fact, that "oops - they were wrong" - and then they say "well, it does not really matter because SH was a bad guy." True, SH was a bad guy, but W and Blair could not have sold this war to the American people and/or the world without making the threat immediate and direct. The only way to do that was to keep the nuke stuff in even though they all knew and now admit was bogus.

Originally posted by Rob67
I say let us learn from Neville Chamberlain and never fall prey to appeasement again.

Rob

We were not appeasing SH, we were controling his every movement, apparently successfully, unlike Hitler.

[Rob67]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I hate to agree with a raging conservative, but Rob67 has a point. The Democrats are wimps. They're Republican Lite.

I always admitted to being Conservative but I am hardly “raging!!” For one thing, I hold no religious affiliation, I’m completely against censorship.

I think those are two traits that have to be associated with the “raging” right. If that is considered “raging” around here then maybe the problem is that some of us are too far to the left! I have my fair share of battles with the religious right.

I am most definitely a moderate Conservative, I wouldn’t even classify myself as a Republican. I do this crazy thing called thinking outside the party lines…

Rob

[estranged4life]

Originally posted by Rob67

I do this crazy thing called thinking outside the party lines…

Ditto for me...And I have/will until the day I die (Probably of Boredom)

[dissention]

Originally posted by Rob67
I always admitted to being Conservative but I am hardly “raging!!”

I am most definitely a moderate Conservative, I wouldn’t even classify myself as a Republican. I do this crazy thing called thinking outside the party lines…

Thanks, I needed a laugh.

[strandinthewind]

I cry foul (HEY its been about a week since I cried it and YOU said it last )

Based on what I have seeen in his posts, I think Rob does not tow the R party line.

If I may, I think Rob. like a lot of other R's, sees his party hijacked by the religious right and no longer for a less intrusive and smaller govt. W certainly is not for those formerly R ideals. Rather, he is a big spender and wants to shove his religion down the throats of all Americans. Interestingly, most D's have demonstrated in the way they vote that they want W's ideals as well.

Long live the Liberitarians!!!!



P.S. just becuase someone is not wildly liberal does not mean they cannot be a mild R

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
True and I think it will hurt some of them. The problem to me is the American public en masse is not in tune enough to catch the difference. Pres. Clinton and his team did not lead us into a war where they knew the most inciting info. (the Niger nuclear stuff) was flatly false. W did this. Without the Niger stuff, no one would have "gone for the war." So, to sell the war as an exigent and necessary one, W lied. That is my problem with W as opposed to Clinton.

Karen Hughes was still spewing the nuclear b.s. on Larry King last night.

[estranged4life]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Long live the Liberitarians!!!!

I thought I read your quote as "Long live the librarians"

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Karen Hughes was still spewing the nuclear b.s. on Larry King last night.

I know - I watched it. I do not think like her, but she is good, I'll give her that.

I think the intelligence over 11 years did suggest SH was attempting or had attempted to build a nuclear bomb. So, she was correct on that point. It is the Niger info. that was the blatant lie to sell the war.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I cry foul (HEY its been about a week since I cried it and YOU said it last )

Based on what I have seeen in his posts, I think Rob does not tow the R party line.

I think Rob. like a lot of other R's sees his party hijacked by the religious right and no longer for a less intrusive and smaller govt. W certainly is not for those formerly R ideals. Rather, he is a big spender and wants to shove his religion down the throats of all Americans. Interestingly, most D's have demonstrated in the way they vote that they want W's ideals as well.

Long live the Liberitarians!!!!

You just had to interrupt my Randi Rhode's listening to reply to this.

If he sees his party being hijacked by the religious right, tough ****. He's the one that voted for Dubya and it's Dubya's agenda. I have no sympathy. Dubya is a part of the religious right and is practically their leader, to say otherwise would be pure horse****. The Repubs haven't been for smaller government for YEARS. For YEARS, Jason. You'd have to be living under a rock to think that they did. So, if he sees Dubya shoving all of this down the throats of Americans, why the full support?

I'm a raging liberal, I won't try to deny it. And, as a raging liberal, I'm of the mind that any Shrub supporter is coked out of their gourd.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by estranged4life
I thought I read your quote as "Long live the librarians"

Yes, it was an intentional and subliminal message to our handsome and talented resident librarian Johnny Stew!!!!!

LONG LIVE JOHNNY STEW!!!!!!!!

[dissention]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Karen Hughes was still spewing the nuclear b.s. on Larry King last night.

KAREN HUGHES IS F*CKING CRAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZYYYYYYY!!!

I watched her last night with my jaw on the floor! I was shocked at how stupid, insane, ignorant, and self-serving she came across as! What a nut job!!! We don't hear from the crazy sow for two years, but now that she's coming out with a book, it's Karen Hughes TV!!

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
You just had to interrupt my Randi Rhode's listening to reply to this.

If he sees his party being hijacked by the religious right, tough ****. He's the one that voted for Dubya and it's Dubya's agenda. I have no sympathy. Dubya is a part of the religious right and is practically their leader, to say otherwise would be pure horse****. The Repubs haven't been for smaller government for YEARS. For YEARS, Jason. You'd have to be living under a rock to think that they did. So, if he sees Dubya shoving all of this down the throats of Americans, why the full support?

I'm a raging liberal, I won't try to deny it. And, as a raging liberal, I'm of the mind that any Shrub supporter is coked out of their gourd.

Well, I know that. I was just saying that not all people who vote for a R candidate believe all the religious crapola that goes with it. I think and pardon me Carne , most Americans vote for the lesser of two evils as they see it. For a moderate R, that probably was W over Gore because W, at least in rhetoric, was closer to the R prociples than Gore. N'est pas?