Printable View
Boy, somebody sure gets grumpy when his candidate has a mid-thirties approval rating. It must really chafe your posterior to know that at this moment, Bush is less trusted than Bill Clinton.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
But by all means, Gawain, go off on how the comics aren't funny. If nothing else, it ups your post count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallup Poll
Big deal. You can get a survey to support any position you like.Quote:
Boy, somebody sure gets grumpy when his candidate has a mid-thirties approval rating. It must really chafe your posterior to know that at this moment, Bush is less trusted than Bill Clinton.
The guy makes a one line joke thats totally irrelevant and you accuse me of posting nonsense to increase my post count. Get a life.Quote:
But by all means, Gawain, go off on how the comics aren't funny. If nothing else, it ups your post count.
Touchy.
WMDs became a lie when it was used as cover for a war that had been planned since before the election. Bush and his boys wanted to go into Iraq but couldn't rationalize it, so they came up with the excuse of WMDs. That's the difference.
Now the dogs counterattack smearing anyone who feels betrayed. A lack of accountabilty leads to a lack of credibility leads to very low numbers at the polls. We ask for accontability because that demoralizes the troops. Looks like the same MO, war-mongering becomes fear-mongering.
ichi:bow:
They could have decalred war on 911 and had no complaints. Why didnt they do it then? Again they could have easily rationalised it. As I pointed out how is it Kerry was calling for this in 98?Quote:
WMDs became a lie when it was used as cover for a war that had been planned since before the election. Bush and his boys wanted to go into Iraq but couldn't rationalize it, so they came up with the excuse of WMDs. That's the difference.
No now you and the liberals are trying to deny that they said the very samething before Bush was even running for president. The smear campaign starts on the left. War deaths become fear-mongering.Quote:
Now the dogs counterattack smearing anyone who feels betrayed. A lack of accountabilty leads to a lack of credibility leads to very low numbers at the polls. We ask for accontability because that demoralizes the troops. Looks like the same MO, war-mongering becomes fear-mongering.
Weak.
Yes that is an apt discription of your reply.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
you saying that on 911 they could just have picked a country that had nothing to do with it and just declared war on it and nobody would have complained?......I hope that there would be at least a couple of people with enough brain cells to complain.
the fact that Kerry supported this in the past somehow makes it right?....there´s some strange logic going on there.
Even weaker. Is your jacket already so empty you can't do more than point fingers and call names ?Quote:
Yes that is an apt discription of your reply.
Besides, a lot of the supposed points you brought up are issues of the political realities of the time. Nothing more complicated. After all, in practice if not in principle USA and Iraq were engaged in a low-intensity air war for the whole decade after the Gulf War...
And by what I've heard of it the Bush adminstration was busily looking for ways to pin WTC on Iraq right after the event. They couldn't, so had to make do with Afghanistan and Osama instead and save Saddam for later.
As Redleg and myself have repeatdly pointed out the fact that Saddam repeatdly broke the ceasfire was enough for us to renew the conflict there. Most Americans would have backed the invasion then. Im sure some would complain. Heck many complained we didnt belong in WW2 either.Quote:
you saying that on 911 they could just have picked a country that had nothing to do with it and just declared war on it and nobody would have complained?......I hope that there would be at least a couple of people with enough brain cells to complain.
For once in his life Kerry was right then. It was right then and its right now. Its you who are using strange logic.Quote:
the fact that Kerry supported this in the past somehow makes it right?....there´s some strange logic going on there.
Whos calling who names here. Hmmm Looks like YOU.Quote:
Even weaker. Is your jacket already so empty you can't do more than point fingers and call names ?
Thanks for making my point for me. The war never stopped.Quote:
Besides, a lot of the supposed points you brought up are issues of the political realities of the time. Nothing more complicated. After all, in practice if not in principle USA and Iraq were engaged in a low-intensity air war for the whole decade after the Gulf War...
:coffeenews:
Why are you wasting our time with this sub-par rubbish ? Your arguments are now down to kindergarten sandbox level.
I can only hope your consistent and severe misreading of a whole lot of things (like the part about the de facto air war) are intentional.
Why because this is the best you can do to counter them?Quote:
Why are you wasting our time with this sub-par rubbish ? Your arguments are now down to kindergarten sandbox level.
Give me real arguments and not half-baked excuses therof,
Specimen A:
,Quote:
Thanks for making my point for me. The war never stopped.
B:
, and I'll actually take them seriously.Quote:
No now you and the liberals are trying to deny that they said the very samething before Bush was even running for president. The smear campaign starts on the left. War deaths become fear-mongering.
oh, and Foxnews:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/poll_111005.pdf
So the claims were true until Bush used them? Interesting....Quote:
Originally Posted by ichi
*not a scientifically valid survey ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
it doesn't change the fact that 94% of msnbc readers think Bush mislead America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Yes, actually it does- unless you can prove that everyone who reads MSNBC responded and no one who isnt a reader did.Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
"readers" or readers- i won't play the semantics game with you over it. there are other poll numbers in those other links, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
So 40 or 50 people believe that , no big deal.~D You do realise their ratings are so low as to be almost non existant dont you. Ill bet Soly is one of those 40 or 50 ~;)Quote:
it doesn't change the fact that 94% of msnbc readers think Bush mislead America
i think the pic says over 69000 responses. unless this is an example of "conservative math" at work ~:joker:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Pretty sad for a cable news network dont you think? I bet O Reilys poll responses blow that away. Lets go by what his audience thinks OK?Quote:
i think the pic says over 69000 responses. unless this is an example of "conservative math" at work
I did. have a look.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
No Oreily poll there sorry. Also looking at those poll numbers Im amazed at the political perssuation of Foxs audience. Here thought only us conservatives watch it. If 57% of conservatives believe something and the over all opinion on that matter is 29% that means less than half of their viewers are conservative.
So are your foreign policy..... :charge:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Interesting poll that is- particularly on the war in Iraq. A majority thinks: we are making steady progress, that we should stay until the job is finished and that news coverage has focused too much on the negatives. I find that somewhat reassuring.Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
Having A quick look at todays paper,
And it looks like clinton is against the war 2,
So There goes that side of your argument.
So i guess thats your agument done with.
As your argument seemed to be "Did clinton lie"
I should probably ask What is your new argument?
But in all Honesty, it dosent matter Cos your just A brain washed patriot who cant see the forest for the trees.
What side would that be? Clinton said Saddam had WMDs now hes backing away with the rest of his party. Clinton is a peice of crap if there ever was one.Quote:
Having A quick look at todays paper,
And it looks like clinton is against the war 2,
So There goes that side of your argument.
Hows that? Nothing has changed. Either he lied in the 90s or hes lying now. You decide when.Quote:
So i guess thats your agument done with.
As your argument seemed to be "Did clinton lie"
Just once can you please come up with a reasonable argument. Im getting tired of all this spam.Quote:
I should probably ask What is your new argument?
But in all Honesty, it dosent matter Cos your just A brain washed patriot who cant see the forest for the trees.
cool down, Just A Girl.