I'm telling you, he refuses to answer directly when he is asked direct questions, and he refuses to cite sources.
Valerie Plame to Testify Friday
- Thread starter scanjock8
- Start date
that article says NADA, but it does points out the extraordinary lengths the LW press will go to somehow make Bush's meaningless 16 words seem a 'lie, when in fact tha CIA cleared the speech and the British stood by it.
And it also points out waht a low low threshold for evidence liberals have when it comes to supporting their political agenda. Liberals believe ANYthing ANYbody says as long as it's Bush bashing!
If it helps JQB I'll admit that Wilson is (since said op ed was published) appearing to be more partisan than he should be.
Maybe it's 'cause I wanna fuck his wife until she gets all my secrets out, or I hers, and so it biases my thinking.:biggrin1:
P.S. BTW, I want to thank everybody for not stooping to Blonde Jokes. Because really a man's man should be blond.:biggrin1:
I know you are unsure.
Maybe it's 'cause I wanna fuck his wife until she gets all my secrets out, or I hers, and so it biases my thinking.:biggrin1:
P.S. BTW, I want to thank everybody for not stooping to Blonde Jokes. Because really a man's man should be blond.:biggrin1:
I know you are unsure.
No, you still sound foolish. Why don't you answer direct questions, directly? Oh, and it's a good thing you never bash ANYone, it's all the left-wingers that do all the bashing, and all you do is state facts, right? Now don't you sound foolish. Go read your RW blogs. Don't bother with the Washington Post, it has NO credibility whatsoever. Try Fox News, it's fair and balanced.
Rikter8
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Posts
- 4,353
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 130
- Points
- 283
- Location
- Ann Arbor (Michigan, United States)
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Wow, you agree with me. Now jq can call you a left-winger, too, and tell you which lw blogs you read. He's brilliant, and a psychic, too! Ann Coulter and Dionne Warwick all rolled into one, what a package deal.
SpeedoGuy
Sexy Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
- Posts
- 4,166
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 41
- Points
- 258
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Pacific Northwest, USA
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Even if it was true that Bush, Blair and their sycophant minions made an honest mistake in assessing Iraq's WMD capabilities (and I don't believe that for a minute), its still says worlds about their competence in interpreting intelligence and acting on it. They are incompetent to lead.
When a ship is damaged by running around, the captain doesn't get to blame the helmsman, the chart maker or the ship's designer. The captain takes the blame.
When a ship is damaged by running around, the captain doesn't get to blame the helmsman, the chart maker or the ship's designer. The captain takes the blame.
I like bush, but really do prefer shaved...no floss in the teeth...know what I mean.
Are you capable of posting without being condescending or smug, without name-calling or bashing, just a simple factual post? Can you give a direct answer to a direct question without using oft-repeated cliches or pat-answer phrases?
He ignored my post to him too, do you see me crying? He is a fucktard (God I like that word) for being a goose step thinker but you've got to admit one thing to him, Wilson and Plame, the people and not the political incident, are currently acting in a fashion that, well... is self serving, self promoting. Doesn't change the facts but does undermine them.
Oh, I'm not crying, I just enjoy continuing to prod him to answer about 6 direct questions from me and others that have accumulated since the beginning of the thread. He keeps side-stepping issues and questions, because those would require logic. And you are right, it's interesting to see how the whole issue has evolved and mutated since the very first, when the "leak" hit the newspapers. First, it was the leak. Then it was the declaration of finding the source of the leak. Then it was not actually a leak. Then it was who did and who did not lie about the non-leak. Ah, the twisted mysteries of Washington. And throughout the whole thing, it's also been interesting to see who points fingers at whom, who defends whom, and why, and how they all justify their positions, their changes of position, and their refusal to change positions. Everyone has a different spin on what went on.
The truth is out there.
SpeedoGuy
Sexy Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
- Posts
- 4,166
- Media
- 7
- Likes
- 41
- Points
- 258
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Pacific Northwest, USA
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Somewhere it is. Like most, I believe there are too many unanswered questions about the timing and context of this whole sorry episode just to write it off as a non-issue. Where Karl Rove is involved its easy to smell a rat.
The fact that Fitzgerald never charged anyone with actually outing Plame doesn't mean it was OK to reveal her identity for publication. It might just as well mean Fitzerald couldn't gather enough evidence of intent to charge any of the presumed perps. And if no crime was involved, why was Libby lying?
Regardless of charges and convictions, the scandal still cost Bush dearly in the public eye. For once the tables get turned on Karl Rove. Bush's preoccupation with loyalty and Rove's reputation for dirty tricks finally came back to haunt both of them. lol.
And the truth has spoken.
Try to remember that the people of the United States spoke load and clear in November of 2006 by sweeping the midterms to the left to keep the White House in check.
Truth and Lying aside. The American people are not as stupid as the spin-doctors would like for us to be. As a nation we are just a little slow at letting real truths sink in.
The Bush report card has some bright spots. But just like his C- to D+ grades in school we have found our nation being lead by the popular guy with "The Big-Man-On-Campus", label, and not the smart one with perfect 4.0 grades.
The one with all the donated money and a big name to start the 2000 race to the White House and win the nomination from his party. That same party turned its back on the billionaire that used his own money and has a really high I.Q.(Steve Forbes). Remember? "No hooks in me", a man that does not need to make more money for himself. However looking like and being a bit of a geek, Forbes was not popular with the rest of the nation.
Remember? "No hooks in me".
When the majority of your contributions in a political race come from the "Military Industrial Complex", and the, "Oil Industry", things have a way of going to the thinking of your "Special Interest Groups".
War and Oil.
Both of these industries are raping the economy for every record breaking profit that they can sqeeze out of the taxpayers. And we don't even have a WWIII situation. C-
WAR
Going into Afganistan was justified (9-11-2001). We should have totally controlled this country and found our target. (Bin-Laden) We have not done either. (C-, D+)
Going into Iraq required a different set of reasons. Weapons of mass destruction being at the top of the list.
Wilson was sent to verify that Iraq-Saddam was looking for or had purchased these raw materials. He verifid that this was not the case and reported so.
This finding by Wilson had to be discredited. So OUT his wife at the CIA.
Make fools of both of them and then LIE-LIE-LIE.
WE took Iraq and then had no real plan to control her and make the people safe. Just like New Orleans. (D-, F)
Plenty of money has been spent on Iraq with no real results. In addition to the many lost lives of our troops. We just didn't send in enough troops per capita to control the physical space and its borders right after taking the country. C-, D+ We do get an (A+) for taking the country.
The White House won't listen to the Generals.
The White House would not listen to the FEMA employees.
The White House has not listened to the rest of the World very well.
Why would the White House listen to Wilson?
OIL
Create your own shortage and name your price.
OPEC loves this one.
The Texas and North American Oil Cartel loves this one even more.
When
Try to remember that the people of the United States spoke load and clear in November of 2006 by sweeping the midterms to the left to keep the White House in check.
Truth and Lying aside. The American people are not as stupid as the spin-doctors would like for us to be. As a nation we are just a little slow at letting real truths sink in.
The Bush report card has some bright spots. But just like his C- to D+ grades in school we have found our nation being lead by the popular guy with "The Big-Man-On-Campus", label, and not the smart one with perfect 4.0 grades.
The one with all the donated money and a big name to start the 2000 race to the White House and win the nomination from his party. That same party turned its back on the billionaire that used his own money and has a really high I.Q.(Steve Forbes). Remember? "No hooks in me", a man that does not need to make more money for himself. However looking like and being a bit of a geek, Forbes was not popular with the rest of the nation.
Remember? "No hooks in me".
When the majority of your contributions in a political race come from the "Military Industrial Complex", and the, "Oil Industry", things have a way of going to the thinking of your "Special Interest Groups".
War and Oil.
Both of these industries are raping the economy for every record breaking profit that they can sqeeze out of the taxpayers. And we don't even have a WWIII situation. C-
WAR
Going into Afganistan was justified (9-11-2001). We should have totally controlled this country and found our target. (Bin-Laden) We have not done either. (C-, D+)
Going into Iraq required a different set of reasons. Weapons of mass destruction being at the top of the list.
Wilson was sent to verify that Iraq-Saddam was looking for or had purchased these raw materials. He verifid that this was not the case and reported so.
This finding by Wilson had to be discredited. So OUT his wife at the CIA.
Make fools of both of them and then LIE-LIE-LIE.
WE took Iraq and then had no real plan to control her and make the people safe. Just like New Orleans. (D-, F)
Plenty of money has been spent on Iraq with no real results. In addition to the many lost lives of our troops. We just didn't send in enough troops per capita to control the physical space and its borders right after taking the country. C-, D+ We do get an (A+) for taking the country.
The White House won't listen to the Generals.
The White House would not listen to the FEMA employees.
The White House has not listened to the rest of the World very well.
Why would the White House listen to Wilson?
OIL
Create your own shortage and name your price.
OPEC loves this one.
The Texas and North American Oil Cartel loves this one even more.
When
Which has been one of my main points all along. Some of it just seemed so contrived, but I won't rehash that. Those posts are still on page one.
Or it could mean something else. Please refer back to post #28.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Multipositionpole, that was a pretty fair summation how how I see things as well, but I never thought of putting it in terms of a report card. You are right- a leopard really doesn't change his spots.
Perhaps bush himself really is just performing to the level to which he is accustomed, and I could accept that, were he not surrounded by people who are capable of much better. This is where I move from being able to believe that we just have a "gentleman's Cs" president to thinking there is really something more at work here.
Perhaps bush himself really is just performing to the level to which he is accustomed, and I could accept that, were he not surrounded by people who are capable of much better. This is where I move from being able to believe that we just have a "gentleman's Cs" president to thinking there is really something more at work here.
Well then we are in big trouble because every single Democrat of note in the previous administration, every single Democrat who is in the Senate and the House and had access to the intelligence, England, France, Israel,.... all looked at the inteeligence and concluded that Iraq had WMD. ALL OF THEM.
But Bush was lying . riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Liberals and logic . Not a good mix.
Keep in mind, the slug YOU voted for in the last election had worse grades in college than Bush.
So tell us, why do you presume to know who anyone voted for, (I for one cast a write-in vote)?
Your record still shows a complete disregard for truth, and a continued refusal to substantiate any claims.
To refer to your claim that all Democratic senators and representatives said there were WMD's, that's a complete falsehood, as you would know if you lived in the reality based world. (in fact, 126 Democrats voted against the IWR in the House, and 22 in the Senate). As to the oft-cited list of statements made by Democratic leaders, perhaps you should quit reading out-of-context quotes and read their entire surrounding statement . . . check Snopes for more info:
Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Words of Mass Destruction)
[FONT=Trebuchet MS,Book Antiqua,Bookman Old Style,Arial]". . . .some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them — several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S. Moreover, several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes unleashed against Iraq by U.S. and British forces during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, after which Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Gen. Henry H. Shelton (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) announced the action had been successful in "degrad[ing] Saddam Hussein's ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."" [/FONT]
Since you're going to talk about who said what, perhaps you can tell us why Colin Powell said in February of 2001 (referring to sanctions and Saddam Husseins WMD capabilities):
Press Remarks with Foreign Minister of Egypt Amre Moussa
" And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq"
So, since statements made by most Democratic leaders were made well before that statement, one is left to conclude that Colin Powell had newer intelligence than that available to those who made statements prior to this one, since Gen. Powell was speaking as an official representative of the Bush administration at the time.
So, tell us, did tons of WMDs materialize in under a year, only to vanish again?
Please enlighten us.
Republicans and honesty . . . not only are they not a good mix, but never the twain shall meet.
. . . I'm just waiting for you to question the source of the Powell quote, since it's from the State Departments own web site.
Oh, and just for the fun of it:
Do those two cats look familiar to you?
