Bush the liar!

[Annie]

Because Clinton was a liar and ended up not being trusted, the Democratic leadership wants to paint Bush with the same brush so Clinton won't look so bad after all, and those who make the effort to vote won't be turned off on the Democrats permanently. The focus of all their charges against Bush--no matter what the topic or policy being discussed--is that he lied. It's absolutely their favorite ploy, and that's all it is--a partisan ploy.

Well said Adam's, I agree. Never recognized it being in reaction to Clinton's behavior, but that looks to be the case!

 

[Adam's Apple]

The Democrats would have enough to do to clean up their own uncalled for lies. Recent stories about Joe Wilson and Sandy Berger are cases in point, although in the Sandy Berger case, it is probably "called for" lies. Mara Rudman, a close associate of Berger's, was on Hardball with Chris Matthews this week trying to explain/make excuses for what Berger did. Matthews, who bends over backwards to do what he can to promote the liberal cause and current line, asked some hard questions and rebutted everything Rudman said quite easily. The approach that Matthews took with Rudman on this particular matter was quite shocking in itself. He usually goes right along with the spin and asks soft questions so his viewers will buy into the point(s) being made by his guest. Maybe he's beginning to get the message from O'Reilly that "the spin stops here." Wishful thinking on my part, I guess.

 

[freeandfun1]

The Democrats would have enough to do to clean up their own uncalled for lies. Recent stories about Joe Wilson and Sandy Berger are cases in point, although in the Sandy Berger case, it is probably "called for" lies. Mara Rudman, a close associate of Berger's, was on Hardball with Chris Matthews this week trying to explain/make excuses for what Berger did. Matthews, who bends over backwards to do what he can to promote the liberal cause and current line, asked some hard questions and rebutted everything Rudman said quite easily. The approach that Matthews took with Rudman on this particular matter was quite shocking in itself. He usually goes right along with the spin and asks soft questions so his viewers will buy into the point(s) being made by his guest. Maybe he's beginning to get the message from O'Reilly that "the spin stops here." Wishful thinking on my part, I guess.

I know Chris is an old-time Democrat, but when I first started watching him a few years ago, he was MUCH more subdued and I like him. But since 9-11 he has turned really vile and some of his comments are WAY off base. Furthermore, I hate that he lets that "bitch" (can't remember her name) sit in for him and it is SO obvious she hates anything even possible connected to the GOP.

 

[MrMarbles]

That dosen't really answer my question. Just because Clinton may have lied, dosen't mean GWB hasn't.

 

[Adam's Apple]

MrMarbles, when you can present some definite proof that George W. lied--such as has been provided that Clinton lied--then we will give you some consideration and debate this issue with you. No intelligent person is going to believe that Bush lied just because the Democrats say its so and want people to believe it. Your "biggie" that Bush lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq has been discredited so often it's unbelievable that you guys keep spitting it out there like it's truth. How many intelligence services had the same information the U.S. did? The President can only act on the intelligence given to him by those charged with that responsibility. It is not Bush's job to personally go out and collect intelligence. And how about Mr. Putin calling Bush and telling him that Iraq was planning to attack America? This definitely wasn't in his country's best interests because Russia was benefitting big time from the oil/food program. And what happened to the chemical and biological weapons the United Nations inspectors said Iraq had but have not been accounted for to this very day? Did they make that story up? Where did the chemical and biological weapons used against the Northern Kurds and the Iranis come from if not from Iraq? And why didn't Saddam let his scientists talk to the UN inspectors without his henchmen being present? Guess you would rather believe that Bush lied than try to find out the answers to those questions.

 

[MrMarbles]

MrMarbles, when you can present some definite proof that George W. lied--such as has been provided that Clinton lied--then we will give you some consideration and debate this issue with you. No intelligent person is going to believe that Bush lied just because the Democrats say its so and want people to believe it. Your "biggie" that Bush lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq has been discredited so often it's unbelievable that you guys keep spitting it out there like it's truth. How many intelligence services had the same information the U.S. did? The President can only act on the intelligence given to him by those charged with that responsibility. It is not Bush's job to personally go out and collect intelligence. And how about Mr. Putin calling Bush and telling him that Iraq was planning to attack America? This definitely wasn't in his country's best interests because Russia was benefitting big time from the oil/food program. And what happened to the chemical and biological weapons the United Nations inspectors said Iraq had but have not been accounted for to this very day? Did they make that story up? Where did the chemical and biological weapons used against the Northern Kurds and the Iranis come from if not from Iraq? And why didn't Saddam let his scientists talk to the UN inspectors without his henchmen being present? Guess you would rather believe that Bush lied than try to find out the answers to those questions.

I'm just trying to figure out why Bush is good. So far there have been no real reasons stated. Try to explain why, without using insults and vague explainantions, or going on the defensive.

 

[chagan]

There are many places on the web to go to find all of Bush's lies.

Go here:
http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm

or here:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/22/1090464797687.html?oneclick=true

or here:
http://www.bushlies.com/

or even here:
http://www.house.gov/appropriations_democrats/caughtonfilm.htm

To find some more please go to google and type in "Bush Lies". You are bound to find a lot. :shocked:

 

[dilloduck]

I'm just trying to figure out why Bush is good. So far there have been no real reasons stated. Try to explain why, without using insults and vague explainantions, or going on the defensive.

I think he's good because of the way he helped America recover from 9/11.
(How many do ya want?)

 

[Annie]

That dosen't really answer my question. Just because Clinton may have lied, dosen't mean GWB hasn't.

1. He has kept promise to give tax relief.
2. 9/11 changed the pledge of not having US involved in 'government
building', but he has been consistent in where we will go.
3. Everyone: citizens, Congress, foreign countries believe he means what he
says. Very different than past, since Reagan. They don't have to 'agree'
but they know where he stands.

Enough for a beginning?

 

[Moi]

That dosen't really answer my question. Just because Clinton may have lied, dosen't mean GWB hasn't.

And just because he may have received faulty intelligence just like his predecessor and almost the entire planet earth (and some martians I've heard about) doesn't mean he's a liar either.

You want proof, start with yours. Where is the lie and I don't mean just regurgitate the same old same old that the intelligence was wrong.

 

[ellen]

"and therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other."
--The Virginia Declaration of Rights June 12, 1776

Where do you get YOUR information?

ABSOLUTELY.

I get my information from newer sources. Thomas Jefferson was one of the founding fathers of Virginia, and he was a Unitarian, which is not even Christian today in some churches. If Thomas Jefferson had been able to travel around the world the way we can today, do you think he would have limited 'forbearance, love and charity towards each other' narrowly to Christianity?' I don't think so.

 

[MrMarbles]

And just because he may have received faulty intelligence just like his predecessor and almost the entire planet earth (and some martians I've heard about) doesn't mean he's a liar either.

You want proof, start with yours. Where is the lie and I don't mean just regurgitate the same old same old that the intelligence was wrong.

I'm just trying to find out why people like the guy. Lie, no lie, what is it about Bush that brings out such passion?

 

[Annie]

I'm just trying to find out why people like the guy. Lie, no lie, what is it about Bush that brings out such passion?

Actually I think you are missreading trust on WOT for passion. Truth is, there is nothing that's been done by the dems that is building confidence in their ability to take over.

Many in GOP are not happy with spending and kowtowing to the calls for internationalism!

 

[lilcountriegal]

I'm just trying to find out why people like the guy. Lie, no lie, what is it about Bush that brings out such passion?

One of the most admirable things for me is his human nature. Read up in the politics forum on some of the interactions he has with the "common folk". Jogging with the guy who lost his leg, crying with and holding the little girl who lost her mom on 9/11, being at ground zero and helping lift the morale of the rescue personnel, and that's not to mention that I agree with his politics in general.

In today's politics, many politicians forget about the people they are there to serve. GWB is one of the very few who does not.

 

[JohnGalt]

I like President Bush because he is truly a man of conviction. He will do what is right for the country whether or not it is popular with the polls. He get's my respect because of his integrity in this sick world.

 

[adamsimpire]

Ahhh, where to start. The hard-core left of today's America, to me, seems to have transformed into a huge, hateful, Bush-bashing political party. I guess they started their campain with very little to work with for them. They miss their good old days with Clinton, and some of them can't stand to see a Godly man and a man of his word in office.

So they had to come up with something, and what they are doing works (not well, but it does seem to get a good rally behind it) but at a price. The left of America has sunken low enough to start a hate movement towards President Bush. One of the biggest things that aggrivates me is that they are calling George Bush a liar, when infact he is not.

In the days before and leading up to the 2nd Iraq war, Bush told the U.S. that he recieved substantial intelligence that Iraq had W.M.D.'s. He also gave Saddam the chance to dissarm, which he did not. And what makes me wonder is this, IF Saddam did not infact have W.M.D.'s, then why did he tuck his tail between his legs, and hide? He could have shown himself to the U.S., contacted us, and simply say, "I do not have W.M.D's." If we did not believe him, he could have let the inspectors search all they wanted.

BUT, he chose to say nothing, and kept the inspectors on the run. This was suspicious enough for George W. Bush (and at the time, John Kerry) to launch an offensive attack on Saddam's regieme.

For all I know, Saddam, possibly had W.M.D's just as much as he might not have. If he did have them, we maight never find them. They're probably well hidden (I.E. stuck in cement, that belongs to an unsuspicious sidewalk) or were taken out of the country to a more convienient place for terrorists.

Well, I'm off, for now.

 

[MrMarbles]

Hhmmm all very interresting.

 

[conservative101]

who should i vote for?

 

[Annie]

who should i vote for?

Dunno. What's important to you?

 

[conservative101]

i dont know