Does the Truth really matter? Libs don't seem to think so...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by THE LIGHT, Mar 8, 2010.

  1. THE LIGHT
    Offline

    THE LIGHT Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,030
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Under His Wings in the Shadow of the Almighty!
    Ratings:
    +301
    I can remember not too long ago when it was all the rage in America for liberals to tout one of their favorite bumper sticker slogans, "Bush lied; people died." These statements were passionately fueled by the fires of the anti-Bush movement and starkly pointed towards the soon to be "unpopular" war in Iraq. But was it solely George W. Bush who laid claim to the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? And did he lie about them? Or were we mislead by the media?

    There are several reports by prominent sources and speculation by others indicating that it was not a matter of “if” but “where” these weapons were transferred. However, it is not my intent to vindicate those making the claims but rather to bring to attention our need as “We the people” to honestly evaluate each and every political figure not based on race or political party, but based on moral integrity and factual evidence. Often, we get so wrapped up in what we want to be true that we miss the actual truth.

    To answer the first question, “Was it solely George W. Bush who laid claim to the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?” here are a few quotes made by members of the opposing party of whom were fervent critics of President Bush.

    Yes, I know, the knee jerk response from many of you will be that they were misled. Okay, suppose they were. However, this supposition would lead to the question, “By whom were they misled?” which would ultimately lead back to the prior administration of President Bill Clinton who had the following to say on “Larry King Live” in July of 2003:

    "When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for."

    The Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso recalled speaking with Clinton later that year saying that, "When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."

    Of course, we may never fully know what else Clinton knew on this issue since many top secret documents were stolen and shredded by Clinton’s National Security Advisor Sandy Burger prior to the 911 Investigation Commission’s investigation.

    Fast forward several years and we find ourselves sitting at yet another important threshold in history with the decision of universal health care. In spite of the massive public disapproval of the current proposal, liberals are calling for implementation of the “nuclear option” (also known as the 50 plus 1 vote). Not too long ago, conservatives contemplated using the same option and were met with the following remarks by those now supporting the idea.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X3lQBfNJIs&feature=youtube_gdata"]YouTube - Flashback: Democrats call Nuclear Option "Tyranny of the Majority" "Arrogant"[/ame]

    So I leave you with these final questions. Does the truth matter? Or is it subject to the desired outcome of the tyrannical few?

    Will America stand or fall? I believe this question hinges solely upon our ability to isolate the facts from what we desire the outcome to be. Politicians will continue to speak deceitfully from both sides of the isle, but their destiny lies in the hands of the American people for the time being. We must not remain silent, but remember what really matters when it comes to speaking up.
     
  2. DE3
    Offline

    DE3 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    163
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +18
    Truth always matters.

    I don't think the question in regards to Bush centers around whether the intel of WMD was correct or widely believed. The question is whether the action was necessary given what we saw the threat level to be? To this date I don't think the threat level ever reached the point for the action we took. Yes, hindsight is 20/20, but it serves as a good teacher. I was 100% behind the effort to go to war with Iraq. Today as the situation sits I am 50/50. It was very costly for us.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2010

Share This Page