Hey Libs!

[nakedemperor]

it was always PART OF The argument. WMD was PART OF the argument. Quit trying to constrict the argument to JUST WMD when that was never the case. Why do leftists insist on revising history?

If anyone insists on revising history its the Bush administration. None of them have TOUCHED the WMD issue since a few months after invasion, when before the invasion it was every 2nd word out of the mouths of Rice, Bush, et al.

It was part of the argument because it had to be. If your plan is to make dinner it is NECESSARY to do the dishes afterward, and in making dinner you can say part of the whole process is doing the dishes, but you made dinner to eat, not to do the dishes. Even though doing the dishes is a very worthwhile and noble goal. It just has to be done.

 

[dmp]

If anyone insists on revising history its the Bush administration. None of them have TOUCHED the WMD issue since a few months after invasion,

Your statement is only true because 'today' qualifies as 'months' after.

Last week does too. As does last month. Bush's administration has been answering questions on WMDs frequently.

 

[OCA]

[; I'm pretty sure you're refering in large part to Bill Clinton, but let's face it, the most oft-referenced misleading Clinton ever did was saying he didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky.

So i'm guessing you don't think his bombing of an innocent aspirin factory and the killing of innocent civilians on the day of his impeachment vote is misleading?

 

[OCA]

The media does not have a liberal bias.

That education at Brown is doing absolutely nothing for you. If you don't understand this simple little fact, that the LMM is overwhelmingly liberal than you have no hope after graduation.

Can anyone say Dan Rather?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The media does not have a liberal bias. If you're pointing to inordinant amounts of "downer" Iraqi stories vs. amounts of "uplifting" Iraqi stories, that's because news is a business. Its not because news outlets want to show how badly things are going. News is a business and appeals to what people are most interested in (which is rarely what issues are most important). That's why murders and Michael Jackson and O.J. Simpson get so much coverage, not because liberals are obsessed with celebrities.

A sarcastic look at what would happen if the Iraqis were to copy our "non-liberal biased" Media:

January 31, 2005
Iraqi Election Held; First Step Toward American-Style Democracy Taken
Powerful Lobbyists For Special Interests To Be Created Next Week

Iraqis hailed the Iraqi election this past weekend as a "good first step" step toward a representational democracy, but, with a mixture of sadness, hope, and courage, acknowledged that more needed to be done. "We have much to do before we can claim the kind of successful representative democracy that America has," said Fawad Ghreib, an Iraqi election official. "For one thing, in this election we barely had any three-hour-long waits."

Iraqis expressed disappointment that the election failed to produce a vote which could be settled by lawsuits. "I am afraid that the counting of ballots in all of Iraq is perfectly uniform," said a discouraged Hasseem Wasabi, a Baghdad resident. "Clearly we still have a very long ways to go."

Iraqis hope to have hackable electronic voting booths in sixty per cent of the country by the time of the next election, with unreliable optical scanners in most of the remaining precincts. "We must remember that American Democracy wasn't built in a day," said Wasabi.

Iraqi officials were also dismayed by the sixty per cent voter turnout. "That's certainly far too high," said Sam Jabouli, a poll watcher in Fallujah. "There are far too few disaffected citizens. But we are confident that as people see their government in action, we can halve that figure."

Iraqi officials were said to be troubled that so little money was required to campaign for a government position. "We will not be able to enact a good campaign finance reform bill unless we can build campaign finance abuses," said Jabouli. "We are working on it."

http://tomburka.com/

PS: If downer stories are so "good for business", then why do the more positive stories on Fox seem to attract the huge numbers?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

If anyone insists on revising history its the Bush administration. None of them have TOUCHED the WMD issue since a few months after invasion, when before the invasion it was every 2nd word out of the mouths of Rice, Bush, et al.

It was part of the argument because it had to be. If your plan is to make dinner it is NECESSARY to do the dishes afterward, and in making dinner you can say part of the whole process is doing the dishes, but you made dinner to eat, not to do the dishes. Even though doing the dishes is a very worthwhile and noble goal. It just has to be done.

Regardless of your inane prattle, WMD was NEVER the ONLY reason given.

 

[dmp]

Regardless of your inane prattle, WMD was NEVER the ONLY reason given.

I'm such a loser...Mary offered to BET me $100 I wouldn't read the word 'prattle' today...I declined.
(sigh)

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm such a loser...Mary offered to BET me $100 I wouldn't read the word 'prattle' today...I declined.
(sigh)

Prattle is the perfect word for ne's thoughts.

 

[Zhukov]

It was part of the argument because it had to be. If your plan is to make dinner it is NECESSARY to do the dishes afterward,

No it isn't.

You could leave the dishes for someone else to do, after all you made the dinner.

You could just not do the dishes, and leave a mess all over the kitchen for the cockroaches and rats.

You could eat on paper plates with plastic sporks, and throw it all away when you were finished.

 

[Annie]

The media does not have a liberal bias.

Yeah, they do have a liberal bias:

http://mason.gmu.edu/~atabarro/MediaBias.doc

A Measure of Media Bias

Tim Groseclose
Department of Political Science, UCLA, and
Graduate School of Business, Stanford University

Jeff Milyo
Harris School of Public Policy
University of Chicago

September 2003

 

[dmp]

Yeah[/url]

Sometimes when I read your username aloud, I pronounce it 'Kah-Thaynee' just to be funny.

 

[Annie]

Sometimes when I read your username aloud, I pronounce it 'Kah-Thaynee' just to be funny.

Knock yourself out!

 

[Johnney]

funny thing .... randi rhodes is complaing on air america right now....the tinfoil heads on the DU are saying the whole thing is rigged and all the elected officials are US puppets .... ted kennedy and barbara boxer are saying the whole thing is a failure .... kerry is saying we shouldn't be there..elections would never happen and now he is saying in the future lies the test and that he was right all along

hes jsut jealous that they arent <i>their</i> puppets

 

[MadMax]

If anyone insists on revising history its the Bush administration. None of them have TOUCHED the WMD issue since a few months after invasion, when before the invasion it was every 2nd word out of the mouths of Rice, Bush, et al.

It was part of the argument because it had to be. If your plan is to make dinner it is NECESSARY to do the dishes afterward, and in making dinner you can say part of the whole process is doing the dishes, but you made dinner to eat, not to do the dishes. Even though doing the dishes is a very worthwhile and noble goal. It just has to be done.

That was a ploy to get the U.seless N.ations involved. When it became apparent they were paralyzed by their own corruption and apathy for human suffering Mr. Bush and company proceeded with what needed to be done all along, which was the removal of a brutal DICKTATER and the luring of islamic extremists " who would love to behead you and me BTW " into the battlefield. Once there, our military can slaughter them like the worthless pigs they are. I could go on and say more but whats the point? Some will only piss and moan about WMD WMD they never found WMD ( every time I hear that phrase I laugh out loud ) and have a warm feeling knowing the Dems and libs will NEVER get it. Hey you guys have Dean, Boxer, Pelosi, Kerry ,Kennedy, wow what a line up Personally I don't know why the Bush admin gives a flying Frick what you whacko's or the rest of the idiots think. I am sick of PC being forced down our throats, and I blame Bush and company for that too, even though I believe in the man and what he is doing.With the party of no attacking him all the way and at every turn ( no plan, no solution, no agenda ) Damn, spank me I've been bad!! :spank3: :spank3: :moon4:

 

[Adam's Apple]

Regime change and the security of America (NE, you got that one right) were the underlying reasons for pre-emptive war. These issues as they pertained to Saddam and Iraq were on the table a long time before WMD entered the picture. WMD was just one aspect of the total picture, but it was the one aspect in Saddam’s hands that threatened America’s security the most. I will remind you that there were plenty of administrations of other nations that thought Saddam had WMD (beliefs based on the same intelligence the Bush Administration had) because he had used them in the past and had exhibited no reservations whatsoever in using them. When Saddam tried to have Bush 41 assassinated, it demonstrated clearly his aggressive intentions toward America and its leadership.

Hindsight is always perfect and simply gives the liberal Dems and the liberal press a political issue. Prior to voting to authorize going to war, the Democrat members of Congress were given the same information about Iraq that the Administration had, and they voted to go to war based on that information. I suppose one reason they did that was because they felt America's security was in danger.

Regarding the money spent on the Iraq war and the number of lives that have been lost, I will remind you and the other libs that freedom is not free and war is not a polite, social tea party.