Who Said It?

Did anyone say the majority of Dems voted for the war?
Most Dems (and thanks for conceding the point that most Dems supported the war) supported it right up until it became politically expedient to declare it lost and the president lied to them.
Thanks for agreeing with the basic point here. Go out and misconstrue some other thread.

Rabbi..

I know your reading skills are better than this. Are you intentionally misleading or just playing games?

You state Dems "overwhelmingly supported the war" The numbers show you are intentionally lying once again

I said Dems supported Bush after 9-11 until iraq....you state this means they supported the war

Another intentional lie
You're the one who wrote "most Dems supported Bush". We've already established that an overwhelming number--an absolute majority in the Senate--voted for the war. A very large number of Dems in the House did so too.
And they continued to do so up until the war became unpopular and they bailed.
What is difficult about this? I mean other than admitting that the Democrats are the party of feckless weasels who will gladly declare defeat and do anything else just to stay in power?

More spin and dishonesty as he deliberately takes things out of context.

Hey rabbi why did you dishonestly CHOOSE to leave off the second half of rightwingers statment?

here is the full context.

"Most Dems supported Bush after 9-11 and up until he invaded Iraq......then the real Bush came out along with the ineptness of his strategy."

So why be so dishonest??

Fact is that a majorty of the dems did not support the invasion and the FACTS show that most dems in congress voted against giving W the authorization. so for you to imply that the dems, as a whole, supported the invasion "up until the war became unpopular and they bailed." is nothing but a LIE.

However, that is typical for you and the fact that you continue to LIE and take things out of context just like brietbart did when he edited that video shows that you are nothing but a worthless troll who has nothing valid to offer.
 
Hey, Dick. Why don't you respond to what I actually wrote rather than your twisted misinterpretation of what I wrote? Cool idea, eh?

How about you take your own advice and stop whining about something that you regularly do to others?? LOL

If you don't like it then don't do it to others. Then you might actually have the credibility to demand different from others. Until then, enjoy getting what you give. LOL
 
Didn't we already prove the majority of Dems voted against the war?

Most Dems supported Bush after 9-11 and up until he invaded Iraq......then the real Bush came out along with the ineptness of his strategy

The Iraq invasion has been discussed to death for seven years. I really don't know what Rabbi's intent is other than, as I said, he wants to start another fight.

The aspect of Democratic malfeasance has not been discussed nearly enough. Many of the major figures in the Democratic party said exactly what Bush said. Many of them supported Bush and the war. Only when the war became messy and difficult--as wars are wont to do--did they cut and run and accuse the administraiton of "lying" even though they had said the exact same thing at the time.

"many" of them did support W howerver, the MAJORITY of the dems did NOT. So your lame attempt to hold all accountable for the minority is beyond dishonest.
 
The Iraq invasion has been discussed to death for seven years. I really don't know what Rabbi's intent is other than, as I said, he wants to start another fight.

The aspect of Democratic malfeasance has not been discussed nearly enough. Many of the major figures in the Democratic party said exactly what Bush said. Many of them supported Bush and the war. Only when the war became messy and difficult--as wars are wont to do--did they cut and run and accuse the administraiton of "lying" even though they had said the exact same thing at the time.

"many" of them did support W howerver, the MAJORITY of the dems did NOT. So your lame attempt to hold all accountable for the minority is beyond dishonest.

Did anyone say the majority did? No.
Stop quibbling. Address the issue. Or STFU.
 
Did anyone say the majority of Dems voted for the war?
Most Dems (and thanks for conceding the point that most Dems supported the war) supported it right up until it became politically expedient to declare it lost and the president lied to them.
Thanks for agreeing with the basic point here. Go out and misconstrue some other thread.

Rabbi..

I know your reading skills are better than this. Are you intentionally misleading or just playing games?

You state Dems "overwhelmingly supported the war" The numbers show you are intentionally lying once again

I said Dems supported Bush after 9-11 until iraq....you state this means they supported the war

Another intentional lie
You're the one who wrote "most Dems supported Bush". We've already established that an overwhelming number--an absolute majority in the Senate--voted for the war. A very large number of Dems in the House did so too.
And they continued to do so up until the war became unpopular and they bailed.
What is difficult about this? I mean other than admitting that the Democrats are the party of feckless weasels who will gladly declare defeat and do anything else just to stay in power?

OK Rabbi

I understand the game you are trying to play. Nothing to be gained by debating a troll

Carry on and good luck with your games
 
Did anyone say the majority of Dems voted for the war?
Most Dems (and thanks for conceding the point that most Dems supported the war) supported it right up until it became politically expedient to declare it lost and the president lied to them.
Thanks for agreeing with the basic point here. Go out and misconstrue some other thread.


Ok rabbi, you seriously need to learn how to read.

Someone said the majority of the dems did not vote to give W authority for the invasion and then you tried to split hairs and focus on how the dems in the senate voted while basically ignoring how the dems in the house voted.

Then to top it all off, rightwinger, saying that dems supported bush after 9/11 does not equate to supporting the war in iraq so he conceded nothing.

The iraq war started in march of 2003 and 9/11 occured in 2001 and the war with iraq and the public debating of the invasion did not start immediately following 9/11. Which leads us back to one of your previous false claims in which you tried to claim that we, as a country, debated the invasion of iraq for 18 months prior to the invasion which would have meant that we started debating the invasion of iraq right after 9/11 but even you know that is not the case and yet you still LIED about it.
Oh well this post of yours is nothing but a glaring example of how dishonest you are and how you have no integrity. GJ. LOL

Quibble. Prevaricate. Mis-read.

Thanks for admitting to your tactics now if you could actually debate a topic and have the integrity to admit when you are wrong then you might actually have a leg to stand on.

Do you have anything to refute the notion that an overwhelming number of Democrats supported the war, agreed with the basic intelligence, and then when things started to go south claim Bush "lied us into war"? If not, shut the fuck up and post elsewhere.

YES. The FACT that a majority of the democrats voted against giving W the authority shows that your claim that "an overwhelming number of Democrats supported the war" is false based on the fact that the phrase "an overwhelming number of" is merely a different way to phrase "a majority of" and that shows that you are WRONG because even as you admit "a majority of democrats voted not to give bush the authority"

Face it you have been shown to be WRONG on several occasion throughout this thread and for some delusional reason you still believe that you are correct and still have the credibiltiy to call anyone out when you don't. If you don't like being called out for your BS there is a real simple solution, and that is DON'T post your BS.
 
The aspect of Democratic malfeasance has not been discussed nearly enough. Many of the major figures in the Democratic party said exactly what Bush said. Many of them supported Bush and the war. Only when the war became messy and difficult--as wars are wont to do--did they cut and run and accuse the administraiton of "lying" even though they had said the exact same thing at the time.

"many" of them did support W howerver, the MAJORITY of the dems did NOT. So your lame attempt to hold all accountable for the minority is beyond dishonest.

Did anyone say the majority did? No.
Stop quibbling. Address the issue. Or STFU.

Yeah you did when you paraphrased that statement and tried desperately to argue that a majority of the dems in the senate did and a large portion of the dems in the house did along with several other comments of yours that you are now ignoring because it suits your needs to be oblivious and you lack the integrity to actually stand behind what you say.

The issue has been addressed and you lost. Any and all of your implications against the dems as a whole was lost the moment that the FACT that the majority of the dems voted not to give bush the authority was uttered and yet you continue to spin in a desperate attempt to keep this going. Don't you think it's time that you accept that and stop spinning?
 
"many" of them did support W howerver, the MAJORITY of the dems did NOT. So your lame attempt to hold all accountable for the minority is beyond dishonest.

Did anyone say the majority did? No.
Stop quibbling. Address the issue. Or STFU.

Yeah you did when you paraphrased that statement and tried desperately to argue that a majority of the dems in the senate did and a large portion of the dems in the house did along with several other comments of yours that you are now ignoring because it suits your needs to be oblivious and you lack the integrity to actually stand behind what you say.

The issue has been addressed and you lost. Any and all of your implications against the dems as a whole was lost the moment that the FACT that the majority of the dems voted not to give bush the authority was uttered and yet you continue to spin in a desperate attempt to keep this going. Don't you think it's time that you accept that and stop spinning?

No. I am correct. You don't want to face an inconvenient fact so throw up every quibble you can.
An overwhelming number of Democrats supported Bush, voted for the war and then when things looked bad accused Bush of lying to them, even though they were saying exactly the same things earlier.
This is indisputable except by the extreme partisan hacks and Bush haters. Like you.
 
Did anyone say the majority did? No.
Stop quibbling. Address the issue. Or STFU.

Yeah you did when you paraphrased that statement and tried desperately to argue that a majority of the dems in the senate did and a large portion of the dems in the house did along with several other comments of yours that you are now ignoring because it suits your needs to be oblivious and you lack the integrity to actually stand behind what you say.

The issue has been addressed and you lost. Any and all of your implications against the dems as a whole was lost the moment that the FACT that the majority of the dems voted not to give bush the authority was uttered and yet you continue to spin in a desperate attempt to keep this going. Don't you think it's time that you accept that and stop spinning?

No. I am correct. You don't want to face an inconvenient fact so throw up every quibble you can.
An overwhelming number of Democrats supported Bush, voted for the war and then when things looked bad accused Bush of lying to them, even though they were saying exactly the same things earlier.
This is indisputable except by the extreme partisan hacks and Bush haters. Like you.

What inconvenient fact are you claiming that I don't want to face?? I have to ask because the drivel that you post after you make that claim is NOT a fact but your own misguided and unsubstantiated OPINION.

The vote totals on the authorization were shown to you earlier and that proves your claim that "an overwhelming number of Democrats supported the war" is false. The FACT is that a majority of democrats voted against giving him authorization which counters your spin.

Define the phrase "overwhelming number."

Face it, you lost AGAIN by making claims that you can't support with anything REAL. Spinning now won't change that FACT.
 
Yeah you did when you paraphrased that statement and tried desperately to argue that a majority of the dems in the senate did and a large portion of the dems in the house did along with several other comments of yours that you are now ignoring because it suits your needs to be oblivious and you lack the integrity to actually stand behind what you say.

The issue has been addressed and you lost. Any and all of your implications against the dems as a whole was lost the moment that the FACT that the majority of the dems voted not to give bush the authority was uttered and yet you continue to spin in a desperate attempt to keep this going. Don't you think it's time that you accept that and stop spinning?

No. I am correct. You don't want to face an inconvenient fact so throw up every quibble you can.
An overwhelming number of Democrats supported Bush, voted for the war and then when things looked bad accused Bush of lying to them, even though they were saying exactly the same things earlier.
This is indisputable except by the extreme partisan hacks and Bush haters. Like you.

What inconvenient fact are you claiming that I don't want to face?? I have to ask because the drivel that you post after you make that claim is NOT a fact but your own misguided and unsubstantiated OPINION.

The vote totals on the authorization were shown to you earlier and that proves your claim that "an overwhelming number of Democrats supported the war" is false. The FACT is that a majority of democrats voted against giving him authorization which counters your spin.

Define the phrase "overwhelming number."

Face it, you lost AGAIN by making claims that you can't support with anything REAL. Spinning now won't change that FACT.

Merely repeating what you've already said and has been discredited is not arguing. It is whining.
When you can provide evidence that an overwhelming number of Democrats did not vote for the Iraq War resolution and then cut and run and accuse Bush of lying when they had said teh exact same thing, then we can talk.
 
No. I am correct. You don't want to face an inconvenient fact so throw up every quibble you can.
An overwhelming number of Democrats supported Bush, voted for the war and then when things looked bad accused Bush of lying to them, even though they were saying exactly the same things earlier.
This is indisputable except by the extreme partisan hacks and Bush haters. Like you.

What inconvenient fact are you claiming that I don't want to face?? I have to ask because the drivel that you post after you make that claim is NOT a fact but your own misguided and unsubstantiated OPINION.

The vote totals on the authorization were shown to you earlier and that proves your claim that "an overwhelming number of Democrats supported the war" is false. The FACT is that a majority of democrats voted against giving him authorization which counters your spin.

Define the phrase "overwhelming number."

Face it, you lost AGAIN by making claims that you can't support with anything REAL. Spinning now won't change that FACT.

Merely repeating what you've already said and has been discredited is not arguing. It is whining.When you can provide evidence that an overwhelming number of Democrats did not vote for the Iraq War resolution and then cut and run and accuse Bush of lying when they had said teh exact same thing, then we can talk.

LOL you do realize that you are describing your own posts don't you?? Afrter all, you are the one repeating the same disproven drivel over and over again expecting a new result. LOL

Are you asking me to prove a negative? LOL Fact is tahtyou presented an OPINION that you can't prove and are trying to demand that others should ahve to prove your OPINION to be wrong when the burden of proof is on YOU.

BTW the proof that an "overwhelming number", otherwise known as a MAJORITY, of democrats in congress voted against giving bush the authority to invade proves your spin WRONG.

You lose AGAIN.
Now watch you repeat your same spin again expecting a different result. LOL
 
Last edited:
Can you not distinguish between "majority" and "overwhelming number"?
I have stated no opinion whatsoever. Everything I posted was verifiable fact. Now try to refute it or spin it away.
 
Can you not distinguish between "majority" and "overwhelming number"?I have stated no opinion whatsoever. Everything I posted was verifiable fact. Now try to refute it or spin it away.

Can you?? An "overwhelming number" is a number of something that overwhelms that in which it is in opposition to, which is by any defintion a MAJORITY. Especially in the context of congress, seeing as how that would mean that you are claiming that more than half of the dems supported giving bush the authority to invade overwhelming a smaller number of dems who voted in opposition, when even you admit that is NOT the case.

All you have stated is OPINION and if everything that you posted is verifiable then why do you continue to fail at verifying it?? LOL

You made the claims, you can't prove them, they have been proven wrong, and yet you continue to demand that you chould be proven wrong AGAIN.

BTW you were asked to define the phrase "overwhelming number." so why is it you failed to do so?? Scared you will prove yourself wrong AGAIN? LOL
 
Last edited:
Wow Spin much?
Almost 40% of the Dems in the House voted for it. That sure beats the one GOP rep who voted for healthcare that allowed Nancy Pelosi to crow that the bill was bipartisan.
40% of the opposition party is overwhelming. It certainly is bipartisan support.

But none of that really contradicts the fact that many leading Democrats supported Bush, believed that Saddam had WMD and then abandoned Bush when the war started to become unpopular.
If you have evidence that they all stood behind their vote then post it. Otherwise STFU.
 
Wow Spin much?
Almost 40% of the Dems in the House voted for it. That sure beats the one GOP rep who voted for healthcare that allowed Nancy Pelosi to crow that the bill was bipartisan.
40% of the opposition party is overwhelming. It certainly is bipartisan support.

But none of that really contradicts the fact that many leading Democrats supported Bush, believed that Saddam had WMD and then abandoned Bush when the war started to become unpopular.
If you have evidence that they all stood behind their vote then post it. Otherwise STFU.

You should really ask yourself that question. Especially since you are now trying to shift the argument away from your own "overwhelming majority" argument instead of admitting that you were wrong.

So why are you NOW trying to change terminology and avoid your own words?? LOL
 
Wow Spin much?
Almost 40% of the Dems in the House voted for it. That sure beats the one GOP rep who voted for healthcare that allowed Nancy Pelosi to crow that the bill was bipartisan.
40% of the opposition party is overwhelming. It certainly is bipartisan support.

But none of that really contradicts the fact that many leading Democrats supported Bush, believed that Saddam had WMD and then abandoned Bush when the war started to become unpopular.
If you have evidence that they all stood behind their vote then post it. Otherwise STFU.

You should really ask yourself that question. Especially since you are now trying to shift the argument away from your own "overwhelming majority" argument instead of admitting that you were wrong.

So why are you NOW trying to change terminology and avoid your own words?? LOL

yawn.
Got something substantive there, bubba?
Nope. Guess not
 
Wow Spin much?
Almost 40% of the Dems in the House voted for it. That sure beats the one GOP rep who voted for healthcare that allowed Nancy Pelosi to crow that the bill was bipartisan.
40% of the opposition party is overwhelming. It certainly is bipartisan support.

But none of that really contradicts the fact that many leading Democrats supported Bush, believed that Saddam had WMD and then abandoned Bush when the war started to become unpopular.
If you have evidence that they all stood behind their vote then post it. Otherwise STFU.

You should really ask yourself that question. Especially since you are now trying to shift the argument away from your own "overwhelming majority" argument instead of admitting that you were wrong.

So why are you NOW trying to change terminology and avoid your own words?? LOL

yawn.
Got something substantive there, bubba?
Nope. Guess not

HAHAHA says the hack who has failed to provide anything of substance. Now that is hilarious. Let's see you have been asked to prove your claims on several occasion and all you could do was present lame excuses as to why you couldn't. Then when called out for being an ignorant moron who can't even define the terms he is using you try to change the subject. LOL

Although I do give you kudos for continuing to try and spin to CYA. It is better than your cowardly exit from the kagan thread where you just disappeared after sticking your foot in your mouth. LOL
 
No spin. Just facts. Can you refute any of it without distorting what I wrote?
Nope.

You presented OPINION and then dishonestly tried to claim it was fact when it was NOT, so there is nothing to refute.

You lose AGAIN, gj. LOL
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top