0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 11:54 am
Even if its another republican?
Nice to know you will accept another Republican in the office.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 11:57 am
Perhaps this has already been brought up, but how about Bush's calling to our attention the fact that "America is addicted to oil"? This from an oil-man?

Talk about being born again. This makes his religious conversion look like choosing Coke vs Pepsi...
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 12:03 pm
You have to have a healthy appetite for horseshit to support this scumbag!

Anon
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 12:04 pm
Anon-Voter wrote:
You have to have a healthy appetite for horseshit to support this scumbag!

Anon


And nobody likes it more then you and mags.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 12:08 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
You have to have a healthy appetite for horseshit to support this scumbag!

Anon


And nobody likes it more then you and mags.


You're saying Mags and I support Bush? I'd say that demonstrates your ability to comprehend pretty well!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 12:14 pm
Anon-Voter wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
You have to have a healthy appetite for horseshit to support this scumbag!

Anon


And nobody likes it more then you and mags.


You're saying Mags and I support Bush? I'd say that demonstrates your ability to comprehend pretty well!!

Anon


Nope.
I'm saying that you and her have a healthy appetite for horseshit,judging by how much the 2 of you like to sling.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 06:27 pm
Magginkat wrote:

..
Why do you cheer when the man (I use that word loosely) occupying the oval office announces that he has broken the law and will continue to do so? Would you do the same if the last legally elected president, Bill Clinton was still in office? LMAO! Hell no.
HELL YES! We in fact did do the same thing for Clinton when he too like many of his predecessors wiretapped calls between our foreign enemies and people residing in the USA and between those residents and other residents in the USA. Since it was legal for Clinton to authorize such wiretapping, then it is also legal for Bush to authorize the same kind of wiretapping. Clinton did not break the law when he authorized such wiretapping. Bush did not break the law when he authorized such wiretapping.

[quote]The Constitution of the United States of America
Effective as of March 4, 1789

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
...
Article II
...
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States
...



13. Joint Resolution: Passed September 14, 2001. SJ 23 ES 107th CONGRESS JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/terroristattack/joint-resolution_9-14.html

14. Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002 (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq
www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

What is your evidence that you think refutes my evidence? [/color]

You guys are such hypocrites. For several years you screamed that lying matters. Now that your old boy has become known as the most hated, most prolific liar to every occupy a public office your whole outlook has changed.

Bunkum Slop! All that alleged hatred et cetera is based on lying propaganda

Hypocrites.[/quote]
Clinton pled guilty to perjury before a grandjury. When Clinton perjured himself, he broke the law. Bush has not ever testified before a grandjury.

Bush did not lie about Saddam possessing ready-to-use WMD or abetting al-Qaeda's perpetration of 9/11. Bush believed that true until he learned it was not true well after the invasion of Iraq. My evidence to support that is the fact that Clinton while president said Saddam possessed ready-to-use WMD and he declared Saddam's regime a danger to Americans among others.

12. STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT, October 31, 1998
H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/libera.htm

What is your evidence that you think refutes my evidence?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 06:50 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
Perhaps this has already been brought up, but how about Bush's calling to our attention the fact that "America is addicted to oil"? This from an oil-man?

Talk about being born again. This makes his religious conversion look like choosing Coke vs Pepsi...
He was never much good as an oil man anyway. The majority of that segment of his speech strikes me as nothing more than political chatter, but it is good that he recognizes America's addiction, no? 6 years to alternative powered cars is absurd when you consider the lack of infrastructure, but the 2025 AD number could hold some promise if there's any truth to the stated intention.

Personally, I'd have liked it if he went to bat a little harder for nuclear power. From everything I've read; that seems to be the most plausible solution to our current addiction. At the exponential rate China and India are increasing their oil consumption; removing that monkey from our collective back could very well be the strategy that keeps our economy out in front.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 06:51 pm
Actually, Ican, although I completely agree that he committed perjury before the Grand Jury, and is a self-admitted liar, Clinton was acquitted of perjury in his impeachment trial. He was found to be in contempt of court by a federal judge, and agreed to a 5 year suspension of his Arkansas law license.
0 Replies
 
Magginkat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 07:01 pm
I think I've read all the BS I can stomach for a few days. You clowns would defend that lying, murdering thug if he walked out into the middle of Pennsylvania Av, dropped his pants and used it as a bathroom, then pulled out a machine gun and started mowing people down.

You would find some way to convince youselves that it was a patriotic thing to do.

Frankly & with no apologies to anyone, I get up every morning, turn the TV on and hope to hell that he dropped dead over night. Most of the world would cheer to hear that good news too.

I love my country. It's george bu$h that I can't stand.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 07:02 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Actually, Ican, although I completely agree that he committed perjury before the Grand Jury, and is a self-admitted liar, Clinton was acquitted of perjury in his impeachment trial. He was found to be in contempt of court by a federal judge, and agreed to a 5 year suspension of his Arkansas law license.

Tico, I think his impeachment trial merely resulted in a determination that Clinton's perjury was insufficient cause for his removal. It did not acquit him of anything else. But as you pointed out he was found guilty only of contempt of court -- but only as a result of a plea bargain he obtained in return for his admitting perjury.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 07:20 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Actually, Ican, although I completely agree that he committed perjury before the Grand Jury, and is a self-admitted liar, Clinton was acquitted of perjury in his impeachment trial. He was found to be in contempt of court by a federal judge, and agreed to a 5 year suspension of his Arkansas law license.

Tico, I think his impeachment trial merely resulted in a determination that Clinton's perjury was insufficient cause for his removal. It did not acquit him of anything else. But as you pointed out he was found guilty only of contempt of court -- but only as a result of a plea bargain he obtained in return for his admitting perjury.


Minor but important point of clarification: The Senators had the option of voting "Guilty" or "Not Guilty." He was found "Not Guilty," thus "acquitted," of the two counts in the impeachment: Perjury (55-45) and Obstruction of Justice (50-50). Guilty would have required two-thirds vote. The result of the "Not Guilty" findings was Clinton was allowed to remain in orafice -- I mean office.

Quote:
The Senate, having tried William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, upon two articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the House of Representatives, and two-thirds of the Senators present not having found him guilty of the charges contained therein: it is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the said William Jefferson Clinton be, and he is hereby, acquitted of the charges in this said article.


Here's a LINK .
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 08:05 pm
Ticomaya wrote:

...
Minor but important point of clarification: The Senators had the option of voting "Guilty" or "Not Guilty." He was found "Not Guilty," thus "acquitted," of the two counts in the impeachment: Perjury (55-45) and Obstruction of Justice (50-50). Guilty would have required two-thirds vote. The result of the "Not Guilty" findings was Clinton was allowed to remain in orafice -- I mean office.

Quote:
The Senate, having tried William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, upon two articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the House of Representatives, and two-thirds of the Senators present not having found him guilty of the charges contained therein: it is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the said William Jefferson Clinton be, and he is hereby, acquitted of the charges in this said article.

...

Ok, I understand your point now. Thanks!

After reviewing the following from Article II of the Constitution, I am compelled to agree with you whether I want to or not.
Quote:
Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 08:08 pm
So we're all agreed that Clinton is a stinkin' liar? Good. Laughing
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2006 08:28 pm
Magginkat wrote:
I think I've read all the BS I can stomach for a few days. You clowns would defend that lying, murdering thug if he walked out into the middle of Pennsylvania Av, dropped his pants and used it as a bathroom, then pulled out a machine gun and started mowing people down.

You would find some way to convince youselves that it was a patriotic thing to do.

Frankly & with no apologies to anyone, I get up every morning, turn the TV on and hope to hell that he dropped dead over night. Most of the world would cheer to hear that good news too.

I love my country. It's george bu$h that I can't stand.


Then leave.
Believe me,you will NOT BE MISSED by anyone.
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Feb, 2006 12:02 am
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Feb, 2006 02:38 am
George Bush is a puppet, and a bad joke.

I never saw a man so completely out of his depth.
He has not even learned to read his autocue fluently.

I'm glad to note however, that his speechwriters have toned down the "Axis of Evil" rhetoric.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Feb, 2006 07:57 am
An update on that "swing [..] back to support for The President, his Administration, and its actions"...

Code:BUSH APPROVAL RATINGS, DEVELOPMENT


FOX NBC/WSJ CNN/Gallup Pew AP/Ipsos

Jan 06 -10 -15
Jan 06 - 7 -11 -16 -19
Dec 05 -15
Dec 05 - 9 -16 -13 -16 -15
Nov 05 - 6
Nov 05 -17 -19 -23 -19 -24
Oct 05 -10 -15/13 -12 -22
Oct 05 -11 -15 -19 -18 -19
Sep 05 - 2 - 5
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Feb, 2006 08:23 am
It's finally become a realization to me that this insistence on Bush idiocy is part and parcel of the Democrat/liberal hubris of having a monopoly on morals and the righteous highground. It results in a dangerous dismissiveness being taken toward their opponents and only gets worse the more they lose. I think it has been so for decades. We saw it with Kerry's "Hope is on the way" mindset and now the new theme of "There is a better way" (Gov. Kaine's rebuttal to the SOTU address).

It amuses me when I see the editorials of Bush's inconsistency on policy (think energy) and I smile to think his enemies have once again walked into the genius of his ploys. So, continue to think that way, but also be prepared to resurrect the "Weeping and Gnashing" thread that's sure to include the usual "How did this happen?" and "Most Americans are stupid" rhetoric. There may be a "better way", but beyond calling the president stupid, the opposition is clueless as to just what that way is.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Feb, 2006 08:50 am
McTag wrote:
I never saw a man so completely out of his depth.
He has not even learned to read his autocue fluently.


Interesting opinion, McT, and one certainly in keeping with what most would expect you to say. But completely at odds with most observers of the speech.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/02/2023 at 04:57:47