John Bolton lied to Congress?

This basically sums it up:

That Butan is a bad mutha (!)....watch your mouth!

X:

Quote:

That Butan is a bad mutha (!)....watch your mouth!

I'm just talking about Butan!

Cycloptichorn

woiyo wrote:

old europe wrote:

woiyo wrote:

old europe wrote:

woiyo wrote:

God forbid we upset BUTAN.

Wanna invade it, too, if they reject Bolton?

Only if they threaten the security of the United State. Somehow, I doubt they pose such a risk to the US.

Oh, like Iraq, you mean. Got it, boss.

EXACTLY. Now you are catching on. It takes time for some of you from "OLD EUROPE" to understand rational thought. Probably now that some in Europe has tasted the "fruits" of your liberal immigration ways, I see more and more of your are starting to understand.

I like it when people spell OLD EUROPE in capital letters! That's the way it should be!

So how's the Southern Border these days?

For security reasons, I can not provide those details. Why don't you try to sneak over and see if you can make it.

Brandon9000 wrote:

thethinkfactory wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Liberal expose number 10,000 of a Republican scandal. Wow, you've certainly exposed a dangerous felon this time. I'm still waiting for Bush's honorable discharge from the National Guard to be revoked and changed to dishonorable.

Bush will make Bolton ambassador exactly as he plans to.

Brandon:

This distraction is often called ignoratio elenchi in my business.

Can you speak to the topic?

TTF

I did. 1. you people come up with an unending series of exposes, which you trumpet as the end of the world, but which are of virtually no significance, or sometimes exactly no significance. 2. In the end, your Republican scandal no. 10,000 will not affect the Bolton appointment in the slightest.

And furthermore, next week, when you accuse Condoleeza Rice of writing a note on the back of her hand to improve her performance at a piano concert, and demand a Congressional investigation, I will not take that very seriously either.

Try winning a few elections.

I am not sure who 'you people' are - you sound a little paraniod. I am also not sure how you could read my mind or predict my future without knowing me. It seems that you have argued against ad hominem with ad hominem.

Also, I don't think you won anything. I know it has become popular in America that if you are a fan of a team for a while you feel like you can call them your team. But I feel it is unreasonable to get any feeling of pride when "your team" wins.

Since I belong to no party nor voted a straight ticket - I am not sure what your are talking about.

Can you speak to the topic at hand or do you simply choose to attack an invisible and fictitious 'you people' while appealing to a group of fictitious people who are morally superior and are 'winning'?

TTF

He'll be powerless at the UN. He's already a laughingstock there.

Note that he can be rejected by the UN, apparently...

Cycloptichorn

woiyo wrote:

God forbid we upset BUTAN.

Wanna invade it, too, if they reject Bolton?

woiyo wrote:

old europe wrote:

woiyo wrote:

God forbid we upset BUTAN.

Wanna invade it, too, if they reject Bolton?

Only if they threaten the security of the United State. Somehow, I doubt they pose such a risk to the US.

Oh, like Iraq, you mean. Got it, boss.

woiyo wrote:

For security reasons, I can not provide those details. Why don't you try to sneak over and see if you can make it.

You mean like that:

Well, from what I am told, it is not as difficult as the picture which you posted above. So come on, give it a try.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He'll be powerless at the UN. He's already a laughingstock there.

Note that he can be rejected by the UN, apparently...

Cycloptichorn

What do you figure the odds are that he will be?

Brandon9000 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

He'll be powerless at the UN. He's already a laughingstock there.

Note that he can be rejected by the UN, apparently...

Cycloptichorn

What do you figure the odds are that he will be?

Two of the members on the council, the ones that oppose the 'reforms' that Bush wants, are China and Russia. So I wouldn't be at all surprised if they 'checked his credentials' a little bit. Say 40-60 against.

Bolton would then be in sort of a provisional/limbo state until the whole thing got sorted out, which would end up being about half of his tenure. So it could be a very strong move to nullify the guy before he gets a chance to do, well, anything.

Not that he will/would anyways. He's a laughingstock here at home and abroad. Note that all the Bushies had to do were turn over a few documents (NSA intercepts that, imo, probably have a whooooole lot to do with the Plame case, hee ehe) and he would have been confirmed by the Senate.

Bush talks about an 'up or down vote.' Well, Bolton had TWO up or down votes, and he failed both. But Bush appointed him anyways. More proof of the lies spewed by the administration.

Cycloptichorn

I heard Bolton talk (radio news today) and he sounds like a facetious oik, most unstatesmanlike.

More proof of the lies spewed by the administration.

This basically sums it up:

Naw, he's uniting US with Mexico.

Exactly like Iraq, which had had WMD, annexed its neighbor, promised to destroy its WMD, and then was deceptive about it. Saddam Hussein with a stockpile of serious WMD would have been a threat to the whole world.