"Trust us"

[TexasTiger 13,005]

The reason we are getting so far afield is because you are doing backflips to avoid facing the clear fact that Bush went out of his way to lie about what he was doing.  It wasn't even in response to a question.  It was planned.  Why can't you just say "Yeah, it was lie, but I still support him and what he did."  That's all.  Just recognize the obvious and keep your same position if you wish.

In regard to your posts, you clearly don't understand the issue.  If you want to complain now about what Clinton did, fine.  But the reason you didn't hear Spector and McCain and especially the more radical Republicans raise a stink at the time was b/c the same legal issues don't apply when surveillance is conducted on communications that occur wholly outside of the USA.  The NSA routinely conducts surveillance on such communications.  It might piss off Europe, but it ain't illegal.

213520[/snapback]

That is so much BS, are your eyes brown? Think back and remember the rhetoric, remember all the times you spouted off and said it should be done better. It should be done right. It should be done in an exemplary manner.

In regard to your posts, you clearly don't understand the issue.

The issue is national security, plain and simple.

The issue is dems manufacturing an issue to try and make political points.

The issue is there is a majority of Americans who see your “issue” for what it is

The issue is the majority of Americans don’t have a problem with the government tracking communications between domestic Islamist groups and al-Qa'ida terrorists? The issue is the majority of Americans see the dems as not giving a crap about national security.

The issue is no matter how much you dance around and pontificate, American citizens do understand and do recognize the dems for what they are and what they are doing.

Why can't you just say "Yeah, we have been obstructionist for the past six years and we will continue because that is all we have.” Why can't you just say "Yeah, we hate Bush and to hell with national security.” Why can't you just say "Yeah, we want to get even because the Republicans brought up impeachment charges against Clinton.”

Oh one last thing, even if President Bush did lie, why would that bother Democrats? It’s not like you guys have not had plenty of liars in office is it?

213542[/snapback]

It's funny how you wish to paint me with such a simple brush as just hating Bush no matter what and wanting him impeached. The fact is, you defend everything he does, no matter what. You can't even recognize a lie. With Clinton, I recognized the lie. In fact, I didn't believe him from the first time he said, "I want you to listen to me..." I could tell he was parsing the words "sexual relations" from the start. I still supported him, but I didn't excuse the lie or fall for it. Not you, buddy. You fall hook, line and sinker. You see no faults. Attribute every single criticism to partisan hatred. Your mind doesn't even really function in this realm, even though you are clearly quite bright otherwise. You repel facts like Superman repels bullets.

Dems haven't been obstructionist for 6 years. Almost all voted for the first Patriot Act, almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan, and the party leadership in the House and Senate still are not calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. But they are the oppositon party and don't kiss his ass enough to suit you and your like-minded friends. By contrast, the Republicans strongly opposed Clinton at almost every turn. They didn't support military action in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, even while our troops were engaged. They didn't even support the efforts to attack Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Not a single Republican supported Clinton's first budget-- not one. Was that obstructionist? Your double standard is amazing, but even more amazing is the fact that you can't see it.

BTW, I haven't seen anything that would lead me to support impeachment for Bush at this point. I do think he violated the law, and I do think one can reasonably take the position that it is an impeachable offense, but if the administration has only conducted surveillance under the parameters he claims, I would not favor impeachment. I don't view impeachment as a proper political weapon, which is exactly how it was used in regard to Clinton, which I'm sure you favored. If it turns out that the authority was grossly abused, that view might change, but my preference would be that Congress would choose to engage itself to provide the proper balance that our system of government intends. I think that is where folks like Specter and McCain are coming from, as well. I really don't think it is good for the country to be caught up in an impeachment battle unless it is clearly warranted. I suppose if I actually had the blind hatred for Bush that you imagine I have-- which is probably assumed by you since you felt that way about Clinton-- I would feel quite differently.

I do want the truth to come out and be seen, because I think the effective functioning of our democracy relies on informed, engaged citizens, rather than those who act like mindless sheep. I believe that history will show Bush to be a failure as a President. I hope that I am wrong about that, but doubt that I am.

[Tigermike 3,052]

It's funny how you wish to paint me with such a simple brush as just hating Bush no matter what and wanting him impeached.  The fact is, you defend everything he does, no matter what.  You can't even recognize a lie.  With Clinton, I recognized the lie.  In fact, I didn't believe him from the first time he said, "I want you to listen to me..."  I could tell he was parsing the words "sexual relations" from the start.  I still supported him, but I didn't excuse the lie or fall for it.  Not you, buddy.  You fall hook, line and sinker.  You see no faults.  Attribute every single criticism to partisan hatred.  Your mind doesn't even really function in this realm, even though you are clearly quite bright otherwise.  You repel facts like Superman repels bullets.

Dems haven't been obstructionist for 6 years.  Almost all voted for the first Patriot Act, almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan, and the party leadership in the House and Senate still are not calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.  But they are the oppositon party and don't kiss his ass enough to suit you and your like-minded friends.  By contrast, the Republicans strongly opposed Clinton at almost every turn.  They didn't support military action in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, even while our troops were engaged.  They didn't even support the efforts to attack Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.  Not a single Republican supported Clinton's first budget-- not one.  Was that obstructionist?  Your double standard is amazing, but even more amazing is the  fact that you can't see it.

BTW, I haven't seen anything that would lead me to support impeachment for Bush at this point.  I do think he violated the law, and I do think one can reasonably take the position that it is an impeachable offense, but if the administration has only conducted surveillance under the parameters he claims, I would not favor impeachment.  I  don't view impeachment as a proper political weapon, which is exactly how it was used in regard to Clinton, which I'm sure you favored.  If it turns out that the authority was grossly abused, that view might change, but my preference would be that Congress would choose to engage itself to provide the proper balance that our system of government intends.  I think that is where folks like Specter and McCain are coming from, as well.  I really don't think it is good for the country to be caught up in an impeachment battle unless it is clearly warranted.  I suppose if I actually had the blind hatred for Bush that you imagine I have-- which is probably assumed by you since you felt that way about Clinton--  I would feel quite differently.

I do want the truth to come out and be seen, because I think the effective functioning of our democracy relies on informed, engaged citizens, rather than those who act like mindless sheep.  I believe that history will show Bush to be a failure as a President.  I hope that I am wrong about that, but doubt that I am.

213551[/snapback]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons. For reasons of my own. I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS. But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush.

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,". Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan? Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan? Remember the Axis of Evil? You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT. For the life of me I can't imagine why. Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead. You, me, our children, our grandchildren.

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning. Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others. Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning." President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested. Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large. These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are. (Applause.) So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk. And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it. (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world. (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex. The tirades of the dems have grown old. Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons.  For reasons of my own.  I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS.  But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush. 

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,".  Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan?  Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan?  Remember the Axis of Evil?  You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT.  For the life of me I can't imagine why.  Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead.  You, me, our children, our grandchildren. 

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning.  Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others.  Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning."  President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested.  Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large.  These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are.  (Applause.)  So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk.  And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.  (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives.  First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice.  And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.  (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex.  The tirades of the dems have grown old.  Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

213569[/snapback]

Well put, JJ.

Al Qaida sees the whole world as a battlefield whereas our liberal democrats define it as a single country. Between them (democrats) handcuffing our troops and handing over their talking points to the enemy, America has an uphill climb to win this war.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

It's funny how you wish to paint me with such a simple brush as just hating Bush no matter what and wanting him impeached.  The fact is, you defend everything he does, no matter what.  You can't even recognize a lie.  With Clinton, I recognized the lie.  In fact, I didn't believe him from the first time he said, "I want you to listen to me..."  I could tell he was parsing the words "sexual relations" from the start.  I still supported him, but I didn't excuse the lie or fall for it.  Not you, buddy.  You fall hook, line and sinker.  You see no faults.  Attribute every single criticism to partisan hatred.  Your mind doesn't even really function in this realm, even though you are clearly quite bright otherwise.  You repel facts like Superman repels bullets.

Dems haven't been obstructionist for 6 years.  Almost all voted for the first Patriot Act, almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan, and the party leadership in the House and Senate still are not calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.  But they are the oppositon party and don't kiss his ass enough to suit you and your like-minded friends.  By contrast, the Republicans strongly opposed Clinton at almost every turn.  They didn't support military action in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, even while our troops were engaged.  They didn't even support the efforts to attack Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.  Not a single Republican supported Clinton's first budget-- not one.  Was that obstructionist?  Your double standard is amazing, but even more amazing is the  fact that you can't see it.

BTW, I haven't seen anything that would lead me to support impeachment for Bush at this point.  I do think he violated the law, and I do think one can reasonably take the position that it is an impeachable offense, but if the administration has only conducted surveillance under the parameters he claims, I would not favor impeachment.  I  don't view impeachment as a proper political weapon, which is exactly how it was used in regard to Clinton, which I'm sure you favored.  If it turns out that the authority was grossly abused, that view might change, but my preference would be that Congress would choose to engage itself to provide the proper balance that our system of government intends.  I think that is where folks like Specter and McCain are coming from, as well.   I really don't think it is good for the country to be caught up in an impeachment battle unless it is clearly warranted.  I suppose if I actually had the blind hatred for Bush that you imagine I have-- which is probably assumed by you since you felt that way about Clinton--  I would feel quite differently.

I do want the truth to come out and be seen, because I think the effective functioning of our democracy relies on informed, engaged citizens, rather than those who act like mindless sheep.  I believe that history will show Bush to be a failure as a President.  I hope that I am wrong about that, but doubt that I am.

213551[/snapback]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons. For reasons of my own. I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS. But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush.

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,". Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan? Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan? Remember the Axis of Evil? You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT. For the life of me I can't imagine why. Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead. You, me, our children, our grandchildren.

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning. Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others. Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning." President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested. Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large. These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are. (Applause.) So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk. And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it. (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world. (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex. The tirades of the dems have grown old. Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

213569[/snapback]

Yes, I remember the "axis of evil". Frankly, it would have made more sense to have invaded Iran than Iraq. We have positioned ourselves to where Iran and Korea can't taunt us b/c we are tied up in Iraq. Both Iran and Korea pose larger threats.

Your starting point is accepting all of Bush's positions on the WOT and seeing anywhere who takes a different strategic view as against America. Your post summed that up pretty well. For you, one has to agree with Bush to support America and oppose terror. But what your quote failed to mention was that 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and developed their hatred of America in fundamentalism Islamic schools there which are funded by this strong "ally". Bush NEVER addresses that. It would have made more sense to invade Saudi Arabia and crush those schools than to invade Iraq.

Your tirades are nothing more than repeating what you've been told.

I know many fundamentalists who quote scripture, but never seem to really think about it. You quote Bush the same way.

But you still have not admitted the obvious. Bush flat out lied. Even if you think he had a good reason. You try to change the subject at every turn.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons.  For reasons of my own.  I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS.  But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush. 

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,".  Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan?  Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan?  Remember the Axis of Evil?  You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT.  For the life of me I can't imagine why.  Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead.  You, me, our children, our grandchildren. 

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning.  Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others.   Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning."  President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested.  Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large.  These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are.  (Applause.)  So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk.  And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.  (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives.  First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice.  And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.  (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex.  The tirades of the dems have grown old.  Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

213569[/snapback]

Well put, JJ.

Al Qaida sees the whole world as a battlefield whereas our liberal democrats define it as a single country. Between them (democrats) handcuffing our troops and handing over their talking points to the enemy, America has an uphill climb to win this war.

213581[/snapback]

Our biggest challenge in the WOT is an incompetent adminstration who doesn't see the global problem. Bush sees Iraq as the centerpiece of the war on terror. That's insane.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

OK, whatever you say. You democrats are all behind us ... in your own "we support you by cheering for your defeat" kind of way.

"I wish we had not spent as much of our time and efforts in Iraq as we have, because we really need, the real battle against terror is in Afghanistan and the surrounding areas where al Qaeda is now holed up." —DNC Chair Howard Dean

I'd say the Bush administration, thank the Good Lord, sees this conflict as a global war. He defined the war as such standing on the smoldering heap of what was once the WTC. It's the democrats that keep referring to Afghanistan as being the battlefield of the real war on terror.

The biggest thing I think Bush failed to forsee or factor into the war equation was having to fight the democrat party in addition to Al Qaida. Since holding hands and singing "God Bless America" on the Senate steps after 9/11, the democrats have done nothing but obstruct our efforts in this war. Time after time, the American people have heard soundbites from people with (D)'s after their names undermining the administration and our troops. This has done nothing to further our objectives, but it has done wonders for the enemy. Democrats are Al Qaida's only hope of victory.

**edited to add:

I find it intriguing that you choose the adjective "incompetent" immediately after your boy Kerry used it to describe the Bush administration yesterday. Coincidence .... I think not. It must be the DNC word of the day.

Link to the Talking Points

[AURaptor 1,126]

I thought Reagan was best know for Iran - Contra.  How did that come out?

Why is it that anytime anyone in the current administration is called to task, the defense invariably includes the word "Clinton?"

King George has a whole team of lawyers trying to come up with a non-laughable argument as to how his "eavesdropping" was not a violation of the constitution.  Show me the law which allowed Bush to order such "eavesdropping."

Where do you live.  Someone needs to start picking up your trash when you set it out by the curb.  Supreme court says that legal.

213415[/snapback]

No, Reagan is best known for rebuilding the American military, great tax cuts which saved our economy, the fall of the Berlin Wall and winning the Cold War. Yes, King George ( ) has a whole team of lawyers who agree w/him, some of them who worked in the Clinton Adminstration. One, John Schmidt, was an associate attorney general who defends Bush's policy.

[japantiger 4,051]

Face it, what really pisses the Dems off is that the White House is saying "yes we did it and shame on you for letting the terrorists know". That's what really chaps them. The White House in unrepentant and I'm damn glad.

We should use any and all means to protect our citizens; period. Do you think I give a damn about the rights of some fruitcake in the US that is plotting with Terrorists overseas to kill my family and US citizens? This is pure Mike Dukakis.....I'm too weak and timid to defend my wife even if someone rapes her....remember that guy.....

Fortunately the three branches of government are Separate; but Equal. Dems ususally forgest the "equal" point when they are not in the White House. In the finest tradition of G. Washington, A Lincoln, and FD Roosevelt, the president should remind Congress and the Courts of that point. and live up to his Constitutional responsibility to protect us....when the disloyal opposition refuses to and undermines his ability to do it.........

When will the DEMS EVER come down on the side of the good guys? huh?

[Tigermike 3,052]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons.  For reasons of my own.  I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS.  But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush. 

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,".  Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan?  Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan?  Remember the Axis of Evil?  You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT.  For the life of me I can't imagine why.  Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead.  You, me, our children, our grandchildren. 

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning.  Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others.  Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning."  President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested.  Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large.  These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are.  (Applause.)  So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk.  And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.  (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives.  First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice.  And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.  (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex.  The tirades of the dems have grown old.  Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

213569[/snapback]

Well put, JJ.

Al Qaida sees the whole world as a battlefield whereas our liberal democrats define it as a single country. Between them (democrats) handcuffing our troops and handing over their talking points to the enemy, America has an uphill climb to win this war.

213581[/snapback]

Our biggest challenge in the WOT is an incompetent adminstration who doesn't see the global problem. Bush sees Iraq as the centerpiece of the war on terror. That's insane.

213606[/snapback]

That is freaking classic! How long and how many times have you pointed out that the WOT should be limited to Afghanistan.

Your starting point is accepting all of the DNC'a positions and pontificating endlessly against this administrations policies on the WOT and seeing anyone who takes a different strategic view as against stupid. Your post summed that up pretty well. For you, one has to agree with you and the DNC & moveon.org for their opinions to be valid and have merit. Your tirades are nothing more than repeating what you've been told. And then repeating them endlessly

I know many, many liberals who quote scripture, but never seem to really think about it. Anyone can quote scripture, but that in no way means they know scripture, just ask Howard Dean & John Kerry. Anyone can quote scripture, that in no way means they believe scripture. You quote the DNC positions the same way.

But you still have not admitted the obvious. You and the dems say Bush flat out lied. You give a quote and say he lied. I can quote you and say you lied. I can surely quote John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Joe Bidden,,,,,,,,,,,, and say they lied. In fact I can prove they lied. But you cannot prove he lied. for the most part, on the whole in general I think your guys are the ones lying. You are the grand master at changing the subject at every turn in every discussion.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Once again, valid points JJ. The circular path of the liberal argument always winds back up at the same old Bush Lied material. It's really tiresome.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

Once again, valid points JJ. The circular path of the liberal argument always winds back up at the same old Bush Lied material. It's really tiresome.

213657[/snapback]

Ah, you're the master of the circular argument and yet, ironically, don't even know what it means.

This thread was started with a simple, straightforward assertion. This:

Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution. 

George W. Bush, April 2004

is clearly a lie. You guys want to make this thread about everything else.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

There are plenty of discussions I have chosen to stay out of for a number of reasons.  For reasons of my own.  I do not blindly defend GW, but have no qualms about speaking out when you spew the BS.  But I will say you are the master of painting with a simple brush. 

You say "almost all supported, and still do, Afghanistan,".  Who decided that the war on terrorism is limited to Afghanistan?  Where has the President ever said the WOT would be won in Afghanistan?  Remember the Axis of Evil?  You folks have done all you can to defeat our country in this WOT.  For the life of me I can't imagine why.  Because whether or not you know or admit it, they want us all dead.  You, me, our children, our grandchildren. 

"What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that, far from ending there, our war against terror is only beginning.  Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September the 11th were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others.   Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs, set to go off without warning."  President George W. Bush

" Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested.  Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large.  These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are.  (Applause.)  So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk.  And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.  (Applause.)

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives.  First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice.  And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.  (Applause.)" President George W. Bush

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0020129-11.html

Your tirades have grown old Tex.  The tirades of the dems have grown old.  Not so old that I/we will cut and run like your party would like, but just tiresome and really sad.

213569[/snapback]

Well put, JJ.

Al Qaida sees the whole world as a battlefield whereas our liberal democrats define it as a single country. Between them (democrats) handcuffing our troops and handing over their talking points to the enemy, America has an uphill climb to win this war.

213581[/snapback]

Our biggest challenge in the WOT is an incompetent adminstration who doesn't see the global problem. Bush sees Iraq as the centerpiece of the war on terror. That's insane.

213606[/snapback]

That is freaking classic! How long and how many times have you pointed out that the WOT should be limited to Afghanistan.

Your starting point is accepting all of the DNC'a positions and pontificating endlessly against this administrations policies on the WOT and seeing anyone who takes a different strategic view as against stupid. Your post summed that up pretty well. For you, one has to agree with you and the DNC & moveon.org for their opinions to be valid and have merit. Your tirades are nothing more than repeating what you've been told. And then repeating them endlessly

I know many, many liberals who quote scripture, but never seem to really think about it. Anyone can quote scripture, but that in no way means they know scripture, just ask Howard Dean & John Kerry. Anyone can quote scripture, that in no way means they believe scripture. You quote the DNC positions the same way.

But you still have not admitted the obvious. You and the dems say Bush flat out lied. You give a quote and say he lied. I can quote you and say you lied. I can surely quote John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Joe Bidden,,,,,,,,,,,, and say they lied. In fact I can prove they lied. But you cannot prove he lied. for the most part, on the whole in general I think your guys are the ones lying. You are the grand master at changing the subject at every turn in every discussion.

213649[/snapback]

That is freaking classic!  How long and how many times have you pointed out that the WOT should be limited to Afghanistan.

Never. Are you drinking again?

Beyond this particular piece of insanity, the rest of your post is classic "I'm rubber, your glue."

It reads like a drunken rant.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

I find it intriguing that you choose the adjective "incompetent" immediately after your boy Kerry used it to describe the Bush administration yesterday. Coincidence .... I think not. It must be the DNC word of the day.

Link to the Talking Points

213613[/snapback]

I got news for you--- alot of people have used the word "incompetent" in reference to GWB. Pretty much his whole life, aside from planning great parties at the Deke house when he was social chair. If the shoe fits, you know...

I didn't watch Kerry yesterday. I find him pretty dull. My post was about a particular quote from Bush being a lie. Did Kerry talk about that yesterday, too?

[TexasTiger 13,005]

Face it, what really pisses the Dems off is that the White House is saying "yes we did it and shame on you for letting the terrorists know". 

213637[/snapback]

The WH trots out this argument knowing that their moronic base will fall for anything they say, no matter how little sense it makes. The terrorists know the US engages in surveillance. That is not new. The only thing new is that the Bush administration isn't following the law and getting warrant.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

Remember the Axis of Evil? 

213569[/snapback]

Yeah, guess what? Before Bush, Iran and Iraq were enemies, hardly constituting an "axis". But ole Dubya is a uniter, not a divider:

The Iraqi cleric who once led two uprisings against U.S. forces said Sunday that his militia would help to defend Iran if it is attacked, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

Muqtada al-Sadr, speaking on the sidelines of a meeting with the top Iranian nuclear negotiator, said his Mahdi Army was formed to defend Islam.

''If neighboring Islamic countries, including Iran, become the target of attacks, we will support them,'' al-Sadr was quoted as saying. ''The Mahdi Army is beyond the Iraqi army. It was established to defend Islam.''

The comments could be seen as a message that Tehran has allies who could make things difficult for U.S. forces in the region if Iran's nuclear facilities are attacked.

Remember Sadr? Fought against American troops-- Responsible for many dead Americans-- yeah, that guy. Alive and well, and still a force in a "democratic" Iraq-- which is much closer to becoming an ally to Iraq than ever before. Amazing. We've given Osama what he could only dream of.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

The issue is there is a majority of Americans who see your “issue” for what it is   

213542[/snapback]

Yeah, they do. Just not the way you think:

A new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows that 51% of Americans say the administration was wrong to intercept conversations without a warrant. The poll also showed that 58% of Americans support appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the issue. The poll of 1,006 adults was taken Friday through Sunday and has a margin of error of +/—3 percentage points.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...1-23-bush_x.htm

[Tigermike 3,052]

You win Tex, they should do like the dems want and leave immediately. They should not try to intercept any communication between domestic Islamist groups and al-Qa'ida terrorists? In fact it should be a law that we all sit around smoke pot and sing kum ba yah. Better yet why not have a Joan Baez sing along and make Cindy Sheehan Secretary of State. American should pull back and do no business or travel overseas. Our borders should be open to any and all who wish to come and should not be subjected to any investigation what so ever. And when they get here they will be allowed to immediately vote. I mean good Lord taking classes and becoming a citizen would be too much to ask. They will all be required to chant the DNC mantra "BUSH LIED! BUSH LIES! BUSH LIED!" for several hours per day. Oh yeah while you are making all your changes put NAMBLA in charge of Sex Education and require all males over the age of 6 years old to attend queer nation "feelings" classes. Go ahead and pull out of Iraq because there are absolutely no terrorists there and never have been.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

You win Tex, they should do like the dems want and leave immediately.  They should not try to intercept any communication between domestic Islamist groups and al-Qa'ida terrorists?  In fact it should be a law that we all sit around smoke pot and sing kum ba yah.  Better yet why not have a Joan Baez sing along and make Cindy Sheehan Secretary of State.  American should pull back and do no business or travel overseas.  Our borders should be open to any and all who wish to come and should not be subjected to any investigation what so ever.  And when they get here they will be allowed to immediately vote.  I mean good Lord taking classes and becoming a citizen would be too much to ask.  They will all be required to chant the DNC mantra "BUSH LIED! BUSH LIES! BUSH LIED!" for several hours per day.  Oh yeah while you are making all your changes put NAMBLA in charge of Sex Education and require all males over the age of 6 years old to attend queer nation "feelings" classes.  Go ahead and pull out of Iraq because there are absolutely no terrorists there and never have been.

213921[/snapback]

You have the same nonsequitor response regardless of the facts or arguments. You even worked NAMBLA in. That's impressive. Wow, Joan Baez-- that's a blast from the past. Pot, kum ba yah, Cindy Sheehan, queers...you left out Ted Kennedy...oh, yeah, you worked him in already up thread. No travel overseas, Iraq withdrawal, all sorts of things, in fact, anything and everything that this thread is not about to ignore the point of one simple post. I guess that's all you got. Spares you from actually thinking, so I guess it saves you time. You have it very bad, my friend. This single post amazing captures the utter futility of the current state of this "political forum." You never have to write anything else. Just copy and paste this post each time. None of your like-minded buddies will ever notice, but will, nonetheless, say, "Valid points, JJ." Total Right Wing Bushco Brain Freeze.

[Tigermike 3,052]

And you will continue to say that all is wrong and Bush lied. What else is new? You haven't changed or said anything different for the past six years. Like I said earlier, your responses are tiresome.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

Like I said earlier, your responses are tiresome.

213928[/snapback]

How would you know? I see no evidence that you have ever read them.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Tex, until you can march out one honest, non-Al Qaida affiliated American citizen that has verifiable proof that the "big bad evil American government" has listened in on their phonecalls, then this is much ado about nothing as far as I'm concerned. This whole mess is nothing more than the typical liberal "the sky is falling" rabble rousing. The easiest way to ensure your phone calls are not going to be monitored is not to talk to the enemy. Otherwise, your calls SHOULD be monitored. It's that simple.

I would much rather take General Hayden's expert analysis of the surveillance program over the paranoia exhibited by the chickens on the left. The good General's take is here.

Remember this little nugget the next time someone opines that the left isn't concerned with national security.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

Tex, until you can march out one honest, non-Al Qaida affiliated American citizen that has verifiable proof that the "big bad evil American government" has listened in on their phonecalls, then this is much ado about nothing as far as I'm concerned. This whole mess is nothing more than the typical liberal "the sky is falling" rabble rousing. The easiest way to ensure your phone calls are not going to be monitored is not to talk to the enemy. Otherwise, your calls SHOULD be monitored. It's that simple.

I would much rather take General Hayden's expert analysis of the surveillance program over the paranoia exhibited by the chickens on the left. The good General's take is here.

Remember this little nugget the next time someone opines that the left isn't concerned with national security.

213938[/snapback]

The legality and appropriateness of the program is one issue. The issue that you are still choosing to ignore, is that Bush flat-out lied to the American people by saying that a court always issued a warrant before they would listen to calls. He did it more than once. I just posted one particular time. Why do it to put people at ease if he believed what he was doing was legal? Read this quote:

Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.

Respond to the actual quote. What is he saying? Why is he saying it?

"Nothing has changed, by the way."

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Bush lied. That alone should be enough for the NSA and FBI to cease any and all activity centered on finding out what Al Qaida plans to do next. Then, when the rescue workers are sifting through another smoldering heap of rubble, you leftists will be screaming for Bush's head (YET AGAIN) because he didn't do enough to keep the country safe...just like after 9/11.

I don't care what he said back in 2004. If having the NSA listen in on international phone calls involving terrorists keeps us safe, then so be it. I am willing to forgo my right to talk to Osama in order to stay alive.

Read the General's piece. It's only 21 pages, and it includes some information that debunks the liberal hysteria.

[Tigermike 3,052]

It is inarguable that you and all other liberals are the most flawless human beings on the planet. You are smarter, better-educated, wealthier, kinder and morally superior to all of us benighted quasi-Neanderthals called conservatives, who would like nothing better than to drag society back to the Middle Ages and keep all wealth in Republicans hands. I am truly amazed at the self restraint you display on a daily basis. You would never resort to name calling or making arguments personal would you?

After reading your post over the past five or six years, I have come to the conclusion that liberals are so much smarter than everyone else. In fact liberals are all super smart. That's why they do super smart things like appoint Howard Dean as their party's chairman.

As a great American said.

Bush lied. That alone should be enough for the NSA and FBI to cease any and all activity centered on finding out what Al Qaida plans to do next. Then, when the rescue workers are sifting through another smoldering heap of rubble, you leftists will be screaming for Bush's head (YET AGAIN) because he didn't do enough to keep the country safe...just like after 9/11.

I don't care what he said back in 2004. If having the NSA listen in on international phone calls involving terrorists keeps us safe, then so be it. I am willing to forgo my right to talk to Osama in order to stay alive.

Read the General's piece. It's only 21 pages, and it includes some information that debunks the liberal hysteria.

214019[/snapback]