| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 1/28/2008 11:14:42 AM |
If memory serves, Clinton was impeached while in office, charges were brought properly by the House of Representatives, not a privately funded character assasination by the RNC
As rsx11s has pointed out, this is not accurate.
Ask any conservative what their issue is with Clinton and it will be that he committed perjury, not that he got a BJ. It's the left that won't let the Lewinsky issue die, not the right....
Numerous threads on these very forums show both these sentences to be wrong.
Nearly every person associated with the Clinton's in either public or private sector business are convicted felons.
Cite?
After 7 years of investigation into the current administration, you have one conviction of a senior staffer
However, in the court of public opinion, they are guilty of many crimes.
I'm not "blasting" anyone, I'm responding to posts adressed to me that actually have substance relative to the topic (and perhaps some early sniping)
An interesting notion, being as you started this thread, which means you has the original post in it. How can the original post be a response to the posts in the same thread? | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 1/28/2008 11:16:08 AM | Msg 73
The title of this thread says it all.
What,exactly,is wrong w/ being a liberal?
Should everyone's political beliefs conform to yours?
Are you stating that conservatives possess the only moral values or rational thoughts on the American political scene?
The bashing of liberals is a tired response from people who have more complaints than solutions.
Conservatives have held sway in country for 18 out the last 26 years.
Is this country any better for that fact?
There hasn't been a "liberal" President since LBJ.
And he was more of a moderate.
Again...can't conservatives make their points w/ blaming others for social and political ills of this country?
Or is that too hard? | |
|
| |
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 1/28/2008 3:14:10 PM | That's right, Carter was the last true liberal president, and he won a Nobel Peace Prize.
Now, he's doing alot for Habitat for Humanity and other humanitarian efforts. | |
|
| |
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 1/29/2008 4:13:55 AM |
If memory serves, Clinton was impeached while in office, charges were brought properly by the House of Representatives, not a privately funded character assasination by the RNC
As rsx11s has pointed out, this is not accurate.
Ask any conservative what their issue is with Clinton and it will be that he committed perjury, not that he got a BJ. It's the left that won't let the Lewinsky issue die, not the right....
Numerous threads on these very forums show both these sentences to be wrong.
Nearly every person associated with the Clinton's in either public or private sector business are convicted felons.
Cite?
After 7 years of investigation into the current administration, you have one conviction of a senior staffer
However, in the court of public opinion, they are guilty of many crimes.
I'm not "blasting" anyone, I'm responding to posts adressed to me that actually have substance relative to the topic (and perhaps some early sniping)
An interesting notion, being as you started this thread, which means you has the original post in it. How can the original post be a response to the posts in the same thread?
 | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 1/29/2008 4:50:07 AM | | The Repubs were strongly behind Bush for the past 8 years so focusing on that record makes sense. And with the Repubs saying things like double Gitmo and stay in Iraq for 100 years it makes sense to point out the failure of those policies. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 2:34:40 AM |
Yes, that's right, the Liberals are launching a multi-million dollar ad campaign to keep the focus during the election on President Bush
You can't move to the future, if your stuck in the past. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 3:36:33 PM | The Democratic [sic] Party isn't stuck in the past. Because they know they can't possibly win by highlighting their own candidate's attributes, they're going negative and attacking the opponent.
Except in this case, the opponent is perceived as a grandfatherly, moderate, nice guy. Since the Bush League is the biggest criminal racket in American history, and since 90% of voters are painfully aware they're worse off than they were eight years ago, the Democrats are running against George Duhbbya and hoping we won't notice.
Not that any of this strategy matters. Having neglected to do anything about election fraud for eight years, the Democratic [sic] Party will lose this presidential election and every one after. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 5:37:16 PM | Oh, come on, McCain is four more years of Bush. Bush had the luck to have 911 fall in his lap to save his butt and go from lame duck a few months into his presidency to a "war president". McCain has the war hero/CIC thing going for him, he's not going to let that go for fear of being a lame duck himself.
Strip away his military and war hero credentials and what you have got? | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 6:04:51 PM |
Strip away his military and war hero credentials and what you have got?
Apparently a man who doesn't know that Czechoslovakia was disbanded 15 years ago. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 6:52:57 PM | It has become quite obvious that none of the politicians has a clue about the day to day lives of normal taxpaying americans. It's a power and big money game for both parties alike. Didn't we have a revolution not so long ago because we were being taxed but not represented?
I say it's time to hang 'em all and start over. | |
|
| |
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 8:47:31 PM |
Strip away his military and war hero credentials and what you have got?
At least 20 years of Congress experience. Proven record of initiating/voting on bills to help Americans. Went against his own party to get the surge through - which has saved many lives - to the extent of almost losing his party's nomination.
The above is stripping away McCain's military and war hero credentials... but, in all honesty, as an American the man has served/laid his own life on the line for... why would ya want to? Go figure. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/15/2008 9:08:07 PM | I'm pretty sure that the liberals want to see him and cheney swinging by the neck from a tree high enough so the rest of the world can see that we aren't the problem.We just have no choice in the matter. If I had george in a room alone I would personally beat him to a pulp. the problem is that he wouldn't be man enough to confront me. He is is a coward of the lowest calibre.
Most Americans would want to rip his useless heart out and stuff it down his throat . I would bet m life on it if he was available to to be had. The american public would rip him to bloody pieces. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/16/2008 9:09:48 AM |
If memory serves, Clinton was impeached while in office, charges were brought properly by the House of Representatives, not a privately funded character assasination by the RNC
Clinton was attacked from day one of his administration by a far right wing think tank, and started by a man named David Hale who was deflecting his interest in the Whitewater issue and placing the blame on the Clinton's and McDougal's.
Interestingly, Kenneth Starr was put in charge of that investigation replacing Robert B. Fiske because the Clinton's wanted to avoid an apparent conflict of interest with Fiske. In the end, Starr, who was investigating Whitewater, took a right turn and went after Clinton for the Lewisky scandal. Clinton was impeached by a Republican house and Senate for lying about getting a blow job....and aquitted by the way.
My question to you is, why didn't the same Republican house and Senate go after Bush when it was found that he duped the the entire United States of America into going to war using false intelligence? Seems that was just a tad more serious than lying about a blow job. | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 7/17/2008 6:28:36 AM |
Clinton was attacked from day one of his administration by a far right wing think tank, and started by a man named David Hale who was deflecting his interest in the Whitewater issue and placing the blame on the Clinton's and McDougal's.
Your facts are a little skewed...
"David Hale is a former Arkansas municipal judge, a former Arkansas banker, a self proclaimed Bill Clinton political supporter, though he never made substantial contributions to any of his campaigns. He alleged the charges that resulted in the Whitewater scandal trials. He worked with Jim McDougal on $3 million in loans from a lending company he ran. He plead guilty and went to jail for conspiring to defraud the Small Business Administration in looting the funds from a dummy business he established. He was sentenced to two years and four months in prison for fraud unrelated to the Whitewater deal. As part of his guilty plea in looting money from an insurance company, he provided the allegations for the Whitewater scandal, and testimony for its investigators. He testified in the trial of Jim and Susan McDougal in 1989 when the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan originally failed, and never mentioned Clinton in a detailed account of the $300,000 loan at that time. It was not until Hale came under Indictment on other charges that he alleged any crime by Clinton. There is substantial evidence that Hale brought these charges for profit, and to reduce his own sentence.
Hale testified in U.S. District Court that Gov. Bill Clinton pressured him to make a fraudulent $300,000 loan and that he not be named in the loan. On June 23, 1994 Eugene Fitzhugh pleaded guilty to trying to bribe David Hale.
He was accused of implicating Clinton to reduce his sentence, an accusation is not proof - let's just have one standard for the burden of proof, not a stringent one for the blue team and just any 'ol mud slung up against the wall for the red team....
Interestingly, Kenneth Starr was put in charge of that investigation replacing Robert B. Fiske because the Clinton's wanted to avoid an apparent conflict of interest with Fiske. In the end, Starr, who was investigating Whitewater, took a right turn and went after Clinton for the Lewinsky scandal. Clinton was impeached by a Republican house and Senate for lying about getting a blow job....and aquitted by the way.
Still a little fuzzy on facts here.... Fiske was replaced because the role of "Special Prosecutor" was redefined by Congress. Fiske was appointed by the Clinton Administration, Starr was appointed by an "independent" judicial panel under the new law, the Independent Counsel Reauthorization Act of 1994. If you question the motives of Starr for his political affiliations, then shouldn't you apply the same benchmarks to the one hand picked by the person(s) being investigated?
As for being acquitted, few people are fined and disbarred when acquitted….
My question to you is, why didn't the same Republican house and Senate go after Bush when it was found that he duped the the entire United States of America into going to war using false intelligence? Seems that was just a tad more serious than lying about a blow job.
Memory of convenience? There was a Senate report released last month ( http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/05/washington/05cnd-intel.html?hp ) indicating that the intelligence may have been exaggerated. It is of course being attacked for failing to include statements made from key Democrats who were "in the know" about all of the pre-war intelligence. If the Democratic Congress wants to use it as a basis for impeachment, they have the power to do so ... so the correct question should be, why does the current Democratic Congress not consider their "evidence" of misrepresented intelligence that lead to war on a sovereign nation not more substantial than the impeachable act of (as you say) lying about a blow job? The answer of course is that there is no credible evidence that any misrepresentation of intelligence occurred, rather a failing in the analysis of the data collected by the CIA and other intelligence agencies.
| |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 10/10/2008 6:14:16 AM |
I find it fascinating in the article, that the group blames Bush for the mortgage crisis. Explain that one to me.
okay~~ how about an ineffective attorney generals office for starters? or do you wish I really bear down ~ and offer you chapter and verse, with all the who, whats, and whens?~ in general ~ figure it out for you?~~ then we might debate it.
How is it that the top man in charge , the chief CEO, get to bail, with his pockets buldging with cash ~ and the labor force gets the mess and indebtness he left?
Bush failed to produce leadership on ALL levels of government!
and don't come back with ~ we didn't have another 911! ~ giving credit for what "didn't" happen. ~~ Jimminy Crickets!!
Home land securities ass! ~ Good Leadership ~ would have started firing people that allowed 911 to happen. ~ immigration ~ you bet! ~ Pentagon ~ you bet cha!~
Some heads needed to roll! ~ wake some people up ~ that government jobs are NOT for life!!
but thats not what Geo did ! ~~~Form a committee! ass ! ~
Sorry Pal ~~ I expect more from a leader of the most powerful nation that ever existed.
Good leaderships ~ surounds themselfs with "bright" dedicated people ~ not "Yes Sir" men or "Butt Boys" ~ "Boot Lickers and "lackys"~ or Special Interest Groups"
No more "Golden Parchutes"!! ~ this has got to stop! ~
If I don't handle my business ~ my business handles me! ~~ this should apply to everyone!
Dance | |
|
| How the Liberals plan to beat Bush in '08
Posted: 10/10/2008 6:24:37 AM | How the DNC plans to win???
so far ~ it seems with the facts! and asking the American people to explain a dismal GOP track~ record.
and the hope that enough of the American people have pulled their head out to get a breath of air and look around!
Dance | |
|
Home
login 
