Sammi Jo you do yourself no favours when you post links to David Irving's web-site.
"I don't see any reason to be tasteful about Auschwitz. It's baloney, it's a legend. Once we admit the fact that it was a brutal slave labour camp and large numbers of people did die, as large numbers of innocent people died elsewhere in the war, why believe the rest of the baloney?" Irving said.
He added, "I say quite tastelessly, in fact, that more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz."
He went on, "Oh, you think that's tasteless, how about this? There are so many Auschwitz survivors going around, in fact the number increases as the years go past, which is biologically very odd to say the least. Because I'm going to form an Association of Auschwitz survivors, survivors of the Holocaust and other liars, or the ASSHOLS."-David Irving-quoted at www.nizkor.org.
Maybe it's just me but his record of Hitler worship and Holocaust denial sort of puts him in the dangerous bullshit file for the remainder of his existence.
In your world, it seems that all possibilities add up to "Bush misled" or "Bush lied", it really boils down to that in every thread.
In your world it seems that no-one uses politics to achieve gain except for republicans.
I and I would venture to say that America is getting sick of the type of vitriol that you and like minded partisans are spreading. I think that the more it is spread the more people will see it for what it is.
So please, make sure that you elude to that in every post, put it in your signature, spread that message. Cast aspersions if you really think that it furthers the debate. I don't and I frankly am getting tired of it.
Hey that's just me though, you should probably continue it seems to work for you.
Never-mind, good job.
Look I didn't hear anybody saying that when the conservatives kept harping on the " Monica And The Cigar Adventures In The Oval Office ". It's the other side of the coin now so deal with it.
Look I didn't hear anybody saying that when the conservatives kept harping on the " Monica And The Cigar Adventures In The Oval Office ". It's the other side of the coin now so deal with it.
We are not talking about a cigar controversy, nor would we with this president. I thought we would not supposed to bring up Slick Willie.
Clinton disgraced himself and his office, not to mention Monica, Hillary, his daughter, and who am I forgetting?
But the difference is that statement "I did not have sex with that woman..." and his testimony under oath, that made him a verifiable and not to mention impeached, "liar". That was a bipartisan vote right?
He also lost his ability to practice law, didn't he?
Let's not even get into the myriad of shady deals and characters that surrounded him and his wife, like flies surround cow patties. You can say "you can't prove any of that" like I have heard a million times, but that also does not stop those same people from accusing this president of things that cannot be proven.
But you have just proven my point IMO. This is all about revenge for Clinton impeachment and the Gore loss. I may be wrong but that is what I see.
We are not talking about a cigar controversy, nor would we with this president. I thought we would not supposed to bring up Slick Willie.
Clinton disgraced himself and his office, not to mention Monica, Hillary, his daughter, and who am I forgetting?
But the difference is that statement "I did not have sex with that woman..." and his testimony under oath, that made him a verifiable and not to mention impeached, "liar". That was a bipartisan vote right?
He also lost his ability to practice law, didn't he?
Let's not even get into the myriad of shady deals and characters that surrounded him and his wife, like flies surround cow patties. You can say "you can't prove any of that" like I have heard a million times, but that also does not stop those same people from accusing this president of things that cannot be proven.
But you have just proven my point IMO. This is all about revenge for Clinton impeachment and the Gore loss. I may be wrong but that is what I see.
Ha! Geez!
The thing with Clinton was mainly his own business and not ours. The only time he went over the line is when he lied to the american people about it. He should have never covered it up. But guess what? It's really none of our business and it didn't result in the death of anyone or cost the tax payers billions.
Unlike what's suspected of Bush.
Oh and I think the proof's out there. Will we find it?
Hell, I don't know. But it doesn't take proof to cast enough doubt about Mr. Bush to throw the election.
The thing with Clinton was mainly his own business and not ours. The only time he went over the line is when he lied to the american people about it. He should have never covered it up. But guess what? It's really none of our business and it didn't result in the death of anyone or cost the tax payers billions.
Unlike what's suspected of Bush.
Oh and I think the proof's out there. Will we find it?
Hell, I don't know. But it doesn't take proof to cast enough doubt about Mr. Bush to throw the election.
This isn't revenge it's the same thing.
The tables are turned now so get over it.
You may be surprised that we actually agree on something:
His sex life is no-one's business. I for one did not care to know about the whole cigar thing. Having said that, he opened it up to public scrutiny by doinking an intern in the oval office! That was just a retarded thing to do.
You may be right about the actions of clinton not effecting any deaths, however it did significant damage to the office of the president and people's respect for the office, some may say that you cannot put a value on that, myself included.
I don't think it is honest to defend bad behavior with previous bad behavior. I know that is an easy way to defend an argument, but I think we should all ID it for what it is.
You may be surprised that we actually agree on something:
His sex life is no-one's business. I for one did not care to know about the whole cigar thing. Having said that, he opened it up to public scrutiny by doinking an intern in the oval office! That was just a retarded thing to do.
You may be right about the actions of clinton not effecting any deaths, however it did significant damage to the office of the president and people's respect for the office, some may say that you cannot put a value on that, myself included.
I don't think it is honest to defend bad behavior with previous bad behavior. I know that is an easy way to defend an argument, but I think we should all ID it for what it is.
This might surprise you, NaplesX, but I believe we are in agreement on this also.
I think that the government and the nation in general wasted too much time and money and energy and "emotional angst" on the whole Starr/Monica/Cigar thing. I won't comment on how it reflects on the sanctity-of-office defenses offered up by some Bush-lovers, although it's tempting. I'm just glad to hear your position on this matter, and how much we agree. It reflects well on your overall approach to politics.
I also agree that he should have suffered consequences such as being censured as President and being disbarred, but I don't think that impeachment was warranted.
Any comments on how Monicagate influenced Clinton's actions against AQ... a possible changing of counterterrorism plans to avoid more Wag The Dog attacks?
Comments
A very candid interview and she came across as an extremely likable person.
It was a great interview, I found myself grinning as it ended.
Very refreshing.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Karen Hughes was just on the Factor and man talk about a credible and unbelievably positive person.
A very candid interview and she came across as an extremely likable person.
It was a great interview, I found myself grinning as it ended.
Very refreshing.
Sorry, Karen Hughs has no credibility. She's appearing on The Daily Show on Wednesday.
Originally posted by HOM
Sorry, Karen Hughs has no credibility. She's appearing on The Daily Show on Wednesday.
This is called putting words in someone's mouth. I did not say what you are espousing about what I said.
Besides that Bill is a tough interviewer and I don't see Clarke putting himself up to that. Karen Hughes is more of a man than he is in that respect.
Originally posted by NaplesX
This is called putting words in someone's mouth. I did not say what you are espousing about what I said.
Besides that Bill is a tough interviewer and I don't see Clarke putting himself up to that. Karen Hughes is more of a man than he is in that respect.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Besides that Bill is a tough interviewer and I don't see Clarke putting himself up to that. Karen Hughes is more of a man than he is in that respect.
Shit, you can't be serious.
Originally posted by giant
Shit, you can't be serious.
I am.
But I am not sure what part of that comment you disagree with. Please be specific.
"I don't see any reason to be tasteful about Auschwitz. It's baloney, it's a legend. Once we admit the fact that it was a brutal slave labour camp and large numbers of people did die, as large numbers of innocent people died elsewhere in the war, why believe the rest of the baloney?" Irving said.
He added, "I say quite tastelessly, in fact, that more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz."
He went on, "Oh, you think that's tasteless, how about this? There are so many Auschwitz survivors going around, in fact the number increases as the years go past, which is biologically very odd to say the least. Because I'm going to form an Association of Auschwitz survivors, survivors of the Holocaust and other liars, or the ASSHOLS."-David Irving-quoted at www.nizkor.org.
Maybe it's just me but his record of Hitler worship and Holocaust denial sort of puts him in the dangerous bullshit file for the remainder of his existence.
My tuppence.
Originally posted by giant
Shit, you can't be serious.
The funny and sad part is that he.....probably is.
maybe they watch
no doubt Karen Hughes will have watched Clarke last night
betcha a cookie she comes with the same talking points
Originally posted by curiousuburb
Jon Stewart scored with this jab at Condi
maybe they watch
no doubt Karen Hughes will have watched Clarke last night
betcha a cookie she comes with the same talking points
Let's be honest:
You do not see the blatant bias on Stewart's part?
That's exactly what I was talking about.
Originally posted by NaplesX
In your world, it seems that all possibilities add up to "Bush misled" or "Bush lied", it really boils down to that in every thread.
In your world it seems that no-one uses politics to achieve gain except for republicans.
I and I would venture to say that America is getting sick of the type of vitriol that you and like minded partisans are spreading. I think that the more it is spread the more people will see it for what it is.
So please, make sure that you elude to that in every post, put it in your signature, spread that message. Cast aspersions if you really think that it furthers the debate. I don't and I frankly am getting tired of it.
Hey that's just me though, you should probably continue it seems to work for you.
Never-mind, good job.
Look I didn't hear anybody saying that when the conservatives kept harping on the " Monica And The Cigar Adventures In The Oval Office ". It's the other side of the coin now so deal with it.
Originally posted by jimmac
Look I didn't hear anybody saying that when the conservatives kept harping on the " Monica And The Cigar Adventures In The Oval Office ". It's the other side of the coin now so deal with it.
We are not talking about a cigar controversy, nor would we with this president. I thought we would not supposed to bring up Slick Willie.
Clinton disgraced himself and his office, not to mention Monica, Hillary, his daughter, and who am I forgetting?
But the difference is that statement "I did not have sex with that woman..." and his testimony under oath, that made him a verifiable and not to mention impeached, "liar". That was a bipartisan vote right?
He also lost his ability to practice law, didn't he?
Let's not even get into the myriad of shady deals and characters that surrounded him and his wife, like flies surround cow patties. You can say "you can't prove any of that" like I have heard a million times, but that also does not stop those same people from accusing this president of things that cannot be proven.
But you have just proven my point IMO. This is all about revenge for Clinton impeachment and the Gore loss. I may be wrong but that is what I see.
Originally posted by NaplesX
This is all about revenge for Clinton impeachment and the Gore loss. I may be wrong but that is what I see.
And I see a person that shops at the same Army Surplus store as Bush:
Originally posted by NaplesX
We are not talking about a cigar controversy, nor would we with this president. I thought we would not supposed to bring up Slick Willie.
Clinton disgraced himself and his office, not to mention Monica, Hillary, his daughter, and who am I forgetting?
But the difference is that statement "I did not have sex with that woman..." and his testimony under oath, that made him a verifiable and not to mention impeached, "liar". That was a bipartisan vote right?
He also lost his ability to practice law, didn't he?
Let's not even get into the myriad of shady deals and characters that surrounded him and his wife, like flies surround cow patties. You can say "you can't prove any of that" like I have heard a million times, but that also does not stop those same people from accusing this president of things that cannot be proven.
But you have just proven my point IMO. This is all about revenge for Clinton impeachment and the Gore loss. I may be wrong but that is what I see.
Ha! Geez!
The thing with Clinton was mainly his own business and not ours. The only time he went over the line is when he lied to the american people about it. He should have never covered it up. But guess what? It's really none of our business and it didn't result in the death of anyone or cost the tax payers billions.
Unlike what's suspected of Bush.
Oh and I think the proof's out there. Will we find it?
Hell, I don't know. But it doesn't take proof to cast enough doubt about Mr. Bush to throw the election.
This isn't revenge it's the same thing.
The tables are turned now so get over it.
Originally posted by jimmac
Ha! Geez!
The thing with Clinton was mainly his own business and not ours. The only time he went over the line is when he lied to the american people about it. He should have never covered it up. But guess what? It's really none of our business and it didn't result in the death of anyone or cost the tax payers billions.
Unlike what's suspected of Bush.
Oh and I think the proof's out there. Will we find it?
Hell, I don't know. But it doesn't take proof to cast enough doubt about Mr. Bush to throw the election.
This isn't revenge it's the same thing.
The tables are turned now so get over it.
You may be surprised that we actually agree on something:
His sex life is no-one's business. I for one did not care to know about the whole cigar thing. Having said that, he opened it up to public scrutiny by doinking an intern in the oval office! That was just a retarded thing to do.
You may be right about the actions of clinton not effecting any deaths, however it did significant damage to the office of the president and people's respect for the office, some may say that you cannot put a value on that, myself included.
I don't think it is honest to defend bad behavior with previous bad behavior. I know that is an easy way to defend an argument, but I think we should all ID it for what it is.
Originally posted by NaplesX
You may be surprised that we actually agree on something:
His sex life is no-one's business. I for one did not care to know about the whole cigar thing. Having said that, he opened it up to public scrutiny by doinking an intern in the oval office! That was just a retarded thing to do.
You may be right about the actions of clinton not effecting any deaths, however it did significant damage to the office of the president and people's respect for the office, some may say that you cannot put a value on that, myself included.
I don't think it is honest to defend bad behavior with previous bad behavior. I know that is an easy way to defend an argument, but I think we should all ID it for what it is.
This might surprise you, NaplesX, but I believe we are in agreement on this also.
I think that the government and the nation in general wasted too much time and money and energy and "emotional angst" on the whole Starr/Monica/Cigar thing. I won't comment on how it reflects on the sanctity-of-office defenses offered up by some Bush-lovers, although it's tempting. I'm just glad to hear your position on this matter, and how much we agree. It reflects well on your overall approach to politics.
I also agree that he should have suffered consequences such as being censured as President and being disbarred, but I don't think that impeachment was warranted.
Any comments on how Monicagate influenced Clinton's actions against AQ... a possible changing of counterterrorism plans to avoid more Wag The Dog attacks?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Let's not even get into the myriad of shady deals and characters that surrounded him and his wife,
Yeah, you already went over the whole clinton death squad bit.