1. ALL of the bush admin 'evidence' has turned out to be wrong or fabricated. They have inspected every site they cited as proof of a weapons program and turned up NOTHING. NOT A TRACE. NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING HAD EVEN BEEN IN ANY OF THE SITES. The Bush 'intel' was wrong. You can't avoid this simple, cold fact.
2. Anyone that actually looks at the details of Iraq's weapons programs already knew this. There is nothing substantial to find according to anything other than the Bush admin. It is clear that weapons programs were NOT restarted and we know for a FACT that any stockpiles of nerve agent would be degraded and useless at this time right now.
The only evidence the Bush admin has presented has been demonstrated false by their own searches. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
Morality has everything to do with it! Just because most politicians are corrupt and lie left and right is no reason to embrace it! It's not ok just because everybody does it. The thing to do is to aspire to doing the right thing ( even if that isn't always possible ). Look you've read my posts and you know I'm not naive or a goodie two shoes but I really believe we shouldn't start down that road of saying it's ok just because everyone does it.
By the way I thought Fran441's thread had a lot of good content. If even some of that is true it needs to be brought to light.
See I didn't bring up Clinton or the democrats once....oops!
1. ALL of the bush admin 'evidence' has turned out to be wrong or fabricated. They have inspected every site they cited as proof of a weapons program and turned up NOTHING. NOT A TRACE. NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING HAD EVEN BEEN IN ANY OF THE SITES. The Bush 'intel' was wrong. You can't avoid this simple, cold fact.
2. Anyone that actually looks at the details of Iraq's weapons programs already knew this. There is nothing substantial to find according to anything other than the Bush admin. It is clear that weapons programs were NOT restarted and we know for a FACT that any stockpiles of nerve agent would be degraded and useless at this time right now.
The only evidence the Bush admin has presented has been demonstrated false by their own searches. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
THE END
giant, now you've crossed the line into total denial and absurdity. ALL of the evidence Bush cited was wrong? ALL OF IT???? Please. That's just an absurd, ridiculous statement.
Your also wrong about point #2. It is NOT clear that the weapons programs were discontinued. In fact, NOTHING indicates they were discontinued. Nothing. Absolutely nothing!!!
You still don't get it. It wasn't up to the inspectors to find weapons. It was up to to SADDAM HUSSEIN to prove he destroyed the weapons he previously admitted having and using. He didn't do that.
Seriously giant, your reasoning is like a small child:
Child: Mommy, where are the M&M's?
Mom: They're in the cabinet.
Child: But where? I can't see them!
Mom: They are there. It's not time to eat them yet.
Child. There are no M&M'S! Where are the M&M's! I can't see them...WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! I want M&M's! You never bought any!!!!
Mom: They were there yesterday. No one has eaten any since then. They are still there. They're behind the cereal.
Child: You never bought them! I bet there's no such thing as M&M's! You lied to me! I'm calling DCF! Show me the M&M's!!!!!!!!
Mom: [opens the cabinet to show the child, she looks behind the cereal but the M&M's aren't there. As she looks through the cabinet, she realizes that her husband must have taken them and put them in the other cabinet....before she can open the cabinet, DCF shows up and takes the child away...That lying bitch!]
You really have no sense of morals, do you? Do you even have a conscience?
Yeah, because what I am willing to tolerate from an elected official is certainly the tell-tale sign of my personal morality?
Please, tonton, you're not this stupid.
Quote:
Lying is bad.
Lying is bad, yes. George Bush is a liar, yes.
I don't care because I got what I wanted out of his lie and I consider his lie not only a lie oft-repeated by world leaders for a decade, but one that had very positive consequences.
Quote:
Lying resulting in a war is bad bad bad hella damn ass bad.
Quote:
Who raised you, Groverat? I'm serious. I wouldn't want your parents as a role model if they're teaching you traht lying is okay. It is not. It is not okay "because everybody does it". It is not okay because you happen to support the result. It is not okay. At all.
You are serious, indeed, you are seriously ****ing retarded to make any of this personal. If you want a flamewar with me you'd better rethink the decision, I'll burn your melodramatic ass alive.
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME OR ANYONE ELSE TO DO ABOUT BUSH'S LIE? I acknowledge it. What now? What now, you melodramatic freak? What now?
Should I quiver and fall to my knees at the revelation that a president lied!? OH NO! What will become of the ****ing world NOW!?
Clinton lied about blowjobs: I didn't give a shit.
Clinton lied about Iraqi WMD: I didn't give a shit.
Bush lied about WMD: I don't give a shit.
Quote:
Our President MUST be a positive role-model. A liar is NEVER a positive role model. I would hate to end up having a country of people like you. I would completely lose faith in American human nature.
So wait... was Clinton treated unfairly or not?
Liars must not be tolerated! What a crock of shit.
I know Bush lied but I don't particularly care. Just like I didn't care about Clinton lying. Notice a pattern?
It's called being consistent. A concept foreign to you in your political beliefs (notice how I don't make broad judgements about your personal morality?) to be sure.
Quote:
When you have kids, you'll teach them that lying is okay if you get what you want out of it?
Is President George W Bush my child? Did I **** Barbara in the 1950s and spawn the big-eared freak?
What does that have to do with anything, tonton?
Quote:
I really don't understand.
Obviously.
Quote:
Please explain how advocacy of lying is not saying that lying os okay. Explain how that is not a reflection on your personal morals.
Telling a lie to get someone to do the right thing isn't always bad. Lies are not always bad.
Quote:
I'm really not trying to be personal here, but I realize that that's how it appears.
Interesting, you tell me that I'm morally bankrupt and want to follow it with "nothing personal"? **** that, you either have the balls to say what you say or don't say it.
Better yet, think about what you say before you spew it out your talkhole and you might not have that problem. A guy your age should've learned that lesson by now.
Can you even begin to comprehend how insanely stupid it is to intimate that I have no moral fiber because I choose not to freak out about a president lying?
A question you didn't answer but I'd like you to: What the hell should I do?
Quote:
President Bush answers the the citizens of the United States of America. Not to you. Not to me.
We are citizens of the United States. At least I am.
Quote:
When the citizens' will is manipulated through deliberately dishonest means, I take offense. And this kind of offense is considerably more objectionable than white lies about sex.
Oh, they're "white lies" now? The moral clarity suddenly gets foggy. The indignation tones down and gets confused. The generalities and blanket accusations get lost.
The Limbaugh-esque moral outrage stutters.
What a pathetic hypocrite, shut up before you make yourself look even more stupid.
Groverat: Not only the lack of differentiation but also a lack of tact thoroughly out of line for a moderator . . . shame on you young man!!
ooops better watch what I say or Groverats going to toungue lash me and tell me to shut up
Some people find themselves to be very moral and yet somehow find sexual promiscuity is not immoral, immorality, in cases of sexuality can be seen as more a matter of what spirit it is in: are all parties involved open and involved out of a a love of the body? is there coercion? ect. I have no problem with sex. sex is not immoral.
I agree that lying is immoral. and breaking vows is bad, if your vows were 'not to f*ck around' then that is bad. That is also between the married couple to work out, and friends and family . . . who knows maybe they had an 'agreement' . . . if we start to legislate the morality of the bedroom (as if we haven't allready-sodomy laws -sheesh!) then where does the line of demarcation get drawn seperating us from the Taliban? . . . well, that's a bit dramatic . . . but it can point out something:
in one case the lie was not political business and should not be made part of the Public concern via the mechanisms of politics . . . as per the example above
whereas the other fib involves the complete reversal of the role of American politics: from being seen as the benign superpower to possibly being seen as the aggressor: a country that invades and takes . . . and kills . . . for reasons that are not to be trusted.
One is a lie about the foibles of the heart, the other is on such a grand scale that many lives were lost and whole countries changed (including our own) America and the world will never be the same.
I don't know . . . if it is true that Bush lied, and for the sake of this post lets leave that aside for now, I think that there is a very very big difference between the forms of 'lying'
Yeah, because what I am willing to tolerate from an elected official is certainly the tell-tale sign of my personal morality?
Please, tonton, you're not this stupid.
Lying is bad, yes. George Bush is a liar, yes.
I don't care because I got what I wanted out of his lie and I consider his lie not only a lie oft-repeated by world leaders for a decade, but one that had very positive consequences.
You are serious, indeed, you are seriously ****ing retarded to make any of this personal. If you want a flamewar with me you'd better rethink the decision, I'll burn your melodramatic ass alive.
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME OR ANYONE ELSE TO DO ABOUT BUSH'S LIE? I acknowledge it. What now? What now, you melodramatic freak? What now?
Should I quiver and fall to my knees at the revelation that a president lied!? OH NO! What will become of the ****ing world NOW!?
Clinton lied about blowjobs: I didn't give a shit.
Clinton lied about Iraqi WMD: I didn't give a shit.
Bush lied about WMD: I don't give a shit.
So wait... was Clinton treated unfairly or not?
Liars must not be tolerated! What a crock of shit.
What a hypocritical crock of shit that is.
Well I don't think you'll win any awards for persuasion or moderation for this one.
Look this is a forum. A place where people exchange ideas. Sometimes those ideas clash. That's life.
As far as Bush's lies and you don't care. What do we want you to do about it? Nothing. Not one thing. You can go your merry way. You can vote for whom you please.
We will of course vote for whom we please.
There are many of us who aren't ok with it.
I'm so happy that you got what you wanted out of this.
I'm even ok with you being comfortable with Bush ( or any other politician ) lying.
The thing about Clinton......well let me try one more time ( before you start that partisian ploy again ).
I'm really kind of angry with Mr. Clinton. If it wasn't for his little mistake we wouldn't have Bush in office right now and the world ( for better or worse ) would be in a different place. He set off the chain of events that led us here. I still don't think his infidelity was any of our business. The place where he went wrong was when he lied. That's where he stepped over the line. He should have said no comment or told the truth. It would have been a lot of ammo for the republicans but look what happened anyway. That's what happens when you lie. You only make things worse. As far as him lying about WOMD in Iraq in 98 well we'll never know. That was a different time and we have no way of investigating it now. With Bush we can be fairly sure. I think many presidents used Saddam when their ratings were low. If Clinton lied about it I would feel that was wrong. However Bush's situation is of a different magnitude. Much more money spent. Many more lives lost. And an attempt to steer the country the way he wants no matter the method or cost.
That's really the problem here. Bush has demonstrated that he doesn't care what anyone else thinks. He just wants what he wants and is willing to go to any length to get it.
I don't want a president like that. That's not what this country is about.
So no I don't think Clinton was treated unfairly ( after he lied ). And before you start I've always felt this way.
I think it's funny that seems to be all the conservatives talk about when they critisize Clinton.
Bush's lie was of a whole different magnitude. It resulted in much loss and it deceived the american people to acheive that end. Clinton was just covering his ass ( bad enough ) but Bush had an agenda.
Now as I said you can believe what you want. But if you come into one of these threads and even tacitly imply that the president lying is ok for any reason. Or that we should be ok with that. Myself or others will continue to counter that notion.
Every time.
By the way I don't think tonton looks stupid at all.
Groverat: Not only the lack of differentiation but also a lack of tact thoroughly out of line for a moderator . . . shame on you young man!!
Grab a dictionary and look up "emeritus" and check the sig. It's all over now, baby blue.
Quote:
Some people find themselves to be very moral and yet somehow find sexual promiscuity is not immoral, immorality, in cases of sexuality can be seen as more a matter of what spirit it is in: are all parties involved open and involved out of a a love of the body? is there coercion? ect. I have no problem with sex. sex is not immoral.
What if the guy who is lying has been accused repeatedly (over a period of decades) of sexual harrasment and sexual assault? What if the guy is in a position of power and makes promises to an extra-marital sex partner in a lower position than himself?
Clinton was a scumbag, hell he IS a scumbag even today, but that's what modern presidents are. Does it make me morally bankrupt to acknowledge that and not really care all that much, that's your call.
Quote:
in one case the lie was not political business and should not be made part of the Public concern via the mechanisms of politics . . . as per the example above
whereas the other fib involves the complete reversal of the role of American politics: from being seen as the benign superpower to possibly being seen as the aggressor: a country that invades and takes . . . and kills . . . for reasons that are not to be trusted.
Clinton didn't use lies to kill people? Desert Fox anyone? 33,000 American troops attacking Iraq on the exact same WMD lie? Anyone? Bueller? The same WMD lies that made Clinton push for stronger sanctions that killed ~1 million Iraqis during his terms? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
But no, let's act like all Clinton ever did wrong was get a blowjob, that's easier if our goal is good 'ole fashion partisan bitchin'!
You want a lie that will piss me off? The lies to keep sanctions going; from Bush's daddy, Clinton and Dubya pre-9/11. Just like I don't support sanctions in Cuba.
--
tonton:
Quote:
You are telling us here that not only should Bush be excused for his lies, but that he should be praised for them because according to you, the result was a good one.
Define "excused". Excused from what? Please answer that.
Define "praised". When did I once say he should be praised? Answer that.
Quote:
Why would I not deduce that you would represent such an opinion to your children? And in turn spawn another generation of liars.
Well you shouldn't come to that conclusion because your entire premise is bullshit.
Tell me, tonton, when the Lewinsky thing went down, were you so full of moral indignation about lying?
Quote:
Does he think he's God? Apparently you do. Or King. King George the Filth. No. By agreeing to represent the people of the United States of America to the best of his ability, he is agreeing to do so with honesty and integrity.
Yeah, I think he's god. You're obviously thinking about this very intelligently and reasonably.
Do you even read what you write before you post it?
Quote:
A thief of the freedom of dissent.
How did Bush rob anyone of their right to dissent? I guess those million-strong protests while he lied were figments of my imagination?
Quote:
I agree. But we're all learning throughout life, are we not? I need to be a little more patient with people who frustrate me.
I'd say drop the drama queen attitude when someone dares say something bad about your precious Democrats and doesn't shit blood at the mere mention of a dirty Republican.
This Limbaugh moral outrage act is ****ing priceless.
Quote:
But what you are doing is congratulating him for a job well done. That's why I contend (are we getting intimate, now, Groverat?) that you lack morals. Can't you tell the difference?
Am I congratulating him on lying? Am I? Could you show me where?
You can see I'm glad he did what he did (war) and I don't care that he lied to do it. Mainly because it was the exact same lie that kept sanctions on and Saddam in power.
Where was this moral outrage on WMD for the last 12 years, tonton?
Quote:
There is a difference between the lies Clinton told about his penis and the lies Bush told about the personal safety of the citizens of the United States of America and the reasons for attacking a sovereign nation. If you cannot see that difference then I cannot help you.
Desert Fox. What about Desert Fox?
Were you tongue-lashing and moralizing in 1998 when Clinton bombed the shit out of Iraq on the WMD lie?
Be honest now, tonton, lying is bad!
I love it when hypocrites moralize, it's priceless.
Quote:
At least it stutters with honest intentions.
You are quite open with your status as a partisan tool and a hypocrite, I must agree.
"Desert Fox?! Uh... well... obviously uh... YOU HAVE NO MORALS! YOU THINK BUSH IS GOD!"
Since Clinton only lied about the little things, like cheating on his wife, I think we can assume that Iraq did have CBN weapons/program in 1998.
When the inspectors went back this year, they went under the assumption that Iraq had not disarmed. In reality, like a policeman, they had probable cause and they acted on it.
The only other alternative is that the whole UN/(the world) was duped/strongarmed by Halliburton's sinister agents of evil--otherwise the inspectors would never have gone back.
Since Iraq didn't comply with the requirements of the UN we (the US and Britain) kicked their ass. Iraq had plenty of time in the run-up to the war to "get rid of the dope" and, like the Museum of Antiquities, the absence of CBN is being played for maximum effect.
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
I think for many the truth is whatever would be worst for GeeDub.
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
No.
Dubya is both a "lair" and stupid.
However,
SH is not an innocent victim, but a murderous psycopath who was mauled by the west for reasons other then his WMD.
Get it?
You seem to forget that members of the US government have come out and SAID WMD was used for beaurocratic reasons.
He obviously had them in 1998 (even though the guy who said they were destroyed in 1991 is trumpeted as evidence that Iraq had no WMD before this war), because ... well... Bush uses made-up words.
Comments
1. ALL of the bush admin 'evidence' has turned out to be wrong or fabricated. They have inspected every site they cited as proof of a weapons program and turned up NOTHING. NOT A TRACE. NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING HAD EVEN BEEN IN ANY OF THE SITES. The Bush 'intel' was wrong. You can't avoid this simple, cold fact.
2. Anyone that actually looks at the details of Iraq's weapons programs already knew this. There is nothing substantial to find according to anything other than the Bush admin. It is clear that weapons programs were NOT restarted and we know for a FACT that any stockpiles of nerve agent would be degraded and useless at this time right now.
The only evidence the Bush admin has presented has been demonstrated false by their own searches. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
THE END
Originally posted by groverat
jimmac:
Obviously people don't like it.
What the hell does morality have to do with it?
Morality has everything to do with it! Just because most politicians are corrupt and lie left and right is no reason to embrace it! It's not ok just because everybody does it. The thing to do is to aspire to doing the right thing ( even if that isn't always possible ). Look you've read my posts and you know I'm not naive or a goodie two shoes but I really believe we shouldn't start down that road of saying it's ok just because everyone does it.
By the way I thought Fran441's thread had a lot of good content. If even some of that is true it needs to be brought to light.
See I didn't bring up Clinton or the democrats once....oops!
Originally posted by Anders
I don´t like hate sites like that. But it had a few good quotes.
I don't think it's as much a hate site as a making fun of site. I don't think even they take themselves that seriously.
Originally posted by giant
SDW, let me make it simple for you:
1. ALL of the bush admin 'evidence' has turned out to be wrong or fabricated. They have inspected every site they cited as proof of a weapons program and turned up NOTHING. NOT A TRACE. NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING HAD EVEN BEEN IN ANY OF THE SITES. The Bush 'intel' was wrong. You can't avoid this simple, cold fact.
2. Anyone that actually looks at the details of Iraq's weapons programs already knew this. There is nothing substantial to find according to anything other than the Bush admin. It is clear that weapons programs were NOT restarted and we know for a FACT that any stockpiles of nerve agent would be degraded and useless at this time right now.
The only evidence the Bush admin has presented has been demonstrated false by their own searches. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
THE END
giant, now you've crossed the line into total denial and absurdity. ALL of the evidence Bush cited was wrong? ALL OF IT???? Please. That's just an absurd, ridiculous statement.
Your also wrong about point #2. It is NOT clear that the weapons programs were discontinued. In fact, NOTHING indicates they were discontinued. Nothing. Absolutely nothing!!!
You still don't get it. It wasn't up to the inspectors to find weapons. It was up to to SADDAM HUSSEIN to prove he destroyed the weapons he previously admitted having and using. He didn't do that.
Seriously giant, your reasoning is like a small child:
Child: Mommy, where are the M&M's?
Mom: They're in the cabinet.
Child: But where? I can't see them!
Mom: They are there. It's not time to eat them yet.
Child. There are no M&M'S! Where are the M&M's! I can't see them...WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! I want M&M's! You never bought any!!!!
Mom: They were there yesterday. No one has eaten any since then. They are still there. They're behind the cereal.
Child: You never bought them! I bet there's no such thing as M&M's! You lied to me! I'm calling DCF! Show me the M&M's!!!!!!!!
Mom: [opens the cabinet to show the child, she looks behind the cereal but the M&M's aren't there. As she looks through the cabinet, she realizes that her husband must have taken them and put them in the other cabinet....before she can open the cabinet, DCF shows up and takes the child away...That lying bitch!]
You really have no sense of morals, do you? Do you even have a conscience?
Yeah, because what I am willing to tolerate from an elected official is certainly the tell-tale sign of my personal morality?
Please, tonton, you're not this stupid.
Lying is bad.
Lying is bad, yes. George Bush is a liar, yes.
I don't care because I got what I wanted out of his lie and I consider his lie not only a lie oft-repeated by world leaders for a decade, but one that had very positive consequences.
Lying resulting in a war is bad bad bad hella damn ass bad.
Who raised you, Groverat? I'm serious. I wouldn't want your parents as a role model if they're teaching you traht lying is okay. It is not. It is not okay "because everybody does it". It is not okay because you happen to support the result. It is not okay. At all.
You are serious, indeed, you are seriously ****ing retarded to make any of this personal. If you want a flamewar with me you'd better rethink the decision, I'll burn your melodramatic ass alive.
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME OR ANYONE ELSE TO DO ABOUT BUSH'S LIE? I acknowledge it. What now? What now, you melodramatic freak? What now?
Should I quiver and fall to my knees at the revelation that a president lied!? OH NO! What will become of the ****ing world NOW!?
Clinton lied about blowjobs: I didn't give a shit.
Clinton lied about Iraqi WMD: I didn't give a shit.
Bush lied about WMD: I don't give a shit.
Our President MUST be a positive role-model. A liar is NEVER a positive role model. I would hate to end up having a country of people like you. I would completely lose faith in American human nature.
So wait... was Clinton treated unfairly or not?
Liars must not be tolerated! What a crock of shit.
What a hypocritical crock of shit that is.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Child. There are no M&M'S! Where are the M&M's! I can't see them...WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! I want M&M's! You never bought any!!!!
Good one!
Hey gaint, I live in a small town and somebody stole my car---could you find it for me?
You guys crack me up!
Says it all. Where's that brick wall smiley?
Yeah, my words say it all. You're right.
I know Bush lied but I don't particularly care. Just like I didn't care about Clinton lying. Notice a pattern?
It's called being consistent. A concept foreign to you in your political beliefs (notice how I don't make broad judgements about your personal morality?) to be sure.
When you have kids, you'll teach them that lying is okay if you get what you want out of it?
Is President George W Bush my child? Did I **** Barbara in the 1950s and spawn the big-eared freak?
What does that have to do with anything, tonton?
I really don't understand.
Obviously.
Please explain how advocacy of lying is not saying that lying os okay. Explain how that is not a reflection on your personal morals.
Telling a lie to get someone to do the right thing isn't always bad. Lies are not always bad.
I'm really not trying to be personal here, but I realize that that's how it appears.
Interesting, you tell me that I'm morally bankrupt and want to follow it with "nothing personal"? **** that, you either have the balls to say what you say or don't say it.
Better yet, think about what you say before you spew it out your talkhole and you might not have that problem. A guy your age should've learned that lesson by now.
Can you even begin to comprehend how insanely stupid it is to intimate that I have no moral fiber because I choose not to freak out about a president lying?
A question you didn't answer but I'd like you to: What the hell should I do?
President Bush answers the the citizens of the United States of America. Not to you. Not to me.
We are citizens of the United States. At least I am.
When the citizens' will is manipulated through deliberately dishonest means, I take offense. And this kind of offense is considerably more objectionable than white lies about sex.
Oh, they're "white lies" now? The moral clarity suddenly gets foggy. The indignation tones down and gets confused. The generalities and blanket accusations get lost.
The Limbaugh-esque moral outrage stutters.
What a pathetic hypocrite, shut up before you make yourself look even more stupid.
ooops better watch what I say or Groverats going to toungue lash me and tell me to shut up
Some people find themselves to be very moral and yet somehow find sexual promiscuity is not immoral, immorality, in cases of sexuality can be seen as more a matter of what spirit it is in: are all parties involved open and involved out of a a love of the body? is there coercion? ect. I have no problem with sex. sex is not immoral.
I agree that lying is immoral. and breaking vows is bad, if your vows were 'not to f*ck around' then that is bad. That is also between the married couple to work out, and friends and family . . . who knows maybe they had an 'agreement' . . . if we start to legislate the morality of the bedroom (as if we haven't allready-sodomy laws -sheesh!) then where does the line of demarcation get drawn seperating us from the Taliban? . . . well, that's a bit dramatic . . . but it can point out something:
in one case the lie was not political business and should not be made part of the Public concern via the mechanisms of politics . . . as per the example above
whereas the other fib involves the complete reversal of the role of American politics: from being seen as the benign superpower to possibly being seen as the aggressor: a country that invades and takes . . . and kills . . . for reasons that are not to be trusted.
One is a lie about the foibles of the heart, the other is on such a grand scale that many lives were lost and whole countries changed (including our own) America and the world will never be the same.
I don't know . . . if it is true that Bush lied, and for the sake of this post lets leave that aside for now, I think that there is a very very big difference between the forms of 'lying'
Both were bad
In ancient cultures that would have been enough to stone you . . .
thank goodness we're not living in Sparta . . .
Not only the lack of differentiation but also a lack of tact thoroughly out of line for a moderator . . . shame on you young man!!
we'll, you're half right......
Originally posted by groverat
Yeah, because what I am willing to tolerate from an elected official is certainly the tell-tale sign of my personal morality?
Please, tonton, you're not this stupid.
Lying is bad, yes. George Bush is a liar, yes.
I don't care because I got what I wanted out of his lie and I consider his lie not only a lie oft-repeated by world leaders for a decade, but one that had very positive consequences.
You are serious, indeed, you are seriously ****ing retarded to make any of this personal. If you want a flamewar with me you'd better rethink the decision, I'll burn your melodramatic ass alive.
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME OR ANYONE ELSE TO DO ABOUT BUSH'S LIE? I acknowledge it. What now? What now, you melodramatic freak? What now?
Should I quiver and fall to my knees at the revelation that a president lied!? OH NO! What will become of the ****ing world NOW!?
Clinton lied about blowjobs: I didn't give a shit.
Clinton lied about Iraqi WMD: I didn't give a shit.
Bush lied about WMD: I don't give a shit.
So wait... was Clinton treated unfairly or not?
Liars must not be tolerated! What a crock of shit.
What a hypocritical crock of shit that is.
Well I don't think you'll win any awards for persuasion or moderation for this one.
Look this is a forum. A place where people exchange ideas. Sometimes those ideas clash. That's life.
As far as Bush's lies and you don't care. What do we want you to do about it? Nothing. Not one thing. You can go your merry way. You can vote for whom you please.
We will of course vote for whom we please.
There are many of us who aren't ok with it.
I'm so happy that you got what you wanted out of this.
I'm even ok with you being comfortable with Bush ( or any other politician ) lying.
The thing about Clinton......well let me try one more time ( before you start that partisian ploy again ).
I'm really kind of angry with Mr. Clinton. If it wasn't for his little mistake we wouldn't have Bush in office right now and the world ( for better or worse ) would be in a different place. He set off the chain of events that led us here. I still don't think his infidelity was any of our business. The place where he went wrong was when he lied. That's where he stepped over the line. He should have said no comment or told the truth. It would have been a lot of ammo for the republicans but look what happened anyway. That's what happens when you lie. You only make things worse. As far as him lying about WOMD in Iraq in 98 well we'll never know. That was a different time and we have no way of investigating it now. With Bush we can be fairly sure. I think many presidents used Saddam when their ratings were low. If Clinton lied about it I would feel that was wrong. However Bush's situation is of a different magnitude. Much more money spent. Many more lives lost. And an attempt to steer the country the way he wants no matter the method or cost.
That's really the problem here. Bush has demonstrated that he doesn't care what anyone else thinks. He just wants what he wants and is willing to go to any length to get it.
I don't want a president like that. That's not what this country is about.
So no I don't think Clinton was treated unfairly ( after he lied ). And before you start I've always felt this way.
I think it's funny that seems to be all the conservatives talk about when they critisize Clinton.
Bush's lie was of a whole different magnitude. It resulted in much loss and it deceived the american people to acheive that end. Clinton was just covering his ass ( bad enough ) but Bush had an agenda.
Now as I said you can believe what you want. But if you come into one of these threads and even tacitly imply that the president lying is ok for any reason. Or that we should be ok with that. Myself or others will continue to counter that notion.
Every time.
By the way I don't think tonton looks stupid at all.
Groverat: Not only the lack of differentiation but also a lack of tact thoroughly out of line for a moderator . . . shame on you young man!!
Grab a dictionary and look up "emeritus" and check the sig. It's all over now, baby blue.
Some people find themselves to be very moral and yet somehow find sexual promiscuity is not immoral, immorality, in cases of sexuality can be seen as more a matter of what spirit it is in: are all parties involved open and involved out of a a love of the body? is there coercion? ect. I have no problem with sex. sex is not immoral.
What if the guy who is lying has been accused repeatedly (over a period of decades) of sexual harrasment and sexual assault? What if the guy is in a position of power and makes promises to an extra-marital sex partner in a lower position than himself?
Clinton was a scumbag, hell he IS a scumbag even today, but that's what modern presidents are. Does it make me morally bankrupt to acknowledge that and not really care all that much, that's your call.
in one case the lie was not political business and should not be made part of the Public concern via the mechanisms of politics . . . as per the example above
whereas the other fib involves the complete reversal of the role of American politics: from being seen as the benign superpower to possibly being seen as the aggressor: a country that invades and takes . . . and kills . . . for reasons that are not to be trusted.
Clinton didn't use lies to kill people? Desert Fox anyone? 33,000 American troops attacking Iraq on the exact same WMD lie? Anyone? Bueller? The same WMD lies that made Clinton push for stronger sanctions that killed ~1 million Iraqis during his terms? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
But no, let's act like all Clinton ever did wrong was get a blowjob, that's easier if our goal is good 'ole fashion partisan bitchin'!
You want a lie that will piss me off? The lies to keep sanctions going; from Bush's daddy, Clinton and Dubya pre-9/11. Just like I don't support sanctions in Cuba.
--
tonton:
You are telling us here that not only should Bush be excused for his lies, but that he should be praised for them because according to you, the result was a good one.
Define "excused". Excused from what? Please answer that.
Define "praised". When did I once say he should be praised? Answer that.
Why would I not deduce that you would represent such an opinion to your children? And in turn spawn another generation of liars.
Well you shouldn't come to that conclusion because your entire premise is bullshit.
Tell me, tonton, when the Lewinsky thing went down, were you so full of moral indignation about lying?
Does he think he's God? Apparently you do. Or King. King George the Filth. No. By agreeing to represent the people of the United States of America to the best of his ability, he is agreeing to do so with honesty and integrity.
Yeah, I think he's god. You're obviously thinking about this very intelligently and reasonably.
Do you even read what you write before you post it?
A thief of the freedom of dissent.
How did Bush rob anyone of their right to dissent? I guess those million-strong protests while he lied were figments of my imagination?
I agree. But we're all learning throughout life, are we not? I need to be a little more patient with people who frustrate me.
I'd say drop the drama queen attitude when someone dares say something bad about your precious Democrats and doesn't shit blood at the mere mention of a dirty Republican.
This Limbaugh moral outrage act is ****ing priceless.
But what you are doing is congratulating him for a job well done. That's why I contend (are we getting intimate, now, Groverat?) that you lack morals. Can't you tell the difference?
Am I congratulating him on lying? Am I? Could you show me where?
You can see I'm glad he did what he did (war) and I don't care that he lied to do it. Mainly because it was the exact same lie that kept sanctions on and Saddam in power.
Where was this moral outrage on WMD for the last 12 years, tonton?
There is a difference between the lies Clinton told about his penis and the lies Bush told about the personal safety of the citizens of the United States of America and the reasons for attacking a sovereign nation. If you cannot see that difference then I cannot help you.
Desert Fox. What about Desert Fox?
Were you tongue-lashing and moralizing in 1998 when Clinton bombed the shit out of Iraq on the WMD lie?
Be honest now, tonton, lying is bad!
I love it when hypocrites moralize, it's priceless.
At least it stutters with honest intentions.
You are quite open with your status as a partisan tool and a hypocrite, I must agree.
"Desert Fox?! Uh... well... obviously uh... YOU HAVE NO MORALS! YOU THINK BUSH IS GOD!"
When the inspectors went back this year, they went under the assumption that Iraq had not disarmed. In reality, like a policeman, they had probable cause and they acted on it.
The only other alternative is that the whole UN/(the world) was duped/strongarmed by Halliburton's sinister agents of evil--otherwise the inspectors would never have gone back.
Since Iraq didn't comply with the requirements of the UN we (the US and Britain) kicked their ass. Iraq had plenty of time in the run-up to the war to "get rid of the dope" and, like the Museum of Antiquities, the absence of CBN is being played for maximum effect.
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
I think for many the truth is whatever would be worst for GeeDub.
Facts are mere hinderances.
Originally posted by ena
At the end of the day, this entire argument rests on the assumption that GWB is a lair (and profoundly stupid) and that SH was an innocent victim, mauled by the west for nefarious reasons.
No.
Dubya is both a "lair" and stupid.
However,
SH is not an innocent victim, but a murderous psycopath who was mauled by the west for reasons other then his WMD.
Get it?
You seem to forget that members of the US government have come out and SAID WMD was used for beaurocratic reasons.
Bush colored glasses.