Quote:
Originally Posted by bhkad
There are two reasons why the President has been reluctant to tell us everything about his decision to invade Iraq. One reason might be said to embarrass or hurt him personally, in some way. The other reason might be said to hurt this nation's interests in some way.
|
Quite frankly, the president DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to start a war for non-disclosed reasons.
Your attitude on this issue is ridiculously anti-democratic.
It's arrogant, and egalitarian.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
You and the media have just ASSUMED that the only reason just has to be because he was acting in some ignoble manner and against the interests of the American people.
|
Based on experience.
His reaction to 9/11? Stunned ignorance.
"You're doing a heck of a job brownie".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
Why can't he have been acting wisely and decisively to minimize death and destruction and promote the greater interests of peace and stability?
|
And again I ask, BASED ON WHAT EVIDENCE???
You talk about "assuming", but you ignore the evidence AGAINST your assumption as you complain about others "assuming" a conclusion that you don't like.
That is not consistent with YOUR assumptions.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
You are a tool of those who hate America.
|
And there it is ladies and gentlemen.
The inevitable mindless and meaningless retort that I "hate America".
I criticize George Bush, so I must "hate America".
Quite frankly, anybody that thinks like that shows their capacity to put THEIR POLITICS ABOVE their country's best interests.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
When a prison convict is exonerated with DNA evidence years after his trial what would you say then? I mean, in a poll of the 12 jurors, (a popularity poll in a certain way) the convicted man's 'ratings' were in the toilet.
But all those 12 pollsters were wrong.
You would just throw the innocent man back in prison, I guess.  |
It's not worth it.
(I don't know how many times that has to be said before it sinks in.)
We have spent $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$ dollars, and projected TRILLIONS before we are done.
We have spent American blood.
We are paying at the pumps.
All this for some argument that WAS NEVER RAISED to the American people, and NO SUBSTANTIATION of the claim has ever been offered.
How DARE you compare DNA PROOF of innocence to YOUR scenario that you have NEVER EVER TRIED to offer any evidence for...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
The obviousness of it is lost on you. Paul's popularity is based on the MEDIA'S reluctance to imagine or promote any good reasons for the president 's decision to invade.
|
It's boring how some people think that the media "made" people against the war.
It's also mindless.
But, people like you blame the Jews for everything.
Whoops. Scratch that. The "media" is your punching bag, isn't it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
The President would not do anything that would help himself but hurt America. So, he has had to stay silent and just accept the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, while folks like you mindlessly attack him out of fashion and passion to attack.
|
Quite frankly, this is the defense of somebody who attacks the MOTIVES of the person making the argument because he CANNOT DISCUSS the argument itself.
Quite frankly, there are some things I agree with the president on. We do need retirement reform. I am very pissed at the Democrats for torpedoing that out of political spite.
With that said, NONE of my attacks are "mindless".
They are all based on issues you DO NOT DARE to step into the ring on.