Any one watching the DNC?

[GTISurfer]

Not to start a political war thread here but just curious to see what you thought of the speech's and speakers so far.

[Mr. Nobody]

Jibberish, and hubbub.

[madajb]

Fairly predictable from the clips I've seen.
Haven't watched the whole thing since the nomination is a forgone conclusion.
-ajb

[Gryphun]

Im not (in) to watching girly men

[Valmont]

you were watching something other than MONSTER GARAGE??? shame on you

[Monster8V]

This shit is better than the comedy channel!!

Al Franken getting punked by Sean Hannity, CLASSIC!

[allizard]

I avoid love fest like these like a plague.

[paultakeda]

Clinton is a ridiculously effective speaker.

[madajb]

Clinton is a ridiculously effective speaker.

yeah, it's too bad he's on the wrong side...
=)
-ajb

[paultakeda]

That's just party talk.

[Monster8V]

Clinton is a ridiculously effective speaker.



And an even bigger :liar:

[paultakeda]

And an even bigger :liar:

Now THAT's laughable.

[nanobot6]

I tried to watch Kerry's Sugarmomma's speech. It was just too painful.
If I hear one more person try to validate Kerry as a possible president by saying he was in Vietnam I am going to PUKE.

Clinton is a good speaker I will give him that.

[paultakeda]

If I hear one more person try to validate Kerry as a possible president by saying he was in Vietnam I am going to PUKE.

If I hear one more person try to validate Bush as a re-electable president by saying he succeeded in Iraq, when he currently has not succeeded and has not admitted culpability for our reasons regarding the invasion of said country, I am going to puke.

[nanobot6]

If I hear one more person try to validate Bush as a re-electable president by saying he succeeded in Iraq, when he currently has not succeeded and has not admitted culpability for our reasons regarding the invasion of said country, I am going to puke.

At least he doenst send in our troops, deny them equipment they needed, wait until some of them die then tuck tail and run like Billary Clinton.

(SOMALIA)

[madajb]

If I hear one more person say there is a whit of difference between Kerry and Bush, I'm gonna puke.
-ajb

[creanium]

If I hear one more person say there is a whit of difference between Kerry and Bush, I'm gonna puke.
-ajb
If I hear one more person say they're gonna puke, I'm gonna puke.

[madajb]

If I hear one more person say they're gonna puke, I'm gonna puke.
If one more person pukes, I'm gonna puke.
-ajb

[creanium]

I already puked, and I'm gonna puke again.

[madajb]

I already puked, and I'm gonna puke again.
I told you not to eat the Big Kahuna burgers!
-ajb

[creanium]

I told you not to eat the Big Kahuna burgers!
-ajb
:(

[paultakeda]

At least he doenst send in our troops, deny them equipment they needed, wait until some of them die then tuck tail and run like Billary Clinton.

(SOMALIA)

Would you perhaps like to do a bit more research concerning this or do you just like repeating RNC vitriol?

You do realize that the 87 billion Bush wanted was perfectly acceptable to the Dems, provided it be taken by rescinding the tax cuts he gave the top 1%, or as he lovingly calls them, his base.

It was a simple tit for tat: you want a war? you don't cut taxes, especially not to those that benefit from war regardless.

That's a simplistic reply, but considering your remarks, I really don't see the need to put more effort on text that falls on blind eyes.

[allizard]

Now where is that puke smilie when I need one.

[nanobot6]

Would you perhaps like to do a bit more research concerning this or do you just like repeating RNC vitriol?

You do realize that the 87 billion Bush wanted was perfectly acceptable to the Dems, provided it be taken by rescinding the tax cuts he gave the top 1%, or as he lovingly calls them, his base.

It was a simple tit for tat: you want a war? you don't cut taxes, especially not to those that benefit from war regardless.

That's a simplistic reply, but considering your remarks, I really don't see the need to put more effort on text that falls on blind eyes.

Screw the RNC I feel the DEMOCRAT (SOCLIALIST) TAX plans first hand. I own a business I employ people, I give employees money for the work they do so they can pay taxes and spend money. I pay more taxes then two people make in a year, every quarter. And that doesnt include local California crazy taxes. If you are in the top 1% then write out a check to the IRS if you want higher taxes sooo friggin bad. Dont force me to pay higher taxes then I have to lay off or fire or close branches of my businees which in turn slow the economy and makes it go in the reverse. The top 1% are the people who hire and pay. over tax them and the exodus of work continues out of the country just like Californias beserker Dems have absolutely taxed every big and samll business into oblivion.

And the Idoit dems cant approve the war then not approve the money when our troops are in the field. THE TIT FOR TAT will get more soldiers killed, but thats ok the DEMS will sacrafice men for political gain.

And dont lecture me on research I know who you are Paul you are the freak who thinks he knows everything there is to know about everything there is. This is my last post in this thread I will not argue with the likes of YOU.

[paultakeda]

Vitriol.

In spades.

[paultakeda]

I own a business I employ people, I give employees money for the work they do so they can pay taxes and spend money.

Trickle-down theory, because even if it doesn't really work, it sure sounds good everytime it gets named something else.

Dont force me to pay higher taxes then I have to lay off or fire or close branches of my businees which in turn slow the economy and makes it go in the reverse.

I did not realize paying an additional $5,000 out of the possible minimum hundreds of thousands you net in a year would slow down the economy. I do realize an additional $500 on someone who only makes $50,000 hurts much, much more, but that's not what we're talking about (the top 1%).


And the Idoit dems cant approve the war then not approve the money when our troops are in the field. THE TIT FOR TAT will get more soldiers killed, but thats ok the DEMS will sacrafice men for political gain.


So why won't Republicans let go of an inane tax cut for the same reason? Why didn't they approve the initial request by the military to send an overwhelming force, and instead sent a small army that could not possibly maintain the peace? The situation was made untenable by administrative decisions that did not consider the military's situation. Throwing money at it won't solve the problem either. First you provide a clear plan, then you budget it, then you ask for the money and be willing to make compromises for it.


And dont lecture me on research I know who you are Paul you are the freak who thinks he knows everything there is to know about everything there is. This is my last post in this thread I will not argue with the likes of YOU.

A reputation precedes me. I regret to say I cannot say the same for you.

[madajb]

And dont lecture me on research I know who you are Paul you are the freak who thinks he knows everything there is to know about everything there is. This is my last post in this thread I will not argue with the likes of YOU.
Who's Paul?
-ajb

[madajb]

A reputation precedes me. I regret to say I cannot say the same for you.
Lucky! I want a reputation too!
=)
-ajb

[creanium]

Who's Paul?
-ajb
I was wondering the same thing ...

[creanium]

Lucky! I want a reputation too!
=)
-ajb
Oh, you already have one ... :)

[madajb]

Oh, you already have one ... :)
Yeah...but I want a good one. =)
-ajb

[creanium]

Don't we all? :rolleyes:

[paultakeda]

Apparently, I'm the only one who's blessed.

[creanium]

I wouldn't be so naive "Paul" ;)

[Damon]

I was laughing so hard during the ralph-sessions!

[paultakeda]

I wouldn't be so naive "Paul" ;)

Who's Paul?

:D

[mr_wrong]

And an even bigger :liar:





Oh how I long for the days when the only lies coming out of the Oval Office, were about smoking joints, and banging fat chicks. :rolleyes:

[Monster8V]

Oh how I long for the days when the only lies coming out of the Oval Office, were about smoking joints, and banging fat chicks. :rolleyes:


your still hanging onto the old "HES A LIAR" crap?? Name one proven lie that Bush has told? Please do that. Til then, you'll have 4 more years to come up with an answer. :tup:

Go see Propaganda 911 again and maybe it will refresh your memory. I guess the 911 commision's report was all lies as well? :D :D :D

[madajb]

So..Kerry's the nominee..I gotta tell ya, that took me by surprise...
-ajb

[Monster8V]

So..Kerry's the nominee..I gotta tell ya, that took me by surprise...
-ajb


And you were paying attention and eberytang. :ha:

[paultakeda]

Name one proven lie that Bush has told

You're kidding, right?

[Monster8V]

You're kidding, right?


im kidding about how tall you are.
serious about my question.

Was he telling a lie when he said Saddam needed to be removed from power?
Was he telling a lie when he said if you dont think Saddam should be removed then dont vote for me?
Was he telling a lie when he said there were WMD in Irag and Saddam used them on his own people ?

[madajb]

Can we all play? =)

=
"The Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities." [Source: White House Web site]

"We have not uncovered evidence that Iraq undertook steps to build nuclear weapons or produce fissile material." There has been no evidence of "mobile biological production efforts." Iraq "did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled chemical weapons program after 1991." - The Kay Report, 10/2/03
=
"I got to know Ken Lay when he was the head of the—what they call the Governor's Business Council in Texas. He was a supporter of Ann Richards in my run in 1994." [Source: White House Web site]

"When Governor Bush—now President Bush—decided to run for the governor's spot ...I was very close to [him] and had a lot of respect for him, had watched him over the years, particularly with reference to dealing with his father when his father was in the White House and some of the things he did to work for his father, and so did support him." - Ken Lay, Frontline, 2001
=
"We have [been] increasing Pell grants..." [White House Web site]

The Administration has frozen the maximum Pell Grant available to students at $4,050, despite the President's campaign pledge in 2000 to increase the award to $5,100. The program freeze comes at the same time "state colleges and universities in every region of the country are preparing to impose this fall their steepest tuition and fee increases in a decade." Because of the Administration's budget, "most students won't get any more help than they receive now" – at the same time the White House has proposed a rule change that would cut off 84,000 students from receiving college aid. - Wall Street Journal, 2/3/04; Washington Post, 7/22/03; Cincinnati Enquirer, 10/10/03
=
Hell, we all know I'm not a big fan of the Democrats, but claiming Bush doesn't play fast and loose with the truth is just absurd.


-ajb

[mr_wrong]

your still hanging onto the old "HES A LIAR" crap??

No less then you are hanging to your Clinton hatred

Name one proven lie that Bush has told? Please do that. Til then, you'll have 4 more years to come up with an answer. :tup:

Go see Propaganda 911 again and maybe it will refresh your memory. I guess the 911 commision's report was all lies as well? :D :D :D


So are saying that Bush was 100% truthful? (remember we are discussing lies)

The 9/11 commission found there were NO Iraq/AQ links. Is that a lie? Bush said (and still insists) there was.

Who needs the truth when everything can be blamed on bad intelligence. :rolleyes:

[Monster8V]

The 9/11 commission found there were NO Iraq/AQ links. Is that a lie? Bush said (and still insists) there was.


Read it again, it said there was no AQ link to the 911 attack however, there were ties to Sadams government. He even had some of his military in AQ! Nuthin like partial info....

[Monster8V]

Can we all play? =)


Sure, GOOGLE makes everyone smart.....

[madajb]

Sure, GOOGLE makes everyone smart.....
The source does not make the statement untrue.
-ajb

[paultakeda]

Read it again, it said there was no AQ link to the 911 attack however, there were ties to Sadams government. He even had some of his military in AQ! Nuthin like partial info....

Perhaps you need to rethink that statement. (http://www.google.com/search?&q=no%20credible%20evidence%20that%20Iraq%20and%20a l%20Qaeda%20cooperated%20on%20attacks%20against%20 the%20United%20States)

The whole point of our aggressive position was to find justice for 9/11, not decide which regimes to topple because we're right and they're wrong. We were out to get those that planned and executed this attack. In no way is Iraq responsible for 9/11. How do you justify it? WMDs. Imminent threats. Fissile material that can be used against us. Let's roll. Months later.... oops. No WMDs. No serious attempts for WMDs. Nothing. Well... uh... he was a bad man! It was a totalitarian regime! Evil! Evil!

Yeah. Good one.

[Spunkonsheets]

I have a new hero, and his name is "paul'!

[mr_wrong]

Read it again, it said there was no AQ link to the 911 attack however, there were ties to Sadams government. He even had some of his military in [QUOTE=Monster8V]AQ! Nuthin like partial info....


I'm gonna go ahead and agree with Paul. I'm sure any AQ invlovement in Iraq was probably pretty small (Compared to 9/11 terms). There's probably quite a few other countries who had/have involvement with them. Should we go attack them as well based on this?

AQ! Nuthin like partial info....

Yep. Nothin like partial answers.

Do you think Bush is 100% truthful?

[madajb]

The whole point of our aggressive position was to find justice for 9/11,

No, the point of our aggressive position was to try to convice other tinpot dictators that it was not wise to stand in our way.
A secondary benefit was removing someone that had been a thorn in the side of the world for a number of years.
Now, say what you will about the Bush admin, they are very careful (with the occasional slipup obviously) to say exactly what they mean.
The administration repeatedly says that there are "links" between terrorists and Iraq. Did they ever say "Hey, Hussein funded the flight school lessons" or "Hussein gave money to the 11 hijacker"? No, they said "Imagine _if_".
Big difference.

-ajb

[paultakeda]

No, the point of our aggressive position was to try to convice other tinpot dictators that it was not wise to stand in our way.
A secondary benefit was removing someone that had been a thorn in the side of the world for a number of years.

No, the initial point was 9/11 and al-Qaeda. They did go to Afghanistan, but only after months of deliberation over finding a way to divert justice towards the pettier aim of convincing tin pot dictactors that it was, past tense, not wise to stand in our way. Considering Iraq's war capability in 2001, the past tense is key, as the Iraq we invaded was incapable of being a thorn on anyone's side. That is, unless you count a side being Big Oil and their avarice concerning Iraq's under-utilized oil fields.

The very distinction is not to fine a point on the subject of truth.

[madajb]

Considering Iraq's war capability in 2001, the past tense is key, as the Iraq we invaded was incapable of being a thorn on anyone's side. That is, unless you count a side being Big Oil and their avarice concerning Iraq's under-utilized oil fields.

Throwing out U.N. inspectors, funneling money to terrorist groups, and spending oil-for-food money on anything other than food is being a thorn in the side of the world.
Occasionally, the first world has to show the third world who really runs things. It was to Husseins misfortune that he got picked to be the object lesson.
-ajb

[paultakeda]

The reasons you cite are valid, though I would leave it to government to decide if it is enough to invade a sovereign nation.

But here lies the rub. The dirty little trick is that the White House knew such reasons would be difficult to prove as enough to congress, and as such, decided to invent a new suite of reasons, reasons dealing with imminent danger, to convince an already skittish government still reeling from the events of 9/11 to agree to invasion.

Hence, the true reasons for invading Iraq versus the reasons given to congress and to the public.

It is the difference in these reasons that shows the duplicity of the current administration.

[madajb]

Hence, the true reasons for invading Iraq versus the reasons given to congress and to the public.

It is the difference in these reasons that shows the duplicity of the current administration.
I think that's the true key.
Whether or not you believe that the administration truly believed the (now discredited) intelligence, or whether you believe they simply used it as a red herring.
-ajb

[paultakeda]

An addendum: if you truly believed the now discredited intelligence, you acknowledge it and apologize to the nation. Here Alan can hold bragging rights, as Tony Blair did do the honorable thing in this regard while here we have our own leader continuing to deny accountability.