Obama Lied... and Good Men Died

[Woodruff]

So then you're pursuing Bush as well? Or is this just a partisan thing?

Bush was only continuing the line started by Clinton.

So it's just a partisan thing, as I suspected. Thanks.

[tzor]

So it's just a partisan thing, as I suspected. Thanks.

I can't help it if you continue to wear those red colored glasses, but there is a difference between convincing yourself on flimsy evidence and knowing that something is one thing and saying the opposite.

There is no solid evidence to suggest that Bush knew for a fact that there were not weapons out there.

There is solid evidence to suggest that everyone in a bipartisan manner bought into the flimsy evidence as being rock hard solid when it was simply not true.

President Clinton used that same flimsy evidence to conduct military strikes in Iran in 1998. He no more "lied" than Bush.

Yes, Bush also had alterior motives for going to war with Iraq, and these were clearly not good, but we are specifically talking about "lies."

And it still doesn't compare to the Spanish American War *you remember the Maine right*

McKinley, although forced reluctantly by congress to go into war was ... wait for it ... a Republican.

[Dukasaur]

...

... For all the attention this is getting from major media, it's like Woodward and Bernstein helping Nixon cover up Watergate.

...

Yeah, America's famous free press.

So free they swallowed the Warren Commission Report hook, line and sinker.

So free they fell over themselves to repeat Bush's lies about WMDs in Iraq, and then fell over themselves a second time, pretending that the first time hadn't happened, once it became obvious that the lies would be exposed.

Why would you think it would be any different this time?

[Woodruff]

So it's just a partisan thing, as I suspected. Thanks.

I can't help it if you continue to wear those red colored glasses

It's not red-colored glasses if I recognize that you pursue one individual for something but not another individual who did the same thing. It's just my recognition that you're a partisan hack.

There is no solid evidence to suggest that Bush knew for a fact that there were not weapons out there.

There is solid evidence to suggest that everyone in a bipartisan manner bought into the flimsy evidence as being rock hard solid when it was simply not true.

President Clinton used that same flimsy evidence to conduct military strikes in Iran in 1998. He no more "lied" than Bush.

Yes, Bush also had alterior motives for going to war with Iraq, and these were clearly not good, but we are specifically talking about "lies."

And it still doesn't compare to the Spanish American War *you remember the Maine right*

McKinley, although forced reluctantly by congress to go into war was ... wait for it ... a Republican.

Yeah, you're not partisan at all!

[tzor]

It's not red-colored glasses if I recognize that you pursue one individual for something but not another individual who did the same thing. It's just my recognition that you're a partisan hack.

It is YOU that insist that they are the same thing. They are not the same thing. You are wrong.

Whether or not I am occasionally partisan is besides the point that they are not the same thing.

You must leave the emotional baggage behind you if you are to fully accept logic.

[Woodruff]

It's not red-colored glasses if I recognize that you pursue one individual for something but not another individual who did the same thing. It's just my recognition that you're a partisan hack.

It is YOU that insist that they are the same thing. They are not the same thing. You are wrong.

Whether or not I am occasionally partisan is besides the point that they are not the same thing.

You must leave the emotional baggage behind you if you are to fully accept logic.

A continued policy is a continued policy. I'd suggest you follow your own advice.

[tzor]

A continued policy is a continued policy. I'd suggest you follow your own advice.

I thought the accusation was purjury. Unless you have some unknown, undiscovered, evidence that Bush clearly knew those weapons were not there when previous administrations, and even democrats at the time were saying that it was there, then there is no case for purjury.

Note there is a case to be made for the Plane outting, but that's a different kettle of fish.