Bush's Veteran's Day Speech: What did you think of it?

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

15 Nov 2005, 06:45 AM
Cowutopia

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbobb

Really? Do you live on a College Campus? Cause I do... and I don't see the shit you're talking about. :bs:

There are goddamn hippies jumping about my campus all the time flashing peace signs and playing acoustic guitars while shouting incoherent phrases about peace. All the time. They do think it is vietnam.

Or they're just excited that their poseur subculture now has an outlet to re-enact the lives of past generations that they idolize. We all can dream.
15 Nov 2005, 07:01 AM
SpoDaddy

Quote:

Originally Posted by g0zen

It's not hard, just look under the section marked 'NIGER'. I think it's article II of the report. It's a .pdf so I can't link directly to that section.

Still can't find it. Why don't you just quote from it and link to the main site? I have a hard time believing that kind of a smoking gun hasn't been exploited by the anti war crowd, if it exists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbobb

Here's the thing though. We don't just focus on Bush.

You're honestly sitting there saying that the left doesn't focus on attacking Bush? With a straight face? Are you stoned? Kerry got 50 million votes off a campaign based on attacking Bush, The Daily Show couldn't buy a rating point until they started trashing Bush, Bush bashing has become the new liberal pastime. Have you been living in a cave?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cowutopia

There are goddamn hippies jumping about my campus all the time flashing peace signs and playing acoustic guitars while shouting incoherent phrases about peace. All the time. They do think it is vietnam.

Or they're just excited that their poseur subculture now has an outlet to re-enact the lives of past generations that they idolize. We all can dream.

Ditto with every college campus I've visited lately (I'm going back to school in the spring). If someone's found a college where they aren't re-enacting 1969 PLEASE let me know so I can go there.
15 Nov 2005, 10:51 AM
g0zen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senate Intel Report

In an interview with Committee staff, the former ambassador was able to provide more information about the meeting between former Prime Minister Mayaki and the Iraqi delegation. The former ambassador said that Mayaki did meet with the Iraqi delegation but never discussed what was meant by "expanding trade relations."

That was taken from pg. 44, paragraph 2. As I said, it's a .pdf, so I can't link directly to the section but the entire report can be read here.
15 Nov 2005, 11:39 AM
bbobb

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

You're honestly sitting there saying that the left doesn't focus on attacking Bush? With a straight face? Are you stoned? Kerry got 50 million votes off a campaign based on attacking Bush, The Daily Show couldn't buy a rating point until they started trashing Bush, Bush bashing has become the new liberal pastime. Have you been living in a cave?

Nice job selectively editing out the rest of my quote there:

Quote:

At least I myself do not. My problem is with this administration for starting this war... and with the democrats for not questioning the war.

READING COMPREHENSION GET!!!!

Next time read the whole thing I type before you post a knee jerk reply.

Oh and I really wouldn't suggest bringing the Daily Show into it. Last I checked they were doing quite well in the 1999 election before Bush was even elected.
15 Nov 2005, 11:40 AM
Melf

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

You're honestly sitting there saying that the left doesn't focus on attacking Bush? With a straight face? Are you stoned? Kerry got 50 million votes off a campaign based on attacking Bush, The Daily Show couldn't buy a rating point until they started trashing Bush, Bush bashing has become the new liberal pastime. Have you been living in a cave?

The opposition always attacks a sitting president. That's all the right did during Clinton's 8 years, remember? Hell, Newt Gingrich lost his job because all he did was attack.
15 Nov 2005, 11:47 AM
bbobb

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

Nobody ever alledged that Saddam was involved with 9/11 directly, but even Clinton in 98 knew that there was a link between Bin Laden and Saddam in the Sudan.

Nobody ever did? Really? Cause this link seems to prove you wrong:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/...911/index.html

And how about this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Cheney Sept. 14 2003

"If we're successful in Iraq ... we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

Questioning everything is always a good thing to do. I question Bush's handling of the war, I question the Democrats revolving their entire identity around Bush being Hitler, and I question the media that only reports on bombings and not schools being built and lives being saved. There's no evidence at all that suggests Bush knew the intel he was acting on was false, therefore it's silly to suggest he lied. It's fair to say you think he made a bad choice (if you didn't support the choice back when he made it). The debate will never progress as long as people keep insisting on bringing back the old "Bush lied" propaganda.

I've yet to see you question Bush's anything.

And why is it wrong for someone to say at this point that Bush and they themselves made a bad choice with the war if they supported it? What is this Republican obsession with never admitting that maybe you made a mistake and learning from it?
15 Nov 2005, 12:02 PM
maruchan

lol at Spoos Damage control...
15 Nov 2005, 12:21 PM
bbobb

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melf

The opposition always attacks a sitting president. That's all the right did during Clinton's 8 years, remember? Hell, Newt Gingrich lost his job because all he did was attack.

But Clinton got a blow job in the oval office... and all Bush did was start a quagmire war. Obviously the right was in the right when attacking Clinton and the left is now in the wrong.
15 Nov 2005, 12:41 PM
Master of 7s

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbobb

READING COMPREHENSION GET!!!!

Hey! That's my line!
15 Nov 2005, 06:55 PM
SpoDaddy

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbobb

Nice job selectively editing out the rest of my quote there.

I didn't selectively edit your quote, my response had nothing to do with the rest of what you said. I was talking about liberal politicians and the media, not you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melf

The opposition always attacks a sitting president. That's all the right did during Clinton's 8 years, remember? Hell, Newt Gingrich lost his job because all he did was attack.

And a lot of the times the right attacked Clinton, they were wrong to do so.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page