Bush is a hero
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#159727 Feb 28, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>
See, I'm secure enough in my beliefs........
"The teacher will appear when the student is ready."

I don't remember who said that one.
Some fat little Buddhist guy I think.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159728 Feb 28, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
My record is stellar.
And I am most humble, too.
That's a bit of an oxymoron. No one's record is stellar in private or professional life. If you say you do the best you can, I buy that.

Since: Sep 10

United States

#159729 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooh, Catcher's getting miffed so he's pulling out that crumpled up old race card. I don't care what color he is but I'll bet you're pleased as punch he's black! I'd be pleased as punch to see Condi Rice in that office and guess what? She's even got the real credentials on her resume to have EARNED the office. Electing a African American community organizer as POTUS on the affirmative action platform to even out the playing field is what you got......ain't that a pip!
Maybe you should stick to the Christian threads and give out your free spelling, grammatical lessons to those stupid, poorly educated Christians.
It's amusing.
Your religion Catcher is -----> liberalism.
Your messiah is Obama.
Oh the irony.
You'll just have to keep wallowing in your right-wing misery.

You have earned the right.

Oh the schadenfreude.

Since: Sep 10

United States

#159730 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrelevant drivel. You weren't a very good student, were you?
Here was my post, try again.
"Do a little research on the percentage of African American unwed mothers in this country. After that, see if you can't find a connection with crime, prison, substance abuse, high school drop-out rate, genrational poverty and entitlements.
There's a very obvious common denominator, Catcher and handing them my money isn't the answer."
My academic performance was second to none.

Since: Sep 10

United States

#159731 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Get some new material, will you? That one is overused and I'm begging you to not quote me any Paul Simon. You libs all seem to have a thing for Paul Simon.
Lay out some Plato or Socrates for a change......
====
Here are my parting words to wise for today.
"An eagle was soaring through the air when suddenly it heard the whizz of an arrow, and felt itself wounded to death. Slowly it fluttered down to the earth, with its life-blood pouring out of it. Looking down upon the arrow with which it had been pierced, it found that the shaft of the arrow had been feathered with one of its own plumes.“Alas!” it cried, as it died."
Aesop
"WE OFTEN GIVE OUR ENEMIES THE MEANS FOR OUR OWN DESTRUCTION."
{Beware of the kind of society you wish for, Catcher.}
Cute.

I don't share your paranoia though.

We will do better.

Cya.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159732 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
"The teacher will appear when the student is ready."
I don't remember who said that one.
Some fat little Buddhist guy I think.
You just keep telling yourself that, Lyndi.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159733 Feb 28, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>
"Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible." "
http://articles.cnn.com/2004-06-18/politics/c...
"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said this morning the link between al Qaeda terrorists and Iraq is "accurate and not debatable."
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx...
[Rumsfeld later said comments like those were 'misunderstood'.]
President Bush's spokesman said Thursday that al-Qaeda operatives have found refuge in Baghdad, and accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime of helping Osama bin Laden's followers develop chemical weapons.
"Al-Qaeda and Iraq are too close for comfort," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washingto...
"President Bush's national security adviser Wednesday said Saddam Hussein has sheltered al Qaeda terrorists in Baghdad and helped train some in chemical weapons development -- information she said has been gleaned from captives in the ongoing war on terrorism."
http://articles.cnn.com/2002-09-26/us/us.iraq...
I've seen most of these and funny thing is that when the case for going into Iraq were made these things were not used. I do believe that they were looking at what might unfold and stated opinions but they ever ever said that this is why we need to go into Iraq. they also never made a case for going in because of the brutality. the case made was WMD's and those weren't found. Why are these articles proving a case you want to make when all the articles about Benghazi and what Obama didn't do just fluff? You can't have it both ways. I know people died during the war. but I also know they walked into it equipped and supported. the Benghazi people didn't have that advantage.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#159734 Feb 28, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
My academic performance was second to none.
I didn't realize you were home schooled.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159735 Feb 28, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I've seen most of these and funny thing is that when the case for going into Iraq were made these things were not used. I do believe that they were looking at what might unfold and stated opinions but they ever ever said that this is why we need to go into Iraq. they also never made a case for going in because of the brutality. the case made was WMD's and those weren't found. Why are these articles proving a case you want to make when all the articles about Benghazi and what Obama didn't do just fluff? You can't have it both ways. I know people died during the war. but I also know they walked into it equipped and supported. the Benghazi people didn't have that advantage.
With all due respect, I don't think it's fair to say that those statements and others like them were 'not used' in making the case for going into Iraq. Those statements were used to sell the threat of Iraq to the American public, and had a great deal to do with the public support of going to war there while putting the war in the theater from which we'd been attacked on hold.

According to a Harris poll conducted in 2005, "More than four years after the attacks of September 11, 2001, many U.S. adults still believe some of the justifications for the invasion of Iraq, which have now been discredited, according to a new Harris Poll. For example:

-- Forty-one percent (41%) of U.S. adults believe that Saddam Hussein had "strong links to Al Qaeda."
-- Twenty-two percent (22%) of adults believe that Saddam Hussein "helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11."
-- Twenty-six percent (26%) of adults believe that Iraq "had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded."
-- Twenty-four percent (24%) of all adults believe that "several of the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11 were Iraqis."

And you're right - when the campaign to sell the idea of war in Iraq was first waged, the brutality of the Saddam regime was a back story. It didn't become the important story until WMD and the above had been disproved.

I think to claim the troops were adequately supported is complete and utter hogwash. If the troops were adequately supported there would have been enough of them to secure the country, vastly reducing the likelihood that the surge would ultimately be necessary. If the troops were adequately supported the Occupation Authority would have run by competent professionals.

(It's worth noting that some of the problems the U.S. ran into in Iraq were military policy/planning, and had little or nothing to do with who was President at the time. Whether those problems would have been addressed in sufficient time to avoid the conditions is anybody's guess, but I'd like to think Americans are adaptable enough.)

Lastly, I don't believe I've ever comment on articles about Benghazi that may have been posted here. As a matter of fact, I don't think I've commented on Benghazi at all.

So ... if you want to know what I think about Benghazi, there are two issues. The first was the White House "message" during the election campaign, and that was not only wrong but about as amateurishly handled as anything I've seen since, well, see above.

The second involves the systemic problems within State that resulted in this tragedy, and I saw no comments in this thread I considered worth bothering with because it was all about the blame game with little or no connection to the real issues involved.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159736 Feb 28, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>With all due respect, I don't think it's fair to say that those statements and others like them were 'not used' in making the case for going into Iraq. Those statements were used to sell the threat of Iraq to the American public, and had a great deal to do with the public support of going to war there while putting the war in the theater from which we'd been attacked on hold.
According to a Harris poll conducted in 2005, "More than four years after the attacks of September 11, 2001, many U.S. adults still believe some of the justifications for the invasion of Iraq, which have now been discredited, according to a new Harris Poll. For example:
-- Forty-one percent (41%) of U.S. adults believe that Saddam Hussein had "strong links to Al Qaeda."
-- Twenty-two percent (22%) of adults believe that Saddam Hussein "helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11."
-- Twenty-six percent (26%) of adults believe that Iraq "had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded."
-- Twenty-four percent (24%) of all adults believe that "several of the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11 were Iraqis."
And you're right - when the campaign to sell the idea of war in Iraq was first waged, the brutality of the Saddam regime was a back story. It didn't become the important story until WMD and the above had been disproved.
I think to claim the troops were adequately supported is complete and utter hogwash. If the troops were adequately supported there would have been enough of them to secure the country, vastly reducing the likelihood that the surge would ultimately be necessary. If the troops were adequately supported the Occupation Authority would have run by competent professionals.
(It's worth noting that some of the problems the U.S. ran into in Iraq were military policy/planning, and had little or nothing to do with who was President at the time. Whether those problems would have been addressed in sufficient time to avoid the conditions is anybody's guess, but I'd like to think Americans are adaptable enough.)
Lastly, I don't believe I've ever comment on articles about Benghazi that may have been posted here. As a matter of fact, I don't think I've commented on Benghazi at all.
So ... if you want to know what I think about Benghazi, there are two issues. The first was the White House "message" during the election campaign, and that was not only wrong but about as amateurishly handled as anything I've seen since, well, see above.
The second involves the systemic problems within State that resulted in this tragedy, and I saw no comments in this thread I considered worth bothering with because it was all about the blame game with little or no connection to the real issues involved.
Don't you think the systemic issues belong to whoever is in power and that that person should assume responsibility? That's all I want is ownership. What's done is done, but the cover up, I've not seen anything like since Nixon.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159737 Feb 28, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
My academic performance was second to none.
It seems to me that you have an unnatural desire for greatness. Don't you think you can be great just being an average Joe? Do you always have to go for the "no one is better than me." Ah that's why you can't, won't believe in a higher power. Okay.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159738 Feb 28, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The short answer, which is all you get for now, is that the playing field is not yet level.
That's right, massah.
I'll say. No white man, or woman, with obama's questionable background, his shady associations, his lack of experience and limited abilities would have ever stood a chance of becoming pResident, especially not for a second term.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159739 Feb 28, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>It seems to me that you have an unnatural desire for greatness. Don't you think you can be great just being an average Joe? Do you always have to go for the "no one is better than me." Ah that's why you can't, won't believe in a higher power. Okay.
I'm sorry, I take that back. I have no right to say that.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#159740 Feb 28, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing new on Emanuel. He is on the left so what else can you say? I would love to see the same so called media if a rep. acted like this. You wouldn't have to search for the story and it would be on every station, every paper. On Woodward that is something. Look how quick they turned on him. Like I said what, 5 years ago this guy is Nixon but worse.
I wonder why the Pres. is keeping this top official around? It speaks alot about HIM and his administration.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#159741 Feb 28, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I've seen most of these and funny thing is that when the case for going into Iraq were made these things were not used. I do believe that they were looking at what might unfold and stated opinions but they ever ever said that this is why we need to go into Iraq.
But, they did. As I mentioned previously, the White House letter to the House in March '03 did in fact obliquely state the case for terrorists connected to 9/11 finding refuge in Iraq, and that this was THE major stated reason for war.

Excerpt of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate

"...acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/ne...

And then:
"In his (2003) State of the Union address, President Bush offered at least four justifications, none of them overlapping: the cruelty of Saddam against his own people; his flouting of treaties and United Nations Security Council resolutions; the military threat that he poses to his neighbors; and his ties to terrorists in general and to Al Qaeda in particular."

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/02/17/0...
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>they also never made a case for going in because of the brutality.
Wrong again. See 2003 State Of The Union address cited above.
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>the case made was WMD's and those weren't found. Why are these articles proving a case you want to make when all the articles about Benghazi and what Obama didn't do just fluff? You can't have it both ways. I know people died during the war. but I also know they walked into it equipped and supported. the Benghazi people didn't have that advantage.
It has been amply demonstrated that Bush & Co dd in fact say the things as previously asserted. You said if such could be shown, you would "clamor" for an investigation. It has been shown. You may now honor your words and join the many who are also still, futilely, clamoring for the same.

These articles and those provided previously are NOT an attempt to rehash the Iraq debacle. They have been necessary due entirely to your intransigent insistence on promulgating information not consistent with the public record.

In the bigger picture, my question all along has been,

Why is there a clamor for an investigation into an erroneous post-action "intelligence" report that jeopardized no lives, but nothing but rationalization and blatant misinformation coverage for the continued and systemic false "intelligence" promoting an historically unprecedented preemptive war ten years previoulsy which has resulted in 30000+ casualties and cost well over a trillion dollars?

The question goes to consistency. The lack thereof bespeaks a certain.....sour? taste in certain political mouths.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159742 Feb 28, 2013
Now I know some people like to use the judgicons and that's okay, but I don't understand why the negative ones on Willie's post. At least he is willing to look at the Benghazi issue as really amateurish. I appreciate at least that concession myself in a world that praises Hillary's testimony.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159743 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Well maybe people like Ms. Lee should stop referring to herself as a "freed slave" in order to keep those entitlements coming and istead encourage her voter base to take a new course.
Do a little research on the percentage of African American unwed mothers in this country. After that, see if you can't find a connection with crime, prison, substance abuse, high school drop-out rate, genrational poverty and entitlements.
There's a very obvious common denominator, Catcher and handing them my money isn't the answer.
Actually, your money seems to be the answer for many in Santa's base. If nothing else, we should have learned that obama's takers have no interest in becoming independent.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159744 Feb 28, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I still haven't seen a single thing to suggest that the 'low information voter' constituency supported one candidate over another.
The proof should be as clear as the nose on your face... barry won.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159745 Feb 28, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh those darkies, interfering with Lyndi's peace of mind once again.
Do you view everything through "coloured" glasses?

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159746 Feb 28, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrelevant drivel. You weren't a very good student, were you?
Here was my post, try again.
"Do a little research on the percentage of African American unwed mothers in this country. After that, see if you can't find a connection with crime, prison, substance abuse, high school drop-out rate, genrational poverty and entitlements.
There's a very obvious common denominator, Catcher and handing them my money isn't the answer."
When you can't intelligently answer a question, attack the messenger. Catcher couldn't honestly answer your question, so...

But I suspect that you knew that Catcher was never going to give you an answer.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 17 min North Mountain 55,939
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min old school 650,018
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 46 min old school 44,929
How to find good supplier from china 1 hr choise 1
topix drops human sexuality forum.......this be... 1 hr Marylin 35
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Democrats for Trump 106,065
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 3 hr Brian_G 445,893
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr brandy trujillo 971,739
my cousin touches me when i am asleep and i kin... (Mar '14) Mon Jesus 47
More from around the web