DisneyBaby! said:
Could someone please explain to me a few things. People of a conservative bent are criticised for mindlessly ollowing GOP talking points, but aren't the people of a liberal persuasion guilty of doing the exact same thing?
I was watching Boston Legal last night and they kept repeating the same thing, Bush Lied, Illegal Wiretapping, Erosion of Civil Rights, Torture, Katrina, holding prisoners without trial etc. The problem is that these things now are the talking points and people refer to them in todays political climate and the really do not have much of a clue what they are about.
People say illegal wiretapping and that is very inflamitory, but they do not back it up with any facts. Every one of these areas are so incredibly complicated you can't boil it down to one line. I don't want to get too deep and have huge posts, but could I get a little more than the one line but what you know about these issues. I just want to get past the sound bit mentality that exists. And please do not bring up points that have been discredited, like the sanctions were working when we know that they were corrupt and our most vocal opposition in the world, France Germany and Russia had the most to gain by Saddam Hussien staying in power.
And where is the outrage at JFK for illegally wiretapping MLK, either than or now. Bush and his cronies, how about JFK putting his BROTHER in as Attny. General? Bush and the Millionaires, Wasn't John Kerry worth hundreds of millions of dollars? George Soros is a billionaire if I am not mistaken, talk about being out of touch with the little guy.
Sorry If I have been all over the place. Just tell me exactly what happened in some of these, beyond the talking points
Where to begin! Let's dissect this point by point:
Yes, he did and so did his Vice-President. Answer these 2 questions:
1) Was there "no doubt" that Saddam Hussein had WMD's as this administration claimed? The answer is there was doubt from the DIA, the CIA, the State Department intelligence group and IAEA.
2) Was the only use for those aluminum tubes nuclear weapons as claimed by Bush and crew? The answer is, yes there were other uses.
Point 1, based on only 2 questions, Bush lied.
Bush claims the Constitution AND the resolutions passed by Congress gave him the authority for warrantless wiretaps. There are 2 problems with that scenario.
1) The Constitution is very clear that a warrant is required. The Fourth amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
2) The members of Congress who wrote and passed those resolutions say they did not give the president the power for warrantless searches.
Well what the hell does it mean to you when the president of the United States ignores the Constitution when it comes to warrants and claims he doesn't need them? If that isn't erosion of your civil rights, kindly explain to me and the good folks here what that does mean.
The president of the United States authorized the use of torture via truly tortured legal arguments from Gonzales, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc. How do you define torture? When you force a person to lay naked for 24 hours plus, in a stress position, in their own feces and urine, that is torture. Now that may be recreation to you, but this being a family board, let's not go there.
I know the Bushies believe Bush sits at the right hand of God, but not even Bush can be blamed for Katrina.
However, Bush was fully aware that a major storm was about to hit, the breaching /topping of the levees was a real possibility and Bush did nothing. No, I take that back. He went to a birthday party and played air guitar while the Gulf Coast was reduced to matchsticks and the New Orleans was filling up like a soup bowl. And, yes, Bush was aware of what was happening. If he wasn't, why not?
holding prisoners without trial
What the hell do you call picking someone up, throwing them in a secret prison, not allowing them access to a lawyer, etc.? Or maybe to someone like you, this is just business as usual.
The problem is that these things now are the talking points and people refer to them in todays political climate and the really do not have much of a clue what they are about.
Pot, kettle, black.
And where is the outrage at JFK for illegally wiretapping MLK, either than or now. Bush and his cronies, how about JFK putting his BROTHER in as Attny. General?
How desperate are you people to pump up Bush that you have to go back and pull out of your back passages incidents involving a man who's been dead for 42 years? How stupid is this debate going to get?
Why is there no outrage over JFK.............
BECAUSE HE'S BEEN DEAD FOR 42 YEARS!
Just tell me exactly what happened in some of these, beyond the talking points.
Do you live in a bubble? Have you ever read a newspaper? Does your information go beyond the rightie talking heads and the Freepers?
Obviously, no, or you wouldn't be asking these questions.
On a lighter note, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to shoot another Bushie out of the saddle and to prove once more that Bush's 36% approval rating comes from the delusional, the ill-informed, the very rich, and the "woman, sit down-shut up, I'm controlling your ovaries now" crowd.
Have a nice day and thanks you for making mine.
