Sen. Boxer/Condy Rice

Status
Not open for further replies.
The above quote from SEPTbride2002 is not an aritcle; it is a quote from an editorial, which is the OPINION of one writer. There are very few facts listed at all, most is just an opinion, negating what he precieves as the Republican party line.

Please people, just because all these "pundits" can get something put on a decidedly partisan website, does not make them any more legitimate facts than the rantings of the guy at the bus station. It just proves they have better internet access.

Any political message or point you are trying to get across will be better served by listing FACTS that back it up, not just more opinion pieces and other blanket statements.
 
kmiles said:
The Good Senator Boxer is a hero indeed!

Dr. Rice lied to the U.S. public, can't keep her story straight, and continues to pander to her good friend the shrub instead of stand in representation of the American public.

Indeed! Perhaps Boxer should have climbed over her bench and smacked some intelligence into Dr. Rice. :rolleyes:

LIAR!
 
gallaj0 said:
The above quote from SEPTbride2002 is not an aritcle; it is a quote from an editorial, which is the OPINION of one writer. There are very few facts listed at all, most is just an opinion, negating what he precieves as the Republican party line.

Please people, just because all these "pundits" can get something put on a decidedly partisan website, does not make them any more legitimate facts than the rantings of the guy at the bus station. It just proves they have better internet access.

Any political message or point you are trying to get across will be better served by listing FACTS that back it up, not just more opinion pieces and other blanket statements.

Just to clarify - I never stated that what I posted was an article. So please please stop acting like people are not smart enough to realize that it is an editorial. Thanks.

~Amanda
 
Sorry, I called it an article. I've always referred to editorials as articles in the same way news stories are articles. Either way, I was perfectly clear on it. Sorry if I confused anyone.
 

Sorry about that; it's just the "thing" that gets me all riled up; opinion posing as facts.

A lot of things get thrown into these kind of debates with the intention they get taken as facts, and it really ruins a good argument for me; then I can't take any of the points seriously. And I love a good debate.

Apology offered.

Bad poster. (smacks self on hand)
 
The Republicans never hesitated to call Bill Clinton a liar. But now the word "liar" is banned from political discourse? For goodness sake, this is a government, with checks and balances, not a frat club run by peer pressure. Boxter had every right to call Condi Rice out on these "gray" areas (or lies, for those feeling less charitable), and the public deserves the truth.
 
Bill Clinton DID lie. He had sex with Monica Lewinski (among other things) and said under oath he did not.

Bush et. al. using bad intel (from whatever source) to make policy and pass the info on to the American public is not lying. Stupid, sure, but not lying.

As long as it has not been 100% proven that Bush was aware the intel was outright wrong, he can not be proven as a liar.
 
I love this posting from Senator Boxer's PAC. See http://ga4.org/campaign/ricehearings/d7866k91jmexid
On Tuesday, January 18th and Wednesday, January 19th, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice will appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in a confirmation hearing for her appointment as Secretary of State.

Dr. Rice's confirmation hearing must not be a rubber stamp of President Bush's appointment. The Senate must take its "advice and consent" role seriously.

That's why, as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I intend to stand up and ask Condoleezza Rice the tough questions that Americans deserve to have answered. Questions like:

Why did the United States go to war in Iraq based on misleading -- if not false and fraudulent -- evidence?

Why did we divert valuable resources and intelligence personnel to Iraq, taking them away from Afghanistan and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden?

Why did you mislead the American people into thinking there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida before September 11th?

We must hold Condoleezza Rice accountable for her misleading statements leading up to the Iraq war and beyond before we can even consider promoting her to Secretary of State.

So I ask you to join with me: Lend your voice to the chorus of millions of Americans across our great land who are demanding that Condoleezza Rice tell the truth about Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, the search for Osama bin Laden, the fight against Al Qaida, and the war on terrorism.

I urge you to sign my petition below, so I can take your voice with me to the committee room and the floor of the Senate in the pursuit of the truth from Condoleezza Rice.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
U.S. Senator
I have signed this petition. I urge anyone who believes in holding people accountable to also sign.
 
Condoleezza Rice is smart, no doubt. She could talk a square into a circle. Senator Boxer refused to be talked in circles by her. Rice's flabbergasted response was just what "circle talkers" do when they are cornered.
Senator Boxer is a public servant doing her job for the American people.
 
gallaj0 said:
Bill Clinton DID lie. He had sex with Monica Lewinski (among other things) and said under oath he did not.

Bush et. al. using bad intel (from whatever source) to make policy and pass the info on to the American public is not lying. Stupid, sure, but not lying.

As long as it has not been 100% proven that Bush was aware the intel was outright wrong, he can not be proven as a liar.

LOL, just a matter of semantics. I believe Senator Boxer used the words "have not been forthcoming" anyway. I won't even bother going into the differences between a President who lied about a sex act and a President who was not "forthcoming" about the facts that brought our country to war, because its obviously not worth it.

These days, calling a liar a liar is a greater outrage than actually lying. We live in interesting times is all I can say.
 
The Democrat party is in BIG trouble right now and I don't see them winning anyone over by continuing their partisan attacks!

I disagree. Look back at the last few years of Clinton's presidency and you would have seen much of the same type of partisan wrangling as Republicans lamented bitterly about President Clinton.

The only reason that there is not a Democrat being inaugurated tomorrow is that we did not have a likable candidate, period. People could not warm up to Kerry.
 
Lets look at the consequences of Bush's and Condi's lies. Here is the story of a woman who lost her brother in Iraq due to Bush's lies about WMDs. See http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php...=article&sid=1516&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
This week, the White House announced, with little fanfare, that the two-year search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq had finally ended, and it acknowledged that no such weapons existed there at the time of the U.S. invasion in 2003.

For many, this may be a story of only passing interest. But for me and my family, it resonates with profound depth.

My brother was Sgt. Sherwood Baker. He was a member of the Pennsylvania National Guard deployed a year ago with his unit out of Wilkes-Barre. He said goodbye to his wife and his 9-year-old son, boarded a bus and went to Ft. Dix, N.J., to be hastily retrained. His seven years of Guard training as a forward observer was practically worthless because he would not face combat. All he needed to do was learn how to not die.

He received a crash course in convoy security, including practice in running over cardboard cutouts of children. We bought him a GPS unit and walkie-talkies because he wasn't supplied with them. In Iraq, Sherwood was assigned to the Iraq Survey Group and joined the search for weapons of mass destruction.

David Kay, who led the group until January 2004, had already stated that they did not exist. Former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix had expressed serious doubts about their presence during prewar inspections. In fact, a cadre of former U.N. inspectors and U.S. generals had been saying for years that Iraq posed no threat to our country. On April 26, 2004, the Iraq Survey Group, at the behest of the stubborn administration sitting safely in office buildings in Washington, was still on its fruitless but dangerous search. My brother stood atop his Humvee, securing the perimeter in front of a suspect building in Baghdad. But as soldiers entered the building, it exploded; the official cause is still not known. Sherwood was struck by debris in the back of his head and neck, and he was killed.

Since that day, my family and I have lived with the grief of losing a loved one. We have struggled to explain his death to his son. We have gazed at the shards of life scattered at our feet, in wonder of its fragility, in perpetual catharsis with God.

I have moved from frustration to disappointment to anger. And now I have arrived at a place not of understanding but of hope — blind hope that this will change.

The Iraq Survey Group's final report, which was filed in October but revealed only on Wednesday, confirmed what we knew all along. And as my mother cried in the kitchen, the nation barely blinked.

I am left now with a single word seared into my consciousness: accountability. The chance to hold our administration's feet to that flame has passed. But what of our citizenry? We are the ones who truly failed. We shut down our ability to think critically, to listen, to converse and to act. We are to blame.

Even with every prewar assumption having been proved false, today more than 130,000 U.S. soldiers are trying to stay alive in a foreign desert with no clear mission at hand.

At home, the sidelines are overcrowded with patriots. These Americans cower from the fight they instigated in Iraq. In a time of war and record budget deficits, many are loath to even pay their taxes. In the end, however, it is not their family members who are at risk, and they do not sit up at night pleading with fate to spare them.

Change is vital. We must remind ourselves that the war with Iraq was not a mistake but rather a flagrant abuse of power by our leaders — and a case of shameful negligence by the rest of us for letting it happen. The consequence is more than a quagmire. The consequence is the death of our national treasure — our soldiers.

We are all accountable. We all share the responsibility of what has been destroyed in our name. Let us begin to right the wrongs we have done to our country by accepting that responsibility.
Condi's and Bush's lies cost this lady her brother.
 
simpilotswife said:
I disagree. Look back at the last few years of Clinton's presidency and you would have seen much of the same type of partisan wrangling as Republicans lamented bitterly about President Clinton.

The only reason that there is not a Democrat being inaugurated tomorrow is that we did not have a likable candidate, period. People could not warm up to Kerry.

Yes and that is the BIG trouble..... such weak candidates first Gore and then Kerry.. where is the depth in the party?
 
snoopy said:
LOL, just a matter of semantics.


No, it's a very distinct line. Any court of law would look at the FACTS and determine what is provable, and what is not.

People should live and die by the definition of the words we use, otherwise, they become meaningless.

Just because you don't like the politics of somebody, does not mean that they can not tell the truth.

Did Bush/Condi lie? Possibly. Can you prove it? No. And that is where the definition of lying comes in.

People can be wrong without lying; it happens all the time. Doctors misdiagnose disease, police arrest the wrong person, it happens every day. Sometimes these thing have devastaing affects on people.

But the facts are that, unless one of the people on the "inside" come forward with proof that there was, indeed knowledge before the Iraq invasion happened that the were absolutely no WMD's in Iraq, that there can be no way of proving what a person knew or didn't know.

It's not like information leaves a traceable stain on a dress or anything. :smooth:

And despite the tragic and devastating loss of life due to the invasion; it does not change the facts that they may not have been lying, however wrong they have proved in hindsite.
 
EsmeraldaX said:
I say we bring back old school politics...really OLD school....

Let's have people start wearing poufy shirts and running as Whigs and Tories again!

Since both political parties are apparently falling apart.

ja6.gif


I'm John Quincy Adams...and I approved this message!

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Good one!
 
Great news. Some Senate Democrats will delay Condi's confirmation for a time with a mini-filibuster. This should be fun and should give some additional good stuff to discuss about Condi the Liar.

BTW, just remember, at least when Clinton lied, no one died. You can not say the same about Bush and Condi.
 
WWTBAMFAN said:
Great news. Some Senate Democrats will delay Condi's confirmation for a time with a mini-filibuster. This should be fun and should give some additional good stuff to discuss about Condi the Liar.

Fine by me. Filibuster away! Can't wait for the 2006 mid-term elections. :) :) :)
 
gallaj0 said:
No, it's a very distinct line. Any court of law would look at the FACTS and determine what is provable, and what is not.
In a court of law, one looks at all of the evidence including the fact that Bush has been trying to justify the removal of Saddam from the first day of his adminstration. I suggest you read Richard Clarke's book and the account of Paul O'Neal on the issue of Bush's obsession with getting the man who tried to killed his poppy. I found these statements to be interesting. See http://hnn.us/articles/3165.html
“From the start,” said Paul O’Neill in his book interview, “we were building the case against Hussein and looking at how we could take him out and change Iraq into a new country…It was about finding a way to do it that was the tone of it…the president saying, ‘Fine. Go find me a way to do this.’ And how would O’Neill know? O’Neill, as Secretary of the Treasury also sat on the National Security Council.....

Missing from all the recent analyses and editorials, however, is any attention to the reason why: Why did Bush have this thing about Saddam? Why the “detour into an unnecessary war in Iraq?” as the U.S.Army War College recently put it.

“He tried to kill my Dad,” the President once explained. But I believe there was more to this unnecessary war than that. I believe there was a method in Bush’s madness, a method that most likely had as little to do with oil as it did to terrorism.
Before Bet and dmadman call someone a liar, they need to look at the facts. The WMD was just a lie to justify the invasion of Iraq so that Bush could get the man who tried to kill his poppy. In a court of law, this type of evidense would carry far more weight that Condi's posturings and bluffs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom