Yes, it is very funny how the dems like to "have it both ways" on almost every controversial issue. Hmmm... like the Repub attacks on Max Cleland, a Dem, during the 2002 elections claiming he was weak on national security. Would that be the same Mr Cleland - decorated war hero who lost several limbs in Vietnam ?
Or the same Republican party that hammered the Dems over the Homeland Security act. Who originally proposed this piece of legislation...? Dems perhaps?! And which party ended up opposing it because it might have had some job security for the workers involved... the Repubs perhaps ?
Lol ! Googling the "Hilary" + "Hitler" references could take a while. Or how about the radio 'hosts' calling for someone to take pot-shots at the Clintons... Or the REALLY civil discourse about their daughter - who was so obviously courting scandal by... existing !
Court of law eh ?:-)
Would that be in a military trib in good ole' Camp X-Ray ?
Exactly WHERE do rights apply these days ?
Detention without trial isn't a good start is it now...?
Interesting sentiments.
Maybe Dems could admit that Clinton had a sexual weakness. But then the right will never voluntarily admit that they distracted government resources at the time when they should have been hunting Al-Q instead of trying to nail Clinton and his wife over "Whitewater" - which, incidently, they were completely exonerated.
Try reading "The Hunting of the President" or "The Clinton Wars" for a better understanding of the Mellon-Scaife-funded witch-hunt into Clinton.
Hmmm - moral equivalence: Iran-Contra or lying about receiving oral sex ? Arms to terrorists, lying and resulting deaths from said arms...?
"The Republicans already know what slimes the Liberals are."
Ahhh... an ad-hominem attack from the land of the neo-con:-)
So your average confederate-flag-waving Republican is in favour of equality for people regardless of race, religion or sexuality ? Or is that only if you're white, male and hetrosexual ?! ROFLOL !!
>>First off, he didn't lie about the WND.
Oh REALLY?! So why has the Iraq survey group been withdrawn only finding 16 shells left over from the Iran-Iraq war... which turned out NOT to contain any chemical agents ?
Could it be because the UK & US governments fiddled the intelligence when they knew full-well that Iraq no-longer had any WMD...?
Would that be a "I did not have sexual relations" moment ? True - Clinton didn't he PENETRATIVE sex - just oral. Did Bush lie or not... well he DID if he know that the intelligence reports were massively spun and there were no WMDs left in Iraq.
Or was it Mr Cheney himself...?!
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/press.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20 38.htm
Didn't you read the article - they're going for option 1) Blame the Democrats.
These are the same kind of 'people' who would be pleading with a judge "she was asking for it - she had a short skirt so I just couldn't help myself taking what I wanted" - which is what their "excuse" amounts to...
Let's see now - who had to gain from leaking Democratic documents...? Republicans ?
Yet you think that the lack of evidence (so far) is grounds to drop this. "Move along now nothing to see here".
"Absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence".
C'mon now - let us all in on the secret - you were Ari's scriptwriter weren't you ? When he suggested anyone denying the existance of Iraq's WMD suggest where they were ! ROFLOL !
Slashdot Mirror
You must have a cast-iron stomach. Not sure I could make it through 'Slander' ! :-)
Yes, it is very funny how the dems like to "have it both ways" on almost every controversial issue.
Hmmm... like the Repub attacks on Max Cleland, a Dem, during the 2002 elections claiming he was weak on national security. Would that be the same Mr Cleland - decorated war hero who lost several limbs in Vietnam ?
Or the same Republican party that hammered the Dems over the Homeland Security act. Who originally proposed this piece of legislation...? Dems perhaps?! And which party ended up opposing it because it might have had some job security for the workers involved... the Repubs perhaps ?
Lol ! Googling the "Hilary" + "Hitler" references could take a while. Or how about the radio 'hosts' calling for someone to take pot-shots at the Clintons... Or the REALLY civil discourse about their daughter - who was so obviously courting scandal by... existing !
Can't disagree with those sentiments ! :-)
Would it be too partisan to state the obvious answer...? Will refrain
Court of law eh ? :-)
Would that be in a military trib in good ole' Camp X-Ray ?
Exactly WHERE do rights apply these days ?
Detention without trial isn't a good start is it now...?
Interesting sentiments. Maybe Dems could admit that Clinton had a sexual weakness. But then the right will never voluntarily admit that they distracted government resources at the time when they should have been hunting Al-Q instead of trying to nail Clinton and his wife over "Whitewater" - which, incidently, they were completely exonerated.
Try reading "The Hunting of the President" or "The Clinton Wars" for a better understanding of the Mellon-Scaife-funded witch-hunt into Clinton.
Hmmm - moral equivalence: Iran-Contra or lying about receiving oral sex ? Arms to terrorists, lying and resulting deaths from said arms...?
"The Republicans already know what slimes the Liberals are." :-)
Ahhh... an ad-hominem attack from the land of the neo-con
So your average confederate-flag-waving Republican is in favour of equality for people regardless of race, religion or sexuality ? Or is that only if you're white, male and hetrosexual ?! ROFLOL !!
>>First off, he didn't lie about the WND. Oh REALLY?! So why has the Iraq survey group been withdrawn only finding 16 shells left over from the Iran-Iraq war... which turned out NOT to contain any chemical agents ? Could it be because the UK & US governments fiddled the intelligence when they knew full-well that Iraq no-longer had any WMD...? Would that be a "I did not have sexual relations" moment ? True - Clinton didn't he PENETRATIVE sex - just oral. Did Bush lie or not... well he DID if he know that the intelligence reports were massively spun and there were no WMDs left in Iraq. Or was it Mr Cheney himself...?! http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/press .htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20 38.htm
Didn't you read the article - they're going for option 1) Blame the Democrats. These are the same kind of 'people' who would be pleading with a judge "she was asking for it - she had a short skirt so I just couldn't help myself taking what I wanted" - which is what their "excuse" amounts to...
Let's see now - who had to gain from leaking Democratic documents...? Republicans ? Yet you think that the lack of evidence (so far) is grounds to drop this. "Move along now nothing to see here". "Absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence". C'mon now - let us all in on the secret - you were Ari's scriptwriter weren't you ? When he suggested anyone denying the existance of Iraq's WMD suggest where they were ! ROFLOL !
Hmmm... so the original Watergate was just a few good 'ole boys having some fun then...?