Kudos to Colbert

POSTED BY: Dayve
UPDATED: Monday, May 8, 2006 14:47
VIEWED: 5560
PAGE 4 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

JMB9039

Thursday, May 4, 2006 2:15 PM

Colbert was fantastic! And Bush didn't really laugh it off - if anything he hated it. I don't care though - Colbert did the role he was hired to do - did a great job - and AU, stop being a moron and use your brain for a second.

DAYVE

Thursday, May 4, 2006 2:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
Sounds good. So... where we goin?

R O A D T R I P ! ! !

RIGHTEOUS9

Thursday, May 4, 2006 3:23 PM

Here's a lie for you Auraptor..just one, cuz that's all you asked for. One that sadly, you can't use the current Republican Talking Points to deflect. You can click on the link or just read the exerpt I posted.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/11/AR2005
071101568.html

"Asked about the matter on nine occasions over the years, Bush has said he welcomed the investigation, called the name disclosure "a very serious matter," and declared that the sooner investigators "find out the truth, the better, as far as I'm concerned."

"I want to know the truth," Bush told reporters in September 2003 after news of the investigation had burst into headlines. "If anybody has got any information, inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business."

In 2003, McClellan said it was "a ridiculous suggestion" that Rove was involved. "I've made it very clear, he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was," he said. He also said that any culprit in the White House should be fired "at a minimum."

At one point, McClellan vowed: "The president has set high standards, the highest of standards, for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

Bush replied "yes" when asked in June 2004 if he would fire anyone who leaked the agent's name."

Well we're still waiting for somebody to get fired.

on edit -- of course you can use the republican talking points...the one about my source being the liberal media...because when people write bad stories about this Administration, (even if not disproven), they don't get Rathered into retirement and humiliation by the rest of the liberal media right? By their own company even, right? Because that strong, assured liberal bias in the media is so pervasive, it allows them to protect their own, right?

AURAPTOR

Thursday, May 4, 2006 9:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Since you won't offer up an example of where he lied, and there's nothing to indicate that he's incompetent, I'd have to say 'neither'.
AU, seriously, you've been offered up post after post of examples of the Bush administration's blunders and duplicity - going on three years now. Your ostrichism trumps all comers. No one wants to waste their time. Besides we've all heard the republican talking points ad nauseum. You regurgitating them won't add any sparkle.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

Seriously, I've not been offered up post after post of anything of much substance. Blunders, ( or opinions OF blunders ) are not 'lies'. The left simply parrots that Bush lied us into war, puts cute slogans on bumper stickers , but not once has anyone ever given examples. It's so easy, no one even tries? You folks remind me of Young Earth Creationist, who tell themselves that early man lived w/ the dinosaurs. How do they know this ? What evidence do they have ? Well, there's the Bible, of course, and EVERYONE knows it to be true!

Sorry folks, but don't get angry at me if all you can do is offer up circular reasoning for your hatred of Bush.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

RIGHTEOUS9

Thursday, May 4, 2006 10:30 PM

And wrong again Auraptor, because you ignored my post above that did give you an example, it was that easy.

STORYMARK

Thursday, May 4, 2006 11:31 PM

Such is the standard AURaptor routine. Ignore what is inconvenient to his programin... er... argument.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

CITIZEN

Friday, May 5, 2006 12:08 AM

Error, does not compute.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.

DAYVE

Friday, May 5, 2006 1:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Since you won't offer up an example of where he lied, and there's nothing to indicate that he's incompetent]

I hesitate to get into this, but since you asked for it...I can post a very lenghty summary of Bush's lies, but i'm not sure this site has the bandwith available... so, please refer to the site listed below...
http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm

Here is a quote from the site that you may find interesting:

Some Bush backers claim he's not a liar, he's just not very bright and doesn't remember things very well. That may be true, but we're sure Bush would not allow such an excuse in his "responsibility era." We're sure Bush would agree that if he's that dumb, he shouldn't be President. Other Bush backers claim that some of his lies are "technically correct" or "tailored to fit the audience," or some such circumlocution. What they're talking about are lies of omission rather than lies of commission. In lies of omission it's what they imply, not what they say. For example, the other evening Bush told Congress and the American people that he was putting a "lock box" on Social Security. Now, it's very clear that Bush wanted us to feel secure in the belief that he was protecting all of our Social Security funds for the future. No question, right? Yet, the very next day when his budget book was released, we learned that Bush told a lie of omission. What he didn't tell Congress and the American people is that he would later take from $.6 to $1 trillion out of that "lock box" to cover his tax cuts. No doubt, Bush lied. He wanted folks to believe something that he knew was not true. Of course, politicians do this all the time. It's second nature. In sum, the thing that really bothers us about Bush's lies is that he is also a hypocrite and pretends he's above lying. As a liar, he reinforces our assumptions about politicians. As a hypocrite, he reinforces our assumptions about his character. --Politex

more?

Trailers Of Mass Destruction, Part Two..."You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.* And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them." (italics ours) --WP, "Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons. President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof, " May 31, 2003
*At the time of this statement, no such weapons were found, and no such weapons have been found to this day. On this point as well as the use of the captured trailers as biolabs, the WP said this in the above article: "U.S. authorities have to date made no claim of a confirmed finding of an actual nuclear, biological or chemical weapon. In the interview, Bush said weapons had been found, but in elaborating, he mentioned only the trailers, which the CIA has concluded were likely used for production of biological weapons." There was no statement of fact, there was no smoking gun. The CIA's finding was advanced as an opinion based on its own particular process of elimination, and it was immediately challenged by both U.S. and U.K. intelligence analysts who had seen the trailers. --Politex, 08.09.03 (italics ours)
Now comes this..."Engineering experts from the Defense Intelligence Agency have come to believe that the most likely use for two mysterious trailers found in Iraq was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons rather than to make biological weapons, government officials say.

this goes on forever....
and as i stated previously, there will be a book on the lies of George Bush.... well i was wrong.... there are several....too many to list in fact....

so, i say to you Mr. (or Ms. - not sure here) Auraptor...please open your mind to the fact that you, and countless others, have been misled by a master of deception... please look at all the evidence and mak

DAYVE

Friday, May 5, 2006 1:50 PM

excuse the dp

STORYMARK

Friday, May 5, 2006 4:18 PM

Bump - Just to make it harder for some to ignore the inconvenient.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE