Last week the libs/dumbocrats were faulting Bush for not being more vocal about the Israeli incursion into Lebanon, but were careful not to take a stance for themselves. This week they are criticizing him for not condemning Israel in their pursuit of terrorists. Do they wait until the ruling party makes a decision and choose the opposite position?
2006-07-27 03:48:15 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
And are DEEjay and manic engaging in Lib/Dem crisis mode: when unable to answer a question go on the offensive or avoid the subject with a nonsensical blog that doesn't address the question.
And to answer your dedirected question DEEjay, I rarely watch the talking head shows and I was teaching last night so I missed O'Reilly anyway, I made this observation on my own.
2006-07-27 04:56:21 · update #1
Crazy that they are bashing Bush for supporting Israel, yet their website just posted support for Israel?
2006-07-27 03:51:05 · answer #1 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 8⤊ 5⤋
Yes, I think that is the case with the Libs. My Mom's side is 100% Christian Lebanese (2nd generation) so I am half. The government there was getting to be more pro Western, but what I have heard from the innocent civilians is that there has been so much death and distruction all over the country that many more once neutral people are turning against Israel.
Israel says that was not their intention, but what repairations will they do to change those opinions?
2006-07-28 08:24:40 · answer #2 · answered by mighty_bruin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush publicly stated that we would support Israel, "Democratically", which means, they need to fight their own battle, as it was much needed, since they have been taking too much crap down through the years.
As far as Libs/Demo-RATS, waiting, it is because they are ignorant, with only a limited amount of intelligence, and they would never admit it, but, they need to be guided by an intelligent man like our President, and then turn around and condemn him just to make it look good!
Lets face it, Bush will get blamed for everything & anything with those people...
MANIC, has to much time on his/her hands.. not like we dont have enough sources spreading worthless propaganda around.
Impeachment? thats a laugh...
2006-07-27 05:08:31 · answer #3 · answered by Katz 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely, this has been their game plan for 6 years. It's no wonder they are in the position they're in. Howard Dean just condemned Maliki for being Anti-Semitic after his speech to congress yesterday. Dean knows it would be political suicide for the Prime Minister of Iraq to denounce a Muslim organization such as Hezbollah. The good news is they continue to not learn from there mistakes.
2006-07-27 03:58:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dumbocrats , as we speak the congress is planning to sue bush in federal court over signing statements which violate the constitution and overstep his presidential authority. Leading this is Senator Arlen Specter Republican chairman of the judiciary committee.I guess we democrats were beat to the punch on this one also.
2006-07-28 09:42:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
One needs no proof for prejudicial thinking.
On the other hand, to totally twist your question to fit my independent thinker position, it seems to me that both parties engage in this sort of silliness, particularly when they are not in power. Politicians are opportunists. It's just the politicians doing what they do.
The real division in politics is over distribution of wealth and pretty much nothing else, politics being - by definition - squabbling over limited resources.
2006-07-28 11:41:59 · answer #6 · answered by Cheshire Cat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The democrats have been a little lost when it comes to the "War on Terrorism" position. They have been dilly dallying about it all the time. But other than that, I think they have been taking positions, even though it has been very fragmented. They need a leader desperately who can bind them to one unique vision.
2006-07-28 05:01:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
what i do not realize is the Mccannes were given the employ automobile 25 days after Maddie went lacking why are the police no longer searching into who employed the automobile from the third of ought to or beforehand all peoples that had get entry to to automobile and were replaced into Maddie kept for 25 day till her mom and father employed this automobile and why did they proceed using it understanding that their little woman were put in the boot or did they understand ??????
2016-10-15 06:33:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Was Clinton best buds with Israel when he was in office...he was a democrat correct?
Jimmy Carter brought peace to there and he was a democrat too.
Democrats are just as bad as any other political party in power.
2006-07-27 03:59:16 · answer #9 · answered by gotearz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's probably best not to make things up to try to prove your own point. It's called a "fallacy of logic". Just like, "All Republicans are total assholes because I read it somewhere". Definitely sounds right, but I can't prove it by making something up.
2006-07-27 03:52:34 · answer #10 · answered by Soopa 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
first of all it really does seem that way..... (the whole taking sides after thing)
but the whole condeming isreal situation is a really touchy subject so the 'left' is going to do what the usually do and sit on the fence ( & support both sides) rather than lose the jewish vote.
2006-07-27 03:55:11 · answer #11 · answered by Carson N 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋