Not only does truth not matter to liberals...they are so hell bent on gaining back power that they are actually rooting for us to LOSE in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When Zarqawi was killed...the libs were sad. When Saddam was captured, the libs were sad.
If Gore or Kerry were president and these things happened the libs would have rejoiced.
Their hatred of Bush and thirst for power runs so deep they will sell out their own country and its citizens to terrorists just to get elected.
2006-08-31 17:11:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Edward 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
the subsequent time George Osborne places a action to the abode of Commons, the Lib Dems could warn Andrew Mitchell and the best Minister that they'll vote against it, and attempt a Vote of self belief against the Coalition except Osborne is bumped off forthwith from his interest as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Now Cameron can the two call their bluff, or pass Osborne out to keep the Coalition and stop a fall down in self belief for the British financial equipment from the markets via a known election being compelled while Miliband is up interior the polls. Osborne could in no way have been Chancellor interior the 1st place. until eventually the recession grew to become into taken care of out, Clarke could have had his old interest back, allowing adequate time for brand spanking new expertise to be introduced into government. Or do the Tories rather have no person of any ingenious and prescient and calibre using fact the undesirable old days of Thatcher? Osborne is barely there using fact he has some malign carry over David Cameron; he's fully poisonous for the country. With this scalp, the Lib Dems assert a attractiveness for moderating the Tories, and underlining the completed factor of a Coalition - to enable clever government whilst preserving down the dogmatic and militant loonies. If we had Coalition a technology in the past, water would not have been privatised and offered off overseas, and we would possibly not have had the ballot Tax.
2016-10-01 03:56:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You know, I'm getting pretty old and I can't remember a wider split between the two major parties. I strongly suspect it's because people are relating NOT to the mainstream party agendas, but to the far left and far right agendas that get all the press.
The liberal agenda, in my opinion, was made VERY clear when the democrats ousted Joe Lieberman in the primaries. Their agenda is clearly against the war - I don't honestly believe they are taking the threat of terrorism seriously enough. And that's scary.
Like Bush - hate Bush, but, damn it, you know where he stands concerning the serious threat the Islamic radicals present to the world and our way of life.
Who really knows where the Democrats stand?
I can guess - and my guess is a sad commentary.
2006-08-31 16:11:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Whew, talk about splitting; how many millions of people are lumped in those all-encompassing statements?
If the current Republican administration was so great, they wouldn't need to make people sign "loyalty pledges" just to attend a political speech--that's not a speech, it's a staged propaganda rally and frighteningly fascist. In my democracy, citizens are allowed to attend the speeches of the candidates running for office.
Lies? The biggest one was that Iraq had something to do with 9-11 & that somehow justified the Iraqi invasion/war (which doesn't appear to be helping anyone's family!)
The biggest lie of all starts with the phrase 'liberal media,' which from the start was based on faulty data from a pre-neocon fanatic. For legitimate information read "The Republican Noise Machine" by David Brock.
Worried about the viability of your democracy? Read how the current administration is undermining the balance of powers in "Worse than Watergate" by John Dean (who is a Republican, by the way).
God Bless the US and protect us from this type of mindless ranting.
2006-08-31 15:45:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by knewknickname 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Blanket statements about "liberals" and "conservatives" do not recognize that the world is not a simple choice of black or white.
By calling those who oppose your opinions names, you remove any chance for reaasonable dialogue or compromise.
The end result of no compromise is the Middle East.
Is that what you want for America?
Not every conservative is great and not every liberal is an idiot. Or vice versa.
Try to be more specific with your debates.
2006-08-31 15:33:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by aka DarthDad 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Conservatives are the liars, but since you consider yourself a conservative you can't admit that. It's the real truth. The war on Iraq, the conspiracy theories, they aren't made for the public's pleasure rather for the truth and exposure of a liar, the man at the head of this country. Liberals fight for truth and justice. They bring equality. After all this country is a democracy that should be run by democrats, as it is named. If they wanted it to be run by republicans, they could've called it a craphole.
2006-08-31 15:33:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Fadi P 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
This would be laughable if your hypothesis wasn't so pathetic.
The Bush whitehouse and the drooling religious right that is pulling his chain, wouldn't KNOW the truth if it fell on them and everything that comes out of Bush's mouth is either ignorant or a bold faced lie. In fact, his lying is getting so bad than he has to resort to name calling... guess he never got over the 9th grade mentality.!
And YOU want to accuse the Liberals of not being truthful.
THAT'S FUNNY.... even if it IS a bit sad.!
2006-08-31 15:30:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Truth matters for neither the Democrats NOR the Republicans these days. As long as they're in power, they don't care.
2006-08-31 15:31:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
They live in their own twisted little world, believing their own lies.
2006-08-31 16:00:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
that is the main reason for the bashing and conspiracy theories
2006-08-31 15:27:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋