the lies
1. Bush Lied
2. Bush is dumb
3. Bush planned 911
4. Bush ignored 911
5. Bush ignored the warnings left by Clinton of 911
6. Bush is always on vacation
7. Bush sent the Hurricanes to NO
8. Bush did nothing about the hurricanes
9. Bush hates black people
10. Bush went to war for oil
11. Bush has stopped huntin Bin Laden
12. Bush isnt doing enough to fight terror
13. Bush is doing to much to fight terror
14. Bush invented failed terror plots
15. Bush is spying on Americans
16. Bush is a terrorist
17. Bush bomed the NO levees
18. Bush sent Rita to finish the job that katrina didnt complete
19. Bush sent hurricanes to kill black people
20. Bush is a draft dodger
21. Bush stole the election
22. Bush fixed the election
you democrats are obsessed with Bush and have no agenda except to spew more hatred.....and your supposed to be the party of tolerance
2006-09-06 02:19:56 · 20 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
my sources are democrats and their accusations here on answers and in the press.
2006-09-06 02:36:53 · update #1
Because the democrats had planned on a political dynasty and were shocked when Gore lost. What they didn't realize was that the majority of voters do not approve of their socialist agenda. (and Gore had, and has, the personality of a rock and comes across as a creepy uncle who tries too hard to be liked.)
They actually believed Clinton would have won the election if Perot hadn't cut into Bush Sr's demograghics.
So they claim Bush "stole" Florida although its been proven that the discounted "hanging chads" favored Bush and would have widened the margin. Then they accuse Diebold of rigging machines in Ohio even though the gap of only 120,000 votes cannot be explained as the exit polls projected a larger Bush victory.
So rather than accept that their left-of-communism platform will not be accepted by America, they blame losing on Bush. Likewise, in November when they pick up house seats they will not recognize it is a backlash to the media trouncing Bush's policies. They will see it as an affirmation of their agenda, again distorting the reality of the situation.
2006-09-06 02:42:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Democrats are confused like Kerry was Democrats have no agenda and they just oppose Bush they vote for the War in Iraq then slam him now and call for US withdraw knowing Iraq will became a mess if the USA leaves now.If he does accuse him of deserting Iraq.
Was Clinton is responsible what did he do after the USS cole bombing ?what did he do after the embassy in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed
Bomb sudan Why ?
Hit a few Afghanistan tents the terrorists had fled the site and caused less 1000 worth of damage
The terrorists responded with 9/11
He should done what Bush attack afghanistan
The greater the hit bush higher will he rise
1:The Only US president to win a 2nd term after the losing the popular vote.
2:The Only son of a President to win a 2nd term
3:The first GOP to became President without winning California in the last 150 years
2006-09-06 06:25:33 · answer #2 · answered by rhinogirl 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I see your trying desperately to try and lay a smoke screen to protect your party. However no one would say that Dem's are the party of high morals. Where as repubs constantly push themselves as holier than thou. when one puts themselves on a pedestal you had better not fall it's a long way down and the landing is very painful. It also should be noted that all the above were punished except Clinton and Studds as they didn't break the law. Clinton had the right to pardon anyone he wants. Studds had sex with a 16 year old which is legal in most states including Washington DC and Massachusetts Studds home state. The scandal then was that he was gay. Foley on the other hand was in charge of the pages what he did was at least an ethical breach also he may have ran a foul of a anti-predator laws he helped to pass. In studds time these laws didn't exist so your smoke screen is rather thin and will be blown away as this scandal continues on.
2016-03-27 00:09:55 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jeez--I'm a democrat, and I haven't heard of half of these! But I do agree with some of them:
1. Which time? Even members of his administration admit they had little or no evidence that there really were weapons of mass destruction.
2. It goes without saying.
5. There were many warning signals he ignored--there is always increased chatter on the net prior to an attack, and throughout August, the web was going insane with chatter.
8. Or at least he did little. He's responsible for the actions of the people in his administration, and there is no way you can say FEMA or any other government agency handled the situation well.
9. He's the first president in history who refused to go to an annual NAACP convention.
10. Isn't it odd that his vice-president and close advisor was the president of Haliburton, who got the contract to handle oil in Iraq without even bidding on a federal job? And that he is an oil man himself?
13. He keeps insisting that he needs to prevent even American citizens from taking actions which are guaranteed by the Constitution, all in the name of "security." Freedom and security tend to be the very opposites of one another. A prisoner has few freedoms, but he is secure in the knowledge that he has a bed, 3 squares, and certain guarantees.
15. Remember that he wanted to wiretap the phones even of U.S. citizens--I'd hardly call the head of Greenpeace a terrorist.
21. Funny, the entire election hinged on one state, where the vote was strongly disputed, and that happened to be the one where Bush's brother was governor. And nationwide, the popular vote still went to Kerry.
I think we have a pretty strong agenda--to have an honest government which works to help our citizens and protect their rights. We don't seem to have that right now.
2006-09-06 03:26:11 · answer #4 · answered by cross-stitch kelly 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just to put you at ease...I'm a registered democrat, consider myself very moderate, live in the middle with most of the Democrats and Republicans in the country and can say with hand on heart that I've never thought or believed anything on that list. I've read them twice and can unequivocally confirm that. So there you have it. You've lied by suggesting that all democrats are obsessed .... and I've told the truth. Keep them coming, though. I'm sure Jim W will resurface again soon so you have someone to play with.
2006-09-06 02:45:10 · answer #5 · answered by jamie 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OHMIGAWD! You sound as bad as the Democrats that hate Bush. Frankly I don't know which is worse. The exaggerations about what it Bush's fault or the exaggerations of those exaggerations.
I don't know which party is worse. Democrats who have no real ideas about anything and can only blame Republicans for everything, or Republicans who aren't thinking before they come up with the ideas they have to solve things.
2006-09-06 02:35:00 · answer #6 · answered by namsaev 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You're so silly. Democrats only dislike the things Bush has done. Your list has a few things that aren't true, but alas for us all, it has many true items.
The biggest is probably Bush ignoring 9/11 - we know a CIA agent showed him the memo "Bin Laden determined to strike within the US" and Bush told the agent, "YOu've covered your a**, you can go now."" Then, he extended his vacation!
What a leader. We don't tolerate gross incompetence, we don't tolerate Bush's treasonous behavior of spying on americans, fixing intelligence to go to war, ordering the torture of innocent people...
My question to you is why you do tolerate this? I was raised a Navy brat, and we respected our constittution - abhorred the actions of people like Bush who don't respect our laws.
What kind of American are you that you think such a grossly incompetent and clearly immoral (dropping bombs on neighborhoods, if torturing people to death isn't enough for you) thief (he's drained our huge surplus and given it to Halliburton) deserves any tolerance?
2006-09-06 02:29:03 · answer #7 · answered by t jefferson 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Two Presidents, The first president initiates a bloody, costly, unending war on false premises and approves covert policies of illegal detentions, kangaroo courts, extraordinary renditions, torture and warretless wire-tappings of thousands of Americans. The second president lies about hooking up with an intern. QUESTION - Which one should be impeached? Which one should be supported? Which one should be trashed and thrown away?
2006-09-06 03:18:57 · answer #8 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Give me a break! When Clinton was in office, Republicans were acting like one-year old babies who were told they couldn't have their candy. Republicans showed far more obsessive hatred towards the Clintons than I have seen towards Bush from the Democrats. Part of the reason I stopped considered voting Republican was because of their compulsive and obsessive hatred towards the Democrats.
Republicans are in no position to complain about hatred. You guys dish it out, but you can't seem to take it.
2006-09-06 02:33:38 · answer #9 · answered by brian2412 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Take a look at the years from 1992 to 1998 and the same could said for the Repubtards. Seems someone can't take their own medicine.
Nice list of bull. Heck of a job Shirass.
2006-09-06 02:33:36 · answer #10 · answered by GJ 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋