I'm not.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0927munsil-democrats0927.html
The state Democratic Party's chairman has acknowledged the party gave $100,000 to an independent expenditure group that in turn paid for a Web site critical of Republican gubernatorial candidate Len Munsil, a development that a Munsil aide called deceitful.
A Democratic Party spokesman on Sept. 18 had denied the party had any involvement with two groups linked to the Web site, but party Chairman David Waid said this week that spokesman Bart Graves spoke in error and hadn't known of the party's $100,000 donation to the Arizona Values Coalition.
2006-09-27 04:58:54 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Map, guess you can't comprehend what you read. Try reading it again.
2006-09-27 06:34:29 · update #1
WHAT, only 3 thumbs down. I thought by now all the dem losers would have piled on. As for the memo from Clinton to Bush. I guess he can say Bush was warned. About the same if I walk into 7/11 and say "Some guy, plans to rob a store, but I have no idea of a date or any firm info on plans etc. Just it might be a plane"
2006-09-27 11:10:30 · update #2
Clinton also ignored a Presidential briefing memo warning him of a Bin Laden Hijacking and Plane attack.
The memo, from 1998, is in the 9/11 Commission report.
The same report Clinton said people shoudl read to find out the truth about 9/11.
Here's the online version:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch4.htm
Section 4.4 has the Clinton memo in it.
Again the DEMS blame Bush for ignoring a memo that CLINTON ignored first!!!!!
2006-09-27 05:04:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
You are up to 4 td's. But then if dems were aqble to read above a 3rd grade level they might be able to form a coherent answer to you. Don't hold your breath. The only thing lower than a democrat is the used condom you avoided at the beach this weekend.
2006-09-27 11:14:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Clinton ordeal began with Whitewater. yet at the same time as Clinton hid behind "you could not try a sitting President for a criminal offense dedicated previous to taking workplace" the certain Prosecutor followed up on leads in that analyze that had to do with sexual harassment and abuse contained in the State abode in Arkansas. That led to him interviewing White abode staffers, aides, and interns. (Supposedly Hillary had info about the Little Rock sex abuse capers, at the same time as she changed into AG, which will floor if she tries to run in 2008.) The Dems would ought to get info on Bush that would lead him to ought to testify lower than oath. till subpoenaed the prospect is Bush would comply with testify, yet no longer lower than oath. If subpoenaed he will be counseled the nature of the testimony and would maximum likely classify the relative innovations for the length of his Presidency.
2016-11-24 22:28:56 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Shocking! Just shocking! You know tho--I am so sick of both sides trying to dig up dirt on the other. If the candidates used 1/10 the energy doing their JOBS and building their own records and actually listening to Americans as they do trying to smear the competition, I believe we'd actually have a pretty good system--and we'd actually be making progress.
2006-09-27 05:10:40 · answer #4 · answered by Cherie 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Filthy hippie flag burning left never ceases to amaze me.
The whole party platform is full of double standards and hipocrisy.
And then theres this: "Its all Bushs fault man, he got us into this illegal war mannn."
I think I hear that tribute to ignorance at minimum 50 times a day by the baby killers on this site.
2006-09-27 06:50:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't hear you saying that republicans don't do the same thing.
What you are talking about is nothing compared to some of the disgusting tactics of Karl Rove.
2006-09-27 05:34:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Geez, they are in politics and they paid for mud-slinging? I am sure Bush never did that. I am also sure that if KINKY wins in TEXAS things might change!
This guy is like me. Tired of people that take sides instead of disliking those that do wrong and voting for those that do right, regardless of party.
2006-09-27 05:16:28 · answer #7 · answered by RJ 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That seems to be the democrats choice of money..,lets not forget Jefferson of Louisiana and his cool 100,000..,well I take that back.,its 90,000 now he spent 10,000.Get whats for dinner honey..,dont know but dont take any money out of the freezer.
2006-09-27 05:06:13 · answer #8 · answered by halfbright 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Yeah, they didn't know where they had spent 100 grand....
I believe that just as much as I believe Clinton tried really hard to kill Bin Laden.......
2006-09-27 05:18:32 · answer #9 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I'm not the Democrats are a lieing pack of would be do nothings bent on subversiveness......
They only deserve what they get!
2006-09-27 05:02:17 · answer #10 · answered by battle-ax 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋