why do republicons believe in these fairy tales?

Question

1. "Saddam had links to 9-11 and Al Qaeda"..... FALSE. No links were ever found that supports this myth. In fact, Saddam had turn away many Al Qaeda leaders who had sought refugee in Iraq.

2. "Saddam massacred his own people for no reason"..... FALSE. While it's true that he killed thousands of Iraqis, many were his enemies who had tried to assasinate him and/or overthrow him. Regardless, The Bushes killed more Iraqis than Saddam ever did.

3. "The recession began after the collapse of the Dot-Com during Clinton's presidency." FALSE. The recession officially began in March 2001 when the economy went in to reverse. The dot-com bubble bursting had no negative effect on the economy as it continued to grow at a record pace.

4. "Bush invaded Iraq because of faulty intelligence from the Clinton administration." FALSE.... CIA warned Bush that the intelligence was untrue and couldn't be trusted.

Feel free to list more myths that republicons continue to believe as facts.

1) He did fund Al Qauda, thats a fact. His neighbors to the east ratted him out.

PROVE IT. A SIMPLE LINK FROM A CREDIBLE NEWS SOURCE WILL DO. EVEN FROM FOX NEWS.

2) Saddam killed HUNDREDS of thousands of Iraqis testing out his Mustard Gas and Sarin; thats a fact, the Iraqis told us that and then we found used Chemical Weapons within Iraq.

HE DID USE GAS SUPPLIED BY REAGAN/BUSH ADMINISTRATION ON THE KURDS.... BUT TO SAY THE KURDS WERE "HIS PEOPLE" IS FLAT OUT DUMB. THEY WEREN'T HIS PEOPLE, THESE WERE OUTSIDERS WHO THE IRAQIS HAVE BEEN BATTLING FOR DECADES EVEN PRIOR TO SADDAM TAKING OVER AS LEADER. IT'S NOT LIKE HE DROPPED THE BOMB IN THE MIDDLE OF BAGHDAD.

Point # 1 - Prove Saddam turned away al Qaeda. You can't.

I WILL.....

Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5328592.stm

I JUST DID. NOW YOU PROVE SADDAM HAD LINKS TO AL QAEDA.

Point #2 - I suppose you are condoning the murder of dissidents or people who want free elections. Real nice.

I'M SAYING IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN THE RUSSIANS INVADING AND KILLING CHECHYNYANS. WHY NO OUTRAGE THERE?

Answer 1

They don't listen to the truth and they believe everything Rush and Ann Coulter say (seeing as how they are oh, so truthful). They'll probably say you're a terrorist or ask why you hate America or call you some other name because they can't come up with anything factual to debate with.

Answer 2

1) I personally have never stated that Saddam had links to Al Queda or 911. I will admit that some people harbor a false impression that 911 was a cause, but it was never cited as such by the President. However, it is incorrect to state that Hussein did not support terrorism. Most us can well remember the 25,000 bounties he paid to families of suicide bombers. I don't know about where you are from, but where I am from that's called supporting the cause.

2) Saddam Hussein used WMDs on both the Iranians and the Kurds. While a case can be made that the Kurds posed a threat to his regime it does not justify his actions. I don't know where you get the 1000's number killed under Hussein. The range is in the hundreds of thousands although I doubt we will ever know the true number. The idea that the Bush Adminstration has killed more Iraqis is laughable at best, and even if you accept the high number of 655,000 being circulated, it still is not on the hands of the administration as the majority of these deaths are Iraqi on Iraqi.

3) Your information here is really incorrect. This assumption was based on incorrect findings from the NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research) which were later revised. See just one quote below regarding it.
NBER President Martin Feldstein said, "It is clear that the revised data have made our original March date for the start of the recession much too late,"
Unemployment peaked at 3.8 in April 200 and began to rise. Interest rates peaked at 6.5 percent in 2000 and had to be lowered in an emergency move in Jan 2001 due to weakening sales and production under Clinton. GDP growth fell to almost 0 in the third quarter of 2000. This is all indicative of a recession and it all happened under Clinton.

4) Not even going to argue this point with you. I will just refer you back to fact that almost everyone who saw this intelligence came to the same conclusion. Further there are numerous statements on record from Clinton and others before Bush was president supporting these same findings.

Now having stated this here is my conclusion regarding your question. You are just as guilty of believing incorrect information as you accuse others of. Your agenda is rooted in dislike of the administration and based on questionable assumptions rooted in misinterpretation or in some cases faulty data.. This is your choice to make and you can choose to believe whatever suits your worldview, but kindly respect the same for others even though they don't agree with you.

Answer 3

Point # 1 - Prove Saddam turned away al Qaeda. You can't.

Point #2 - I suppose you are condoning the murder of dissidents or people who want free elections. Real nice.

On point 3, that's a result of monetary policy and increased interest rates, which usually take 3-6 months to have a real economic effect. That would mean the decision to raise the rates took place prior to Bush's inauguration in January 2001.

Point 4 - never heard the CIA info was bad from Clinton's time, but would not be surprising thanks to the Lautenberg bill, which made it illegal to pay foreign criminals for information, and basically decimated the CIA of many of its long time veteran operatives.

Answer 4

1) He did fund Al Qauda, thats a fact. His neighbors to the east ratted him out.
2) Saddam killed HUNDREDS of thousands of Iraqis testing out his Mustard Gas and Sarin; thats a fact, the Iraqis told us that and then we found used Chemical Weapons within Iraq.
3) Clinton had the chance to take out Bin Laden multiple times but never did; I blame him for 9/11 but I dont see what he has to do w/ Iraq.
4) Ive never even heard anyone say that; We went in mainly because Saddam gained petrolium a few years back and since then the UN had put 27 sanctions on him which he ignored ALL of them. And on top of that after he gained the petrolium, he wouldnt let ANY weapon inspectors from the UN or any nation into his country. After that wouldnt you assume that he was up to something in there?

So he murdered his own citizens, funded terrorism, ignored UN sanctions, and was experimenting w/ Nuclear Power. And now I cant wait to watch this SOB die.

Answer 5

Why? Because the GOP has powerful mouth pieces like Limbaugh, Savage, O'Liely and Hannity to spread there lies and propaganda. What's the old saying, tell a lie often enough and people will start to believe its true even though ALL of the facts available prove otherwise. I think Bush himself said it best:

If you've retired, you don't have anything to worry about. The third time I've said that. I'll probably say it three more times, see, in my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda.

-- Truth... Propaganda... Pretty much the same thing as far as Dubya is concerned. A surprisingly candid statement, though... Greece, New York, May 24, 2005

Answer 6

With all due comprehend, your premise is somewhat over board. Even the Laffer curve preducts no such element; it basically predicts that the is a tax fee factor which will maximize gross sales. of course, at a nil% marginal fee, income tax gross sales will be $0. apart from some those who would favor to artwork charitably, at a one hundred% marginal fee income tax gross sales will mind-set $0. there's a level between those the position gross sales is maximized. did you recognize the position that's?

Answer 7

republicans/democrats certainly do not believe that! only people on Yahoo! who dont vote, never touch a newspaper but watch movies from Micheal Moore and claim they are politically educated!

Answer 8

1. I know of no Republican that thinks that, I do however know DNC moles that tried to act like Republicans and sprout that crap.

2. All this stuff has been covered ad naseum and to keep asking this inflamnatory type of question is childish and stupid.

Answer 9

Why bother? They are only going to come on and either state how their facts are true or just call you an idiot. Either way, no one is going to win.

Just take pleasure in the fact that you know what is right and what is spoken by the Bush regime. . .

Answer 10

Democrats support terrorism. It is a sign of weakness to talk to or negotiate with your enemies. If your enemies do not accede to your demands BEFORE you talk to them, then it's time to bomb or invade. Countries which are our declared enemies are ruled by madmen. Muslims wish to conquer the entire world and they will soon have the capability of doing so.