the support bush had from liberals for fighting Al-queda after 911?
Has Iraq really become that big of an albatross for them?
2007-01-10 01:29:57 · 7 answers · asked by The Twist 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Let me make it clear for you, Mikira
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtfAnoiZVhjN4SCB.fNROzTsy6IX?qid=20070110062110AAmq2Tj&show=7#profile-info-32515e7f5939d1eb07bc456b7a51bd96aa
does that help you and the other reality denialers?
2007-01-10 01:47:07 · update #1
Ann Coulter - strident researcher...LOL
2007-01-10 01:57:43 · update #2
More Clarification:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AubutasFFTHc7jwfd83pyIbzy6IX?qid=20070110065939AATPNzC
2007-01-10 02:05:51 · update #3
Have they ever told the truth?
2007-01-10 01:35:29 · answer #1 · answered by T S 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
People misremember recent history - there was indeed some high-visibility disagreement about Afghanistan:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=154
If you don't like Ann Coulter (she is very strident, I agree), look up her sources and tell us she's lying.
Also, many folks contend that they "support the war on terror but not the war in Iraq," but they seem to be the same ones also attacking all the other programs - domestic surveillance, detainment tat Gitmo, etc. - that have little, or NOTHING, to do with Iraq. I've addressed these elsewhere.
Also, they blamed Bush for 9/11, saying he did not "connect the dots." Well, Iraq was a HUGE dot, and it would have been irresponsible for him NOT to go in. We'll never know what Saddam would have done had we not. Would Democrats have supported going to Afghanistan BEFORE the US was attacked on a rationale of "pre-emption," when many didn't support going into Iraq on that rationale AFTER we felt what it was like to get sucker-punched?
There is a lot to criticize about Bush's handling of the war. No war goes smoothly.
But if your complaint is you dislike distortions, don't engage in your own. :)
PS Care to refute any of her points?
2007-01-10 09:48:38 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush had support from everyone including the Liberals and the UN in regards to fighting Al Queda after 911. So are you trying to say we are saying he didn't have their support? Or are you saying we are lying that he did have their support? Your question is completely unclear on what you are trying to imply.
2007-01-10 09:41:20 · answer #3 · answered by Mikira 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Precisely the point, after 9/11, not only Liberals supported Bush, but the whole world. I remember phoning home from a bar in Germany when the event happened and their were real tears in the eyes of my business colleagues.
3 years on, everybody hates Bush to the extent they mesh this with Americanizm. They not only have an albatross but their boy should be brought before an International Criminal Court.
2007-01-10 09:40:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
What lies have been told. The vote to enter Iraq was approved by a super-majority of both houses of Congress. Conservatives, liberals and moderates all voted for the war.
The ones who are lying are the liberals who deny supporting the war: http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
2007-01-10 09:39:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, the next president will have to wear waist high rubber boots around in the white house, for years, thats how long it will take to clean all of Bush's BS up
2007-01-10 09:39:40 · answer #6 · answered by AD 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Maybe they have to fight lies with lies! LOL
2007-01-10 09:57:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋