Why weren't cons accused of being unpatriotic when they obsessed over a bj?
It's not like he outed a CIA agent or anything,
over false documents for the war in Iraq no less......
2007-04-08 07:24:35 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
LMAO: "at war" when the hell are we NOT at war? hmmm?
I suppose if we weren't 'at war', it's again a free for all, make up your damn minds.
....and since this unending because futile 'war on terror' will last throughout future democrat's terms, you will be respecting and patriotically supporting them as well, ha?
URSO full of sht...pleeeeeze.
2007-04-08 07:34:33 · update #1
Nope. But it is un-patriotic to go public with constant malcontent against your nation, while at war.
Support the nation. It has to survive each presidency.
Argle, maybe you can explain in detail what part of my answer you have a problem with. Once again, reading words that aren't here.
We haven't seen war. If the Liberals get their way, we will.
2007-04-08 07:28:03 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 7⤋
Yep, it's only when the President is a republican.
Jerry Falwell:
Produced a propaganda smear piece when Clinton (A Democrat) was President, ADMITTED that there might have been some innaccuracies.
But when a Republican is in charge, if someone says "terrible things" about him, then according to the Jerry, that guy needs to be "popped".
2007-04-08 15:01:11 · answer #2 · answered by ck4829 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, if your chosen president starts a war for profit and it's unpatriotic to question or critique an American president during a war then any presidential warmonger can keep the American collective mouth shut by simply keeping America in a state of perpetual war ... kinda like "The War on Terror". "The War on Terror" can never be won and will never end so no more critiquing the president again ... ever. very convenient is "The War on Terror".
2007-04-08 14:32:58 · answer #3 · answered by nebtet 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
To hear many (certainly not all) of the Republicans tell it, apparently so. There can be no reconciliation or meaningful debate as long as bigotry, name calling, and hatred are the primary tools of self-proclaimed patriots.
2007-04-08 14:54:51 · answer #4 · answered by Olde Spy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
After eight years of thorough investigating, the only evidence of wrongdoing was a blue dress.
Come on. (No pun intended)
Now, the tide has flip-flopped, for it is believed anyone with a dissenting voice is unpatriotic.
Instead of being compassionately conservative, G.W. Bush has become a decider of war and torture with disregard to the Constitution.
Sanity only begs to question WHY!
2007-04-08 14:39:43 · answer #5 · answered by Johnny 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Don't confuse them with the facts - they already have enough trouble keeping the lies straight.
*See above. Lol.
** The part about this being a war, and then saying it's unpatriotic to say it isn't.
*** Lol! Spoken like a true chickenhawk.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f327/marvisrad/CupOfShutTheFuckUp.jpg
2007-04-08 14:28:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Because receiving a BJ in the oval office is not a patriotic act.
Defending the country from the likes of radical Islam is.
Bush did not out a CIA agent, nor did he present the Congress( the body that actually sent troops to Iraq) with false documents.
If you have proof that he did, then please present it for all of us to see.
2007-04-08 14:35:50 · answer #7 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.
2007-04-08 14:54:33 · answer #8 · answered by Logan and Ella's Mommy 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
A patriotic BJ - now you have gone too far!
2007-04-08 14:40:45 · answer #9 · answered by thewindywest 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
yes! because no Democrat in recent times has been right about much
2007-04-08 14:30:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋