Is that the best you've got, neo-clown? Considering that the biggest liars have been proven to be Bush and Cheney, shouldn't you far-rightists shut up about lies?
2007-07-17 16:54:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by atheist 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
And, your question is about what? It is fairly clear, you are looking in the mirror, as you type. And, or pointing fingers, when, as you do so - 4 fingers point back at yourself.
What is your reason for the accusation of 'lies'? I hate to be one to use this worn out phrase, but, cannot resist...
Where is your proof? Where is your evidence for making such a bold-face statement?
Note: Romare, I second that motion - great answer!!
2007-07-17 17:37:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ro40rd 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No but Mepublicans sure do observe and display Fudd's first law of opposition " if you push something hard enough, it WILL fall over" Now there is a republican think tank result that is quite applicable to the War in Iraq. Not to mention that we are spending 12 BILLION dollars a month there. Now, who is the political party who always is asking for money? Hmmm
I under the Impression that the Mepublicans are fond of saying the Democrats are. Well gee, I guess THEY have their Heads where the sun dont shine,HUH?
2007-07-17 17:01:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Newtons laws of gravity and motion rely solely on fact and calculation. An individual who assumes or labels those with a liberal view liars, uses no facts nor calculations.
A fine example being the first person to answer on this list.
2007-07-17 16:48:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by dCon 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
You know, phrasing things in terms of Newton's laws of motion is not a bad idea.
"An object in motion will tend to continue in motion"
becomes
"A president in denial will tend to continue in denial."
NOTE TO ROMARE:
Great answer! I'm going to copy it and paste it for every idiotic neocon troll. I'll give you credit, of course.
It works very well for neocons and their lies.
2007-07-17 17:00:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
No, but here's a lesson in logic for the cons:
Just because you repeat something over and over again, or just because Bush, Cheney, or Rush says it, then that does not make it true.
2007-07-17 16:47:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by ck4829 7
·
8⤊
0⤋
"A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN"
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.
He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.
Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.
He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.
He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.
The house didn't have electricity until some liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
2007-07-17 16:48:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
1⤋
maybe they explain the direction of bush's approval rating as his lies come to light
2007-07-17 16:48:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by bdbbdb 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
a stupid person might think so, I imagine
2007-07-17 16:47:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Nick F 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
WTF... I can't tell if this should be in the science or the asinine section.... definitely should NOT be in politics.
2007-07-17 16:56:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋