English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-11-15 01:26:16 · 19 answers · asked by Johnny D 2 in Politics & Government Politics

Morden - has you mind turned to jello? I did not say I think Bush is a liar only that Bush haters say that. Stop drinking the kool-aid!

2007-11-15 02:07:41 · update #1

19 answers

Anyone that can find a politician that doesn't lie has tapped into their own gold mine.

The deciding factor comes down to who lies the least and Hillary isn't anywhere near the bottom, skilled or otherwise.

2007-11-15 01:31:16 · answer #1 · answered by LadySable 6 · 4 4

I think its the kind of lie where your leader looks you in the eye and says that a program for middle class kids is not going to be renewed because it doesn't take care of the poor first. When its not supposed to. Or that we went into Iraq to the tune of some nine billion dollars, on cherry picked Intel.
Or that there never was credible Intel on any link between Osama and Saddam. Except in his dreams.
Funny thing about all those Hillary lies...a Republican investigation for six years found no wrongdoing on her part. None. Six years, millions of dollars, and she didn't do anything wrong. All that gossip, all the lies and slurs printed about her, and a Republican investigation finds nothing.
I'm so sick and tired of Bush's incompetence, that I'd take skilled anything...anything at all.

2007-11-15 09:46:37 · answer #2 · answered by justa 7 · 3 1

People who don't hate Bush say that he is a liar. Why? Because he IS a liar. That doesn't mean that Hillary isn't a liar. She probably is one too. So far her lies have not gotten thousands of people killed in an unnecessary war. Politicians all are liars, that is what they do. How much their lies impact the constituency and the world depends on the lie and who is telling it.

2007-11-15 10:17:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Well Hilary hater-Neocon, Bush is not only a liar, but criminal, blood thirsty war criminal, thief and far from being bright. Accordingly any Democratic Party candidates will be way better than evil and criminal Bush-Cheney duo regardless if you like it or not.

2007-11-15 10:30:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I never said that he is a liar... i dislike the fact that president wanted a reason to attack because he saw a window of opportunity to bring democracy to the middle east and with a new government in iraq = second secure source of oil(silly idea.) also sadaam never used their wmds on us during the gulf war and he had it for 20 yrs prior (bush and his administration fooled most HILLARY CLINTON and most americans)
george w and his administration also felt bad about bush senior watching the iraqis killed when he asked them to rise up against the government and they wanted to remove that guilt

thus, hillary does not have the skills or her vote would have never been cast.... neither does guliani... for heavens sake is just a mayor... we have thousands of them and they have never run a country.

2007-11-15 10:27:31 · answer #5 · answered by enrique7718 5 · 0 2

And you have EXAMPLES of all this "truth stretching" right?

What am I saying? Republicans don't NEED evidence, just innuendo is enough. Hundreds of investigative hours wasted, hundreds of millions of US taxpayer dollars thrown away and not ONE charge has ever been brought, not one indictment handed down and not one DAY of a prison sentence handed out to Bill OR Hillary Clinton. Even the impeachment was overturned in appellate court. When will Republicans repay us all that money? When will Republicans repay us for the trillions they are currently borrowing from Communist China to give to Halliburton?

This is how Republicans investigate a crime. They accuse, then manufacture "eyewitness" accounts (with absolutely no REAL evidence of wrongdoing) to bolster their fantasies. Doesn't matter if the charges are true, the damage is done in the reputation department.

Just hundreds of millions of dollars wasted by Republicans.

When Bush said "We will Smoke Osama Bin Laden Out of His Cave" was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush said, "I want Bin Laden, dead or alive", was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush said, "Saddam Hussein has nuclear weapons", was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush said, "We Fight Them There So We Don't Have to Fight Them HERE" was he lying or merely justifying ignoring the UNs directives about not invading Iraq? And if this statement is true, why did the JFK fuelline plot and the "Fort Dix Six" conspiracies happen at all?
When Bush said, "We will be in Iraq no longer than 6 months and this war will cost no more than $87 Billion, which the US will be repaid from oil revenues", was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush said he's "been to war, and been the father of twin girls, and war is easier", was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush put on that flight suit and stood on the deck of that aircraft carrier and said, "Mission: Accomplished" was he lying or just stretching the truth?
When Bush told the US we needed to invade Afghanistan to remove the Taliban militia from power, yet 5 years later the Taliban still control vast portions of Afghanistan, was he lying to us or just stretching the truth?
When Bush said he satisfactorily completed his military obligation in the Texas Air National Guard, even though THEY had him listed as a "non-locatee" (the Air Force's phrase for AWOL in the 70s) was he lying or stretching the truth?
When Laura Bush admitted in two separate interviews that George liked his cocaine in college, was SHE lying or just stretching the truth?
When Colin Powell went before the UN and described mobile labs and aluminum tubes, was he lying then? He admitted as much on "Meet the Press" this past June. Which time was he lying? When he told the world Hussein had nuclear weapons or when he told the American people it was "hogwash" to rally support for invasion?

Which is it?

2007-11-15 10:18:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

I despise bush just as much as the next lib..but calling him a liar is lame. Everyone lies...politicians(on both sides) just do it much more

if one calls him a liar, they should at least specify what is being lied about

2007-11-15 09:31:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

No merit to the question, but to answer it, I'll say "no."

Just because people despise Bush tearing down our civil liberties does not mean they automatically like Hillary. Simple-minded people may not realize this, but I am sure you do.

2007-11-15 09:32:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

I think that we need change too, but I think that the only Candidate who isn't lying about just about everything is Ron Paul.
I don't think that Hillary is even a consideration. Her behaviour is revolting, and she doesn't even merit consideration.
As to the rest of the candidates, I believe that they are more of the same, whichever party you are looking at. There really isn't enough difference in any of the top tier candidates to distinguish them.
The only hope for our Country is Ron Paul.
He is the only one who really stands for anything.

2007-11-15 09:46:14 · answer #9 · answered by maryjellerson 4 · 0 5

You assume that anyone who hates Bush loves Clinton.

Why can't you hate both? I don't limit my hatred to one person. I hate all of them.

The world is not all black and white or Pepsi and Coke.

2007-11-15 09:50:41 · answer #10 · answered by cattledog 7 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers