Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 179 (8014 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-19-2014 6:04 AM
199 online now:
frako, PaulK, saab93f (3 members, 196 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Ed67
Post Volume:
Total: 723,693 Year: 9,534/28,606 Month: 1,224/2,455 Week: 534/428 Day: 6/117 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234567Next
Author Topic:   Why is the President Lying ... again?
RAZD
Member
Posts: 15446
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 1 of 103 (147115)
10-04-2004 3:09 AM


In recent ads and campaign quotes from Bush:

The Kerry Doctrine, Bush said, is this: "That America has to pass a global test before we can use troops to defend ourselves. Senator Kerry's approach to foreign policy would give foreign governments veto power over national security decisions," Bush said. "I have a different view. When our country is in danger, the President's job is not to take an international poll. The President's job is to defend America."

This is a flat out lie that anyone can check by reading the transcript of the debate (see Transcript here)

Why is the president lying to the american people ... again?

One of the articles about these recent lies is Bush rips 'Kerry Doctrine'(click for full article)

This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-03-2005 21:06 AM


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 10-04-2004 3:43 AM RAZD has responded
 Message 4 by Silent H, posted 10-04-2004 6:17 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member
Posts: 8959
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 2 of 103 (147126)
10-04-2004 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
10-04-2004 3:09 AM


as a relatively new kerry supporter, how exactly is it a lie? just for clarification.

kerry's view does seem to be that we should pay attention to world's opinion of our actions, because it's better to have their support. it's not so much waiting for their opinions to come in, but taking it into account.

at least that was how i understood it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 3:09 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Lam, posted 10-04-2004 4:45 AM arachnophilia has responded
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 6:29 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded
 Message 8 by NosyNed, posted 10-04-2004 11:28 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
Lam
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 103 (147133)
10-04-2004 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by arachnophilia
10-04-2004 3:43 AM


In Kerry's own words, "But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

In this context, "global test" means a universal test where "your people understand fully... and you can prove to the world...."

I may not have the vast world experience as Mr. Bush, but even I can understand that Kerry did not mean it to say what the president has been screaming on television:

quote:
That America has to pass a global test before we can use troops to defend ourselves. Senator Kerry's approach to foreign policy would give foreign governments veto power over national security decisions I have a different view. When our country is in danger, the President's job is not to take an international poll. The President's job is to defend America.

This is by far the worst quote mining I have ever seen.

Added by edit:

Sometimes I wonder if the Bush supporters like whatever actually pays attention to what Bush is saying rather than what he claims to be: (1) religious, (2) conservative, (3) a bigot, and (4) a republican.

I'm a Kerry supporter and there are some things that I criticize him for. For example, when Kerry was asked to give an outline of his plan and a time line, Kerry tried to dodge the question by refering to what Bush is doing rather than what he (Kerry) plans to do. Furthermore, he failed to give any kind of timeline as was asked.

I think the only reason why Bush didn't pursue this is because he knows that he's already doing such a bad job already. It's like they're blackmailing each other.

If you want to be wise, don't follow CHRIS PORTEUS jr's definition as "a hard laborer that perhaps lacks education and only has a few simplistic beliefs but does not question those beliefs is wise." Question those that you support. If they make a mistake or are being dishonest, make a note of it. Don't blindly follow everything they say. The only way you can know what you are going to get is to note down the things you agree with as well as the things you don't agree with and then weigh them. Don't just blindly follow anyone that claims to be (1) religious, (2) conservative, (3) a bigot, and (4) a republican even though he is clearly a liar and a hypocrit.

This message has been edited by Lam, 10-04-2004 04:03 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 10-04-2004 3:43 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 10-05-2004 12:36 AM Lam has responded

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 2098 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 4 of 103 (147135)
10-04-2004 6:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
10-04-2004 3:09 AM


Why is the president lying to the american people ... again?

Because they've found it so consistently easy, why not again... and again... and just for kicks, yet again?

Did anyone watch Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer yesterday? He really put the screws on all the Reps who showed up (especially Rice). It was beautiful.

The only thing I hated is that what you have just mentioned kept coming up again and again... even Blitzer seemed sick of it by the end. The Reps were sticking to the new lie, but only one maybe two Kerry supporters gave it a good defense. Terry McAuliffe was so shrill in his response he made the RNC chairmain sound like maybe he was telling the truth.

What I don't get is why no one is stating the obvious. There is an internationally recognized standard for what PRE-EMPTIVE invasion requires. Number one on that list is something imminent, otherwise it is not pre-empting anything and is just an invasion.

Even given all the intel they said they had, there was no imminent threat of their attacking ANYONE (and that mirrors what Powell said early on),which means there was time for other means to be tried... and in this case was being tried. Now they are even admitting it would have been 10 years before Iraq could have become a threat, and that ASSUMES we let them.

They focus on the first part of Kerry's statement about this "test", that it is a global one, but lose the last and most important part... that it's about proving legitimacy. We have to be able to show its legitimacy to global standards, not that we have to have the globe tell us whether it was legitimate and that is the standard.

But I guess that is the whole point. You get everyone debating what he meant by the global part of the test, so that no one gets to the end of the sentence which was legitimacy. They would NOT want to discuss that.

This message has been edited by holmes, 10-04-2004 05:21 AM


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 3:09 AM RAZD has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 15446
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 5 of 103 (147136)
10-04-2004 6:29 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by arachnophilia
10-04-2004 3:43 AM


Global Test
Lam has your answer. Not only that

KERRY: The president always has the right, and always has had the right, for preemptive strike. That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War. And it was always one of the things we argued about with respect to arms control.

No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.

But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

What I have emphasised in yellow above is a direct contradiction to what Bush claims the "Kerry Doctrine" to involve.

He was there, he knows what Kerry said, he is misrepresenting it, and it is done intentionally for personal political gain: he is lying.

This is not the first time and it won't be the last

The president is also claiming that Kerry saw the same evidence that he saw on the threat that Saddam posed. This too is a lie, as it now transpires that the whitehouse kept information from the security counil members of the senate AND the senate in general that countered the evidence for going to war: they suppressed evidence that showed the sanctions were working in order to go to war.

THAT is despicable.

I cannot see how anyone can enjoy being a patsy for this person.

This message has been edited by RAZD, 10-04-2004 05:30 AM


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 10-04-2004 3:43 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 10:48 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 15446
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 6 of 103 (147160)
10-04-2004 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
10-04-2004 6:29 AM


Christian followers -- please answer: how can you back a known liar
Bush has been shown to lie several times, this latest one about the "global test" is the most blatantly intentionally self-servingly false statement of the bunch.

How can you as a true christian still believe that he is really that much of a fundamentalist believer when he makes such willfull lies?

Of course I don't see how anyone can believe a word he says, but that is MY opinion: why do you give him a "BYE" when you can see that he is lying?

enlighten me.

please.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 6:29 AM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Lam, posted 10-04-2004 11:27 AM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 11:43 AM RAZD has responded

  
Lam
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 103 (147164)
10-04-2004 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
10-04-2004 10:48 AM


Re: Christian followers -- please answer: how can you back a known liar
Well, I'm still convinced that there are people that would vote for anyone that claims to be the 4 things I stated above, regardless if he's a man or monkey.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 10:48 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8561
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 8 of 103 (147165)
10-04-2004 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by arachnophilia
10-04-2004 3:43 AM


Veto
The word veto has very specific meaning. If you read what Kerry actually suggested he, in NO way, implies any such thing. In fact he makes it clear that the US could well go ahead with an action solo.

The inclusion of the word veto is a deliberate attempt to make it appear that Kerry is saying something else. That is, the republicans are lying on this one and very much so.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 10-04-2004 3:43 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1870 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 9 of 103 (147169)
10-04-2004 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
10-04-2004 10:48 AM


Kerry lacks leadership abilities, because of his double speak, etc...
I'm not a politician, but either were a soveign nation or were not, you all didn't seem outraged at the communist butchering millions of south vietnamese after we left them defenseless, truly you democrats should read up on Chamberlain, don't realize the terrorists made a house call on the pentagon, killed hundreds of our leaders, and you all sit back and say we should look to the United Nations who believe Israel shouldn't build a wall to protect the palestian children from blowing themselves up because with a wall they would not be able to cross over to blow up Israelies, etc...Globalisms, asking the UN to intercede, to make our decisions, is just not the answer, we need to be a soverign nation, not bound by International courts, so we can make our own decisions(the senate, Congress agreed as did Mr. Kerry that going to war with Sadamn based on the intelligence was the right thing to do), etc...If you don't want us to be a soverign nation, then whats the reason your an american, the problem with Kerry is that he flips positions, begging the question of his ability to lead, the world needs stability, and an unstable president that flips positions constantly, as political winds dictate, is not in our best interest, etc...
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 10:48 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Loudmouth, posted 10-04-2004 2:12 PM johnfolton has not yet responded
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 5:26 PM johnfolton has responded
 Message 37 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 6:00 PM johnfolton has not yet responded
 Message 41 by nator, posted 10-05-2004 8:42 AM johnfolton has not yet responded

  
Lam
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 103 (147171)
10-04-2004 11:51 AM


Is it me or whatever seems to not able to read and comprehend what he's just read?
Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 10-04-2004 11:56 AM Lam has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8561
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 11 of 103 (147173)
10-04-2004 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Lam
10-04-2004 11:51 AM


Reading abilities
That's a major reason why I rarely reply to his posts. He has shown that he in incapable of learning even if he might be able to read (which seems to be doubtful).
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Lam, posted 10-04-2004 11:51 AM Lam has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 12:11 PM NosyNed has responded
 Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 10-04-2004 12:28 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1870 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 12 of 103 (147178)
10-04-2004 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by NosyNed
10-04-2004 11:56 AM



Ned, I realize Canada is likely going down the slippery slope, in respect to the freedom to preach about abominations(what Mr. Kerry appear to avoid talking about, those abominations), it appears Canada has been moving to aline your laws with the United Nations Charter, just wondering, did Canada sign up to belong to the International World Courts, what GWB said would not bind Americans to, but all that aside, a little off topic, just curious, what kind of sports car did you decide to buy, etc...

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa050602b.htm


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 10-04-2004 11:56 AM NosyNed has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by NosyNed, posted 10-04-2004 2:25 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 6202
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


Message 13 of 103 (147186)
10-04-2004 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by NosyNed
10-04-2004 11:56 AM


Re: Reading abilities
I think that the following quote, from this thread is pretty good evidence that whatever is a troll.

quote:
...How will the righteous be allowed to be holy still, if they are forced to marry same sex which is considered an abomination.[Emphasis added.]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 10-04-2004 11:56 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Dan Carroll, posted 10-04-2004 12:34 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded
 Message 22 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-04-2004 4:35 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
Dan Carroll 
Suspended Member (Idle past 845 days)
Posts: 2904
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 14 of 103 (147188)
10-04-2004 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Chiroptera
10-04-2004 12:28 PM


Re: Reading abilities
Wait, that's not part of the liberal agenda?

This sucks. I thought the whole point of being liberal in the 21st century was to forcibly turn everybody gay. Sort of like in the sixties, when Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. did a little genetic tinkering, and made everybody black. Or in the twenties, when the suffragettes legally enforced sex changes, and made everybody into women.

I tell you, the left has lost its way.


"If I had to write ten jokes about potholders, I don't think I could do it. But I could write ten jokes about Catholicism in the next twenty minutes. I guess I'm drawn to religion because I can be provocative without harming something people really care about, like their cars."
-George Meyer, Simpsons writer
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 10-04-2004 12:28 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

    
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 103 (147201)
10-04-2004 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by johnfolton
10-04-2004 11:43 AM


Re: Kerry lacks leadership abilities, because of his double speak, etc...
quote:
I'm not a politician, but either were a soveign nation or were not,

Iraq was a sovereign nation and we attacked them because they would do what we or the UN told them to do. If we find some one uncooperative and then decide it is reason to invade, perhaps we should also side in favor of the US cooperating with international bodies.

quote:
truly you democrats should read up on Chamberlain, don't realize the terrorists made a house call on the pentagon, killed hundreds of our leaders, and you all sit back and say we should look to the United Nations

How many of those terrorists were Iraqis?

quote:
If you don't want us to be a soverign nation, then whats the reason your an american,

We are and I want us to continue to be a sovereign nation. Sovereignty should not mean do as we please when we please. The next election will hopefully show that a majority of americans WANT us to cooperate with other nations. If the people want it, then as a sovereign nation we should be able to do it.

quote:
the senate, Congress agreed as did Mr. Kerry that going to war with Sadamn based on the intelligence was the right thing to do

They did not agree to go to war. They agreed that President Bush had the authority to use force as a last resort. President Bush did not do that, and he failed to fulfill his other obligations before going to war. Two trips to the UN does not a diplomatic mission make. 90% of the casualties and 90% of the cost does not a coalition make. Bush did not "stay the course" he proposed to Congress. Bush flip flopped.

quote:
and an unstable president that flips positions constantly, as political winds dictate, is not in our best interest, etc...

So why do you stay with Bush? During the debates with Gore, Bush claimed that the best path for foreign relations was to stay "muted". He was advocating that America take a lesser role in international politics. This, in no way, reflects his current position. Bush sways with the political winds as well.

This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 10-04-2004 01:14 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 11:43 AM johnfolton has not yet responded

  
1
234567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014