It's only credible if you hand wave away the previous administrations comments and ignore ten years of Saddam undercuttinga and avoiding
UN sanctions. Now I realize some people that have a mindset that necessitates this and think they are presenting a likely scenario rather than an unlikely one.
It's the intent that matters not the words. If you are saying what you believe to help your country you are being true to it in your heart. If you are spouting what you know to be BS even if it's the same words as some dupe which also helps terrorists you are guilty of being treasonous while he is not. Both can be wrong and hurting our country, and both could be accused of treasonous actions (not the crime) because no one knows for sure. In a reasonable moderate society only those which had a history of obfuscation and and political shenanigans like Al Sharpton or ones contradicting their own past statements would be subject to the assumption they were intentionally lieing about such issues.
Regards,
Mark
Flame » in reply to "Bush is a liar"
It's Not Credible
The whole thread (148 posts)
- JFC can't we just get along....
- Apparently not (n/t)
- The thread is now locked
- Thank you.
- Uh Frank This Is Flame
- Uh Mark
- Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position
- Point by point
- MA Wins Again
- re: MA Wins Again
- There You Go Again
- Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- Aye, there's the rub
- Hello
- I say again: Put up, or shut up.
- Sort of A good Point
- That being the case
- On the WMD Issue
- In The Interest Of Time - Blood For Oil (n/t)
- re: That being the case
- That being the case
- Sort of A good Point
- I say again: Put up, or shut up.
- Well said (n/t)
- Hello
- re: Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- Aye, there's the rub
- re: There You Go Again
- Criticism of Bush's war policy = treason
- There You Go Again
- re: MA Wins Again
- MA Wins Again
- "3) Providing aid and comfort to the enemy has nothing to do with treason and no reasonable person would think otherwise."
- Do you speak for all conservatives?
- Hell No
- around and around and around and around
- re: "Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position "
- OK It Is The Conservative Position
- OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- The Summary You Ignored
- Restriction of Speech
- Yes You've Got It Wrong
- As, apparently do you
- Why Do You People Ignore Half Of What I've Posted To Make Your Points?
- Wow
- Battle Fatigue?
- Scarred, battered, but unbowed
- Robert did not make a mistake, you did in misunderstanding him.
- We Both Did According To This
- That would be the apology and pledge I referred to. I could not have made my post much simpler. (n/t)
- We Both Did According To This
- Battle Fatigue?
- You people?
- Wow
- Why Do You People Ignore Half Of What I've Posted To Make Your Points?
- As, apparently do you
- Yes You've Got It Wrong
- And Ignored Again (n/t)
- Restriction of Speech
- I see The Plea For Consistency Once Again Falls On Deaf Ears
- re: OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- The Summary You Ignored
- OK It Is _A_ Conservative Position
- OK It Is The Conservative Position
- Hell No
- Delete Post Or Modify Name
- Point by point
- Wow The Liberals Took A Poll And Voted Against The Conservative Position
- This Is Flame
- Picking at scabs
- Uh Mark
- It isn't serious, is it FrankC -
- Is this one about me? (n/t)
