Thought I was done responding and I went back and reread your post. Do you realize how absurd that statement in the title is? If you're looking for documentation about the misdeeds of an individual, do you go to a reference that looks kindly upon the man? Of course the damning things are going to be found more readily on sites when they believe the guy evil. If you felt he was the second coming of Christ you'd tend to look for evidence to support it. Investigative reporters don't go after a story generally unless it seems to have an element of truth to it.
The difference here is that there's millions of "Bush-haters" Steve and you can't ignore their input just because it goes against your beliefs. He's the most polarizing political figure since Joe McCarthy and you all know it. Can I assume then which side you would have been on in the 50's?
Art
Current Events » in reply to re: Geez…
"You post a site that is extremely anti-Bush and call that documenting lies? "
The whole thread (33 posts)
- Timing of the attack on Iran. Follow the aircraft carriers.
- Bird farm boogie-woogie
- re: Follow the aircraft carriers.
- Last time they hadn't prepared the population yet.
- BTW - Russia and China have formed a military alliance. Iran an "associate".
- You are aware you're just making this up as you go along? (n/t)
- No, I wasn't. Which parts? (n/t)
- re: No, I wasn't. Which parts?
- BTW - Iran with nuclear power = WW III. Mad. Insanity. Unless - - -
- Confession. I made up the parts labeled as conjecture. (n/t)
- re: Confession
- Comparison
- "The only thing crazier than a stark raving mad nut is..." (n/t)
- re: Confession
- re: No, I wasn't. Which parts?
- No, I wasn't. Which parts? (n/t)
- Last time they hadn't prepared the population yet.