XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: dead@gone.com   
      
   On Mon, 13 May 2013 21:53:34 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:   
      
   > Tom McDonald  wrote in news:83gkt.352$je4.172   
   > @newsfe09.iad:   
   >   
   >> On 5/13/2013 7:45 PM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   >>> deep wrote in news:rfg2p85d0op3t1knln4conjjsdncn6bq9g@4ax.com:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 14:15:56 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> deep wrote in news:nfa2p8diimermp4kcg1pv6prbqrso51udh@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 12:15:57 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> deep wrote in news:dbo1p8dvo2pkvfpgef5a3cl6tm8v48t92u@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On Sun, 12 May 2013 22:30:33 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason)   
   > wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> They had a chance to talk to the survivors the week after the   
   >>> attack   
   >>>>> so   
   >>>>>>>>> they knew the truth--that it was a well planned terrorist   
   > attack.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Which nobody knew until much later.  The Administration wasn't   
   >>> hiding   
   >>>>>>>> anything.  At the time nobody knew what was going on.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Bullshit.  They sure as hell knew the following morning.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Prove it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Watch the hearings, dumbass.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   They had no good intel on the ground.  They had no warning,   
   >>>>>> nobody claiming responsiblity.  Contradictory reports from on site.   
   >>> It   
   >>>>>> wasn't until days later all the facts came out and even then they   
   >>>>>> weren't completely sure of what the truth was.  There was no deceit   
   >>> or   
   >>>>>> deception.  Only a breakdown of intel and communications in a very   
   >>>>>> difficult time.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Must be why all the aliterations on the reports while the   
   >>> Administration   
   >>>>> claims only one change and it was purely 'sylistic'.  ;)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Once again this is nothing but a bunch of Republicans   
   >>>>>> monkeys flinging feces hoping some will stick to Obama.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Apparently some of that stuck to you since you seem to be full of   
   > shit   
   >>>>> again.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> They have no proof.  Just Obama haters' opinions.  Another Republican   
   >>>> witchhunt, and they are dragging out anybody they can find who will   
   >>>> try to blame everything on Obama.   
   >>>   
   >>> Sounds just like you guys on Bush.   
   >>>   
   >> Well, except, of course, Bush actually did most of the stuff we blamed   
   >> on him. Hell, lots of it, he was (and is) proud of.   
   >   
   >   
   > Actually, no, he didn't.  He did not falsify intel although he may have   
   > misread it.   
      
   What about the claims that they knew exactly what WMDS Saddam possessed   
   and where they were located a few days before the war?  Obviously they   
   were lying then.   
      
    He saw the same intel the committees did   
      
   That turns out not to be the case. A lot of intel showing that Saddam did   
   not have WMDs or the capability of making any was held back. And the   
   Senate did not declare war.  They simply passed a resolution telling Bush   
   to start a war if he felt like it, on the understanding that he wouldn't   
   do so without backing from the UN Security Council.  That was another   
   thing Bush lied about.   
      
   and the Senate   
   > passed a war resolution supported by statements from John Kerry, both   
   > Clintons, etc..   
      
   Again, false.  Most of the quotes right wingers love to cite came from   
   1998, or 2002, before the UN inspectors, led by an American joint task   
   force, determined that Saddam was in complience.   
      
      
    He did NOT do the deregulation attributed to him.  He   
   > did not give a taxcut to the rich that the middle class didn't also   
   > receive.  In fact, Obama not only extended that taxcut and added another   
   > 2% from payroll taxes.   
      
   Boy, you're just chock-full of lies, aren't you?  Over 90% of his tax   
   cuts went to the rich, who have since basically gutted the American   
   economy.  And yes, Obama extended much of that tax cut, another   
   disgraceful cave on his part.   
      
   Assuming you AREN'T in the top 1%, why are you applauding the massive   
   screwing you're getting?   
   >   
   > Was Bush a good president?  I don't think so but I do think that history   
   > will judge him a much better president than the current media does.   
      
   I think he will go down as the first post-coup President of the former   
   United States.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)