http://www.msnbc.com/news/1000254.asp Notice how the country to blame for Iran's nuclear program is the Soviet Union. A country that doesn't even exist anymore. And he doesn't care where Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are tried if they are captured. Yes, OBL killed over 3,000 Americans on our soil, but we'll let the Hague have him, where every anti-American lunatic the world over will use "international justice" to beat us over the head about how evil America is. And of course, they can't get the death penalty there. Yeah, let's let these scumbags live after all the misery they have brought to so many people. Bush jumbles a few words, he's a primate. Dean talks about a country that hasn't existed for 12 years, he gets applause. Huh? I hope he gets the Democratic nomination. I'm going to enjoy watching Bush mop the floor with this deluded maniac.
Yeah, I saw that interview. The whole international tribunal thing was a little disturbing. Dean has a tendency to answer questions he hasn't formulated a policy for. Instead he should have just offered a little spin for that one. He will definitely change his answer for that issue. As far as Bush goes, he never answers a hard question. What are you talking about? Never has the bar been lowered for a president as it has for Bush. Bush doesn't just jumble a few words. He can barely complete a sentence. I hope Dean gets the nomination as well. However, I am still not convinced that the majority of people who voted against Bush last time will change their minds. Why do conservatives give Bush a pass? He is one of the biggest spenders in years (much more than Clinton). The deficit is approaching a half trillion dollars this year and next. I would put Dean's character against Bush's any day. Bush is all talk when it comes to character, and you guys simply buy it!
Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball" You are making my point for me by posting this reference to Dean's reluctance to release all his records. Bush is doing the exact same thing, but on much, much larger and more important issues. 1.He is impeding the 9/11 investigation. The whole national security line is bull. The investigation is embarrassing to the administration. 2.He refuses to answer whether he ever used cocaine. 3.He will not release the records of his and Cheney's meetings with the energy companies. 4. He lied about the reasons for the war in Iraq. This is just off the top of my head. I am sure if I researched a bit, there would be some other fine examples.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball" Actually I am not making your point. You brought up character, and I just showed you that Dean is not who you are making him up to be. So for you the issue's you bring up about Bush not answering questions or hiding information should be non-issues unless you are going to put Dean down as well. I would like proof that Bush lied about Iraq. You can make a better argument that we may have had some bad intelligence. Bush's main point was always that Saddam was ignoring the UN resolutions ending the first war since as far back as 1998. Saddam continued to make token attempts to comply. There was intel that if we did not get full inspections dangerous situations could be going on unchecked. These situations were the possibility of WMDs Saddam tried to make missile deals with North Korea. Also see Jetstorm's thread on terrorist ties. Do you really think the Democratic Senators that voted in support of the war did not have access to a lot of intel before the war started. It is just now after we have not found a WMDs they are coming out bashing Bush. If it was just lies would the Democrats have voted YES?
But, Bush's records while he was Governor of Texas are available to the public. Dean's Vermont gubernatorial records remain sealed. 1) How has Bush impeded the 9/11 investigation? By insisting on some national security protections of certain CIA material on terror intelligence in the lead-up to the attacks? We are, after all, still fighting the War on Terror and still trying to get these guys. I am all for a bi-partisan, independent investigation into 9/11, but now is not the time for that. We must wait until Al-Qaida is completely stamped out of existence, the War on Terror is won, and the intelligence is no longer vital to national security. Besides, I imagine the investigation would be more embarassing to his predecessor's administration than his. 2) Why is Bush snortin' something 30 years ago relevant today? And do you have proof that he did indeed snort something? Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated allegations. And hey, I'm all about giving guys second chances. I was all for giving Clinton the benefit of the doubt, until he brought his philandering into the Oval Office and made it clear it was not all in the past. As far as I know, Bush hasn't been snorting lines of coke off the Presidential desk. 3) Why do you want the energy policy meetings publicized? What do you think you are going to find? While I'm not much of a fan of secrecy myself, and I wouldn't have held the meetings in private simply to avoid the fit-pitching of Democrats, perhaps they merely wanted to have a level-headed discussion of energy policy without the Greenpeace nuts trying to stampede the meeting and raving about BushCheneyHalliburtonEvilConspiracytoDestroytheWorld. Sometimes it takes parties meeting behind closed doors to hammer out agreements and get things moving.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Howard Dean on "Softball" I guess its a question of magnitude. Bush lies about the big stuff. Perhaps if he had a sexual affair, you might get angry. Probabaly 90% of all conservatives can't stand Clinton because of character issues, but you give Bush a pass on the same character issues. Bush did lie about Iraq. This administration used the power of FEAR like no other. This war was not about WMD. This war is about a vision of a greater middle east that is friendly to U.S. interests... period! Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Perl, and others have been planning this for years. Andrew Card... "you don't introduce new products in August" Paul Wolfowitz... "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on"
You would be wrong about the investigation being more embarrasing to Clinton. George W. Bush gave about $125 million in aid to the Taliban in 2000. That pretty much destroys the notion that Clinton should known about 9/11. I'll give you the reference if you like. Doing coke is a felony, isn't it? He has yet to answer the question. Also, Clinton was hounded for years about White Water. Why isn't Dean given the same benefit of the doubt on the Vermont records?
