of course i hold bush responsible for all that has gone on since the beginning of fighting in iraq, but to say that congress merely went along so they wouldn't "divide the country"? c'mom red....have the testicular fortitude to admit that they all relied on (in hindsight) faulty intel. speaking of blame, maybe it's the dems fault for not providing a better candidate than "i voted for the 87 billion before i voted against it"
I do not. There are plenty of liars, both sincere and insincere. A few posts ago, I said that I had no further word on the subject, but here I am posting again. Did I lie? Was I sincere or insincere? By your narrow definition there can be no lies unless we know something about the liar that only he can know. It's a broader definition than that, amigo. You attempts to discredit me don't mask the fact that you can't accept the dictionary definition. And if you think I'm a poor researcher, I am amused. I've enjoyed a long, distinguished and award-winning career doing exactly what . . . wait a minute! You're pulling my chain, again. :grin:
I didn't advocate that there was a "conspiracy". I do maintain that a covert agent was exposed, somebody with classified information responsibilities exposed her, and the president pledged to punish the leaker. I don't care if it turned out to be David Letterman, but I did expect that the law would be taken seriously and that the President would do what he promised. It's pretty obvious that certain people in the administration did use the leak to advance their sliming of Wilson. Libby perjured himself to try to cover for it. Like I said before, it's more of a political scandal than a legal one. And it really reeks.
Did they not? And it is a Republican Senate and a Republican House. Sure, I hold them responsible, too. Democrats included. :wink: Well, the war ain't their fault, but they are surely responsible for running a Northeastern liberal candidate that don't represent the moderate majority and couldn't win. They should have learned after Mondale, Dukakis, etc. The time the Dems did win was when they went with southern moderates like Carter and Clinton. Both parties are dominated by their extreme elements right now and the citizens are growing tired of the partisan bickering at the expense of the overall good of the country. I think both sides pick center-leaning candidates in 2008, but I still hope for the day when a truly moderate party emerges between the extreme positions of the GOP and the Democrats.
only if the lie is about a mental state, like intent to do something, like in this case with bush. most lies are about actual actions, not future intent. please try and understand that. e.g if i say i am hungry, you will just have to take my word for it. same with if i make some claim about an action i intend to take at a later date. however, if i claim i didnt steal your wallet, then you find 100 witnesses that saw me do it, i am caught lying. my definition is not narrow, it is accurate, you just arent grokking what i mean. red, please, for once read what i am saying. you simply refuse to understand the difference between a lie and the action of lying. a lie can be a simply untrue statement. the action of lying is to state a lie as true. please try and understand that, or do me a big favor and stop pretending you cant understand. you are quoting me the definition of a lie, which is not the same as the word "lying", which is what you are accusing bush of doing. i cannot read your mind, but my guess is that you were not lying, but meant what you said, exactly like bush may have been doing. the simple fact that you did not follow through is not lying. review: please understand that you are applying the definition of the word lie to the different word lying, which means to tell a lie with intent to decieve. please, please, please understand that. i am sure you are a fantastic researcher at work. however, in the course of discussion here i think you tend to speak about things you do not exactly understand and then use flawed research to back your opinion, as with the examples i mentioned.
Three alleged errors in 7544 posts! I dare say that a .9996 average is probably better than yours. Certainly better than average around here. And not all of my responses here are the result of research. Much of it comes from my 157-like intellect. :grin: Jeebus loves you mahtin. But I think you just love to argue. I can relate. :thumb:
1. please honky, you are not as smart as 157. lets try and be realistic. 2. i would prefer if you would use your brialliant hippie mind more, and research less. it is when you start filling in the gaps of your knowledge with research that i think you lose your way. more grokking, less googling.
