Two Ian threads busted before noon (over here). Poor sap. Must have ran over his puppy or something and is crying out for help. Or somethin'.
He cited numbers. Given that you based this thread on a blog entry, you don't get to complain about other people's citations.
I like how the lefty liberals deny reality=> We invaded to remove a dictator, we did! We invaded to bring democracy, we did! We invaded to bring free elections, we did! Iraq has no dictator, we removed him. Iraq has open democracy, we helped. Iraq had free elections, we helped. Liberals scream more troops, soldiers on the ground say they have enough, Liberals scream pull troops, soldiers on the ground want to finish mission, Liberals scream about exit strategy, soldiers on the ground know when done. Liberals lost the House, Liberals lost the Senate, Liberals lost the Executive Office, and they lost most Governorships; You Wonder Why? Liberals aren't working for you; they are working against you. Liberals work for themselves; against America. What makes this country great is that Liberals are not running it; Thank God!
No you invaded to get oil, and George Bush said it was to get rid of Weapons of mass destruction, there weren't any, he lied, if he went in to remove a dictator why not go to Zimbabwe or any of those African nation? he won't cuz they don't have oil, the only thing Bush is interested in is money, why do you think the whole world hates the US government. Why didn't Bush go after Bin Ladin or is clearly a major threat? cuz they couldn't find him so to please the public he turned his attention to Iraq and make it look like they are a real threat when they are not.
His speech had the lowest TV viewing of all time for a president. So this was his 63% of supporters: Our president is a dumb s___
As most of the 80% you're talking about believe that's going to happen one day, I host a farewell/boot-in-the-ass party for them at my place every year. However, after so many disappointments, I'm getting frustrated. I may have to make it BYOB if they don't diappear soon.
Nice find, and the quote box was the exactly correct answer. Had the speech been given by Clinton, the percentages of dems and reeps would have likely been reversed.
Its is a real poll that is un-representative of the American public. So, if you want to say such and such percent of VIEWERS think this and that - great.
And, since no one has bothered to contradict this, I'll just assume everyone on BigSoccer believes it to be true. snarf snarf snarf
I was thinking it was more likely to be a Toby Keith song. That said, I think it's obvious that there's been a seismic shift in Americans' views of various issues over the last several months. Sadly, it came too late for sanity to prevail last November and, unless those Americans who have been honest and brave enough to ditch the denial and recognize the truth actually use their newfound persepctive to vote, may not affect the next election cycle. But at least the sheeple at large have temporarily awakened from their normal flatline torpor and ovine obedience enough to start asking questions they should have been asking years ago. I think that Bush's repeated attempts to link Iraq to 9/11 this week show that Rove has also recognized the shift and that the Reeps are desperate enough to try one more round of their usual fear-mongering because, frankly, given America's rejection of Bush's domestic agenda re: Social Security et. al., it's about the only card they have left until they can rig the judiciary some more.
We invaded because we need oil, we did! We invaded to bring democracy, bullshyt! We invaded to bring free elections, bullshyt! Iraq's dictator that was a US ally decided to not follow ordres anymore, we removed him. Iraq has open democracy, we helped...make a semi-democracy/theocracy/tribeocracy who's people are scared of insurgents bullying and killing everyone. Hell we even got some of Saddam's people still in power. Iraq had free elections, we helped....most whom got elected into power so they can allow us to suck up as much oil as our corporations want. Liberals scream more troops, there aren't many more troops to deploy, Liberals scream pull troops, most soldiers on the ground want to go home as soon as possible, Liberals scream about exit strategy, exitting will commence when insurgent attacks stop occuring in news often and government can convince the gullible conservatives that we did our part and now we can make a run for it. This trend happens every once in a while, just like liberals had a lot of power during 60s/70s. Liberals are working for us alot more than the corporate(compassionate) conservatives are. I can assure you there will be a huge liberal backlash following this administration. Thank God!
I love how the conservatives go on about liberels denying reality when it was the conservative government who lied about the reasons for war in Iraq, lying about the 45 minute threat, lying about Saddam having links with Osama Binlad. Then he said he wanted to give Iraq a democracy when under the United Nation laws it is illegal for one nation to overthrow the government of another nation, even if that government does not represent the majority of the population, which the US government broke. but of course as Zimbabwe, other corrupt african nations and North Korea have no oil they won't invade them, conservatives trying to deny reality
And it's pathetic that the tactic keeps working. Not to Godwin this thread, but The Bush administration and the American sheeple have proven beyond doubt that Goering was right when, at his trial, he said: "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." Of course, ol Herman wasn't saying anything that Machiavelli didn't reveal 450 years earlier and what any intelligent observer of human power structures didn't know at least 3,000 before Nicky indiscreetly let the cat out of the bag for good in his Discourses and more popularly in The Prince.
So...you and the liberals opposed the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan. At least someone finally admits it.
Not this tired old canard.... Ian, check the polling for support on overthrowing the Taliban. Okay, I'm curious myself - Here's the link: Did the US Make a mistake sending troops to Afghanistan (Not exactly the point you raised, but can we agree its close enough?): November, 2001: Yes 9%, No: 89% January, 2002: Yes 6%, No: 93% Of course, there was a very small minority that didn't want to go - but show me any poll that has 100% or 99% support on ANY issue. My personal opinion (as if anyone would really give a rat's ass): I supported overthrow of the Taliban at time, but thought we would be bouncing rubble around, and falling into the same trap the Soviets fell into a generation ago. I was very pleasantly surprised about how well things went, and appreciated the widespread international support. We did a hell of lot more than bounce rubble. Since then, I've been somewhat dismayed by the lack of troops/peacekeepers deployed (particularly at the expense of our involvement in Iraq. IMO, Afghanistan is falling (though not as steeply) into a similar morrass as Iraq. Its all very troubling. I fear some awful footage of dead US grunts being used as a propaganda tool for whack-job Islamacists.
i'm not saying wheather i opposed it or not, it's the UN laws and you obey them. Even if i really wanted to see a change in a government but if theres a law saying you can't do it then you can't do it. Simple now why not go back to Iraq and Bush the Republican government said that Iraq has weapons of mass distruction which it was proved it didn't = lie the rebublican government said there were links between Saddam and Osama = complete utter b0llocks Bush is afriad of Saudi Arabia government turning Islamic fudementalist, and if they do thats a lot of the USA's oil gone, so whats a good idea for them to do? make it look like Saddam is linked to Osama and has weapons of mass destruction for an excuse to invade to get there oil. if the Bush administration was for peace and setting up democracy, it would of let the UN inspectors do there job for longer to make sure there are any WMD (thats the reason bush said he went to war) but no he didn't want them to find out that there is no weapons of mass destruction so the US could get it's oil, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and other countries accross the world have currupt dictators in charge, will the Bush Administration go out and take them out? no cuz they don't have oil, it's simple, it aint rocket science no wonder the whole world hates Bush, are you puzzled why they do?
So, you and the conservatives deny links between the Taliban and 9/11. At least someone finally admits it. Hello. I'm Dan Loney. Remember, straw men are people too. Straw people, sure. But in a way, aren't we all simply beings created by God to make a facetious argument against Satan? *the more you know*