Why dont the Democrat/Liberls want 9/11 to go away

[Steff]

Congress authorized the use of force as did the UN with numerous resolutions...

Authorizing the use of force and declaring war are not the same things.

who says so?? you?

Actually yes. Where I live we have our local white supremacist group and nothing has been done to combat them.

do you need to be reminded of all the democrats who wanted the use of force in Iraq if saddam didn't comply with the UN resolutions and who agreed with Clinton that saddam HAD wmd"s...people like Daschle, Clinton, etc...?

Since I'm not a Democrat I couldn't care less what they wanted. Invading a country that posed no credible threat to us is unconstitutional. PERIOD. Again we don't attack or prosecute people for what they might do. INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty.

first of all, it is TOTALLY appropriate for any current events, or events that occurred during the current administration of ANY president, to be used in the forthcoming campaign. to think otherwise is totally assanine LOL... what on earth are they supposed to talk about, the events of the previous century???

second, the democrats have been using 9/11 and the subsequent war as their primary campaign focus since the day it began. it's their most fervent hate-speach against bush. what's good for the goose is good for the gander. if they can use it as hate speach, i praise God that freedom of speach allows it to also be spoken of in a positive manner.

To mention it as an event yes, to use it as a reason to try and bully people into feeling less secure when the same thing could happen tomorrow no. Democrats have been pointing out that Bush used americas fears to form anti-constitutional agencies and put into effect anti-constitutional laws. Sounds pretty fair to me.

oh wait... a third thing... steff, as much as i really don't even want a response from you because i loathe getting into disagreements with you... (because unlike river's and my disagreements, there is no respect between you and i), i can't help but wonder if you're trying to play off the fantasy that the bush administration was responsible for the intelligence reports during the previous administration? i've heard that ridiculous fantasy before somewhere, and it makes me laugh like crazy at the incredulity of it.

Well LadyC, unlike you I believe respect is earned not given. I don't unilaterally vote for either party blindly, and I firmly believe we should stick to the constitution because that is what our founding fathers wanted. They realized that freedom and security are not mutually exclusive like you tend to believe. They also knew that big government does not provide security, but has a tendency to opress its people.

As for the intelligence failures being Bush's fault, I don't believe that, but I do believe he has done nothing to truly make America safer, I believe he has violated the constitution, and I don't believe he has America's best interests at heart. Three good reasons I won't be voting for him come election day.

yes it should be used politically when you have a blame America liberal running as a candidate on a platform that he will solve the terrorist problem by appeasment...geez steff, river, this one is for you

Ahh the ends justifies the means argument. Gotta love it. But as we all know this is utterly false.

Edited July 17, 2004 by Steff

[Guest LadyC]

Well LadyC, unlike you I believe respect is earned not given. I don't unilaterally vote for either party blindly,

steff, you assume WAY too much about me. i do believe respect is earned, not given, which is why i have none for you. likewise, i'm sure.

nor do i vote blindly or unilaterally for any party. until bush, i had never voted for a republican, certainly not in a presidential election at any rate. i had always voted for a third party. i'm quite proud to be among those who choose to cast my vote for him again though.

the rest of what you posted is in MY opinion a bunch of malarky and i won't bother arguing with you over it.

[senerhu]

Authorizing the use of force and declaring war are not the same things.

When force is authorized, we don't have to declare war...right?

Actually yes. Where I live we have our local white supremacist group and nothing has been done to combat them.

Unless you're privy to the FBI, IRS and Secret Service files, that is a statement you can't make...

Since I'm not a Democrat I couldn't care less what they wanted. Invading a country that posed no credible threat to us are unconstitutional. PERIOD. Again we don't attack or prosecute people for what they might do. INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty.

No credible threat? YOU ARE IN A STATE OF DENIAL. What do you think the 22 UN resolutions were all about, chocolate pie in ethiopia??

Ahh the ends justifies the means argument. Gotta love it. But as we all know this is utterly false.

Just the facts...

[Steff]

When force is authorized, we don't have to declare war...right?

Wrong, the President is a servant of the people and as such he is supposed to follow the wants of their elected representatives (Congress). If we are going to risk American lives in a all out war, then there should be a formal declaration made as such by congress.

Unless you're privy to the FBI, IRS and Secret Service files, that is a statement you can't make...

Fair enough I'll give you that one.

No credible threat? YOU ARE IN A STATE OF DENIAL.

No I'm just a realist. If Saddam had WMD then where are they?His military was crippled and there still is no sign of a link to Al Queda.

What do you think the 22 UN resolutions were all about, chocolate pie in ethiopia??

Oil what else?

[senerhu]

Wrong, the President is a servant of the people and as such he is supposed to follow the wants of their elected representatives (Congress). If we are going to risk American lives in a all out war, then there should be a formal declaration made as such by congress.

Congress did authorize this...right?

No I'm just a realist. If Saddam had WMD then where are they?His military was crippled and there still is no sign of a link to Al Queda.

they were shipped to syria, just before the war started. And there are enough small indications to support the overall view that the intelligence was right all along.

Remember the missles found that had a range of 93 miles? The air craft buried in the sand? The enriched uranium now being taken out of Iraq? The warheads filled sith sarin that were supposedly destroyed? I could list more...

Oil what else?

Give me a break.. doesn't Kuwait have oil??? geez

[Guest LadyC]

Congress did authorize this...right?

yes, senerhu, you are absolutely, positively, correct. congress DID pass a resolution AUTHORIZING bush to go to war with iraq.

[senerhu]

Congress did authorize this...right?

yes, senerhu, you are absolutely, positively, correct. congress DID pass a resolution AUTHORIZING bush to go to war with iraq.

I know it and you know it, but somebody sure needs to tell steff...and how many of the democrats who oppose the US involvement now (political year) voted yes for the resolution...

ps, your reduced sig still looks great...

[Guest kitkat]

Congress did authorize this...right?

yes, senerhu, you are absolutely, positively, correct. congress DID pass a resolution AUTHORIZING bush to go to war with iraq.

I know it and you know it, but somebody sure needs to tell steff...and how many of the democrats who oppose the US involvement now (political year) voted yes for the resolution...

ps, your reduced sig still looks great...

If President Bush was here, he would approve of that message Senerhu.

Kat

[ted]

We went there for OIL??

Ummm..

How much are YOU paying at the pump these days??

And just which part of the constitution is Bush in violation of?

(foot still tappin')

t.

[Guest LadyC]

Congress did authorize this...right?

yes, senerhu, you are absolutely, positively, correct. congress DID pass a resolution AUTHORIZING bush to go to war with iraq.

I know it and you know it, but somebody sure needs to tell steff...and how many of the democrats who oppose the US involvement now (political year) voted yes for the resolution...

ps, your reduced sig still looks great...

thanks, it lost a lot of quality, but i did it for the sake of the board!!! but, at someone else's wise suggestion, i did put a link to the higher quality larger one!!