Nancy Pelosi attacks the POTUS

[Guest LadyC]

What did those 3,000+ dead people at the Twin Towers have to do with "big oil"?

AMEN!

i could point out the fallicy in about 2/3's of steff's post, but it wouldn't change her mind. i would like to see her answer that question you just posed though!

(unless she would answer it by denying the countless concrete links between al qaeda and iraq!)

[Guest kitkat]

Those darn un-patriotic spawns of Satan!!!

Edited May 24, 2004 by kitkat

[Steff]

This statement contradicts itself.

If the war is about "big oil" then we will see our investment back

Considering Big Oil invests 80%+ of it's assets overseas I would say that's a pretty fair assumption that if I'm right we'll never see the money in this country.

Especially if Bush keeps allowing jobs to be taken overseas with no tax penalty.

But let us know when you stop using "big oil" in you automobile and/or to heat your house. Until then it seems a bit hypocritical to complain about those who get it for you.

I heat with wood heat and drive a Toyota Prius, I'm doing my part how about you?

What did those 3,000+ dead people at the Twin Towers have to do with "big oil"?

reductio ad absurdum, the real question is what did invading Iraq have to do with the "Twin Towers" and the fact that we were supposedly there for WMD.

Go "Where's my Cocaine?" Bush!

Edited May 24, 2004 by Steff

[Guest yod]

Considering Big Oil invests 80%+ of it's assets overseas I would say that's a pretty fair assumption that if I'm right we'll never see the money in this country.

You do know that we will use Iraqi oil revenues to repay us for the war, right?

Especially if Bush keeps allowing jobs to be taken overseas with no tax penalty.

Only Congress can enact tax law...but have you noticed that our economy has been zipping right along since the Bush tax cuts came into effect?

Works EVERY time it's tried...

But let us know when you stop using "big oil" in you automobile and/or to heat your house. Until then it seems a bit hypocritical to complain about those who get it for you.

I heat with wood heat and drive a Toyota Prius, I'm doing my part how about you?

I wish I could live in a tree house and swing through the jungle on tree vines but this is the 21st Century.

I'm not about to be a hypocrite and complain for having hot water, electricity, air conditioning and heat. I like it!

Do you also swear off of those modern comforts? Does your Toyota run on chicken poop?

I hope you use deodorant!

reductio ad absurdum, the real question is what did invading Iraq have to do with the "Twin Towers" and the fact that we were supposedly there for WMD.

I watched GW Bush tell everyone in America that we were going into Iraq for REGIME CHANGE. Were you in Canada or something? I'm sure they showed the speech there...so you must have been in Yemen?

The policy of REGIME CHANGE was championed by Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi et al under the Clinton Administration. They just didn't have the courage to actually accomplish it. The word that comes to mind is "coward"

Are you ready to eat some crow now?

Those WMDs are in the Bekka Valley of Lebanon under Syrian supervision. Everyone knows this (except you?).

There was an attempted attack in Jordan about 3 weeks ago which could have killed up to 80,000 people with these WMDs which came from Syria. I predict them to show up right before the election.

Go "Where's my Cocaine?" Bush!

Yes! Please God!!!!

[Steff]

I watched GW Bush tell everyone in America that we were going into Iraq for REGIME CHANGE. Were you in Canada or something? I'm sure they showed the speech there...so you must have been in Yemen?

The policy of REGIME CHANGE was championed by Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi et al under the Clinton Administration. They just didn't have the courage to actually accomplish it. The word that comes to mind is "coward"

Yes a Regine change championed under the guise that they had WMD and we had an immenent threat from Iraq, which was never the case. The link to Al Queda has yet to be proven, and to boot we put Saddam in office.

Was Saddam an evil person? Yes. Should we have removed him from office? Yes. But at the same time I think a much cleaner job could have been done without the extreme cost and loss of lives.

Those WMDs are in the Bekka Valley of Lebanon under Syrian supervision. Everyone knows this (except you?).

There was an attempted attack in Jordan about 3 weeks ago which could have killed up to 80,000 people with these WMDs which came from Syria. I predict them to show up right before the election.

A truly honarable president with truly good intentions would attack and find those weapons now and let the public know about it. If what you say is true and he uses it for furtherance of his campaign then has has shown his true colors, one of a political oppontunist and a liar. If he was truly doing his job properly however, the weapons would have never left Iraq so either way he's either dishonest or incompetent. I think I'll support someone else thank you very much.

Do you also swear off of those modern comforts? Does your Toyota run on chicken poop?

I hope you use deodorant!

Edited May 24, 2004 by Steff

[Guest yod]

A truly honarable president with truly good intentions would attack

He did. That is why we are in Iraq...because he is truly honorable.

A truly honorable American would understand that these things aren't done overnight and support our troops while they finish job. Instead we have Democrats demoralizing our boys and giving comfort to the enemy all because they lust for political position.

A Syrian invasion has not been prepared for or approved....yet.

This is why Pelosi's comments are dangerously close to being treason. We DO need to take care of Syria but with the Democrats dividing the nation for their own political purposes, it has created a climate where Bush has to justify everything. I think he'll wait until after he has spanked Kerry in the election and the American people have spewed the Democrats out of Congress. The majority of us know lying partisan cowards when we see them.

But at the same time I think a much cleaner job could have been done without the extreme cost and loss of lives.

Do you know that 8,000 brave Americans died in the battle for Midway? That was ONE battle for ONE small island in WWII. There has been no "extreme" cost or loss of lives...except at the Twin Towers.

Links to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations have been shown but ignored by liberals and liberal media because they hate Bush and can't stand the thought of him being right.

Saddam didn't announce on it on billboards around Washington DC but he was funding terrorist groups everywhere

And everyone in the entire world knows Saddam had WMDs. It is not a question of "if" he had them....it's "where are they now?"

Bush attempted to negotiate first....and also tried to get the U.N. to do their job SEVENTEEN TIMES.

Maybe we could have tried tickling Saddam's feet until he said "uncle"?

Clinton had 8 years to take care of this situation but did nothing except to send a missle to an aspirin factory one day to keep Monica off the front pages during his impeachment hearings.

If what you say is true and he uses it for furtherance of his campaign then has has shown his true colors, one of a political oppontunist and a liar.

That is how Democrats think.....because almost all their politicians are crooked and liars they think everyone else is.

I was referring to terrorists using them before our next election in an attempt to help Kerry. If terrorists support Kerry...doesn't that tell you something?

If he was truly doing his job properly however, the weapons would have never left Iraq so either way he's either dishonest or incompetent.

All of this happened during the time we were waiting for diplomacy and the UN to work.

Really....there is nothing Bush could do, would do, will do that is going to make dishonorable people support him. They don't like him because he is exactly what he seems to be. Honest. Courageous. Righteous.

They hate the truth and prefer the liar.

I think I'll support someone else thank you very much.

Like who?

[barracuda]

Nancy and her ilk are just trying to destroy Bush and in the process putting our troops in even more danger. She is one of the "Enemy within." She is against everything decent and moral. She favors murdering babies. She should be behind bars in my opinion. Ditto for most of the alphabet channel news reporters, or traitors I should say.

How patriotic of you John...to speak out against our leaders

I'm sure our friends here would agree that was a good thing....

Pelosi isn't one of our leaders. She's a reprehensible Democractic Parrot who speaks nothing but hatred and vitriol against Republicans. Her only real agenda is to spew hatred for the opposition. For her it's not about what's best for this country, but about what's best for her own interests. Just another great example of a self-serving egomaniacle politician.

[barracuda]

Yes,

but not in time of war when the lives and welfare of our troops are at stake!

That used to be considered either treason or sedition.

Sedition or Treason for those acts were only for enlisted troops on the front lines. It is well within her right to voice her opinion whether I agree with it or not.

Nancy and her ilk are just trying to destroy Bush and in the process putting our troops in even more danger. She is one of the "Enemy within." She is against everything decent and moral. She favors murdering babies. She should be behind bars in my opinion. Ditto for most of the alphabet channel news reporters, or traitors I should say.

Fallacy of non sequitur and not even a reasonable argument here. Basically all you said is "she's bad because I don't like her". Sure she doesn't like Bush and neither do I but that doesn't mean we're out to destroy the USA.

Yep, all the makings of a troll in the works. I wish you well in your short stay here.

[Steff]

When in doubt, Ad Hominem eh Barracuda? Rather than make a thoughtful reply to what I said like Yod? How very mature of you.

I never said I liked Pelosi, but I did say I felt she had a right to criticize Bush. Even in wartime it is our right to criticize the president and his actions.

Just for your information, Treason is the ONLY offense in the constitution that warranted a death sentence. And speaking out against the government by citizens even in wartime is NOT an act of treason, in fact it is protected by first amendment rights. My point was the only case where speaking out against the government could even be considered treason is if you were enlisted and then it would be sedition in most cases.

Sedition has only been used in past cases against military personnel who did things like encourage others to desert, or take up arms against their fellow troops. It has never been used against private citizens or even used in a very long time.

[Guest yod]

Steff...I appreciate that you seem reasonable even though we are at polar ends of this discussion.

And for anyone who doesn't know...

Political speech is the only speech where someone can't be sued for (non) truth in advertising.

Ms. Pelosi has not actually committed treason but I do think that her comments are divisive for the sake of being divisive.

And she's probably been chosen to do this because she is safe in her Congressional district even if it doesn't work.