Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

A true "gotcha" moment. Hypocrits are so pathetic...

Re: Analyse this
 

The link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq was tenuous at best. Sure it's in the document, but if pressed I don't think the Democrats would have agreed with it.

As for the rest, Bush's flip-flop is just as amusing. Now it's not about WMDs, it's about spreading liberty. If that's our principle to go on, why are we not in Liberia, Rwanda, the Sudan, etc. cleaning up these regions and promoting democracy?

Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

That many did not dare to vote against a text they knew were inaccurate, since they would be viewed as America-haters.

Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

If I remember correctly, only 3 or so memebers of the hou (I heard it in a speech given by Rep. Ron Paul so I don't remember exactly) voted against the resolution.

This was the perfect scenario. There was almost no way for just about any elected official to vote against it. As was said above, they would be perceived as un-patriotic, appeasement mongers, or whatever else you want to call them.

Finally, it still amuses me that so many people assume there's an actual difference between most of the republican and democratic parties. They are both globalist, and statist. They're just selling the same thing with a different paintjob.

Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

On a side note I was at a business seminar where there was a speaker speaking about courage. One speaker had a two hour speech which was very good. He showed a picture of a woman and said: "When you reach her couragelevel you will be very successful". He said in a Iraqi-war vote (I don't know which) she was the only one to vote against. She was a big example and encouragement for me.

Also some inspiration to keep fighting manipulation and power abuse.

Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

<Finally, it still amuses me that so many people assume there's an actual difference between most of the republican and democratic parties. They are both globalist, and statist. They're just selling the same thing with a different paintjob. >

I'll pretend for now that I used to agree with this statement until MoveOn took over the Dem party.

And make no mistake about it, its their party now.

-Matt

Re: Analyse this
 

I'm not trying to make any claims. I just find it funny that they agreed with Bush before the war, now they are saying he shouldn't have said the exact same things they said.

When they talk about it today, they don't use the present tense. They act as if they knew before the war that it would turn out this way. Clearly, this was not the case.

Re: Analyse this
 

If it's tenous at best, Dems shouldn't have signed it. I don't sign things if I don't agree with them.

I actually never read this document before today. When I read it I burst histerical laughing because it was the complete contradiction of what I was hearing Dems say on TV. Now they have lost all credibility. They're like fish who go all-in when they are behind and outdraw and then act like they knew it was the right move.

Re: JOINT RESOLUTION ON IRAQ - October 11, 2002
 

If you vote for things you don't believe in, you don't deserve to be elected.

Re: Analyse this
 

NH