|
|
#1
12-23-2005, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Biggest Political Liars of 2005
Interesting article detailing the biggest political liars of 2005. Every politician lies, whether it be Clinton, Reagan, Bush41, or your local mayor. That's no big secret, except to the most naive. These two guys, however, have taken it to another level. They make Clinton and Reagan look like Mother Theresa and the former Pope. It is incomprehensible to me that 30%+ of the general population in the U.S. still supports these two individuals as our leaders.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10578257/site/newsweek/ 
|
|
#2
12-23-2005, 05:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
More Leftist Drivel
It's awefully naive and stupid to expect the president or others to tell the truth in public regarding classified matters.
|
|
#3
12-23-2005, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
Yeah, people are too stoopid to think for themselves. Thats why we elect leaders based on personal traits and likability, rather than their positions on actual issues.
|
|
#4
12-23-2005, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
[ QUOTE ]
It's awefully naive and stupid to expect the president or others to tell the truth in public regarding classified matters. [/ QUOTE ] You think they should lie rather than refrain from comment?
|
|
#5
12-23-2005, 06:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
Refraining from comment often gives more information than a denial.
|
|
#7
12-25-2005, 03:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
[ QUOTE ]
It's awefully naive and stupid to expect the president or others to tell the truth in public regarding intentionally leaking classified matters. [/ QUOTE ] FYP
|
|
#8
12-25-2005, 04:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
[ QUOTE ]
It's awefully naive and stupid to expect the president or others to tell the truth in public regarding classified matters. [/ QUOTE ] I'm confused as to why you think this takes away any validity from most of the article's points.
|
|
#9
12-25-2005, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Biggest Political Liars of 2005
My God, that is a good question. I would have to say its one of the many hypocritical pathological liars in the Democratic leadership. You know, the same people who are accusing Bush of everything they did and supported only because now it's politically "adventageous". They get my vote. Clinton lied, people died in Iraq because of it. Clinton is the one that said Iraq had WMDs, Clinton told Bush that, the fault lies with Clinton using the idiotic "logic" of leftists.
|
|
#10
12-25-2005, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: More Leftist Drivel
Methods of pressure and coercion that do not result in physical injury are not torture IMO. So this is a definition thing, and there was a recent thread on this. I don't define torture as anything that might cause a subject psychological harm and induce him to talk. And incidences of physical torture carried out by US military/intelligence on their own initiative is not the same as there being a policy authorizing such methods.
And regarding the FISA, the president should lie rather than publicly disclose our intelligence methods, noting as I said above that a refusal to comment can impart more information than a denial. This then is appropriately protecting classified matters, and is an issue separate from the legality of those methods which has been debated here as well in other threads. If some reporter were to ask the president tomorrow, is the CIA roaming freely in Pakistan in acting against terrorists, a refusal to comment would be taken as an affirmative that could have political consequences for a friendly government. Thus the appropriate response is to say no, and if proven to have lied, then ask, what did you expect. Government officials do not owe it to the general public to give a level of truthful information regarding classified matters that could be of assitance to our enemies. And a refusal to see this point is merely because one is against our involvement in certain areas, which is a separate issue.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
