Sorry Arky, you walked into that one big time, since Bill Clinton spoke the first paragraph of december’s quote and Hillary Clinton spoke the second paragraph of december’s quote.
So, December, you just outright lied in your OP to make a point.
That’s pretty fucking low. And not, IMO, in keeping with anything resembling the standards of this forum and this board. Not that my opinion matters, just saying.
I said I was quoting the President. I didn’t say which President.
It is true that one of the comments was made by a close advisor of the President, rather than the President himself. That was a careless error on my part. Still, there’s no reason to believe that President Clinton disagreed with Senator Clinton’s comment.
This thread proves that some posters are looking to find fault with George Bush (and me), even if Bill and Hillary Clinton as saying the same things as we are.
Careless?
Bullshit. You knew very well what you were doing.
bait and spoil,
why do you people still bother?
Every time I think we’ve reached a new low around here…
New thread:
Is December a Liar ?
If so, does that mean all republicans are liars ?
Which avoids talking about the real issue, which is that George W. Bush intentionally deceived the American public in order to prosecute an unjustifiable war. You are so intent on supporting a Republican president at any cost, you have sacrificed the truth and any pretense that it means anything to you. Touché, december, but in doing so you have revealed that your motives have nothing to do with patriotism or love of country, and everything to do with political opportunism. I will approach all your future debates with that in mind.
Mack, did either of the Clintons order the invasion of Iraq? Did anybody go die because of a snipped quote from a right-wing shitrag? No. Hell, I can find a quote from any politician and make it fit whatever agenda I wish. Especially if I don’t have to attribute or date the quote. Big whoopty shit. People are being sent to their death for reasons that, as originally stated, are false. Wrap a flag around THAT and smoke it…
Isn’t there some term that’s customarily applied to a poster who posts intentionally misleading material, merely to get a rise out of other posters?
I think the main bitch about Bush’s pronouncements was that he cherrypicked the intel for every scrap he could find to support the idea that Saddam was an Imminent Threat to the good 'ol USA, even to the point of weaseling in the African Uranium deal that our own intel folks knew was BS, in order to sell us on the idea that we needed to invade another country.
When Bill was CinC, he and damn near everyone else over the years had concluded that Saddam was a bona fide Bad Apple who probably had a weapons arsenal as well. As far as I can recall though, he didn’t have us start a war based on hearsay. Even though he believed that Saddam had the weapons (back in 1998 when he said that) his approach to the problem was to try and contain Saddam while working with the international community, while Bush’s approach was to tell the inspectors that they had better git on out of Iraq 'cause Uncle Sam’s gonna kick some ass.
There’s a phrase that gets frequent use around here: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” A parallel I think would apply here is: “Extreme actions require solid justification.” The bottom line is that Bush’s justifications are looking rather hollow, and there are quite a few people saying that he in effect showed us a black balloon and said it was a bowling ball.
[Moderator Hat ON]
Hm. Deliberately lying to the GDer’s about the source of a quote is a pretty jerky thing to do. I consider it downright unethical in a debate forum, and I’m usually a pretty strong proponent of “let people post whatever they like, the truth will out”. I am locking this thread and it will stay locked until I get an email from december that convinces me to reopen it.
[Moderator Hat OFF]