Could you be good enough to link to your source for this? I’d like to be able to examine the statement in a context that allows me to refrain from calling you out for disingenuousness based on the cavil you raise in post #15.
Thanks! 
Also, he appears to be wrong about the number. He said 61 percent of democrats thought Bush had foreknowledge. In fact, 35% did.
And the question left itself open to interpretation.
And bush had endless evil deeds accrued by the time of the poll.
So if one did want to say, “But the do it tooooo!” he wouldn’t even be justified with that. Bricker’s failure is two-fold.
Just wanted to stress that point. 
Do you think the left can do no wrong? Do you have any internal integrity, or are you totally guided by what you think others might be getting away with?
Actually the cite is the same as mine:
I believe I just realized what Bricker was getting at, he added the Not Sure into the number.
35% Did know.
39% Didn’t know.
26% Not sure.
Given that the “Bin Laden Determined to Strike the United States” intel. briefing I’d be more prone to add the “Not sures” to the Didn’t know category. Since it is what probably added suspicion to their minds.
Warned generically? Seems to me an explicit warning about bin Laden’s intent is worth more than a can or two of crappy store-brand creamed corn.
Your choice of words tells me that your mileage varies on that, which makes it a good thing for America that your guys are out of power and look to remain out of power for the forseeable future. Willful blindness is not a survival trait in either individuals or nations.
Sounds like the same brainless goofs that believe we “staged” the lunar landing in order to beat the russians to the moon. Run sarah Run ( what a simp … she will be easy to beat)
Ahhh-the Old “I’m rubber, you’re glue” defense.
I’ll tell you what, though. When I give a Bricker-type “They do it toooo!” response in a thread about the left doing something wrong, you go right ahead and call me on it, o.k.?
From what I’ve seen, if anyone even bothers to try a thread critical of the left here, you will either defend the left or not participate in the thread.
But, if you don’t like that question, how about this one:
Do you have anything positive to say about anyone that disagrees with your political agenda?
But the “left” is less of a unified message machine, less of a “brand” than conservatives are. Any hypocrisy on the part of some individuals ostensibly on the “left” does not damage the credibility of all non-conservatives nor shore up that of conservatives.
Really? As I’ve posted many times on this board, I’m a conservative that is pro choice, pro gay marriage, generally supportive of the ACLU, and an atheist. All conservatives are not the same.
I’m sure I most certainly do, depending on who exactly we’re talking about and what exactly my political agenda is.
Now would you have anything negative to say about people who agree with your political agenda?
Note to self: check and make sure Oakminster is not on the “Straight to the Wall Come the Revolution” list. Salvageable.
It’s close enough that I’d answer “yes” unless the question was quite tightly worded.
I’ve got an even better question-Do you have anything at all to say that is pertinent to this particular thread?
I could quiz you as to how you’re defining “conservative”, but instead I’ll ask, what percentage of Americans would describe themselves thusly?
I did say “less of a”, not “all” of anything.
Not sure there is anyone that agrees with my political agenda in a high profile position. I’m on record here and elsewhere as saying Bush the Younger is the worst POTUS in my lifetime. Don’t know if I’ve called Sarah Palin a fuckwit here, but I’ll do it here, for the record. Rush Limbaugh is a windbag that is very good at soundbites, but not very good on substance. Glen Beck is not even on my radar, but some of the things I’ve seen attributed to him are stupid. Same with that other guy…the one with the really whiny, nasal voice…I can’t even remember his name.
I believe an idea should stand or fall on its merits, regardless of which side of the aisle proposed it.
Are you asking as a poster, or as a moderator?
My guess would be “likes guns”. One of those Second Amendment people who is willing to sacrifice any and all of the other principles he holds in the defense of his toys. The people who vote for Republicans who are in declared opposition to everything else that they supposedly believe in, because the Republicans support the Second Amendment better.
Which I’m sure is why they do so; the Second Amendment has turned into a great weapon against all the other Amendments.
I just finished defending Al Gore against claims that he was a liar. There are many time I’ve stood up for liberals and criticized conservatives on this board.
How’s your record in that area, sparky?
Well that’s not fair. A Republican would have to tell the truth first.
That was a joke.