no teletrack installment loans

If you do recognize such a distinction, then that is what I was referring to

By 4 de julio de 2022 No Comments

If you do recognize such a distinction, then that is what I was referring to

I suppose, if you define «the media» as every blog, newsletter, advocacy group, and partisan paper, then I take it back, they have accused Bush of lying, and Kerry, and accused both of tools as big business, murderers, and criminals. If you do not believe in any distinction between «mainstream media» and just «media,» then I will simply cede the point.

5) «Apparently misinterpreting people’s statements is a common argumentative strategy of the left. I didn’t say that war was “silly” I said the politically motivated dyslexia concerning the president’s statements is silly.»

It is sad that in your frustration, you have descended to petty insults at me in place of quik installment loans Gary Indiana the logic that you have been relying on thus far. In any event, I would suggest a more careful reading of my posts before responding out of anger. Allow me to re-post what I said: «I sincerely hope that a full invasion of another country predicated on support from a population that was mistaken in its beliefs (for WHATEVER reason) will not simply be forgotten or dismissed as silliness.»

In other words, my argument is that those words have caused the American people to believe something that may not have been true to influence them on deciding whether or not to support a war. You are dismissing the debate over what Bush said to justify the war as » politically motivated dyslexia,» and I am refuting that claim. So you see, I never suggested that you believed that the war in Iraq was silly (why on earth would I?).

6) «Come on, Clinton lied under oath his impeachment was legally justifiable. If not for a benevolent Republican congress he would have been removed from office. Don’t forget they had the goods on him. If not for the conservative actions to preserve the integrity of the executive, Clinton would be far more disgraced.»

The obstruction of justice vote was 50–50, with 5 Republicans breaking ranks to vote against impeachment

At this point, you are simply missing what I was trying to get at. My point was not the infamous Lewinsky scandal

It is easy to dwell on the Lewinsky scandal because he actually lied, but in fact the accusations of misleading were continuous

Once again, allow me to re-post what I said so that you might understand my point: «you will hear liberals attacked for misleading the American people about something. Certainly, there is 8 years of commentary and accusations about Clinton. In most cases, they were also accurate.» I hope we are clear on what I am getting at? You accused me of holding Bush to too high a standard, and I responded that I hold him to same standard that Clinton was held to for 8 years.

However. since you brought the subject up, your memory of history is (to say the least) inaccurate. Conservatives hated Bill Clinton just as much as liberals hate Bush. Clinton was impeached on two counts, grand jury perjury (228–206) and obstruction of justice (221–212), with the votes split along party lines. The Senate Republicans, however, were unable to gather enough support to achieve the two-thirds majority required for his conviction. On Feb. 12, 1999, the Senate acquitted President Clinton on both counts. The perjury charge failed by a vote of 55–45, with 10 Republicans voting against impeachment along with all 45 Democrats. So you see, my friend, your theory about conservative integrity for the office flies in the face of the entire proceedings.

7) «The unattainable standard that you are holding GWB to is that he satisfy your every insecurity and suspicion otherwise he is to be suspected of lying. Irrational.»

Leave a Reply

Envíanos un mensaje en WhatsApp