My DEBATE With a CRAZY Right-Wing CONSERVATIVE!

[Placebo]

>>>HIS WORDS: (i won't bother posting mine since I think its pretty obvious what the responses to THIS crap would be!)

The only disgrace here is the Democrats telling our men and women in the armed forces that fight and die so bravely for something they believe in that they are fighting and dieing for a meaningless war that is a lie.

It’s a shame that LIBERALS like you have so much hate that you can't be intellectually honest. The truly amazing thing about the Democrats is that they are so pissed off about losing an election; they will lie, fabricate, and distort the truth and disgrace the office of the President in a feeble attempt to get back into power. I doubt that the American people will fall for such a weak candidate as John Kerry. He offers nothing to the American people but the empty promise of a change in leadership. I'm sorry, but so far he has shown very little leadership.

I find it offensive and in poor taste and judgment to dishonor the office of the President in the way that people like you have. Bush is one of the most congenial people we have had in office in a long time. He extended his hand to Ted Kennedy in an effort to make him a partner, and what does he get back? He gets back lies and distortions about his character. Yeah, you liberals have a LOT to be proud of. I suggest you all be very careful about what you are sowing, for one day you may have to reap what you sow. Think about that for a while if you are capable of thinking. It might do many of you good.
__________________________________________________________________________

I'm not sure whether to cry or laugh. Unfortunately, the problem with your analysis is that it relies solely on the cotton candy "journalism" being foisted upon you by the broadcast media. Clearly, you're not one to conduct your own independent research, so here's some help. Research articles by Paul Wolfowitz and others which appeared in 2002 editions of Foreign Affairs. The rationale there was laid out clearly and here it is.

1. The Middle East is a destabilized region. Much of that instability, especially in Saudi Arabia, was caused by the presence of large number of U.S. troops on this holy Muslim soil. After all, this was what generated such hatred towards the U.S. by Osama bin Laden.

2. The U.S. established its large military presence in Saudi Arabia following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Remember Desert Shield and Desert Storm?

3. While Desert Storm liberated Kuwait, it failed to topple Saddam Hussein, who remained in power and continued to be a security threat to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations.

4. Because Iraq remained a threat, large numbers of U.S. were stationed in Saudi Arabia to discourage Iraqi adventurism

5. To help stabilize the region, the U.S. needed to remove its large military presence in Saudi Arabia.

6. To remove U.S. Troops from Saudi Arabia without further destabilizing the region, it was necessary to neutralize Saddam Hussein as a threat to the region.

I know this is somewhat more complicated than the analyses that are presented in People magazine, but I'm sure that if you took the time to do your homework, you wouldn't make the silly (and offensive) generalizations you seem to be hooked on.

Yes, WMD was a PRETEXT for the war, but not the fundamental strategic reason that the U.S. went to war. Unfortunately, when such a large proportion of the U.S. population needs simplistic explanations to complex issues, the type of confusion you have exhibited is not uncommon.
________________________________________________________________________

First let me remind you that the WMD issue is trumped up by people like YOU and the Democrats in a weak attempt to minimize what is being accomplished over there. The main reason we are there is to enforce the UN resolutions that Saddam was OBVIOUSLY not abiding by after the Gulf War in 1991. He thumbed his nose at the UN for almost a decade. The WMD issues was ONE part of many issues that the Senate AND the Congress AND 32 other countries felt NEEDED enforcement. Otherwise, why bother having UN resolutions if countries can flaunt them.

Secondly, YOUR admired candidate voted FOR the resolution and states for the RECORD he would have done so TODAY even with the hindsight we currently have.

Last, but NEVER least, Saddam was KNOWN to have stockpiles of chemical weapons and was actively seeking nuclear ability and biological weapons. Are you suggesting in your convoluted thinking that we are just picking on a despot who never used mustard gas against his own people and the Iranians in another war he started? Are you suggesting that continuing to pretend that Saddam was NOT a threat to the region was GOOD policy? Are you saying that the terrorist training camps in the Iraqi desert and all those bomb vests found in the hospital on hangers were for peaceful intentions?

Get your head out of the sand dude, your lack of facts and demagoguery is a veil to cover up the fact that Kerry offers the American people NOTHING but empty promises of job growth (where's the plan?) and more taxes on the people who create the jobs in this country.
____________________________________________________________________

Once again you talk about lies. NO ONE has proven anyone lied about anything. If you had half a clue you would know that the WORLD intelligence communities believed the same information the Congress and President had and it was the BEST information we had. We went in based on what we BELIEVED to be the truth and YOUR weak attempts to claim it was a lie doesn't wash with the facts. Why don't you show some concrete proof just where Bush lied to anyone? You won’t because you can't. All you appear to be able to do is rant and rave like your lunatic buddy Howard Dean about things you obviously know little about.
____________________________________________________________________

The only party I see here who is factually divisive is the Democratic Party. They talk about class envy and class struggle between the rich and the poor. They talk about race. They have attempted to divide the nation against the Commander and Chief in a time of war within less than a year of the most devastating attack this nation has witnessed since WWII.

If you want to talk about a party that is divisive, look at the despicable comments made by Ted Kennedy and some of his partners in crime on the Senate and House floors which slander the character of the Office of the President and make UNSUBSTANTIATED and EXAGERATED claims about lies and secret plans. This reads like a good science fiction novel, but is not based on reality or facts.

Yes I think you and your merry band of detractors have served to divide this great nation more than any other time in history that I can remember. All because your party lacks any substance, offers the American people NOTHING, and is still pissed off about a close election lost based on Electoral Votes. You weirdo’s really need to get a reality check and quit BASHING America. It isn't just YOUR opinion that matters. There are just as many people here who disagree with your point of view.

I'll be happy to continue to debate the FACTS in here, but calling someone a liar without any substance is just plain hatred. That’s the ONLY thing that is driving the Democratic agenda. HATE. How pathetic and sad is that? Hatred for a man who attempted to reach across the aisle, reach bi-partisan agreements on health care for the elderly, education and stem cell research. Then to have it slapped into his face by the dishonorable Ted Kennedy. I bet you didn't have a clue that the Medicare Drug bill was Ted Kennedy's baby. I bet you didn't know that George W was the FIRST president to sign onto stem cell research and fund it.

Yep, lies seem to be what Democrats do best these days. Too bad this is the BEST you have to offer.
____________________________________________________________________


HOW CAN ANYONE IN THIS COUNTRY ACTUALLY BELIEVE ALL THIS CRAP??? and oh yea, basically he dismissed everything i happened to say in response to him as nonsense because i happen to be 18 years old (he is 50) and i am a "think he knows it all 18 year old liberal" i suppose it would be alright if i had opinions but AGREED with him though right :scared:

[noahmijo]

1. Show him this

Kerry supported Bush all the way and on the war?

Nope total lie.

Kerry said he would've given authorization again because on the terms that if there was an imminent threat or if Saddam did do something crazy like let loose a nuke in NYC even the biggest pacifist on here I think would've agreed with fighting back cause in that sense we are under direct threat.

However the spin is to make it look like Kerry agreed with pre-emptive war no questions asked but such is not the case:

Take a look at his own speech on the authorization vote:







Whole speech here:

http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/kerry-iraq.html

[Bandit]

2. Them Democrats is just bad people......

Americans are just not as stupid as you/they would like to think. Bush* is history and his whole Cabal is likely to do some hard time.

[KurtNYC]

3. He just cranks out the party line on all that stuff

He could sit in for O'Reilly because he has the party BS down pat. Easier than thinking for himself I'm sure.

Here is my question for these guys -- What would rank as total failure in terms of a President? What would it take for you to say that a President is a total failure and therefore the country deserves better?

Where did Bush lie? Debate #1 "I wouldn't use force" "I don't believe in nation building" "I believe we are over extended in too many place around the world"

You can get the actual sound clips here (as part of a great song): http://www.topplebush.com/PeaceMarch.mp3

[DebinTx]

4. Ask him who's lieing now

Bush Administration quotes on Iraqi WMD's 2002-2003

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
---Dick Cheney August 26, 2002

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
---George W. Bush September 12, 2002

If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
---Ari Fleischer December 2, 2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
---Ari Fleischer January 9, 2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.
---George W. Bush January 28, 2003

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.
---Colin Powell February 5, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
---George Bush February 8, 2003

So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment has to be clearly not.
---Colin Powell March 8, 2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
---George Bush March 18, 2003

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
---Ari Fleisher March 21, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
---Gen. Tommy Franks March 22, 2003

I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.
---Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board , March 23, 2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
---Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark March 22, 2003

We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.
---Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.
---Neocon scholar Robert Kagan April 9, 2003

I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.
---Ari Fleischer April 10, 2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
---George Bush April 24, 2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
---Donald Rumsfeld April 25, 2003

We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
---George Bush May 3, 2003

I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction.
---Colin Powell May 4, 2003

I never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
---Donald Rumsfeld May 4, 2003

I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.
---George W. Bush May 6, 2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
---Condoleeza Rice May 12, 2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
---Donald Rumsfeld May 27, 2003

For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
---Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003