BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 10:38 AM

So what's the point unless we just enjoy testosterone poisoning ?

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: GUEST,Rufus
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 10:23 AM

Bobert comes here to troll wif his stink bombs an piss people off.

How ever some wierdos comes here for support of their wacked out thinkin and radicalisim.

Lookee Abu. Here is some folks as paranoid and full of hate as me so I must not be so fucked up after all.

Then there is others that while not pushin any agenda of ther own feel obliged to tell the wackos how wackety the really is.

OOH that pisses 'em off bigtime an they fight back like it's a contest between a teenager an his parents

Jus give 'em plenty of rope and see how wacky they gets.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 09:40 AM

Sometimes I wonder why we debate these things on the Mudcat. Folks already have made up their minds. Are we expecting that someone with conservative viewpoints will read a liberals posts, slap their forehead and exclaim "Oh my God - I've been wrong all this time". Or is it possible that a conservative viewpoint expressed here will suddenly make a liberal stand up and say - "I've had my eyes opened up - George Bush is the best thing that ever happened to this country".

Folks don't come to the Mudcat BS section for V-8 moments. We come here to expound views that we already have and are very unlikly to change. Or we come here just to try to piss people off.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 09:33 AM

It is a VERY inconvenient truth for Hub, and many like him, that the President has wasted American treasure and American blood with his dirty little war, and that he has steadfastly insisted this was a wise thing to do. It is inconvenient to conceive that the POTUS is a loose-limbed jackal and spendthrift who actually, by resorting to violence, has ruined thousands of lives.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 09:22 AM

SH: "The inconvenient truth that he doesn't want you to know is that he is hopping from city to city burning thousands of pounds of jet fuel and then jumping into gas or diesel burning SUV's or limo's from the airport to the galas..."

Arne: "Picked that up on Freeper.com or WhirledNutzDaily, didja? Or was it His Emanence Rush that gave you that scurrilous lie?"

Actually Arne, I've been watching the news and reading newspapers and seeing and reading about him flying from one place to the other or getting out of SUV's or limo's at the showing of his picture. Besides, if I had heard it from one of the other sources that you listed, does that make it any less true? The only way it isn't true is if he didn't get on an airplane or in an SUV or limo. Do you know for sure that this didn't happen? Did he just walk from the airport to the theatre? Did he ride a bicycle between the cities.

Arne:"A lie can travel around the world before the truth even puts it's shoes on." Never so true as now. And the RW uses this tactic. See here.

I clicked on the link. I didn't even know about that. Doesn't surprise me though, seeing that it's on one of your kook websites. If true, then kudos to Gore. But what about the planes? What about the other times?


Arne: "What a big, steaming sack of horse patooties. Lies upon lies there."

Take a look at the following quotes:


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
   - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
   - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
   - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
   - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
   - Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
   - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
   - (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
   - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
   - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
   - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
   - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
   - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
   - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
   - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
   - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
   - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
   - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002


And yes these quotes are copy and pasted. (as if that makes a difference) Does that make them any less true?


Try again Arne. Your boat's taking on too much water. There comes a time when you have to throw the bucket down and start dog paddling or drown.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 09:14 AM

Lokking at the first post, one thing stands out. They're all personal or political things. It doesn't matter if they're true or not, or who lied,   or if it's all a giant conspiricy.

In a few decades, do you think there will be more real intrest in what Mr Rove said when, or why no steps were taken to reduce CO2 emmissions, now Washington Floods every high tide?

There is a huge volume of data showing climate change is real, and is almost certainly caused by us. There is alot of propaganda and deliberate misinterpretaition by both sides, but we can't ignore it. How long our leaders can is another question....

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 06:56 AM

Not for long, kendall, not for long...

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: kendall
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 05:25 AM

It sure is refreshing here in Old Blighty to pick up a newspaper that is not controlled by Rupert Murdock and his conservative mafia.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Arne
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 03:41 AM

[artbrooks]: Politician = liar. So then, what else is new?

Well, we can't control what politicians do (although it behooves us to choose them more carefully), but we can and should take responsibility for our own actions. And I'd think that somewhere near tops on that list would be: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." I think that Susu's Hubby ought to consider this one for a moment.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Arne
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 03:34 AM

Susu's Hubby spins the RW "talking points" lies he's been spoon-fed by the RW Mighty Wurlitzer:

The inconvenient truth that he doesn't want you to know is that he is hopping from city to city burning thousands of pounds of jet fuel and then jumping into gas or diesel burning SUV's or limo's from the airport to the galas...

Picked that up on Freeper.com or WhirledNutzDaily, didja? Or was it His Emanence Rush that gave you that scurrilous lie?

"A lie can travel around the world before the truth even puts it's shoes on." Never so true as now. And the RW uses this tactic. See here.

But Susu's Hubby has drunk the Kool-Aid. He has no shame and no conscience. He'll ignore this, and go spouting it again here or somewhere else in two weeks time like it was the Gospel truth.

The inconvenient truth for liberals, however, is that Karl Rove has basically been exonerated.

The inconvenient truth is that Fitzgerald, barring future developments doesn't expect to seek a prosecution. But Rove has apparently changed his story and admitted to passing Plame's status to reporters (rather than the other way around as he originally claimed, having conveniently "forgotten" his involvement). And Dubya, who had promised to fire anyone "involved" in the Plame outing, has yet to sack Rove for his perfidy.

The recent California elections had liberals waiting with baited breath to see the outcome as to claim some sort of victory to show the country that they will once again rule both chambers of congress.

Busby did better than any Democratic candidate has done in a long time in the "very safe" Republican 50th district.

4. John Kerry (who served in Vietnam) is still going around and spouting that the information that Bush, the CIA and the FBI showed to him before the war misled him and other liberals for voting for the Iraq war. Of course that was before he voted against it.

The inconvenient truth for liberals, however, is that it's the same information that was given to them by Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright a year or two prior during the previous administration that was never acted upon. How long will this guy be around? He needs to go back to his McMansion and get his fat wife to get off of her butt and make him a samich.

What a big, steaming sack of horse patooties. Lies upon lies there. Not to mention a good indication of Susu's Hubby's foul disposition (and Susu's misfortune). Maybe the Catters should take up a collection for her.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: M.Ted
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 01:46 AM

You don't actually know anything about any of this, and have made no attempt to learn anything about it, Susu's Hubby--so your opinion is worth about the same as any wino in the gutter. Liberal or Conservative, you really owe it to you country to have informed opinions--

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 01:20 AM

Lovely man.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 12:09 AM

What is it that makes you think Karl Rove was exonerated just because the investigator declined to prosecute him? The only thing he was let off on the hook about was that he didn't lie to the FBI. The fact that he lied to the American press about the very same issue is not legally prosecutable, of course. But the REAL offense which he has NOT been "exonerated" for is his part in the outing of Valerie Plame.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 11:52 PM

Exactly. The elections are an enormous PR exercise designed to fool ordinary people into the silly notion that they actually have a voice, and an effect on national policy. Elections used to be held in Soviet Russia for the same purpose. All the candidates were assorted representatives of the ruling order, and the same is true in American elections. It's just pretend, folks! 2 major parties...with one ruling $y$tem behind them. The more they can divide you to fight against each other uselessly over those 2 totally bogus parties, they better they can divide and conquer. And that's all it amounts to.

But just wait. The next election will come, and you'll get caught up in the game...just like always. You'll get hooked by the drama. It's a many-month drama, like a huge TV mini-series or a sports playoff, put on to distract and entertain. The ruling $y$tem always wins, no matter which party takes the presidency.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 11:17 PM

Anyway, whenever the Democrats do regain power, it will be because the people who own both parties want them to. As we saw in the last two elections, you can't argue with the ones who own the apparatus.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 11:03 PM

I think the job requires lying. That's the problem. If you don't tell the right lies, you won't last long on the job. They may, in fact, even kill you if nothing else will shut you up or convince you to lie like you're supposed to.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:59 PM

Politician = liar. So then, what else is new?

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:55 PM

Oh, I'm sure we have, actually, quite a bit in common, Susu's Hubby. ;-) Seriously. Most people I know, even if we disagree on some specific political issues, the fact is there's a lot of other stuff we are well in agreement on, just the regular stuff we all have to deal with in life.

Party politics divides people against each other in a very bad way. That's one reason why I really DON'T like political parties. And that goes for ALL of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:50 PM

Ron,


Attack me if you wish....it still doesn't make the above truths any less true.




Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:48 PM

"The liberal media this and the liberal media that! Boo-hoo-hoo!"

282RA,

I never said anything about the liberal media. I'm sorry if you're trying to defend your sacred cow but they ain't part of the real truths listed above.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:45 PM

Sorry Hubby--

Bushites are the only ones who wait with "baited breath". Wonder why they never catch anything.

But at least that probably indicates that you didn't actually lift the whole thing off Fox News. You actually wrote more than one coherent paragraph--all by your little lonesome.   Really proud of you. Now all you have to do is start making sense in general and you'll be worth debating.

Congratulations.

Perhaps you'd like to tell us about when we're going to win the War on Terror. What aircraft carrier do you think the #1 chickenhawk will be standing on this time when he accepts the unconditional surrender of Terror? What do you think Terror will be wearing? Will he have a big T on his shirt--otherwise how can we tell that he is Terror?   It sure will be nice to know there will never be any more Terror.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:42 PM

"The rest of your message is so retarded it isn't worth the time it takes to criticize it. Thanks for giving us the sources of all that amazing information otherwise I would have thought you were just talking out your ass."


Sources for what?

Check the California Sec. of State website for the election results but other than that everything I stated has been in the news the past few days and if not then just common sense....oh....that's why you didn't get it.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:41 PM

That will insure that house, senate, and presidential control will not be in liberal hands for the next several years. (That one's for you CarolC)

As I said on the other thread, house, senate, and presidential control would not be in "liberal" hands even if the Democrats were in power in these institutions.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:39 PM

LH,

For some strange reason, I feel we finally have some common ground between us.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:36 PM

If it's any comfort to you, Susu's Hubby, I have long known that American "liberal" politicians are just as lying and duplicitous as are American "conservative" politicians, and that in fact...they BOTH serve the same common interests: big money.

And neither you nor I can do a thing about it. You are living in a $y$tem that, like the latter Roman Empire, is probably beyond moral redemption. The world in general will survive it, however, and will not remember it fondly, I can assure you.

The sad thing is, it may be replaced by something equally bad or even worse...there are no guarantees concerning that.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Alba
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:36 PM

HO HUM.... YAWN!

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:36 PM

"Gee whiz, and did you say that about Clinton when he pulled the same trick?"

Clinton was indicted. They call it being impeached. He wasn't, however, removed from office.

He was disbarred from the Arkansas Bar association and lost his license to practice law. As he should have been for lying to a federal investigator. He was never exonerated.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: 282RA
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:34 PM

Here we go again:

"The liberal media this and the liberal media that! Boo-hoo-hoo!"

Hey, goober, we've all read Bernard Goldberg's "Bias," okay? Like Ann Coulter and Fred Phelps, it was provocative when I first read it, but since then it has gotten old because every conservative who can read above 1st grade level has read it and now thinks he's a media expert. And in the eyes of non-intellectual conservatives, that's the same as blaming everything you don't like on the media and it's liberal bias. How ya'll do it with a straight face after showing us the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly is beyond me.

You might as well blame the conservative media for not stopping the liberal media--no excuses. You're either winning or you're losing. So the liberal media is winning and that's just too bad. Or should it stop and wait for ya'll to catch up?

The rest of your message is so retarded it isn't worth the time it takes to criticize it. Thanks for giving us the sources of all that amazing information otherwise I would have thought you were just talking out your ass.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:31 PM

Yer right, yer no scientists, Hub...

Might of fact, when it comes to politics, just about any position you can take on any issue yoyu'll find on a bumper sticker on the back of some redneck's pick-up truck...

Ever actaully read real newspapers???

Just curious...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:30 PM

"Karl Rove has basically been exonerated."

Gee whiz, and did you say that about Clinton when he pulled the same trick?

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:29 PM

Crap! Just another trolling thread trying to get up the noses of those of the liberal/progressive persuasion. Ignore. Rather than post here, spend your time and energy writing to your congress persons or sending letters to various editors.

Does Susu's Hubby work for Karl Rove?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:27 PM

No, it's because I have other things to do with my time than to label other people, to start arguments, or to brand as "truth" those things with which I agree or which fit my personal world view and "lies" those which do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:24 PM

I didn't figure you would.

Afterall, it's the truth.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:19 PM

Frankly, I don't really five a guck.

Subject: BS: Inconvenient truths for Libs
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:17 PM

Let's start with the obvious.

1.        Al Gore is presently saying that the burning of fossil fuels by humans is the catalyst that will plunge the earth into searing heat and destruction. That might be the case. It hasn't been proven yet either way. (Personally, I think he's full of crap but I'm no scientist.) What is he doing to stop it? Nothing.

The inconvenient truth that he doesn't want you to know is that he is hopping from city to city burning thousands of pounds of jet fuel and then jumping into gas or diesel burning SUV's or limo's from the airport to the galas therefore possibly contributing to his own demise if things are really as bad as he wants us to believe they are. Maybe he should start leading by example and maybe more people will listen. Or is what's good for the goose really not as good for the gander?


2.        Patrick Fitzgerald has spent many months investigating the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame and has investigated several White House personnel. To date he has indicted Scooter Libby on charges of perjury. What exactly Fitzgerald thinks he lied about is still yet to be determined. The media has basically smeared, tried and convicted Rove and has even commented on wanting to see him in an orange jump suit in chains being walked out of the White House.

The inconvenient truth for liberals, however, is that Karl Rove has basically been exonerated. Fitzgerald has not even tried to implicate Rove as even trying to lie about anything or else he would certainly have had Rove indicted as well. I think someone (or a lot of someones) owes Rove a big, fat apology.


3.        The recent California elections had liberals waiting with baited breath to see the outcome as to claim some sort of victory to show the country that they will once again rule both chambers of congress. But then their candidate, Francine Busby, let slip their true feelings of wanting illegal aliens ("undocumented workers" for the PC crowd) to be able to help and vote. Conservatives all over thank her for stating her party's true position. Her candidacy tanked and Brian Bilbray came away the winner.

The inconvenient truth for liberals, however, the field was cluttered with two other candidates. King, a libertarian, with 1.53% of the vote and then Griffith, and independent with the other 3.72% of the vote. Two candidates which anyone will tell you pulled these votes from Bilbray. It's the same that happened with Clinton-Bush Sr.-Perot election. Perot pulled enough votes from Bush in order for Clinton to be credited the election. If Perot had never entered the race or dropped out prior to the election then we would have never had 8 years of Clinton and her husband. Only this time, the conservative came away the winner. If somehow you want to claim this loss a moral victory then I'm willing to grant you all of the moral victories you want in the upcoming election. That will insure that house, senate, and presidential control will not be in liberal hands for the next several years. (That one's for you CarolC)

4.        John Kerry (who served in Vietnam) is still going around and spouting that the information that Bush, the CIA and the FBI showed to him before the war misled him and other liberals for voting for the Iraq war. Of course that was before he voted against it.

The inconvenient truth for liberals, however, is that it's the same information that was given to them by Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright a year or two prior during the previous administration that was never acted upon. How long will this guy be around? He needs to go back to his McMansion and get his fat wife to get off of her butt and make him a samich.



So see, liberals don't own the monopoly on "inconvenient truths". It just so happens that the ones listed above are ACTUAL truth and not some concocted story continuously repeated as to somehow bring validity to what is being said.


Hubby