NationStates Jolt Archive

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."

I don't see any flip flop there, he never accused Bush personally of lieing, which is what the question asked. You are aware there is a difference between the Bush administration and Bush himself right?

I don't see any flip flop there, he never accused Bush personally of lieing, which is what the question asked. You are aware there is a difference between the Bush administration and Bush himself right?

Actually, you are mistaken. His opposition make no distinction between him and his administration. Anything done by his administration is laid at his feet by the opposition. If he meant that Bush personally didn't lie, then to whom was he referring??

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."
Bush's administration IS a lie period.

I don't see any flip flop there, he never accused Bush personally of lieing, which is what the question asked. You are aware there is a difference between the Bush administration and Bush himself right?

That's one of the few things with which I agree from most of the leftist posts on here: the President is the Administration in practice.

Bush's administration IS a lie period.

Interesting viewpoint, but not very helpful.

That's swell, but since the right was so dismissive everytime Rumsfeld, Cheney and co. had their words come right back at them all those times I assume that you'll be dismissive about this as well. I mean, you wouldn't want to look completely partisan and grasping at straws, would you?

John Kerry said, "That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there. We hadn't done the work that ought to be done."

But of course that is untrue. The subways in New York weren't closed down during the Republican Convention, Kerry was just fear mongering.

Interesting viewpoint, but not very helpful.

I don't know, Eutrusca...since CanuckHeaven says so, I might just believe it. After all, I tend to have conservative views, and as you know, all conservative views are misguided, ignorant, moronic position...God knows I don't believe things for myself...I just believe Bush.

I found it very helpful, helpful in re-affirming the fact that there is no way in h*ll Bush will get(steal?) my vote, support or nod of approval.

I don't know, Eutrusca...since CanuckHeaven says so, I might just believe it. After all, I tend to have conservative views, and as you know, all conservative views are misguided, ignorant, moronic position...God knows I don't believe things for myself...I just believe Bush.
Well, at least you are being honest.

Bush's administration IS a lie period.

Yes, and as an American you can exercise your vote and oust him. Oh, wait a minute.....nevermind.

That's swell, but since the right was so dismissive everytime Rumsfeld, Cheney and co. had their words come right back at them all those times I assume that you'll be dismissive about this as well. I mean, you wouldn't want to look completely partisan and grasping at straws, would you?


Lol,

I expect nothing less then this attitude from a party who's highest representative lied under oath and they just let it go. *shrug*

Bush looked like a lost chimp in a hailstorm in the dabate last night.

And what a pathetic attempt at trying to show that Kerry lied.

Actually, you are mistaken. His opposition make no distinction between him and his administration. Anything done by his administration is laid at his feet by the opposition. If he meant that Bush personally didn't lie, then to whom was he referring??
And you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if Kerry doesn't differentiate between Bush and the Bush administration. He still is right on a technicality, since he as not accused the president himself of lieing to the US.

Well, at least you are being honest.

Golly...thanks! :)

Canuck: I mean no disrespect...it's just that your comment baited me too much...I couldn't help myself... :p

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."
OHMYGOD NO
the FIEND
thats IT!!
im voting for bush

Lol,

I expect nothing less then this attitude from a party who's highest representative lied under oath and they just let it go. *shrug*
I guess now I'm supposed to respond with "I would expect nothing less from the party that spent $10 million tax dollars to ask the question in the first place, because for some reason we all wanted to know about his sex life instead of what he may have been doing that could have prevented 9/11," except that I'm not a democrat. The only party I've ever registered under was Green, and I didn't even do that this time.

Considering the death toll of that lie in comparison to whats happened since, I'm pretty okay with that.

Here's a Bush flip flop for all you Kerry haters out there:

We entered this war with Iraq under the pretenses that 1. There were WMD. 2. That said WMD could reach American soil in 45 minutes. 3. That Iraq played a pivotal role in 9/11.

Each of these things turned out to be wholly untrue.....so, what do we get? Bush doesn't say, "Hey guys, we went in for one reason, but since that reason has turned out to be untrue, we have to just finish the job we started and get out ASAP." Nooooooo...we get, "Saddam was a bad, bad man!" SO WHAT????? Who cares? Not me!!!

After 9/11, I want Bin Laden's head on a plate....remember him?? Who in the hell cares about Saddam?? If Bush told the American people after 9/11 that we were going into Iraq to change the political climate of the middle east, the people would have laughed him straight out of office.

I think the truth is clear: 9/11 was the new Reichstag fire, and this war in Iraq is about nothing more than economic agendas of greedy old men, while Osama Bin Laden laughs his ass off at us from his pathetically easy to find hide out in Afghanistan somewhere.

Four more years of this?? I'd rather take four more boots to the head.

Well here they come...the insults. They just solve everything don't they? Instead of reasonably talking things out and respecting others views some people prefer the swift and simple approach. Oh well, sometimes there's just no help for people.

Bush has, it seems to me, shredded his responsability. When you are the president and you publicly ask the people for support of a war built upon faulty intelligence and information you are the top man who makes the decision to go, as he did. Now that we see that the information was wrong and that the war is not going to be "on the cheap" which as a military historian can tell you is always impossable. No war is ever cheap, and a mistake as trusting intel and opinions which have been proven wrong. Well you can blame the intel and facts and distorted information but as president always the blame is yours. cause you say go. We all know it is the responsablility that comes with the big boys chair. Kerry, is not a flip flopper, this is spin doctoring of the worst kind, anyone can see the information offered up in distorted details. Yes he changed his opinion of this war, many americans did due to the changing information on the war. When we found out that the information and intel was faulty the question than becomes not why the Senetor change his opinion, but why the president did not. let's keep our eyes on the ball and not get blinded sided by the GOP spin docters who are (I'm very sorry to say) VERY good at their jobs.

i think both candidates should play a paintball game at the next debate... lolol :P

What does it matter who lies? It's the polititcians who always win. It's just because Bush is quite obvious in his motives. People like to see matters of desperate doom conducted out of sight. Except they don't like to see it, because they can't.

Some Americans can be so PICKY in their politics. Generally British people pride themselves on the fact that their politicians lie and flip and flop ALL the time and no-one cares anymore.

Here's a Bush flip flop for all you Kerry haters out there:

We entered this war with Iraq under the pretenses that 1. There were WMD. 2. That said WMD could reach American soil in 45 minutes. 3. That Iraq played a pivotal role in 9/11.

Each of these things turned out to be wholly untrue.....so, what do we get? Bush doesn't say, "Hey guys, we went in for one reason, but since that reason has turned out to be untrue, we have to just finish the job we started and get out ASAP." Nooooooo...we get, "Saddam was a bad, bad man!" SO WHAT????? Who cares? Not me!!!

After 9/11, I want Bin Laden's head on a plate....remember him?? Who in the hell cares about Saddam?? If Bush told the American people after 9/11 that we were going into Iraq to change the political climate of the middle east, the people would have laughed him straight out of office.

I think the truth is clear: 9/11 was the new Reichstag fire, and this war in Iraq is about nothing more than economic agendas of greedy old men, while Osama Bin Laden laughs his ass off at us from his pathetically easy to find hide out in Afghanistan somewhere.

Four more years of this?? I'd rather take four more boots to the head.

i think youd care if you lived in iraq.

plus i dont see the U.S. making any money off the war.....

I don't know, Eutrusca...since CanuckHeaven says so, I might just believe it. After all, I tend to have conservative views, and as you know, all conservative views are misguided, ignorant, moronic position...God knows I don't believe things for myself...I just believe Bush.

Heh! Join the club! I've been called everything from one-sided to a lier just for expressing my views. And the more cogently I try to state them, the more anger I seem to stir up among the leftists. I suspect they may be having trouble with cognitive dissonance. ;)

Simply cut it out please!

In other words...
Shut up!

Europeans are bored to read about two lame presidential candidates,
trying to nitpick eachother.

John Kerry said, "That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there. We hadn't done the work that ought to be done."

But of course that is untrue. The subways in New York weren't closed down during the Republican Convention, Kerry was just fear mongering.

Actually, the station and the tunnels near Madison Square Garden were closed for the RNC, to the annoyance and dismay of many New Yorkers.

Bush tries so hard to get people to believe his lies, and it's dismaying how many believe him.

How about when Bush lied (as he did in the debate,) about Saddam attacking us? How about how Bush and his representaives are lying right now about Kerry wanting to dismantle the multi-lateral talks with North Korea? All Kerry said was that he wanted bi-Lateral talks in addition to the multi-lateral talks. To think China would pull out of talks about nukes on their doorstep just because the US takes a more active role is laughable.

How about when Bush stated that Iraq had 100,000 fully trained police when his own people say they only have 8,000+?

Bush lies, then tries to make Kerry the liar.

Go ahead, eat the poisoned oatmeal, strap on your Nikes, cover yourself with a purple shroud, and fly off with the comet.

Well here they come...the insults. They just solve everything don't they? Instead of reasonably talking things out and respecting others views some people prefer the swift and simple approach. Oh well, sometimes there's just no help for people.

Insults. Don'tcha just LOVE 'em! Heh!

Simply cut it out please!

In other words...
Shut up!

Europeans are bored to read about two lame presidential candidates,
trying to nitpick eachother.

Fortunately this board has provided a way for you to avoid reading virtually anything you wish ... just don't click on the link! :)

What does it matter who lies? It's the polititcians who always win. It's just because Bush is quite obvious in his motives. People like to see matters of desperate doom conducted out of sight. Except they don't like to see it, because they can't.

Some Americans can be so PICKY in their politics. Generally British people pride themselves on the fact that their politicians lie and flip and flop ALL the time and no-one cares anymore.

That only makes me fear for the future of Great Britian!

Golly...thanks! :)

Canuck: I mean no disrespect...it's just that your comment baited me too much...I couldn't help myself... :p
That is okay. I just threw that comment out there because that it is what it appears like to me and many other others. Just what have been the defining moments of this current administration? What have they accomplished in the past 4 years that you can point to with pride and say that America is better off than she was 4 years ago?

Kerry lied on national TV

What else is new? The slimeball lies about everything. But then again, so does Bush.

i think youd care if you lived in iraq.

plus i dont see the U.S. making any money off the war.....
If I lived in Iraq I'd care that a "liberating" force bombed civilian homes. I'd care that said force was now occupying my country. I'd care that the Iraqi prisoners being held by those forces are termed terrorists instead of prisoners of war, and that they were horribly mistreated. I would also care about Saddam, and the human rights abuses he perpetrated, as you said. I'm not sure how that would balance out for me personnaly, but a lot of Iraqis have made it clear that they don't appreciate the US's lengthy intervention.

The US government isn't making any money off this war, but a lot of Bush's corporate buddies now have big fat contracts that they didn't have to compete for. It also helps ease OPEC's control of oil in the region.

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."
and where did you get this from? i cant find a transcript, or did you just remember it from last night and decide to post it today?

and where did you pull the first statement from? cant find it

and where did you get this from? i cant find a transcript, or did you just remember it from last night and decide to post it today? can you prove those are both from last night's debate? because i know when he said the second thing he was referring to his statements during the debate, none outside
Here is a copy of the transcript. I hope you don't mind if it comes from Fox News:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134152,00.html

It is long but worth the read.

Bush's administration IS a lie period.

I noticed when there was a question bush couldn't answer he immediately brought up terrorism or iraq..."oh no they might realize how badly we're screwing them...SCARE THEM!!!"

Fox News

Gimme a bucket, I think I'm gonna be sick.

Here is a copy of the transcript. I hope you don't mind if it comes from Fox News:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134152,00.html

It is long but worth the read.
i have used every search engine i can think of and cannot find kerry every saying what eutrsuscna has him saying in his "flip"

after using every search engine, ask jeeves gives me results, but guess what? it is only referencing news articles in which the RNC accuse Kerry of saying this. thats funny that only the RNC has access to this statement

Simply cut it out please!

In other words...
Shut up!

Europeans are bored to read about two lame presidential candidates,
trying to nitpick eachother.
So don't come in this thread, no one is making you. Dick.
Anyhoo.

Bush's administration IS a lie period.

I noticed when there was a question bush couldn't answer he immediately brought up terrorism or iraq..."oh no they might realize how badly we're screwing them...SCARE THEM!!!"

I noticed when there was a question bush couldn't answer he immediately brought up terrorism or iraq..."oh no they might realize how badly we're screwing them...SCARE THEM!!!"
And the fact that all but two of the questions were about Iraq wouldn't explain why he talked about Iraq? Dumbass.

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."

You still haven't learned the standard, provide a link because people are going to check your shit eventually, but that's other peoples battles going on.

Mine is, why don't you try harder (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=271)? (thats a link, I know you've had trouble with that before)

I mean, c'mon. Grasping at straws is just so desperate....

i think both candidates should play a paintball game at the next debate... lolol :P


hehe, agreed cept roll w/ marbles 'stead of paintballs. bleh, i love seeing people argue over these idiot politicians, anymore all of them are freakin morons. all lie and are looking out for noone but themselves and if you actually think ALL of us come b4 their policies enjoy fooling yourselves. the american president used to be a position of power and respect that was earned and worked for not a position that you can earn by throwing the most sh*t.

I noticed when there was a question bush couldn't answer he immediately brought up terrorism or iraq..."oh no they might realize how badly we're screwing them...SCARE THEM!!!"

You should be scared. Or at least frightened. Try to imagine a terrorist pouring botulinum toxin into the drinking water of say, Los Angeles.

Actually, the station and the tunnels near Madison Square Garden were closed for the RNC, to the annoyance and dismay of many New Yorkers.

Bush tries so hard to get people to believe his lies, and it's dismaying how many believe him.

How about when Bush lied (as he did in the debate,) about Saddam attacking us? How about how Bush and his representaives are lying right now about Kerry wanting to dismantle the multi-lateral talks with North Korea? All Kerry said was that he wanted bi-Lateral talks in addition to the multi-lateral talks. To think China would pull out of talks about nukes on their doorstep just because the US takes a more active role is laughable.

How about when Bush stated that Iraq had 100,000 fully trained police when his own people say they only have 8,000+?

Bush lies, then tries to make Kerry the liar.

Go ahead, eat the poisoned oatmeal, strap on your Nikes, cover yourself with a purple shroud, and fly off with the comet.

Yoo hoo! Eutrusca!

You still haven't learned the standard, provide a link because people are going to check your shit eventually, but that's other peoples battles going on.

Mine is, why don't you try harder (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=271)? (thats a link, I know you've had trouble with that before)

I mean, c'mon. Grasping at straws is just so desperate....

Insulting me does no good; I have become immune! :)

And I wasn't "grasping at straws." Try, just this once, to imagine if one of your leftist friends had posted a quote that illustrated President Bush had lied during the debate. You don't think there would be at least three leftists starting new threads with titles similar to this one?

Yoo hoo! Eutrusca!

Yessss? I'm heeere! :)

John Kerry said, "That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there. We hadn't done the work that ought to be done."

But of course that is untrue. The subways in New York weren't closed down during the Republican Convention, Kerry was just fear mongering.

as opposed to what bush and cheney do right?

Insulting me does no good; I have become immune! :)

And I wasn't "grasping at straws." Try, just this once, to imagine if one of your leftist friends had posted a quote that illustrated President Bush had lied during the debate. You don't think there would be at least three leftists starting new threads with titles similar to this one?
I've mentioned my admiration at your skills at dodging to control the conversation without ever really having to defend yourself, and you still impress.

Reading insults and justifying an unsubstantiated claim (you haven't linked Kerry's original comment, people have been looking for it and can't find it) rather than adressing the argument. Did you follow the link? Have you ever checked my post history where I've commented against arguing minutia against Bush when there are much better things to argue against? Do you do any research at all?

Try addressing the post.

OH MY GAWD!

A POLICITICIAN LIES???????????

[/sarcasm]

Meh!

The shrubs dear in a head light looks, silent pauses while speaking, and just general expressions made people forget about it.

Where were the shrubs debate handlers? Presentation is everything in a debate. I guess he never watched the Nixon and JFK debates ;)

I kept hearing the shrub was a talented debater but from the looks of last night; that only if he is against another guy that can't talk as well.

Kerry won this round hands down.

But it was not enough to put the shrub away.

Kerry is no brainiac from what I saw.

For example the quips about his lack of support for Iraq.

My answer to them would have been.

"Yes I believe it was a mistake to go into Iraq. However, if we don't finish the job that mistake will become a tragedy."

Ahhh well, the first one is done, the next ones will be interesting.

So says the armchair President! ;)

Yessss? I'm heeere! :)

Hmm, you fail to respond to my post, even when I bring your attention to it again?

Hmm, you fail to respond to my post, even when I bring your attention to it again?

Yes. You and I have discussed the differences in the way we view things until I am reluctant to discuss further. Please don't put me in the position of having to defend every word which either candidate spouts. As I have been at pains to state many times on this board, I am no great fan of GWB. I just happen to believe that Kerry would be an absolute disaster for this Country and so focus on him.

It's not that I don't like you, it's that our "discussions" tend to get a bit werisome. Sorry.

Yes. You and I have discussed the differences in the way we view things until I am reluctant to discuss further. Please don't put me in the position of having to defend every word which either candidate spouts. As I have been at pains to state many times on this board, I am no great fan of GWB. I just happen to believe that Kerry would be an absolute disaster for this Country and so focus on him.

It's not that I don't like you, it's that our "discussions" tend to get a bit werisome. Sorry.
you also havnt responded to any of my posts

and while your at it, why does the RNC only have access to the transcript where that quote was made

Flip: Kerry accused President Bush of lying: "This administration has lied to us. They have misled us."

Flop: Kerry now says to the moderator of last night's debate, "Well, I've never, ever used the harshest word ["lie"] as you just did."

I doubt Kerry's expecting people to be this clever, or even is himself, but...
By the standards applied to WMD claims, "has lied" is not the same as "lie."

Yes. You and I have discussed the differences in the way we view things until I am reluctant to discuss further. Please don't put me in the position of having to defend every word which either candidate spouts. As I have been at pains to state many times on this board, I am no great fan of GWB. I just happen to believe that Kerry would be an absolute disaster for this Country and so focus on him.

It's not that I don't like you, it's that our "discussions" tend to get a bit werisome. Sorry.

Ah, but you even failed to respond to my debunking of one of your Kerry "lies."

I'm sorry if having to defend your errors is wearisome.

You should be scared. Or at least frightened. Try to imagine a terrorist pouring botulinum toxin into the drinking water of say, Los Angeles.

Why? Why let terrorists win? Theirs or ours. I'd rather live free, proud, and vigilant than fearful and oppressed. But then its all just a matter of perspective. And the GOP would love for the American people to be completely skewed in theirs. The more people are afraid, the less they reason and the more they long for the security of someone telling them things will be okay (as long as you vote for us).

There is no way to guarantee another terror strike won't happen. The Secret Service will confirm that there is precious little you can do against someone willing to trade their lives for yours when they have the initiative. But then again I could be hit by a car tomorrow, or discover I have cancer, or have a stroke....all of which is more likely than being killed by a terrorist. But if I were to become a prisoner of my fears I might as well commit suicide.

Cheney implies that a vote for Kerry is a vote for another terror attack, then says he only "meant" a much more reasonable statement that who we elect can influence the effectiveness of proactive strategies against terror. But the original interpretation is still out there, and you can bet Cheney was smart enough to realize it would be. Hastert, our illustrious Speaker of the House flat out says that al-Qaeda wants Kerry to win (and just what "in" do you have with that organization to know this, Mr. Speaker?) and that they are likely to try to influence the election with a terror attack. Every poll shows that people think Bush stronger on terror and a new attack even on the presidents watch is much more likely to clinch the election for Bush than for Kerry. So just why will al-Qaeda attack again? Because they want Bush to win? Or is it simply that the GOP's strategy is wrapped entirely around the fear card...because al-Qaeda doensn't have to attack...making people afraid they will despite the lack of ANY evidence or specific intelligence to support their claim will pull votes into Bush's corner.

The definition of terrorism, by the way, is the systematic use of intense fear especially for coercion. Please note that fear is not limited to violence. I am much more concerned with terrorism emanating from our own elected officials than I am of another al-Qaeda strike. Ultimately they can do a lot more damage in the long run.

As for politicians lying, is there anyone reading this thread that honestly believes there are politicians out there that don't? Politicians have been lying and slinging mud at each other for thousands of years. That's how they get elected. Why? Because it works. Because we just eat it up and ask for more. Bush...Kerry. Cicero...Catiline. Somethings never change.

Actually, the station and the tunnels near Madison Square Garden were closed for the RNC, to the annoyance and dismay of many New Yorkers.

Yoo hoo! Eutrusca!

Actually, New York subways continued to run during the convention. "We did not stop any trains," said Transit Authority spokesman Paul Fleuranges. "I will not guess or opine what he (Kerry) was talking about."

Does that answer your statement?

you also havnt responded to any of my posts

and while your at it, why does the RNC only have access to the transcript where that quote was made

I have NO idea!

I have NO idea!
then lets stop calling kerry a liar until some one can produce a transcript where he said it, cuz i damn sure cant find it

Lol,

I expect nothing less then this attitude from a party who's highest representative lied under oath and they just let it go. *shrug*
When clinton lied, nobody died. Even if Bush believed the BS he was saying, it was not for lack of people (trying) to tell him that the information had been debunked. Clinton lied under oath about his personal life. Big deal. I can tell you the number of people who died because of that:Zero. Bush sent us into Iraq, and had no plan for after the war. The number of people who died because of that:Several thousand.

then lets stop calling kerry a liar until some one can produce a transcript where he said it, cuz i damn sure cant find it
Cannot think of a name posted just such a site.
Of course, most are mispeaking, but some appear to be outright lies, from both sides.

Does that answer your statement?


No it doesn't, because here we go:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/wabc_070104_msgclosures.html

If you are one of the hundreds of thousands of commuters who use Penn Station, be prepared for a serious inconvenience the week of the Republican Convention. For security reasons, six of the eight exits will be closed -- causing major pedestrian back ups.

And it only took me a minute to find. Aren't internet searches wonderful?

Cannot think of a name posted just such a site.
Of course, most are mispeaking, but some appear to be outright lies, from both sides.
is that even relevant to my post? no one has produced the transcript, people have references the RNC of accusing kerry of saying it, but not one has him saying it

No it doesn't, because here we go:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/wabc_070104_msgclosures.html

And it only took me a minute to find. Aren't internet searches wonderful?
There is a difference between your points. In the first one you said that stations and tunnels near Maddison Square Garden were closed.

In your second post, you quoted a source that said that only 6 exits were closed, not any tunnels or stations.

In my post I quoted a transit authority that said there were no train stoppings.

Cannot think of a name posted just such a site.
Of course, most are mispeaking, but some appear to be outright lies, from both sides.
Actually, the site I linked DID NOT adress the claim that started the thread. It didn't even mention it. It did cite a previous error of Kerry's (the war has not cost $200 billion, it has cost $120 billion, it is likely to cost $200 billion) and a few foibles (naming a nazi death camp instead of a russian sight) and Bush exagerating the 100,000 figure of trained Iraqis and 10 million registered Afganis.

DO NOT quote me out of context or use me to make erronious claims.

Flip: Bush directly tells the WORLD that Saddam Hussein has WMD

Flop: Bush tells America that Saddam Hussein had the capability of WMD about 2 years or so later.

Actually, the site I linked DID NOT adress the claim that started the thread. It didn't even mention it. It did cite a previous error of Kerry's (the war has not cost $200 billion, it has cost $120 billion, it is likely to cost $200 billion) and a few foibles (naming a nazi death camp instead of a russian sight) and Bush exagerating the 100,000 figure of trained Iraqis and 10 million registered Afganis.

DO NOT quote me out of context or use me to make erronious claims.
Im sorry, I was responding to CS saying to stop calling Kerry a liar, I didnt realize that he was talking about the original post about Kerry saying Bush was a liar. My appologies to CS for that.

I quoted you because of the site you posted. That was not in any way out of context btw.

Im sorry, I was responding to CS saying to stop calling Kerry a liar, I didnt realize that he was talking about the original post about Kerry saying Bush was a liar. My appologies to CS for that.

I quoted you because of the site you posted. That was not in any way out of context btw.
You used me trying to get Eus-whatever to try harder in his discourse by directing him to more relivant discrepancies in what BOTH candidates said in an argument Chess Squares was having over the source of the Kerry quote contained in the original claim. While it is an easy enough mistake to make in a single thread, referencing my post and link was out of context.

That being said, I was being a little touchy about it. It is any easy mistake to make. As long as everything is straight now, it doesn't really matter.

EDIT: I forgot to add, I apologize for being so touchy, not just acknowledge that I was.

he also said that'd he trys not to.. I like how you only used part of his quote :rolleyes:

Flip: Bush directly tells the WORLD that Saddam Hussein has WMD

Flop: Bush tells America that Saddam Hussein had the capability of WMD about 2 years or so later.
Well, considering Hussein used chem/bioweaps in desert storm, I'd say it was pretty fair to guess that he would still have them. You don't honestly think he just threw them all in the incinerator, do you? If he got them out of the country before we could get to them, that would definitely not be our fault. Also, Bush only said that he would have the capability for nukes at a later date, and that could have been as soon as the end of last year. And that information can be found in a CIA document I got from the National Security Archive. Apparently then, it wasn't Bush that lied, if anyone it was the CIA.

Also, I want to point out the double standard. Some have suggested that Bush knew that the 9/11 attacks could be coming, and that he did nothing to prevent them. So you attack him for not acting on intelligence that could be wrong. Then, he learns his lesson and after being given intelligence that linked Hussein, one of the sickest men ever to run a country, to Al Qaeda, he acts on it and go in. Especially since we did have allies that supported us. And he did have CIA intel that he decided not to listen to once, and ended up costing America quite a bit. In one day, 2,800 people died from a single attack on US soil. Now, you want to complain about the loss of barely over a thousand over the course of a year? Seems rather pathetic. I regret their deaths, but more people die from drunk drivers and violent crimes in the US every day. Go fight those if you want to save a lot of lives. Now, Bush has acted on his intel, and you attack him for that. You call him a liar, even though he merely acted on intelligence given to him by the CIA. Go figure.

When clinton lied, nobody died. Even if Bush believed the BS he was saying, it was not for lack of people (trying) to tell him that the information had been debunked. Clinton lied under oath about his personal life. Big deal. I can tell you the number of people who died because of that:Zero. Bush sent us into Iraq, and had no plan for after the war. The number of people who died because of that:Several thousand.

So because no one died that makes it ok? Just for the record, lying under oath is a felony, you know, the kind of thing that gets most people put in jail (unless obviously you are the President). Nixon resigned for less then that. Too bad Clinton was too enamored with himself to do the right thing.

Flip: Bush directly tells the WORLD that Saddam Hussein has WMD

Flop: Bush tells America that Saddam Hussein had the capability of WMD about 2 years or so later.

Um ... Saddam did have WMD's .. its what he used to gas all those Kurds.
We didn't know one way or another with any proof that he dismantled his stock piles (we still don't), the French, Germans, Russians and the UN agree with us on that point. We went in assuming (because of the lack of proof otherwise) that he still had WMD's, unfortunately we gave him a huge amount of time before we actually invaded, time in which he could have (if he did still have them at the time) dismantled, hid or moved them to other countries. Even now, with full access to all records, we have no proof that he followed UN resolution 1441 which (should have) forced him to dismantle his WMD's.

BIG DEAL KERRY SLIPPED
BUSH SLIPPED A SHITLOAD MORE.
he must have used "kerry is a flipflopper" as a comeback like six times.
nice cantidate youve got there.
bush cant debate for crap

and WMDs are generally NUKES not wimpy little mustard gas

There is a difference between your points. In the first one you said that stations and tunnels near Maddison Square Garden were closed.

In your second post, you quoted a source that said that only 6 exits were closed, not any tunnels or stations.

In my post I quoted a transit authority that said there were no train stoppings.

So I was wrong on the tunnels part. Did Kerry ever say tunnels? Nope, just looked at the transcript. Kerry never said tunnels. I did. My mistake. Not Kerry's.

Actually, you are mistaken. His opposition make no distinction between him and his administration. Anything done by his administration is laid at his feet by the opposition. If he meant that Bush personally didn't lie, then to whom was he referring??

So it's a proven lie because you know the thoughts of the Bush opposition?

and WMDs are generally NUKES not wimpy little mustard gas

Hey! :mad: Go do a search on "mustard gas". Look for pictures. Then come back here when you're more educated. :mad:

So because no one died that makes it ok? Just for the record, lying under oath is a felony, you know, the kind of thing that gets most people put in jail (unless obviously you are the President). Nixon resigned for less then that. Too bad Clinton was too enamored with himself to do the right thing.

Technically, a President is always under oath, so when Bush said Saddam attacked us, last night, he was commiting a felony.

Bush looked like a lost chimp in a hailstorm in the dabate last night.

And what a pathetic attempt at trying to show that Kerry lied.

Most chimps probably know how to spell debate...

Technically, a President is always under oath, so when Bush said Saddam attacked us, last night, he was commiting a felony.

Nixon didn't just go about lying on television. Lets try to remember that he stole an election by tapping the DNC's phones.
LBJ did the same thing but we won't get into that.

Btw.. for all of you who think Bush "stole" this election take a look at JFK's election. There were counting errors all over the place in the south. Bobby and John John got some mafia goons to vote with the dead in Chicago. Then Jfk brought us closer to total anhilation than any other president.

Of course Kerry lied! When talking about the coalition, he forgot Poland!

Just a question... If we knew about the plans of September 11th so long ago, why didn't OTHER people do things? Why does Bush have to take the blame. I understand that he could have done something, maybe done a LOT, but so could Clinton. Anyways, I'm not big on either. I think no matter what, if either of the two main contestants for the presidency get the office for the next four years, America is screwed. *Removed because I'm a coward and don't want to piss anyone off*

Anyone else notice that this whole thread is just a bunch of semantics?

BIG DEAL KERRY SLIPPED
BUSH SLIPPED A SHITLOAD MORE.
he must have used "kerry is a flipflopper" as a comeback like six times.
nice cantidate youve got there.
bush cant debate for crap
kerry didnt slip, the RNC made up some bullshit statement by kerry that cant be found anywhere else but the RNC that shows him as a flip flopper, good idea, your candidate looks like a jackass in teh debate, start lying about the other one. you would think in 5 search engines i could find kerry or anyone ever actually saying what the RNC say he said

These are all minor gaffes, regarding Kerry. Where is the debate about George W. Bush's record?

Where is Osama Bin Laden? Why does Bush refuse to remove his lopsided tax cuts to help fund schools and the war on terror? Why was a top White House contracter convicted of swinging a deal between the Bush Administration and Boeing when she KNEW it was against the law to work for both at the same time? Why has everyone forgotten Dick Cheney's ties to Halliburton? Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction? Why did Bush look like a surprised deer in last night's debates? Why did he SOUND like a tape recorder being played over and over in the debate?

exc....

Did Bush really lie? He said "the enemy attacked us"... well, yeah, they definitely did. The terrorists who slammed those planes into the WTC certainly weren't our friends. Kerry made it sound like Bush meant Saddam, and kudos to him, but Bush didn't actually say "Saddam attacked us".

That's one of the few things with which I agree from most of the leftist posts on here: the President is the Administration in practice.
A sorry, sorry state of affairs .... methinks a good example is the 9/11 committee hearings, where Bush specifically wouldn't speak independently, instead holding court with Cheney so he didn't blurt out anything unseemly without a good, subtle reprimand (Kerry shaking Bush's hand! teehee!) and of course no liability on his own part. He seemed to do better when he was debating Gore ... no small accomplishment there, though, so i guess he'll take it where he can get it (no pun intended really).
Of course that would mean that the complete farcicle pursuit of WMD and all that other horsesh*t is also no lower on the pole than the figurehead, Bush. His decision, not someone else's "faulty" intelligence or any of that other jazz. Which way you gonna have it?

Did Bush really lie? He said "the enemy attacked us"... well, yeah, they definitely did. The terrorists who slammed those planes into the WTC certainly weren't our friends. Kerry made it sound like Bush meant Saddam, and kudos to him, but Bush didn't actually say "Saddam attacked us".

He didn't NEED to say it. Bush invaded Iraq, and by extension implied that Iraq was the threat.

If I lived in Iraq I'd care that a "liberating" force bombed civilian homes. I'd care that said force was now occupying my country. I'd care that the Iraqi prisoners being held by those forces are termed terrorists instead of prisoners of war, and that they were horribly mistreated. I would also care about Saddam, and the human rights abuses he perpetrated, as you said. I'm not sure how that would balance out for me personnaly, but a lot of Iraqis have made it clear that they don't appreciate the US's lengthy intervention.

The US government isn't making any money off this war, but a lot of Bush's corporate buddies now have big fat contracts that they didn't have to compete for. It also helps ease OPEC's control of oil in the region.
I agree with this person's assessment. Good post.

Yes. You and I have discussed the differences in the way we view things until I am reluctant to discuss further. Please don't put me in the position of having to defend every word which either candidate spouts. As I have been at pains to state many times on this board, I am no great fan of GWB. I just happen to believe that Kerry would be an absolute disaster for this Country and so focus on him.

It's not that I don't like you, it's that our "discussions" tend to get a bit werisome. Sorry.
I side with Gymoor on this (for whatever difference my posted opinion makes)
You made the thread. You deal with the consequences.
A legit debate is fine and people will of course pursue things OTHER THAN SEMANTICS for an argument, so coast it out! If there's merit in your statement(s) then we'll all be the better for you qualifying your opinion AND quantifying your perspective with facts at the same time!
Cheers!

Why? Why let terrorists win? Theirs or ours. I'd rather live free, proud, and vigilant than fearful and oppressed. But then its all just a matter of perspective. And the GOP would love for the American people to be completely skewed in theirs. The more people are afraid, the less they reason and the more they long for the security of someone telling them things will be okay (as long as you vote for us).

There is no way to guarantee another terror strike won't happen. The Secret Service will confirm that there is precious little you can do against someone willing to trade their lives for yours when they have the initiative. But then again I could be hit by a car tomorrow, or discover I have cancer, or have a stroke....all of which is more likely than being killed by a terrorist. But if I were to become a prisoner of my fears I might as well commit suicide.

Cheney implies that a vote for Kerry is a vote for another terror attack, then says he only "meant" a much more reasonable statement that who we elect can influence the effectiveness of proactive strategies against terror. But the original interpretation is still out there, and you can bet Cheney was smart enough to realize it would be. Hastert, our illustrious Speaker of the House flat out says that al-Qaeda wants Kerry to win (and just what "in" do you have with that organization to know this, Mr. Speaker?) and that they are likely to try to influence the election with a terror attack. Every poll shows that people think Bush stronger on terror and a new attack even on the presidents watch is much more likely to clinch the election for Bush than for Kerry. So just why will al-Qaeda attack again? Because they want Bush to win? Or is it simply that the GOP's strategy is wrapped entirely around the fear card...because al-Qaeda doensn't have to attack...making people afraid they will despite the lack of ANY evidence or specific intelligence to support their claim will pull votes into Bush's corner.

The definition of terrorism, by the way, is the systematic use of intense fear especially for coercion. Please note that fear is not limited to violence. I am much more concerned with terrorism emanating from our own elected officials than I am of another al-Qaeda strike. Ultimately they can do a lot more damage in the long run.

As for politicians lying, is there anyone reading this thread that honestly believes there are politicians out there that don't? Politicians have been lying and slinging mud at each other for thousands of years. That's how they get elected. Why? Because it works. Because we just eat it up and ask for more. Bush...Kerry. Cicero...Catiline. Somethings never change.
Excellent post.