Skip to main content
Update
Non-financial boards have been closed.

Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.

Fool.com | The Motley Fool Community
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 153
Some years ago, I visited the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, where I found this inscription:

"WE WILL NOT LIE. STEAL. OR CHEAT. NOR
TOLERATE AMONG US ANYONE WHO DOES."


http://www.macmurph.com/photodb/picture.php?picture_id=15484

Considering these self-imposed standards, I asked myself why America would try to impeach Clinton for lying about a sexual relationship with an Intern but refuse to impeach Bush for lying to the whole country about the reasons of war.

As a german citizen, I cannot vote in this election but I would vote for anybody but Bush. Even if the democratic party would have nominated Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse. Every candidate can only be better than Bush.

I am concerned how much this ignorant religious bigot has divided your wonderful country which I love from the bottom of my heart.

MacMurph
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I cannot vote in this election but I would vote for anybody but Bush. Even if the democratic party would have nominated Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse. Every candidate can only be better than Bush.


Isn't there a dead candidate standing for congress (I use the term "standing" loosely) in these elections?
I believe he's proving very popular.
I'd certain vote for a stiff in preference to Bush.


CF
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 18
Considering these self-imposed standards, I asked myself why America would try to impeach Clinton for lying about a sexual relationship with an Intern but refuse to impeach Bush for lying to the whole country about the reasons of war.

Because Bush didn't lie. That he lied is a canard of his political opponents.

Clinton was impeached because he lied many times about things far more serious than sex, and the liberal media always covered for him. The sex thing was just the lie that we could nail him for.

ignorant religious bigot

Bush is not ignorant, nor is he a bigot. You should not automatically link the terms "religious" and "bigot."

divided your wonderful country which I love from the bottom of my heart.

This country divided itself well before Bush became President. You might love America but you don't understand Americans. That leftists say that the country is divided just means that they're not happy about being out of power. Were they in power the news media would be waxing lyrical about how a New Camelot had dawned or some such bilge, but the country would still be just as divided as ever.



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I guess we should look to 20th century Germany for ideas on how to select our leaders.

If we wanted to replicate the German household incomes, we should move to Mississippi (the poorest state in the US)

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Because Bush didn't lie.

<><><>

He said things that were and are not true.


scm


ps I guess it depends on how you define "lie"
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
He said things that were and are not true.


scm


ps I guess it depends on how you define "lie"


A lie is a statement made by a speaker who knows the statement is untrue at the time he makes it.

The favorite claim of the far left is that Bush lied about WMD. Well he didn't. When he made the statements and when his administration made the statements, everyone believed the WMD existed and would be found.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Because Bush didn't lie. That he lied is a canard of his political opponents.

At the eleventh hour and fifty ninth minute of the worst administration in US history, with everything we now know about flawed intelligence and misrepresentation of facts, with all the claims and counter claims that have been proven to be wrong, you still have the nerve to say "Bush didn't lie"!

Let's face it, any credibility Bush may have had is long gone and on Tuesday he'll be consigned to the rubbish heap. The fact that you're still hanging on in there tells us a great deal about you!

deejay7
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
>>>The favorite claim of the far left is that Bush lied about WMD. Well he didn't. When he made the statements and when his administration made the statements, everyone believed the WMD existed and would be found.

BRRRINNG, BRRRINNG, BRRRINNG, the gentleman has hit the jackpot!!! As the poster points out, there is an intent requirement to "lying". People are mistaken all the time, without "lying". Doesn't sound nearly as persuasive to say that, "the almost universally held belief that Hussein and Iraq had WMD was proven incorrect".

martybl
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Politics is full of liars isn't it?


"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 Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face..."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time 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, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and 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, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the 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

"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

"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

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), 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 weap ons 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

"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

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The favorite claim of the far left is that Bush lied about WMD. Well he didn't. When he made the statements and when his administration made the statements, everyone believed the WMD existed and would be found.

Semantics!

Then he should have said "we believe Saddam Hussein has WMD" - but he didn't!

He said (among other things):

"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."

deejay7
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
As the poster points out, there is an intent requirement to "lying". People are mistaken all the time, without "lying". Doesn't sound nearly as persuasive to say that, "the almost universally held belief that Hussein and Iraq had WMD was proven incorrect".

what about the intent of ignoring evidence that contradicted their pre-conceived decision point? when does it cross the line from honestly overlooking something into the territory of deceit? since the outcome involved a war, i would think the standard should be set pretty high for knowing the facts. there shouldn't be assumptions that turn out to be untrue... and "what everyone thought" in terms of WMD doesn't cut it... you HAVE to be right for war, especially a preemptive war.

-hack
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
MacMurph,

No doubt you will get someone who makes a snide remark referring to Hitler, directly or indirectly. Ignore it. That says it all about the poster and he closed mind.

What you might not know is that the inscription at the Air Force Academy was not lived up to by the academy, for a long time -- perhaps you've heard of the rape scandals (male cadets repeatedly raping female cadets, and getting away with it) at the Academy.

My point is: despite our Constitution, Declaration, and Bill of Rights, we are a deeply conflicted country -- always have been. We were from the start. Perhaps only a third of the population originally wanted independece.

We built a Constitution based on equality, while persisting with slavery.

We still can't agree that the war we postponed and later fought over slavery was about slavery -- many of the losers say it was about states rights.

And on and on...

Thanks for caring.

Joel
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<The favorite claim of the far left is that Bush lied about WMD. Well he didn't. When he made the statements and when his administration made the statements, everyone believed the WMD existed and would be found. >

If you want to go this way, then it comes to down to judgement. Clinton/Bush Sr both made the proper judgement that it was not wise to attack Iraq. Bush Jr (if he didn't lie) at the very least bad a poor judgement in his decision in attacking Iraq. And we are electing a leader who can make good judgements.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Fullerkz wrote:

<Politics is full of liars isn't it?

<"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 >

How does this make John Kerry a liar? Nobody has ever disputed that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, nobody has ever disputed the need to disarm Saddam. Kerry made the assessement that Hussein was a threat based on intelligence from CIA etc.

How the heck does this make Kerry a liar? The issue, as Kerry and others have pointed out, is where you go from here. Was this wise to go to war as a first resort when you already had UN inspectors doing ther job? Or was it wiser to do what Bush did, invade as first resort and be in the quagmire we are in today. No need to answer, the answer is given.

Meanwhile, back somewhere in Pakistan/Afghanistan, Osama bin Forgotten, the killer of over 3000 Americans seems to be healthier than ever.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
As a german citizen, I cannot vote in this election but I would vote for anybody but Bush. Even if the democratic party would have nominated Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse.

I'm also a European citizen though not a German one. If the democratic party had nominated Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse I would have been less certain Bush is the right president for the United States. With somebody moderate, credible and honest like Joe Lieberman I might even vote for the democratic candidate.

Datasnooper.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
MacMurph - considering you are a citizen from the country that ELECTED Hitler, I think I will take my political recommendations from other people.

JoelCairo - you are welcome.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
MacMurph,

Please excuse my spelling ... and maybe a little grammer.

Wo wohnen Sie in Deutschland? Wann Ich war im Armee, Ich war fur 2 jahren im Bitburg, 3 jahren im Wuerzburg und 6 jaharen im Dexheim, 20 kilometer sudlich von Mainz. Jetzt Ich bin pensioner von der Armee.

Bush lying? Not if Kerry isn't.

Veloci
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The favorite claim of the far left is that Bush lied about WMD. Well he didn't. When he made the statements and when his administration made the statements, everyone believed the WMD existed and would be found.

Jim,

I never believed that. Honestly. From the early nineties, maybe as early as 1992, it seemed pretty clear to me that the never-ending search for WMD was a way to justify and perpetuate the embargo and to keep Iraq submitted.

Vae victis.

Abe
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The subject of Clinton's lie was not the issue. The fact that we purjured himself (lied while under oath) was the reason for the impeachment.

As for Bush, proving any of it a lie, as opposed to his being mis-informed, would be next to impossible.

Keith
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
MacMurph - considering you are a citizen from the country that ELECTED Hitler, I think I will take my political recommendations from other people.


It's inspiring to see how people are ready to learn from the past.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
MacMurph - considering you are a citizen from the country that ELECTED Hitler, I think I will take my political recommendations from other people.


Considering that MacMurph was not even alive during Hitler's time in office, I would say that you are a bit narrow minded and arrogant. I think I will take my political recommendations from people other than you.

Keith
Print the post Back To Top