lying under oath, period, is consequential. legitimizing it under 'certain circumstances' is wrong.
Quote:
|
Are you not arguing to me that the ends justify the means?
|
No, although it certainly does look like that. What I'm arguing is that just as with clinton having a democratic majority to protect him from an impeachment conviction for lying, Bush has a republican majority to protect him from impeachment. In light of this, there will never be a charge against bush, or his administration, so instead of whining and crying about it now, why shouldn't we focus on the fact that regime change was still US policy (which it was) and support the democratization of Iraq?