Don't think anyone has ever asked what I thought was and was not excusable regarding what Bush has done, I simply explain what he did and tried to give an explanation of why he did it. I gave insight to those interested in knowing how to deal with people like Bush. The nature of a wolf makes it behavior predictable, Bush's behavior was predictable. I even tell you what my behavior would have been or would be. I never said if these behaviors/actions/decisions were right or wrong, it simply is what it is. I am the first to know when I cross a line, and I know why I cross it. I am also a person who would admit crossing the line and will tell you why. There is no wolf defense. I made the analogy to further illustrate how either Democrats had no clue or that they actually endorse many of the actions taken by Bush. Sorry, if I can not explain the point in a manner that you can understand.
The Republicans supported the actions take by Bush regarding Iraq, as did I. I have stated several times that Bush has made some mistakes, so have Republicans. However, I don't think he lied, I don't think Bush has done anything rising to the level of an impeachable offense. I do think he used hyperbole in his case for war, but I have stated all of those things.
The actions taken by Democrats don't match the level of their complaints. I asked for help reconciling that in my earliest posts on this issue, never to get any kind of response other than the common themes of Bush lied, they had no choice, or they accomplished some items on the fringes of what is important relative to their rhetoric.
For example I don't understand your behavior. If I thought I was reading a "sham", I might enjoy reading it but I certainly would not put time and energy responding to it, after all a "sham" is a "sham".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
Lemme get this straight, ace....you're posting on a thread authored by a progressive who is objecting to and challenging the presumed democratic nominee for acting "just like them"....for "standing for nothing".
|
Host,
You never really address the question - was Bush's behavior a surprise to you? When Bush made his case for war - did you not consider the fact that he was over-selling his case? Did you not know that his intent was to allow no tolerance for Saddam's defiance prior to him becoming President? Did you not know that Chaney had a crusade going on in his mind regarding executive power? Did you not know that the administration would use it power against those disloyal (i.e. - Plame)? Did you not know the CIA was going to be authorized to do "more" to fight terrorism than they did under the Clinton administration? Now are you saying that Obama's inconsistencies are a surprise to you?
If someone would answer these questions honestly, I would gladly move on and perhaps you folks might understand what my views are based on.
Hell, Kerry was for the war and against it, Obama is for the second amendment meaning individuals have a right to own firearms and against it. Gee, Obama is nothing like most Republicans.