Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'You Lied to Us'
New York Times ^ | 6/02/03 | William Safire

Posted on 06/02/2003 12:18:29 AM PDT by kattracks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last
To: goo goo g'joob
"so, which 3rd place loser gets your wasted vote?"

Firstly, I consider "the lesser of two evils" (a manner of speech only) a wasted vote.

Secondly, if I don't see a third party with a well rounded agenda and not just a single issue to campaign upon, I will not vote for President, but, I will vote for other offices.



41 posted on 06/02/2003 9:21:25 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ganeshpuri89
A very good analogy. Iraq is as large as California and it does not required much space to hide Bio-Chem WMD capable of killing a million Americans.
42 posted on 06/02/2003 9:22:20 AM PDT by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: justshe
I'm doing a search to find it for you.

FReegards
43 posted on 06/02/2003 9:23:24 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: poet
"Is it possible that one of the reasons for invading Iraq was a personal payback by Bush to punish saddam for attempting to assassinate his father 10/11 years ago."

Still repeating this juvenial crap, eh kiddo? Fortunately, the President of the United States is above that and eliminated this regieme for valid, geo-political reasons.

Your continued mantra of Republicans being Democrat-lites is as empty-headed as the rest of your tirade.

"Poet, my ass!"

44 posted on 06/02/2003 9:25:53 AM PDT by Redleg Duke (Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jamesnwu
Saddam offered $10,000 to the families of suicide bombers, Hamas and Islamic Jihad "martyrs", to encourage and finance them.

So did the Saudis, and I imagine in some way still do. Are we going to invade them next? Oh, I forgot, they're our 'ally'

45 posted on 06/02/2003 9:28:47 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Marie Antoinette
Save your breath, POET is a left coast democrat, a Bush and America hater.
46 posted on 06/02/2003 9:32:44 AM PDT by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: poet
Excuse my cynicism, but a lot of what you're saying sounds just like the lines my liberal relatives spout.

Assuming you are sincere in your conservatism, which nationally known conservative figure do you think has any chance of winning a national election, and implementing a true conservative agenda?

48 posted on 06/02/2003 9:35:44 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jamesnwu
US troops are leaving Saudi Arabia. We have a new base in the middle east now.

Oh but wait. I thought th armed forces of this nation of states was just 'freeing' the Iraqi people, not setting up a dependent state from which we have even another base which will suck more tax dollars out of our pockets

The Saudi government is under great pressure to reform. We don't need them as allies any more. Their support for terrorism will continue to become more and more of a liability for them, and soon they will have to choose - either stop, or get stomped.

Curious isn't it, that Saudi involvement in terrorism has been going on for much longer and much more in depth than anything the Iraqis have done, yet as our 'ally' we can afford to let the Saudis make the decision theirselves about terror at some unnamed future time. Hmmmmm, what about the 'war on terror'?

49 posted on 06/02/2003 9:57:24 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
"Poet, my ass!""

Ouch, I'm hurt to the core.

Redleg Duke,
thinks I'm a mook,
as a poet, he says I'm lame,
I'll never be the same,
the tears are falling, I'm going to cry,
he's picking on me, why, oh, why?
he doesn't like my political stand,
he thinks I'm crass,
he ends his tirade with,
Poet, my ass
Ouch

FReegards

50 posted on 06/02/2003 9:59:39 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: desertcry
"Save your breath, POET is a left coast democrat, a Bush and America hater."

Say what? Give me some of that stuff you're smoking. Can't handle differences of opinion, huh? Someome questions your savior (Bush) and he or she is a democrat, Bush and America hater? Shame on you!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can see why you cry in the desert.


52 posted on 06/02/2003 10:06:33 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: poet
Would you please answer the question I asked you re: a viable candidate....and it was again asked of you by another poster in post #48.
53 posted on 06/02/2003 10:16:38 AM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: poet
LOL!

Save that for the next one who disagrees with you.

54 posted on 06/02/2003 10:18:36 AM PDT by Redleg Duke (Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: poet
They are all real dems regardless of the D or R. The main diff is that the dems would slap us in the face all at once with their big government schemes while the Rs will stroke our faces with piece meal implementation of big government. kind of like putting us to sleep and when we wake up we say wha' happened"?
--------------
Secondly, if I don't see a third party with a well rounded agenda and not just a single issue to campaign upon, I will not vote for President, but, I will vote for other offices.

You seem to be ignoring my question about an electable conservative who could accomplish something, so I'll ask a different question.

Conceding your point that both parties are moving toward socialism, albeit the GOP is moving more slowly, aren't we better off at least going with the party that won't do it as quickly, rather than voting third party and thereby (inadvertently perhaps) aiding and abetting the faster move to socialism?

55 posted on 06/02/2003 10:21:26 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: jamesnwu
Don't you see that taking out Saddam was a blow against the Saudis as well as against the terror machine as a whole? You can't fight all the badguys at once.

Nope, don't see that at all. What I do see so far is a trumped up weapons charge and a lame link to terrorist groups that may or may not exist. Much different than the strong ties to terrorist groups the Saudis had and still have

56 posted on 06/02/2003 10:22:16 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: poet
as a poet, he says I'm lame,

hmmmmm....

If that's the best you can do,
I think so too.

57 posted on 06/02/2003 10:24:35 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Imal
I suspect neither Bush or Blair have really gambled their futures away here.

Blair certainly took a big risk, because he is about to be brought up on war crimes before the International Criminal Court (ICC). As is Tommy Franks. Bush is exempt, because the US is not a signatory to the ICC treaty. At one time we were (Clinton signed it into law). But in May of 2002 Bush unsigned the US. So Bush won't be brought up on charges. Blair definitely took the bigger risk.

58 posted on 06/02/2003 10:24:39 AM PDT by my_pointy_head_is_sharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: billbears
You have to take the long view here. The war on terrorism is a war on islam as all islamics are terrorists.

Saudi Arabia is the heart of islam, if we attack it first it will rouse the rest of the islamokazis all at once. We can however peal away countries one at a time, as Ann Coulter says " Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"

Lets get a few of the outlying dominoes falling and the rest will fall by themselves. Even islamics want to be free.

When the time is right, or if it is required, we can nuke mecca and medina (and every arab capital and city of more than 50K) at our whim. We don't have to hurry.

59 posted on 06/02/2003 10:30:39 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: John O
"The war on terrorism is a war on islam as all islamics are terrorists."

I notice you advocate nuking all arab cities of 50K or more. What is your solution for arabs/islamists living in the United States? Especially those who are American citizens?
60 posted on 06/02/2003 10:42:25 AM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson