🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2007-07-23 10:17:30 -0400, bushlyed@yahoo.com said:

> On Jul 23, 8:57 am, Joeseph P. Blow <jpb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 05:49:51 GMT, leroyb...@pillinor.net wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 22:22:12 -0400, Joeseph P. Blow <jpb...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 21:03:20 -0500, Al <albert.finney...@geemail.coom>
>>>> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> In article <46a28eea$0$12208$4c368...@roadrunner.com>,
>>>>> Slim <s...@pickins.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>> On 2007-07-21 16:02:25 -0400, Al <albert.finney...@geemail.coom> said:
>> 
>>>>>>> In article <f7tlft$cr...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>,
>>>>>>> Joeseph P. Blow <jpb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 13:39:15 -0500, "Al Mundy" <t...@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>>>>> Why is it every time someone picks on Bush, the first line of defense is
>>>>>>>>> always Clinton?
>> 
>>>>>>>> Because there's no defense for bush.
>> 
>>>>>>> One of the reasons for the comparison is that so many have willfully
>>>>>>> forgotten the rhetoric from democrats concerning the "imminent" threat
>>>>>>> from Saddam?
>> 
>>>>>> The Dems, and the rest of the planet, got their "info" from BushCo.
>> 
>>>>> Actually no. The rhetoric referenced predates Bush.
>> 
>>>> Invading iraq didn't.
>> 
>>>>>> We now know that that intel was total horseshit.
>> 
>>>>> But Bush somehow created it years before his presidency. That is an
>>>>> interesting theory, care to flesh it out?
>> 
>>>> Liar.  The claims of wmd as a reason for attacking and the attack
>>>> itself was all bush.  Run, neocon. Run.
>> 
>>> Why do you lie when it so easy for us to prove that you're lying?
>> 
>> I'm not lying, neocon.  From what you just quoted:
>> 
>>> Now, against that background, let us remember the past here. It is
>>> against that background that we have repeatedly and unambiguously made
>>> clear our preference for a diplomatic solution.
>> 
>>> The inspection system works. The inspection system has worked in the
>>> face of lies, stonewalling, obstacle after obstacle after obstacle.
>>> The people who have done that work deserve the thanks of civilized
>>> people throughout the world.
>> 
>>> It has worked. That is all we want. And if we can find a diplomatic
>>> way to do what has to be done, to do what he promised to do at the end
>>> of the Gulf War, to do what should have been done within 15 days
>>> within 15 days of the agreement at the end of the Gulf War, if we can
>>> find a diplomatic way to do that, that is by far our preference.
>> 
>> - And -
>> 
>>> 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. We want to seriously reduce his
>>> capacity to threaten his neighbors.
>> 
>> Which, of course, mentions nothing of overthrowing him to shove
>> another democratic state up the ass of the middle east.
>> 
> 
> What I would like the neocons to explain is how come our biggest ally
> in bringing democracy to the Middle East is the dictator of Pakistan
> who overthrew a democratically elected government
> 
> Can you spell hypocrisy

We helped him become a dictator and a despot!

-- 
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and 
carrying the cross." - Sinclair Lewis