Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2006-04-19 07:26:37)
Speaking of bullshit responses, how about Bill Clinton's response to the question, "Did you have sexual realtions with that woman?"Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
The single guy who had to sell the war on a daily basis takes a step away. I say let Bush be his own Press Secretary. Either way you get a bullshit response to your question.
Get my news from Fox....riiiiiiiiiiiight! New York Times is THE paper of record in the USA. Meaning when you go to the library to look up an article The NEW York Times will be the paper you would 99% of the time be looking at. Funny how when a story doesn't suit the right wing...that paper/news cast has a "liberal agenda".Mr.Pieeater wrote:
The republican party is not abandoning the President at all. There are few news organizations in the US that actually report from a fair perspective. The New York Times, which is one of your sources, has a very obvious liberal agenda and if you can't see that then you need to get your news from Fox and you will see the difference. Hence the reason Fox is growing and other news organizations are shrinking.
It is a hard road to fight against people who simply spend their entire day smearing the Bush administration instead of actually coming up with ideas to help change any problems we face as a nation. People don't realize that the lack of support for this Presidency and the war in Iraq only feeds the terrorists. And you calling that man a "rat" is so ignorant you must have aboslutely no sense of reality. Do you think you could be the press secretary for a Presidential administration? I think not.
The way I look at it, you should only be a critic if you can handle what that job is. And how about you not talk about "rats" and make a thread on how to improve the situation in Iraq. Or other important situations in this country. Its easy to sit there and say "Oh, well I wouldn't have done that. Your a terrible president." Instead of actually coming up with solutions to problems. You will never get very far in life if you just complain the entire time and don't give input.
Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2006-04-19 10:51:02)
Clinton should have never been in court having to answer his definition of sex. He broke no laws.Mr.Pieeater wrote:
Speaking of bullshit responses, how about Bill Clinton's response to the question, "Did you have sexual realtions with that woman?"Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
The single guy who had to sell the war on a daily basis takes a step away. I say let Bush be his own Press Secretary. Either way you get a bullshit response to your question.
And you think President Bush gives crappy answers? Clinton played with the words and his "definition" of sex. Do you see Bush working his way with words like that? Has any Presidency ever really been a completely forward one?
That is rediculous that you even say that... Maybe you should think a little bit before you say something as stupid as a politician not being honest, but only about one politician and not the bastard you voted for in the last election...
By the way, Kerry lost because he had absolutely no ideas of his own and only chased the opinions of the people. Which is exactly what the democratic party is currently doing. And that is also the reason they are failing as a party.
Close topic.B.Schuss wrote:
I'll see how this develops, but I really don't see the opportunity for a serious debate on the reasons why Scott McClellan resigned.
So he resigned. What's the big deal ?
AgreedB.Schuss wrote:
I'll see how this develops, but I really don't see the opportunity for a serious debate on the reasons why Scott McClellan resigned.
So he resigned. What's the big deal ?