Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
Pgardn, with no disrespect, 'cause I think you're frighteningly intelligent, I think the Bush cabal didn't let out information about Iraq that contradicted what they wanted to do, so saying the Dems had the same info isn't really true-- they had the same info the public had, but it wasn't the truth; it was massaged and misrepresented. Bush was asking two days after 9/11 if it could be pinned on Saddam and it's no secret his crew wanted to topple Saddam long before 9/11. We were lied to; I don't know how else one can view it now.
Guys, seriously, read the Rolling Stone article. I promise it's an entertaining read, though it's going to infuriate you (check out the grammar of the one former Rep writing from jail). I'm not letting Dems off the hook-- note where they stood in bi-partisanship by the 1990's, but just because both sides have done it doesn't make it right.
Revolution, I'd like a third party, too, but first and foremost, we've got to get rid of the single-party control of all three wings of gov't, for the sake of our own nation's health and security, and our last chance to do that before '08 is coming up fast.
|
Genuine Risk,
Thanks for sharing the article. Very informative. Page 6 was especially chilling.
Do you know why GW has only issued one veto? Might be worth googling his executive modifications, and also the one and only veto he used.
The shame of it all is that some would rather attack ME for my views, rather than presenting meaningful dialogue on the shameful actions of a government that negates the very beliefs that we all should hold most dear.
DTS