Sharon Declares War On Terrorism...

[weazel]

Originally posted by Kieran


Thanks for making my point.

While I respect your intelligence and your profession, I have nothing but contempt for your support of the shrub.

If shrub had ANY honor OR integrity, ANY respect for the office he holds.....OR the American people he would have fired Ari Fleisher for the lies he told his first day in office.

Some of you go on and on about Clinton lying to the public yet turn a blind eye to the current administration when they are guilty of the same....and far worse, allowing Ashcroft to undermine the principles this country was founded on and shrubs undermining the law of the land.

There are "no shades of gray" when it comes to the truth, it's black and white.

A man without honor or integrity has no business being president of the United States.

[Apache]

No shades of gray, yet you paint with a broad brush weazel.

Define your position. What, specifically, is Ashcroft doing you so abhor?

What dishonor has The President of The United States bestowed upon his office?

Blind eye? Perhaps. Most definetly turn a deaf ear to repetitive rhetoric with no substance.

[Kieran]

My point to you, Weazel, is that we cannot have any exchange of ideas until you peel back the hyperbole a bit. You'll note I have not stated any disagreement with your statements, only the comparisons you drew. I know it is pointless to talk about issues until you calm down some- that is the source of my comment.

I've told you before if Bush can be found guilty of wrongdoing I would want him out. Do you keep forgetting this when you lump me in the "blind support" column?

[easymo]

Caligula.  My recollection is, that Sharon's election was do to Arafat's refusal of the generous offer made by Barak.  The Jews did it in a fit of pique. This was like throwing a match into a powder keg.  Surely, you are not argueing that Sharon has improved relations.  Or somehow cowed the Palistinians

[Toad]

Originally posted by weazel
A man without honor or integrity has no business being president of the United States.

Correct me if I'm wrong Weazel, but weren't you a rather vociferous supporter of our previous President?

Kieran has it; "if Bush can be found guilty of wrongdoing I would want him out."  I feel the same way. Felt the same way about the previous occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania and all those before him.

[~Caligula~]

The refusal of those offers pretty much means the same as carrying on with the violence.It showed the palestinians will not stop untill Israel is gone completly,and that`s not an option.
What is the point of trying to negotiate with people, who won`t negotiate and just keep blowing your people up.Just wait untill all of Israel`s people are ground up in scuicide attacks?
Sharon is the last choice,and I hope he`ll succeed in making the palestinians reallize their cause is lost if they use terror to achive their goals,and even those goals need to be retought.
Force is used ,but in a way different kind than the arabs would use.I`m yet to see scores of arabs lying dead in Ramalla,and no news of massacres.Sharon IS doing a good job...I hope he`ll keep it up.

[weazel]

Originally posted by Toad


Correct me if I'm wrong Weazel, but weren't you a rather vociferous supporter of our previous President?

Toad:

Nope, only of his right to privacy in regards to his personal life, that dog won't hunt.

I expect that kind of crap from tumor or cabby...not you.  

Apache:

If he had any honor or integrity he would have fired Fleischer the 1st day in office, good ol' Ari has lied again since, yet shrub keeps him as a spokesman, it speaks volumes about l'il georgies character...or lack of I should say.  

I shouldn't expect moral character from daddys l'il puppet I suppose.

A man of honor or who values integrity would have fired him on the spot. Too bad shrub has neither.  

Didn't he profess to those values when he ran for office, where did they disappear too?

Ashcroft:

How about his statement that the full weight of the US Justice dept would be used to block access to Cheneys records on how the administrations energy policy was arrived at?

Is it a good thing to pervert the Justice Department to protect elected represenatives ass?

I think not.

Nothing there to hide about Enron I'll wager.

How about his willingness to invade Americans private lives without due process?

Doesn't that go against the intent and spirit of the constitution?

Finally how about E.O. 13233?

It seems to be OK to some of you to sweep the past administrations criminal deeds under the Oval Office rug.

Who cares if it circumvents a law written to protect American citizens and government against presidential abuse of power if it protects the criminals who preceeded him, not to mention his own bellybutton when his term is over?

Sheesh, wake up boys and girls...something stinks in Washington, and this time it isn't a democrat.

[Kieran]

You're right of course, Weazel, there is no terrorism in America. No need to investigate anything at all, just go about your regular business.

You're right, Weazel, Clinton had no sycophants doing wrong, the only thing ever done illegal or illicit were his private affairs . Not that it matters, because you're right about one thing, we shouldn't tolerate any wrongdoing. What you haven't proven yet is the wrongdoing.

Sure, you've mentioned many things that should be watched and questioned, but none of them are illegal and nothing has been proven that is. Now this is the point where we keep bringing Clinton up- you were vocal about supporting him. He was every bit of everything you say you detest in Bush, and you appear to be too blind to see it. Even THAT wouldn't matter, except for the vehemence you display not only for Bush but for anyone that doesn't give you anything but unquestioning agreement on your POV.

Call Bush dumb? I suppose comparatively he might be, but he is not the fool he's made out to be. Call his administration criminal? Hmm, odd, Enron seems to have existed before this administration, didn't it? You better look at Congress, and I mean both sides of the aisle, because they would have had more to do with it than this administration. Question his intestinal fortitude on 9/11 (that was an all-time classic), damn, he's following protocol.

Hey, I got my blood pressure up over the election like many others. I thought WJC was a criminal, and you know what? I was right. He WAS proven to have committed a crime (though I suppose you could argue it was major or minor depending on your POV). Did you call for his removal then? If you did, I don't remember. As to the election part, all I could think of when I looked at Gore was "Buddhist Temple", "Lincoln Bedroom", and "campaign fund solicitation on federal property".

Go ahead, detest my "support" of Bush; you're so blinded by your hatred you don't seem capable of understanding what I am saying. To put it bluntly, I am not falling in lockstep with Bush, the Republican party, or YOU. I will not speak out against Bush until I have proof I should. I will not say he is innocent, either, because I don't know. All your vein-pulsing rhetoric will not change that.

One final thought for you, and I'm sure when your head clears you will see it for yourself- the President's powers are limited. There is a Congress and a Supreme Court that are part of the system of "Checks and Balances". If Bush oversteps his bounds, you can be sure he will get stepped on by the Congress, if no one else. Granted, I haven't read the news much lately (damn work hours), but I don't recall hearing anything about such an action. You pleading for us to "wake up" fails to allow for this provision of the Constitution which you feel is threatened.