Author Topic: Last night's Daily Show? (Read 1460 times)

AKIron · « **Reply #75 on:** June 23, 2004, 10:46:49 AM »

I like to think that I am reasonable. That doesn't mean I'll change my view simply because someone else believes they have proven me wrong.

Reagan may have dealt with the Iranians under the table but the hostages were released upon his inauguration. If the Iranians had been unwilling to deal I have little doubt that Reagan would not have left them there for another year.

AKIron · « **Reply #76 on:** June 23, 2004, 11:02:12 AM »

So, you're saying that Iran is a kidnapping, extorting, nation of thugs? Weren't you onboard with their peaceful attempts at nuclear power?

AKIron · « **Reply #77 on:** June 23, 2004, 11:21:25 AM »

Nice sidestep there GScholz, not so deft as mine though.

AKIron · « **Reply #78 on:** June 23, 2004, 11:34:04 AM »

Carter never did get our people out of Iran. They were there for 444 days. Reagan did, on his first day in office. The facts regarding their release are unknown.

Nash · « **Reply #79 on:** June 23, 2004, 11:42:01 AM »

"Reagan did."

Yeah he wasn't half way through his innauguration speech as the hostages were getting set free. Man he works fast...

It's widely believed that Reagan/Bush Sr. did much to ensure that the hostages remained hostages until Carter was defeated.

AKIron · « **Reply #80 on:** June 23, 2004, 11:51:16 AM »

The US did release frozen Iranian assets but I don't really think that qualifies as ransom since the money was theirs. However, I will agree that Iran is full of kidnappers.

AKIron · « **Reply #81 on:** June 23, 2004, 12:04:03 PM »

You do realize that you're talking two different events here, right? The Iran-Contra thing had nothing to do with the hostages in Iran.

AKIron · « **Reply #82 on:** June 23, 2004, 12:10:39 PM »

He may have sold them arms to gain favor with the kidnappers. I told him to nuke all the bastards and let God sort 'em out, but did he listen to me? Noooo. Even tho he did whup the ruskies I am a bit sore we never got to shoot any nukes.

AKIron · « **Reply #83 on:** June 23, 2004, 12:21:32 PM »

Jackboot? You won't see me idolizing Nazis or flying their planes exclusively. But you go ahead and spin it anyway that makes you feel better GScholz and have a restful sleep.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #84 on:** June 23, 2004, 01:12:53 PM »

you just have to learn to speak conservitive/republican.

by side tracking the conversation on to old topics that can't be settled they have in effect admitted that Chaney is a lying POS.

they'll never admit they're wrong, or that one of their sacred cows might have actualy been caught. changing the subject is as close to an admition as you can get.

AKIron · « **Reply #85 on:** June 23, 2004, 01:14:42 PM »

Refusing to continue an argument when it becomes obvious that the other side is impervious to reason isn't side stepping.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #86 on:** June 23, 2004, 01:42:15 PM »

when you have 1 tape where he says it, and another tape (from a later date) where he denies ever saying it.

it's not the guy who says Chaney's a liar who is impervious to reason, it's the side-stepper.

AKIron · « **Reply #87 on:** June 23, 2004, 02:51:11 PM »

All politicians lie, thought we had already established that. Some do it in the interest of their country and some in their own personal interest. Not saying that lying is ever the right thing to do but sometimes it is more despicable than others. Won't you agree?

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #88 on:** June 23, 2004, 03:26:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm371
Yeah Nash. I'm working on Excedrin headache # 365 : The NeoCon rant.

I been reading this thread and I was thinkking about that old commercial, too...made me stop dead in my tracks with laughter!

Good one

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #89 on:** June 23, 2004, 03:33:21 PM »

So, if confirmed links mean a definite connection, whether considered meaningful or not...does this equate collaboration?

My pointbeing, there have been reports of links and business dealings between the Bush family, and Saudi government...does this mean that somehow the Bush family is intimately connected to the Saudi govrnment?

It's easy to draw conclusions with this type of fuzzy math...and while we're on that tip...

What should we make of Rummy and Saddam shaking hands back in 83?

Way too easy to draw BS conclusions on incomplete information, but it's all we've been dealing with for 3+ years, so get over it, please!