Vermont votes to impeach by Dayve

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Missed the first case there Chris.

There's a lot of flames in here....

Blinded by the light Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 9:57 AM

KHYRON

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
So, philosophical question of the day: is it lying if you don't know that you're telling an untruth? It seems like the following are necessary conditions for something to be considered lying: 1) one knows the truth; 2) one tells a distruth; 3) one has the intent to deceive.

To your question, no it isn't lying. To the actual question at hand: I'd say it's lying if one doesn't know the truth but says one does.

By the conditions you set out, Bush was lying:
1) Truth is there was no indisputible, conclusive evidence for WMDs and more time was needed to verify the intel, for instance by having, oh I don't know, weapons inspectors in the place - I'm sure Bush knew this;
2) He said the existence of WMDs was conclusively proven and if the US didn't invade now, now, now there'd be a lot of trouble ahead.
3) He deceived by saying it's conclusively proven when in fact it wasn't, so that he could start this war for whatever reason he and his administration felt necessary.

You say calling Bush a liar is simplistic, I say sometimes the simple answers fit the best.

By the way, I don't at all doubt what you have to say about the difficulties of gathering and sorting through intel, and determining what's real and what's not, although I think there can be such a thing as certainty, for instance if weapons inspectors go to the places US intel tells them to go to find WMDs and there are no WMDs, then that certainly shows that the intel is faulty and more time is needed to re-evaluate it before starting a war based on it.

Quote:
Editted to add: you might want to crucify me for what seems to be a defense of Bush, but I assure you: I don't like Bush.

If it's any consolation, I for one don't at all think you're trying to defend Bush and I doubt anybody who read your posts properly does, you're just trying to get people to re-think the slogan "Bush lied", which is perfectly reasonable.

Quote:
At the same time, however, I think that the global assertion that Bush lied in every particular is simply a naive attempt to paint Bush in the worst light possible.

Well, he's been called a lot worse and those descriptions for the most part are mildly to completely inaccurate ("idiot", "Hitler", etc.). To a certain extent saying he lied is stating the obvious because every politician lies (also the "good" guys). It's just the severity of what the lies lead to that provoke outrage at the fact that he lied, whereas in most cases lying is regarded as common practice.

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:12 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I consider THIS flaming, don't you?
Oh Vermont...well it fugures...right? There are about 24 people living in that state, all either pot-smoking ex-hippies, or ex-draft dodgers....and they certainly have a proud history of things they've "voted" for :

Voted to ban the Easter Bunny & Santa Claus
Voted to have maple syrup replace gold as our monetary standard
Voted to secede from the Union and call their new country Assholia.
Voted to remove crosses from every church.
Voted to make Maui Wowie the official state flower.
Voted to give condoms to fetuses
Voted to declare Howard Dean's brain a waste management area
Voted to make Pat Buchannan the winner in their primary & Presidential front-runner
Voted to declare Star Wars...Revenge of the Sith the greatest movie of all time
Voted to authorize a Britney Spears appreciation day.
Voted to decide when their next vote would be
and a zillion other meaningless, fu**ed-up votes over the years....oh, you thilly state!

Contributed by ShinyEd

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:14 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

And if that ISN'T flaming, please explain HOW it adds to the discussion. In detail.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:24 AM

SHINYED

Hey asshole....you're the f'ing asshole who FIRST USED THE WORD against me...right asshole????? So who's the troll asshole...huh asshole???..Or do you get your asshole jollies off just from attacking people who have not said one f'ing word against you...huh asshole???

You're a tight-assed asshole I see with very limited wit or intelligence....I will therefore withdraw any further asshole conversations with you...ok asshole??? Yes I will continue to post all I want..all day ...every day...all asshole posts...since yer the arbitor of posting appropriateness, you can call me & others assholes all day long..ok again asshole?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
And if that ISN'T flaming

I detected some incendiary devices there, yeah.
In fact, there were probably WMD's in there as well, since we saw none.
And we all know, it's not what you see that counts, it's what you don't see.
(That sounds like the tag from a game show, eh?)

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:33 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Hey a**hole....you're the f'ing a**hole who FIRST USED THE WORD against me...right a**hole?????

There's a quote:
"Who's the more foolish, the fool, or the fool that follows him?"

Chrisisall:
There you go quoting Star Wars again! You obviously have nothing substantive to add!

Chrisisall:
Back off a**hole! This isn't the Schizo Thread!!!!

*sigh*Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:38 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
And if that ISN'T flaming, please explain HOW it adds to the discussion. In detail.

I think it was along the same lines as Hero's two posts in this thread. Why did you not try to 'Google' Hero's statements? Did you recognize Hero's attempt at humor and not ShinyEd's?

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:11 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I don't generally respond to Zero.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:23 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Causal,

I think the difference is that Bush had access to intelligence from the DOE nuclear experts saying the aluminum tubes were completely unfit for centrifuges, from Joe Wilson saying the uranium claim was not true, from intelligence analysts who said 'curveball' was a nutcase and so on. There was all this credible information which DIDN'T support the case for WMD.

And if I may point out - IF Iraq had CW, US troops would have suffered a 20-80% casualty rate. Do you think Bush would have sent troops in to that scenario?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:27 AM

I have much existential angst concerning the extent to which we agree, Khyron...

(Then again, what's that old saw about great minds...?)

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
2) He said the existence of WMDs was conclusively proven and if the US didn't invade now, now, now there'd be a lot of trouble ahead.

Well, the latter part is predictive and as such doesn't constitute knowledge per se, and so I'm not really sure we can say he was lying as much as inflaming public opinion (which he was definitely doing). I, for one, don't think Hussein posed near the threat that Bush said he did. Say what you will--containment actually worked.

As to the former part, I'd be curious to see where he said that "the existence of WMD was conclusively proven." He might have, but if he did, I missed it.

Also, my assessment at the time, based on the intel that I saw, was that it was "almost certain" that Iraq had the goods. Turns out I was wrong, too. Maybe Bush, not being aware of the finer points of intel analysis, confused "almost certainly" with "certainly." After all, that later would definitely have fit not only his worldview, but his intention to take us to war in Iraq (which, I think, he wanted to do for reasons wholly beyond the question of WMD).

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I think the difference is that Bush had access to intelligence from the DOE nuclear experts saying the aluminum tubes were completely unfit for centrifuges, from Joe Wilson saying the uranium claim was not true, from intelligence analysts who said 'curveball' was a nutcase and so on. There was all this credible information which DIDN'T support the case for WMD.

In the first place, yes, I think there were some things that he out-and-out lied on (e.g. the yellow cake and Sudan business mentioned above). So did he lie? Yup. But that's different than the global assertion that he lied in every particular.

In the second place, if there was "all this credible information which DIDN'T support the case for WMD," I never saw any of it. The consensus of the intel community was something along the lines of, "He almost certainly has WMD capability, but we're not sure of the exact nature of that capability." Now, part one supports the president. Part two does not, given how confidently he asserted everything. But don't skip too easily past part one.

Quote:
And if I may point out - IF Iraq had CW, US troops would have suffered a 20-80% casualty rate. Do you think Bush would have sent troops in to that scenario?

Well, I'd be curious where you got the 20-80% casualty rate figure, but that's beside the point. Actually, I think that he did send us into what he thought was that scenario. Hence the elaborate training we received with all our chemical protective gear and the exhaustive drills and precautions we took while in-country. As I said, I was scared shitless the first time we had real in-coming because I thought those suckers would belch out CW. I was convinced of that on the basis of intel I'd seen going back 5 years before Bush. So, yeah, I think he did send us into an environment that he thought had the potential for the deployment of WMD. That's part of the reason I'm sore at him.

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:44 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I wish I could remember where I got the 20-80 % numbers from. A small portion of my work as a chemist involves CW detection so I had to do some research into that area.

The dissent from DOE experts etc all hit the news VERY briefly and then went - POOF ! and disappeared. It was extant and you could probably dig it up - but it was not after the fact. It was at the time.

Many soldiers - most soldiers - didn't have proper CW gear. You were lucky.

Anyway, I gotta get back to work, so I'd love to continue this later.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
My son wanted to go to the local toy store for a special toy the other night. It was after 7:00pm, and I asked him if he was sure it was still open. He stated in no uncertain language that it was definitly open! I called ahead, instead of just rushing out, and found it closed at 6:00pm.
Was my son lying?
In his experience, that store was certainly open into the dark hours. But he had no cause to be so definite in his assertion that it WAS open at that particular late hour, other than his juvinile need for immediate gratification.

Let's just say he was being overzealous.

In light of this example, was Bush lying?
Yes.
Why?
He's not an eight-year-old. And Iraq is not a toy.

OK, the overzealous thing I'll grant you. But let's get closer in the analogy to something like intel. Say instead of your son, it was your wife. She wants you to take her to a nice restaurant, quite a swanky one. And you ask her, "Does it require reservations?" And she, on the basis of a conversation with a co-worker, says, "No, definitely not." Suppose further that this co-worker is wrong, that indeed, you do have to have reservations. Is your wife lying? I would say, no she's not. She doesn't know that what she's saying is an untruth. Her addition of "definitely" isn't warranted on the basis of the credibility of the information she has, but that's not enough to constitute a lie. I have to stick to my guns here, and say that I think that a person lies if-and-only-if they knowing speak an untruth with the intent to deceive.

Quote:
Do not attempt to apply logic to this administration Chrisisall

This administration may not think logically, but that's no reason why I shouldn't!

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:51 AM

Hmm...everybody I worked with (so various SOF units, as well as Marine and Army infantry) had adequate MOP gear. I'd be curious about your source on the claim that "most soldiers" didn't.

And for the sake of due diligence, you're right, there were dissenting voices on the nuclear side of the question--sorry I didn't pick that up earlier. I thought you were making a broader claim. I didn't think he was getting close to nukes, not based on my info. But Nukes are just one component of CBR.

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 12:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Say instead of your son, it was your wife. She wants you to take her to a nice restaurant, quite a swanky one. And you ask her, "Does it require reservations?" And she, on the basis of a conversation with a co-worker, says, "No, definitely not." Suppose further that this co-worker is wrong

No, actually the co-worker is usually correct, it's just my wife has a habit of cutting peeps off when she thinks she's heard enough, and never quite seems to get the whole picture, ergo the mis-understanding...

Now that analogy works for me Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 1:10 PM

Yup, that'd be about right.

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Just so we know you have a point to make and are not as much of an asshole as you appear.

Excuse me Oh Grand Idiot of These Boards.....but who the fuck are you to call ANY Firefly Fan an asshole? Grow the fuck up!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Oh Vermont...well it fugures...right? There are about 24 people living in that state, all either pot-smoking ex-hippies, or ex-draft dodgers....and they certainly have a proud history of things they've "voted" for :

Voted to ban the Easter Bunny & Santa Claus
Voted to have maple syrup replace gold as our monetary standard
Voted to secede from the Union and call their new country Assholia.
Voted to remove crosses from every church.
Voted to make Maui Wowie the official state flower.
Voted to give condoms to fetuses
Voted to declare Howard Dean's brain a waste management area
Voted to make Pat Buchannan the winner in their primary & Presidential front-runner
Voted to declare Star Wars...Revenge of the Sith the greatest movie of all time
Voted to authorize a Britney Spears appreciation day.
Voted to decide when their next vote would be
and a zillion other meaningless, fu**ed-up votes over the years....oh, you thilly state!

ShinyEd ......this is truly a classic & I love it, but you omitted their most proud liberal acheivement which is basically LEGALIZING PEDOPHELIA & CHILD RAPE....all the judges in Vermont let these despicable & un-speakably vile animals who have SEXUALLY ABUSED young children for months, years...well these fucking judges, ALONG WITH OVERWHELMINGLY POPULAR SUPPORT OF ALL THESE FINE UPSTANDING, BUSH-HATING, GOD-HATING LIBERAL RESIDENTS... well they let these bastards off with either NO PRISON TIME or less than a YEAR!@!!!!!!!!!@!@!@!@!@!!!!!!...Vermonters "feel" that these Democratic Voters" are ...well they're just a little off on their meds..a wee bit tweaked, so to speak..and that they need "help". "Well I say FUCK THEM & A BIG fuck them!, to FUCKING ANYTHING THAT COMES FROM FUCKING VERMONT!...but I digress.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:32 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Dear Jongstraw,

I believe you've sufficiently demonstrated your age group for all to see.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:35 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I wonder what it is about the Vermont votes that has all the Bushites in such a lather.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:03 PM

It was a simple question Ms. Rue... and I'll repeat it just for you : Who the fuck are you to call a Firefly Fan an asshole?

Another question you can answer : Why do you attack people with insults based on individual's beliefs?

Answer these questions Ms. Rue...if you don't, then I guess I'd have to call YOU a bad name...how 'bout two...coward & pisspot.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:16 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"It was a simple question Ms. Rue... and I'll repeat it just for you : Who the fuck are you to call a Firefly Fan an asshole?"

The question actually went: "Excuse me Oh Grand Idiot of These Boards.....but who the fuck are you to call ANY Firefly Fan an asshole? Grow the fuck up!"

So, when you tell me which question you what answered, I'll reply.

--------------------
"Another question you can answer : Why do you attack people with insults based on individual's beliefs?"

Why does your side?

Zero
"Dean 54%
Kerry 34%
Kucinich 4%

So Vermont's judgement is seriously suspect. "
SNIDE

"Shiny"Ed
"all either pot-smoking ex-hippies, or ex-draft dodgers ...
Voted to give condoms to fetuses
Voted to declare Howard Dean's brain a waste management area"
STOOPID and mean.

--------------------

"Answer these questions Ms. Rue...if you don't, then I guess I'd have to call YOU a bad name...how 'bout two...coward & pisspot."

Oh yeah, now that's a perfect example right there. You get to figure out of what.

BTW Jockstrap, I haven't seen you contribute ANYTHING on-topic in this thread.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:24 PM

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Hey asshole....you're the f'ing asshole who FIRST USED THE WORD against me...right asshole????? So who's the troll asshole...huh asshole???..Or do you get your asshole jollies off just from attacking people who have not said one f'ing word against you...huh asshole???

You're a tight-assed asshole I see with very limited wit or intelligence....I will therefore withdraw any further asshole conversations with you...ok asshole??? Yes I will continue to post all I want..all day ...every day...all asshole posts...since yer the arbitor of posting appropriateness, you can call me & others assholes all day long..ok again asshole?

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
[BShinyEd ......this is truly a classic & I love it, but you omitted their most proud liberal acheivement which is basically LEGALIZING PEDOPHELIA & CHILD RAPE....all the judges in Vermont let these despicable & un-speakably vile animals who have SEXUALLY ABUSED young children for months, years...well these fucking judges, ALONG WITH OVERWHELMINGLY POPULAR SUPPORT OF ALL THESE FINE UPSTANDING, BUSH-HATING, GOD-HATING LIBERAL RESIDENTS... well they let these bastards off with either NO PRISON TIME or less than a YEAR!@!!!!!!!!!@!@!@!@!@!!!!!!...Vermonters "feel" that these Democratic Voters" are ...well they're just a little off on their meds..a wee bit tweaked, so to speak..and that they need "help". "Well I say FUCK THEM & A BIG fuck them!, to FUCKING ANYTHING THAT COMES FROM FUCKING VERMONT!...but I digress.

----
Bestower of Titles, Designer of Tshirts, Maker of Mottos, Keeper of the Pyre, Owner of a too big Turnippy smelling coat with MR scratched in the neck (thanks FollowMal!)

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:24 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

So anyway, what IS it about these votes that has so many Bushites riled? I haven't seen such a response since I don't know when. Is it the sense that fearless leader might actually be impeached? And what's so bad about that? Wasn't Clinton impeached for getting a blow job? (though acquitted by the Senate). You didn't see democrats going off the deep end like this.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:26 PM

I just read your swell post & it finally hit me ( it's late ) that I've been engaged here with a collection of water and chemicals held together in a human form with absolutley zero brain activity. Good night & good luck!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:31 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I just read your swell post & it finally hit me ( it's late ) that I've been engaged here with a collection of water and chemicals held together in a human form with absolutley zero brain activity. Good night & good luck!

Still nothing about the actual topic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:32 PM

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
So anyway, what IS it about these votes that has so many Bushites riled? I haven't seen such a response since I don't know when. Is it the sense that fearless leader might actually be impeached? And what's so bad about that? Wasn't Clinton impeached for getting a blow job? (though acquitted by the Senate). You didn't see democrats going off the deep end like this.

Maybe because they have defended tooth and nail for so long, and they feel the abject dispair when one realizes that ones own fondly held love has betrayed them utterly and totaly and left them with the tattered remains of a life that was?....... ....oh sorry, I thought we were talking about my divorce

FORSAKEN original

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:32 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Just so it doesn't get lost in the snit-fit, I was curious if anyone had any thoughts on this:

... what IS it about these votes that has so many Bushites riled? I haven't seen such a response since I don't know when. Is it the sense that fearless leader might actually be impeached? And what's so bad about that? Wasn't Clinton impeached for getting a blow job? (though acquitted by the Senate). You didn't see democrats going off the deep end like this.

I'm really curious.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:34 PM