• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

Status
Not open for further replies.
Classified information is on a NEED TO KNOW basis. Okay, so maybe you need schooling, cause you don't know WTF you're talking about. Just because Bush had 96 page, doesn't mean the Senate need 96 pages. That's total bull****, and anyone that's ever handle classified info knows that.

Umm, tell that to Conservative who actually said the House and the Senate have access to the same intell as the information as the president. Meanwhile, the 17 member Senate Intelligence Committee did indeed get a copy of the classified 96 page NIE.
 
Umm, tell that to Conservative who actually said the House and the Senate have access to the same intell as the information as the president. Meanwhile, the 17 member Senate Intelligence Committee did indeed get a copy of the classified 96 page NIE.

So then, 17 members of Congress, both parties, lied and didn't do their job? You continue to blame Bush
 
So then, 17 members of Congress, both parties, lied and didn't do their job? You continue to blame Bush
Who was commander in chief again??

Oh, that's right ...


"As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq." ~ George Bush, 12.14.2005

I'll be sure to remind you of this next time you talk about "personal responsibility."
 
Who was commander in chief again??

Oh, that's right ...


"As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq." ~ George Bush, 12.14.2005

I'll be sure to remind you of this next time you talk about "personal responsibility."

Aw, yes, a leader who takes responsibility vs. the current President who only places blame. As usual, you miss the point, it wasn't Bush alone that made the decision just like it wasn't Bush alone that created the housing bubble but your hatred for Bush has blinded you as you ignore the damage that Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress did
 
Once again, are you speculating or do you have evidence of such (like a copy of the 28 page version you espouse)?

If you want to see the 28 page version, it's online ...

http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/2002 National Intelligence Estimate.pdf

... as far as my claim that the doubts contained in the full 96 page NIE were left out in the watered down 28 page "white paper" ...


The October weapons of mass destruction estimate, with its numerous errors and exaggerated key judgments, reached Congress days before the hurried vote authorizing the President to order an invasion of Iraq.


As the Committee report describes, the unclassified version of the Estimate, the so-called "white paper," that was released concurrently by the Intelligence Community to aid in the public debate further compounded the errors in the underlying classified analysis.


For reasons that have not been convincingly explained, the Intelligence Community eliminated many of the analytical caveats that were contained in the classified estimate when releasing the white paper to the public. Dissenting opinions among agencies on key judgments were dropped from the unclassified document as well. Perhaps most astonishingly, a key judgment in the white paper on Iraq's potential to deliver biological weapons added a meaningful phrase - "including potentially against the US Homeland" - that was not part of the corresponding key judgment in the classified estimate. This addition, which the Intelligence Community has been unable to explain to the Committee, communicated to the American public a level of threat against the United States homeland that was inconsistent with the Intelligence Community's judgment.


Not only did the Intelligence Community produce a white paper that failed to accurately state its own analytical beliefs, and, in turn, misled the public, it selectively declassified information in a way that kept from the public important judgments central to the debate at the time, namely the likelihood that Baghdad would launch a terrorist attack against the United States or assist Islamic terrorists in launching such an attack, especially using weapons of mass destruction.


Only after members of the Committee requested further declassification of the key judgments contained in the October Estimate did the CIA agree to release its assessment that, given what was understood at the time, the likelihood of Iraq initiating a weapon of mass destruction attack in the foreseeable future was low. The likelihood of an attack was assessed to be high, however, under the scenario that Saddam Hussein feared a military attack against Iraq threatened the survival of his regime. This judgment was not in keeping with statements by Administration officials at the time describing Iraq as a looming threat to America.

REPORT ON THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ


For example, where the version Bush had stated:


"We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX."​


Most of Congress was given the White Paper which omitted the "we assess":


"Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX."​


More examples
--> REPORT ON THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ
 
If you want to see the 28 page version, it's online ...

http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/2002 National Intelligence Estimate.pdf

... as far as my claim that the doubts contained in the full 96 page NIE were left out in the watered down 28 page "white paper" ...


The October weapons of mass destruction estimate, with its numerous errors and exaggerated key judgments, reached Congress days before the hurried vote authorizing the President to order an invasion of Iraq.


As the Committee report describes, the unclassified version of the Estimate, the so-called "white paper," that was released concurrently by the Intelligence Community to aid in the public debate further compounded the errors in the underlying classified analysis.


For reasons that have not been convincingly explained, the Intelligence Community eliminated many of the analytical caveats that were contained in the classified estimate when releasing the white paper to the public. Dissenting opinions among agencies on key judgments were dropped from the unclassified document as well. Perhaps most astonishingly, a key judgment in the white paper on Iraq's potential to deliver biological weapons added a meaningful phrase - "including potentially against the US Homeland" - that was not part of the corresponding key judgment in the classified estimate. This addition, which the Intelligence Community has been unable to explain to the Committee, communicated to the American public a level of threat against the United States homeland that was inconsistent with the Intelligence Community's judgment.


Not only did the Intelligence Community produce a white paper that failed to accurately state its own analytical beliefs, and, in turn, misled the public, it selectively declassified information in a way that kept from the public important judgments central to the debate at the time, namely the likelihood that Baghdad would launch a terrorist attack against the United States or assist Islamic terrorists in launching such an attack, especially using weapons of mass destruction.


Only after members of the Committee requested further declassification of the key judgments contained in the October Estimate did the CIA agree to release its assessment that, given what was understood at the time, the likelihood of Iraq initiating a weapon of mass destruction attack in the foreseeable future was low. The likelihood of an attack was assessed to be high, however, under the scenario that Saddam Hussein feared a military attack against Iraq threatened the survival of his regime. This judgment was not in keeping with statements by Administration officials at the time describing Iraq as a looming threat to America.

REPORT ON THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ


For example, where the version Bush had stated:


"We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX."​


Most of Congress was given the White Paper which omitted the "we assess":


"Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX."​


More examples
--> REPORT ON THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ

Damn, your hatred of Bush is a sickness, seek help.
 
Aw, yes, a leader who takes responsibility vs. the current President who only places blame.
7 years and 11 months into Bush's presidency ...

"You know, I'm the president during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived ... And when people review the history of this administration, people will say that this administration tried hard to get a regulator." ~ George Bush, 12.4.2008

As usual, you miss the point, it wasn't Bush alone that made the decision just like it wasn't Bush alone that created the housing bubble but your hatred for Bush has blinded you as you ignore the damage that Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress did
Now THAT'S funny coming from the sycophant who blames Obama for almost ½ of the 8 million jobs lost due to Bush's Great Recession.
 
7 years and 11 months into Bush's presidency ...

"You know, I'm the president during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived ... And when people review the history of this administration, people will say that this administration tried hard to get a regulator." ~ George Bush, 12.4.2008


Now THAT'S funny coming from the sycophant who blames Obama for almost ½ of the 8 million jobs lost due to Bush's Great Recession.

How about the psychopath who always lives in the past but only in the negative areas of the past while always ignoring the present and the failures of the guy you voted for. Absolutely amazing that here we are 3 years after Obama took office, almost 12 years after the invasion of Iraq and you still want to relive the reasons for going into Iraq, still calling Bush a liar, and sill ignoring the empty suit in the WH today's performance. you really do need to seek professional help
 
How about the psychopath who always lives in the past but only in the negative areas of the past while always ignoring the present and the failures of the guy you voted for. Absolutely amazing that here we are 3 years after Obama took office, almost 12 years after the invasion of Iraq and you still want to relive the reasons for going into Iraq, still calling Bush a liar, and sill ignoring the empty suit in the WH today's performance. you really do need to seek professional help

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" ~ a very smart Liberal
 
How about the psychopath who always lives in the past but only in the negative areas of the past while always ignoring the present and the failures of the guy you voted for. Absolutely amazing that here we are 3 years after Obama took office, almost 12 years after the invasion of Iraq and you still want to relive the reasons for going into Iraq, still calling Bush a liar, and sill ignoring the empty suit in the WH today's performance. you really do need to seek professional help
psychopath? ooooooooooooookay...........
 
Sure, Con. Uh-huh ... :roll:

Private Sector:

Carter (4 years): 9,035,000
Bush (8 years): -646,000
Obama (3 years): -549,000

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Sigh. trying to slip some truth to con is a hopeless cause Sheik.Maybe in the parallel universe he dwells in some of the **** he spouts is true but not this one.:(
 
Sure, Con. Uh-huh ... :roll:

Private Sector:

Carter (4 years): 9,035,000
Bush (8 years): -646,000
Obama (3 years): -549,000

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

With such amazing results why did Carter lose in 1981? Hmmm, wonder if it has anything to do with the 19.33 misery index Reagan inherited. Tell me again why you support the leftwing ideology and economic plan? Do you really support more Federal Govt. dependence?
 
Sigh. trying to slip some truth to con is a hopeless cause Sheik.Maybe in the parallel universe he dwells in some of the **** he spouts is true but not this one.:(

Reagan, "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?" American electorate, "NO" thus a Reagan victory

GOP Candidate, "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?" American electorate, "NO, Misery index 7.83 in Jan 2009 and 11.46 in December 2010"

The liberal truth somehow ignores the liberal results, why is that?
 
With such amazing results why did Carter lose in 1981? Hmmm, wonder if it has anything to do with the 19.33 misery index Reagan inherited. Tell me again why you support the leftwing ideology and economic plan? Do you really support more Federal Govt. dependence?

Mostly, it had to do with his continual failure to successfully end the Iranian hostage situation. Throw in a recession in early 1980.

But you were the one to foolishly bring up private sector jobs.

I still can't believe you went there when Carter ran circles around Bush in that department

:lamo
 
Mostly, it had to do with his continual failure to successfully end the Iranian hostage situation. Throw in a recession in early 1980.

But you were the one to foolishly bring up private sector jobs.

I still can't believe you went there when Carter ran circles around Bush in that department

:lamo

I don't think that I have ever seen someone with as bad a case of BDS as you. The question is why? What exactly did Bush do to hurt you or your family? I find it amazing that what happened almost 10 years ago is more important than what happened the last three years. No one can change the actions 10 years ago but we can change the actions now. Has Obama done anything that has disappointed you and what is it in his economic policies that you support? You said he was doing a good job, good job at what?
 
Sure, Con. Uh-huh ... :roll:

Private Sector:

Carter (4 years): 9,035,000
Bush (8 years): -646,000
Obama (3 years): -549,000

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
I didnt add the Carter years up, but for Bush (from your link):

January 2001....132,466,000
January 2008....133,561,000

That is a gain of 1,095,000 jobs not a loss of 646,000 as you claim

Obama:

January 2009....133,561,000
January 2012....132,409,000

That is a loss of 1,152,000 not the negative 549,000 you claimed
 
I didnt add the Carter years up, but for Bush (from your link):

January 2001....132,466,000
January 2008....133,561,000

That is a gain of 1,095,000 jobs not a loss of 646,000 as you claim

Obama:

January 2009....133,561,000
January 2012....132,409,000

That is a loss of 1,152,000 not the negative 549,000 you claimed

Check the dates for Bush, you only looked at 7 years for Bush.

Note to jmac ... you like that, huh? :roll:
 
I don't think that I have ever seen someone with as bad a case of BDS as you. The question is why? What exactly did Bush do to hurt you or your family? I find it amazing that what happened almost 10 years ago is more important than what happened the last three years. No one can change the actions 10 years ago but we can change the actions now. Has Obama done anything that has disappointed you and what is it in his economic policies that you support? You said he was doing a good job, good job at what?

Asked and answered.
 
Look, if you don' want to answer, just say so but you obviously live in a dream world where you dreamed you answered
For clarity's sake, "asked and answered," means you've already asked that and I've already answered. If you forgot my answer, feel free to engage the forum's search feature to find it.
 
Check the dates for Bush, you only looked at 7 years for Bush.

Note to jmac ... you like that, huh? :roll:


Yep, 7 years as opposed to 3 yrs for Obama, doesn't that show what a failure Obama really is?


j-mac
 
For clarity's sake, "asked and answered," means you've already asked that and I've already answered. If you forgot my answer, feel free to engage the forum's search feature to find it.

Sorry, but there was no answer and since there was no answer there is nothing to search for. I am becoming convinced that my 11 year old granddaughter is smarter than Obama supporters
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom