- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Messages
- 43,675
- Reaction score
- 10,967
- Location
- Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
If you insist.
I insist.
If you insist.
I insist.
All that means is that you don't actually pay attention to peoples' posts, but rather simply glance at their lean, deem them "progressive" and proceed to tell them what they believe. An all-too-common tendency of many on the right here, it seems.
Spoken like a true progressive.
All that means is that you don't actually pay attention to peoples' posts, but rather simply glance at their lean, deem them "progressive" and proceed to tell them what they believe. An all-too-common tendency of many on the right here, it seems.
As someone who was once sporting "conservative" in my lean, I can assure you that it's just as common coming from many on the left here. Not you, but many others.
And the ones on the left love to refer to conservatives as "cons" and say what all conservatives think, which always amuses me.
I see it thrown around by some on the left. YMMV on whether it's as common or not.
I rest my case.
Stop spilling your milk and drink it.
Moderator's Warning: |
Stop. Now. |
Yep. It's amusing how both the extreme conservatives and the extreme liberals give themselves away. The extreme of any lean, really. Without even realizing it, I think. They come off as honestly seeing themselves as reasonable and rational and downright moderate.As someone who was once sporting "conservative" in my lean, I can assure you that it's just as common coming from many on the left here. Not you, but many others.
And the ones on the left love to refer to conservatives as "cons" and say what all conservatives think, which always amuses me.
Yep. It's amusing how both the extreme conservatives and the extreme liberals give themselves away. The extreme of any lean, really. Without even realizing it, I think. They come off as honestly seeing themselves as reasonable and rational and downright moderate.
No, congressional buck passing. They merely said he could decide. If he chose no, they would not have overrode his decision. So, this means he was the decider.
Obama voted against the Iraq invasion. Seems he was the leader you needed, after all.
He received congressional approval. Are you trying to argue that point? :roll: Keep making excuses.
No. I'm arguing what you think that means. Sure, they were cowardly. But they did not decide to go. In fact, while giving approval, they asked him not to and promised to fight him if he went outside the UN. They merely passed the buck to him, once congress critters started losing seats by resisting it. I merely ask that we be honest about what went on. At the end of the day, Bush, and only Bush, decided.
You'll have to provide a link to that.
Kerry's speech on the floor.
Kerry's speech on the floor.
I'm not searching Google. I had to work all day. You look for a link and post it. You made the claim. :mrgreen:
I'm not searching Google. I had to work all day. You look for a link and post it. You made the claim. :mrgreen:
See above.
Let me add this as well:
In this editorial posted immediately following the 2002 vote on going to war with Iraq, Larry Eichel remarks on the Democratic senators who voiced concerns on the resolution but still voted for it. He also quotes a memo from Democratic strategists, including current Kerry advisor Bob Shrum, concluding "that it almost didn't really matter (politically speaking) whether Democratic candidates were for or against military action, so long as they adopted nuanced positions, expressed doubts and concerns, and made sure to condemn the Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction." (Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 13, 2002)
John F. Kerry - The 2002 Vote On Iraq | The Choice 2004 | FRONTLINE | PBS
As I said, cowardly. But agreement was it didn't matter, Bush was going.
Of course, so the smarmy liar makes all KINDS of excuses for his own vote. :roll: Do you really think "your side" is any better?