Gallup Refuses To Run Poll Asking Americans If Bush Should Be Impeached

[Nbadan]

Independent democrats say Gallup's response is dishonest and the company is using a double standard when considering the nationwide poll run during the Clinton presidency.
September 2, 2005

By Greg Szymanski


Behind the scenes, independent Democrats who are not “bought and paid off ” by the neo-cons have been pushing the Gallup Poll organization to conduct a nationwide inquiry, asking Americans if they support the impeachment of President George Bush.

But Gallup officials this week categorically refused to poll Americans, telling Bob Fertik, Democrats for Unity president until impeachment was discussed by congressional leaders or news commentators in the media, it was their official policy to refrain from asking hypothetical questions.

Frank Newport, Gallup Poll editor-in-chief, wrote in response to Fertik:

“The general procedure Gallup uses to determine what to ask about in our surveys is to measure the issues and concerns that are being discussed in the public domain. We will certainly ask Americans about their views on impeaching George W. Bush if, and when, there is some discussion of that possibility by congressional leaders, and/or if commentators begin discussing it in the news media. That has not happened to date.”

Fertik, head of an organization at www.democrats.com, disagreed with Gallup, saying the company’s justification was “completely dishonest” since Bush’s impeachment is a hot topic clearly in the public domain and on the minds of many Americans.

“Of course, your justification is completely dishonest. Is Bush's impeachment being discussed in the public domain? Unquestionably! Simply Google ‘impeach Bush’ and you'll get 723,000 links, said Fertik, reminding Gallup that a recent ZogbyPoll in June found 42 percent of Americans polled support impeachment if Bush lied about Iraq

“And this discussion is not limited to the Internet. Wherever Bush goes, he is greeted by "Impeach Bush" signs (e.g. August 29 in Camp Casey and August 30 in California.. And I hear it discussed on political talk radio frequently.But clearly you did not genuinely mean discussed in the public domain, because your next sentence limits the public domain" explicitly to congressional leaders and/or pundits.

“Thus your answer to the other 99.9 percent of Americans who are neither congressional leaders nor pundits can be summed up by paraphrasing a famous Daily News headline: "Gallup to Americans: Drop Dead!”

Fertik also called to Gallup’s attention that many discussions of impeachment have appeared in the media, including statements or references made in the made by Pat Buchanan, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, Dan Froomkin, John Zogby, Keith Olberman. Mark Morford, Rush Limbaugh. Rep. Charlie Rangel, Alan Combes, Ralph Nader, Lyndon LaRouche and John Dean.

Further, Fertik reminded Gallup editors that a poll to impeach former President Clinton appeared in January1998, shortly after allegations about his affair with an intern surfaced, the poll being taken with much less public fanfare than Bush is receiving over a host of possible impeachable offenses.

In response to Fertik’s campaign for an impeachment poll, Gallup was hit with an email barrage, asking why Gallup is skirting the impeachment questions.

More:Artic Beacon (http://www.arcticbeacon.citymaker.com/articles/article/1518131/32636.htm)

So there. Until Tom Delay, Hastart, and Jeff Gannon start talking about the I word, don't expect a poll from Gallup.

Gallup Polls have always favored the WH, so why am I not surprised?

[Hook Dem]

Why don't you start a poll Dan? Afraid of the results?

[cherylsteele]

I thought Bush's popularity in the polls was incredibly low. How are these polls showing favoritism.

Here is a link that shows his disapproval rating at around 50% or higher
link (http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm)

Sure doesn't look biased towards Bush at all.

[Shelly]

Dan can dream, can't he?

[Vashner]

There is no legal ground. He signed disaster paperwork before the storm even hit. He raised 10billion in cash by getting a bypartisan bill passed in 24 hours. He sent in Gen Honorey when the Mayor asked for someone that could take control. He toured the area at the request of the governers. I am sure he tore Mike Brown a new one in private... Don't expect this POTUS to air all his dirty laundry in public.

[cherylsteele]

I don't like bush either but I don't spew smokescreens like Dan does to back my viewpoint when people on this forum can easily search the internet and find articles and info to show him how wrong he can, and usually is.

According to Dan Bush can do no right, no matter what, which gets us nowhere. People like him who look only at the party of an individual is a big part of what is wrong with the elected officials of government.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

independent Democrats who are not “bought and paid off ” by the neo-cons have been pushing the Gallup Poll organization to conduct a nationwide inquiry, asking Americans if they support the impeachment of President George Bush.

:lol

So that's how Bush does it... just buys everyone off :lol

[Useruser666]

I wish Bush would buy Dan off.

[Bo Malette]

He should use physical force instead.

[hussker]

1) Pubilc Opinion does not drive impeachment
2) Leadership and the toughest decisions (WHICH WILL NOT BE TRULY EVALUATED UNTIL WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME PASS...KNOWN AS HISTORY) are hardly ever popular.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I think it's pretty obvious the only way Bush would have made Dan happy was if he would have stood on the banks of Pontchartrain trying to plug the holes in the levee with his fingers, and drowned in the process.

[hussker]

I think it's pretty obvious the only way Bush would have made Dan happy was if he would have stood on the banks of Pontchartrain trying to plug the holes in the levee with his fingers, and drowned in the process.

And let's face it...Bush has no "DIKES" in his administration to plug fingers in...(Did I say that? oh my...)

[Nbadan]

I thought Bush's popularity in the polls was incredibly low. How are these polls showing favoritism.

Here is a link that shows his disapproval rating at around 50% or higher
link (http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm)

Sure doesn't look biased towards Bush at all.

Come on Cheryl, your smarter than this. If other similiar polls are saying W's approval rating is at 38% (which they are), Gallup is saying that thier number is 45% and they do this type of shitty favortism consistently, but that's not fishy to you?

[Nbadan]

I don't like bush either but I don't spew smokescreens like Dan does to back my viewpoint when people on this forum can easily search the internet and find articles and info to show him how wrong he can, and usually is.

According to Dan Bush can do no right, no matter what, which gets us nowhere. People like him who look only at the party of an individual is a big part of what is wrong with the elected officials of government.

Name one thing that W has done right in 5 years in office. One thing that has gone just as the administration planned.

Where are the facts Cheryl? Anyone can say that this is propaganda, or that is propaganda, but look back at the last 5 years and ask your self who has been consistenly right, and who has been consistently wrong? Certainly not the WH.

I don't play party favortism, if you read this forum more you would know that I am just as critical at the micey, weazling Democrat as I am at the current administration.

[Nbadan]

Dan can dream, can't he?

I don't spend my time dreaming of W, but evidently you do.

[Nbadan]

There is no legal ground. He signed disaster paperwork before the storm even hit. He raised 10billion in cash by getting a bypartisan bill passed in 24 hours. He sent in Gen Honorey when the Mayor asked for someone that could take control. He toured the area at the request of the governers. I am sure he tore Mike Brown a new one in private... Don't expect this POTUS to air all his dirty laundry in public.

Bingo, and after he declared this a disaster it became the Feds responsibility.

It took W 4 days to sign a disaster relief bill for Hurricane Katrina, and it took Congress 5 days to sign it. If you don't know the facts don't act like you do.

[Nbadan]

I think it's pretty obvious the only way Bush would have made Dan happy was if he would have stood on the banks of Pontchartrain trying to plug the holes in the levee with his fingers, and drowned in the process.

Or how about if he had done his job correctly and appointed people to the HS and FEMA director positions who were uniquely qualified and not just cronies he was paying back for past favors. You gotta wonder, is Homeland Security, the second largest beauracracy in the U.S, nothing but a vehicle for Republican cronyism and mismanagement?

[cherylsteele]

Come on Cheryl, your smarter than this. If other similiar polls are saying W's approval rating is at 38% (which they are), Gallup is saying that thier number is 45% and they do this type of shitty favortism consistently, but that's not fishy to you?

What other polls?
That link listed most of the major polls. Did you even read the polls? Show me a link to the polls that have him at 38%....I gave you a link to back my statement.

I personally put little to no stock in the polls.


I don't play party favortism
B.S. (I don't use profanity on this board but that deserves it)
You constantly play party favoritism.


Name one thing that W has done right in 5 years in office
He did attack the Taliban and overturn the Afgan government that was harboring them.

He did issue a state of emergency for Louisiana and Mississippi BEFORE Katrina hit the gulf coast.

Look, I said I don't like Bush but....I am big enough to give credit were it is due. You, however, find fault with everthing he does.

I vote for the person not the party....I criticize the person not the party. People like you do just opposite and is a big part of the problem with our government right now.


It took W 4 days to sign a disaster relief bill for Hurricane Katrina,
Correct me if I am wrong but....in order to sign a bill you have to wait for the Congress to pass it.....so blame congress too.....and that has Dems AND Reps. Why did it take the congress that long? Bush signed the law as soon as it hit his desk.

Have you even heard Gen. Honore explain why relief took longer? They had to move all their equipment away from the storm so they would not become victims as well. Roads were impassable...i-10 was destroyed along with all the other roads in and out of the area.

[jochhejaam]

Quote originally posted by Nbadan: “Of course, your justification is completely dishonest. Is Bush's impeachment being discussed in the public domain? Unquestionably! Simply Google ‘impeach Bush’ and you'll get 723,000 links, said Fertik, reminding Gallup that a recent ZogbyPoll in June found 42 percent of Americans polled support impeachment if Bush lied about Iraq


And if you google with parenthesis "Impeach President George Bush" you get a whopping 198 links!

Other google stats:
Impeach Kerry 181,000
Impeach Dan 180.000
Impeach Dean 182,000
Impeach Michael Moore 81,600

In other words, those stats don't mean squat!

[Useruser666]

"Dan is a peach" = 1,720,000 !!! :lol

[Hook Dem]

Or how about if he had done his job correctly and appointed people to the HS and FEMA director positions who were uniquely qualified and not just cronies he was paying back for past favors. You gotta wonder, is Homeland Security, the second largest beauracracy in the U.S, nothing but a vehicle for Republican cronyism and mismanagement?
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1637/yousuck2cw.jpg (http://imageshack.us)Do the world a favor Dan! Flush yourself!

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Way to go you conservative Americans. :rolleyes

Nothing like wanting to stifle the voices of America who speak out against Bush. Perhaps if you'd all take you lips off his ass you'd have the balls to face the facts.

[Hook Dem]

Way to go you conservative Americans. :rolleyes

Nothing like wanting to stifle the voices of America who speak out against Bush. Perhaps if you'd all take you lips off his ass you'd have the balls to face the facts.
Marzetti = Dan's illegitimate son! http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1772/1sportsfinger8kn.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Clandestino]

:lmao

[jochhejaam]

Way to go you conservative Americans. :rolleyes

Nothing like wanting to stifle the voices of America who speak out against Bush. Perhaps if you'd all take you lips off his ass you'd have the balls to face the facts.

What part of only 198 links for "Impeach President George Bush" didn't you understand?

And the "take you lips off his ass" comment is typical of the lack of intelligence exhibited by the NEW Democrats. Nice post Einstein.

[Clandestino]

seeing that little kid reminds of when i was at a restaurant bar once... there was a lot of people there watching the kerry/bush debate waiting for our table and then some little kids says, "daddy, why is that man fighting with the president?"

[Nbadan]

What other polls?
That link listed most of the major polls. Did you even read the polls? Show me a link to the polls that have him at 38%....I gave you a link to back my statement.

I personally put little to no stock in the polls

Here ya go Cheryl...


Data Collected: 09/05/2005
Release Date: 09/06/2005
...
American Reaction to Katrina as of 9/6/05: 38% of Americans today approve of President Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina, down from 48% on 8/31, when SurveyUSA began conducting daily tracking polls. 54% of Americans disapprove of the President's response. 60% of Americans today say the federal government is not doing enough to help the victims, down from a peak of 68% in interviews conducted on Friday 9/2, before the President's first visit to the region. 34% today say the government is doing the right amount to help victims, up from a low of 26% on 9/2. Americans do not agree on what should happen to the city of New Orleans: 31% today say the city should be rebuilt with public money. 31% today say the city should be rebuilt with private money. 33% today say the city should not be rebuilt.

Is the federal government doing too much? Not enough? Or just the right amount to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina?

5% Too Much
60% Not Enough
34% Right Amount
2% Not Sure


Thinking just about the President of the United States ... Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina?

38% Approve
54% Disapprove
7% Not Sure

Survey USA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=8bc175ac-f4d5-4069-b91f-769726c1aec0)

[Hook Dem]

"Name one thing that W has done right in 5 years in office. One thing that has gone just as the administration planned."............How bout winning the election!

[cecil collins]

"Name one thing that W has done right in 5 years in office. One thing that has gone just as the administration planned."............How bout winning the election!

That was almost too republican. You guys have nothing except blind hatred and your thumbs up your asses.


And the "take you lips off his ass" comment is typical of the lack of intelligence exhibited by the NEW Democrats. Nice post Einstein.

Oh wait, we must class it up a little for Mr. Class there. I guess you only like conservative name calling, or else you had several people to call out before Marzetti.


Way to go you conservative Americans.

Nothing like wanting to stifle the voices of America who speak out against Bush. Perhaps if you'd all take you lips off his ass you'd have the balls to face the facts.

I think he said it pretty damn well. Dan is a knowledgable poster, more so than most of you, and myself. Yes he is biased, but so is everyone, and if you say you are not you don't know shit.

[cecil collins]

I thought Bush's popularity in the polls was incredibly low. How are these polls showing favoritism.

Here is a link that shows his disapproval rating at around 50% or higher
link (http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm)

Sure doesn't look biased towards Bush at all.

The results aren't the only thing that can reveal bias. Obviously there can be bias in which questions are polled. This does seem to be bias to me.

[jochhejaam]

Here ya go Cheryl...



Survey USA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=8bc175ac-f4d5-4069-b91f-769726c1aec0)

Here ya go danny


Views of Hurricane Response

Federal government adequately prepared? yes 31% no 67%

State/local government adequately prepared? yes 24% no 75%

Blame Bush? yes 44% no 55%

http://abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1094262&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

[Uncle_Rico]

kerry had no backbone and bush is just a fucking idiot and always on vacation. hmm lets see, in the famous words, "there are problems we are problem solvers". lol. or "new orleans will be fine, i like it a lot maybe too much like houston, hahaha". or whats another one lets see "senator lott's house is rubble and totally destroyed cant wait to go back it's gonna be a beautiful hosue now.

or "no body anticipated the levies breaking"...really it was only all over the news 2 days before the storm hit no. levie engineers said if a cat 4 or slow moving 3 hit no would be under water.

[Vashner]

Republicans don't answer polls anyway... block calls... or the maids answer the phone.

Since we all live in lavish mansions.

[Nbadan]

Here ya go danny


Views of Hurricane Response

Federal government adequately prepared? yes 31% no 67%

State/local government adequately prepared? yes 24% no 75%

Blame Bush? yes 44% no 55%

http://abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1094262&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

This poll doesn't surprise me considering the amount of disinformation that is coming out of the WH blaming local and state officials, but in time the truth will come out because the documentation doesn't lie. Also, I think its funny how you selectively quoted the ABC poll to exclude information that didn't jive with your conclusion about the Feds job performance...


Other evaluations are divided. Forty-six percent of Americans approve of Bush's handling of the crisis, while 47 percent disapprove. That compares poorly with Bush's 91 percent approval rating for his performance in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but it's far from the broad discontent expressed by critics of the initial days of the hurricane response. (It also almost exactly matches Bush's overall job approval rating, 45 percent, in an ABC/Post poll a week ago.)

Similarly, 48 percent give a positive rating to the federal government's response overall, compared with 51 percent who rate it negatively — another split view, not a broadly critical one.

When it gets to specifics, however, most ratings are worse: Majorities ranging from 56 percent to 79 percent express criticism of federal efforts at delivering food and water, evacuating displaced people, controlling looting and (especially) dealing with the price of gasoline. In just one specific area — conducting search and rescue operations — most, 58 percent, give the government positive marks.

[jochhejaam]

or "no body anticipated the levies breaking"...really it was only all over the news 2 days before the storm hit no. levie engineers said if a cat 4 or slow moving 3 hit no would be under water.


So what's you're point? Reinforcing the levees was projected as an 8 year job! :rolleyes

[jochhejaam]

This poll doesn't surprise me considering the amount of disinformation that is coming out of the WH blaming local and state officials, but in time the truth will come out because the documentation doesn't lie. Also, I think its funny how you selectively quoted the ABC poll to exclude information that didn't jive with your conclusion about the Feds job performance...

So you're accusing me of putting a little "english" on the post? Are you flattered or envious?


Of course any poll that disputes your moveon.org polls is skewed.

[cherylsteele]

Here ya go Cheryl...



Survey USA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=8bc175ac-f4d5-4069-b91f-769726c1aec0)

So that goes back to my original question....where is the Bias towards Bush?

you keep saying that polls favor Bush...but the SurveyUSA poll is not favored to him....that polls number only add up to 99%...where is the other 1%....poor math.

Actually the polls you show and the ones I showed have Bush's DISAPPROVAL rating in the low to mid 50% range....pretty much the same....So you really aren't saying anythign new under the sun.

[cecil collins]

But Gallup officials this week categorically refused to poll Americans, telling Bob Fertik, Democrats for Unity president until impeachment was discussed by congressional leaders or news commentators in the media, it was their official policy to refrain from asking hypothetical questions.



Further, Fertik reminded Gallup editors that a poll to impeach former President Clinton appeared in January1998, shortly after allegations about his affair with an intern surfaced, the poll being taken with much less public fanfare than Bush is receiving over a host of possible impeachable offenses.

I think the point is that it is biased towards Bush because they won't even run this poll question because they "try to refrain from asking hypothetical questions." But a poll about impeaching Clinton appeared with less hullaboo. Does it not seem like someone is being protected.

[Nbadan]

New AOL poll just released doesn't fair well for the Governor of Louisiana, the President, Brownie, and HS Director, Michael Jerkoff


How would you rate Bush's handling of the disaster?

Poor 52%
Good 21%
Excellent 15%
Fair 12%
Total Votes: 19,918

How would you rate Blanco's handling of the disaster?

Poor 56%
Fair 27%
Good 14%
Excellent 3%
Total Votes: 9,520

How would you rate Nagin's handling of the disaster?

Poor 48%
Fair 20%
Good 20%
Excellent 12%
Total Votes: 14,611

How would you rate Chertoff's handling of the disaster?

Poor 63%
Fair 20%
Good 13%
Excellent 4%
Total Votes: 16,022

How would you rate Brown's handling of the disaster?

Poor 70%
Fair 16%
Good 10%
Excellent 4%
Total Votes: 17,372

How would you rate Honore's handling of the disaster?

Excellent 36%
Good 36%
Fair 17%
Poor 12%
Total Votes: 17,974

Does placing blame for the disaster response help or hurt?

Hurt 45%
Help 30%
Neither 25%

Who do you blame most for the disaster response?

Federal officials 46%
Local officials 23%
State officials 23%
No one 9%
Total Votes: 48,637

AOL (http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050908090709990003&ncid=NWS00010000000001)

[Useruser666]

Does it not seem like someone is being protected.

Uh no. Just because public opinion dips now and then, presidents don't get impeached. A criminal offense is something of grounds for impeachment.

[boutons]

Since when is a blow-job, or any "sexual relatons", between consulting adults a "criminal offense"?

[Trainwreck2100]

Since when is a blow-job, or any "sexual relatons", between consulting adults a "criminal offense"?


When you purjure yourself in a court about it.

[SpursWoman]

Since when is a blow-job, or any "sexual relatons", between consulting adults a "criminal offense"?


It's not. But lying under oath is.

[MiNuS]

going to War in Iraq lying to you ibecil retards that there were significant amounts of "Wmds"-

that is a big crime!

[SpursWoman]

going to War in Iraq lying to you ibecil retards that there were significant amounts of "Wmds"-

that is a big crime!


Huh? Were you trying to be ironic?

[MiNuS]

Huh?
that's right!! We can talk about blow jobs and sex and slick Willie all we want but when it comes to talking about this idiot President Bush,you numbnuts forget about him lying in your freaking faces!

just :flipoff

[Trainwreck2100]

going to War in Iraq lying to you ibecil retards that there were significant amounts of "Wmds"-

that is a big crime!


He shifted th blame to someone else so no recourse can be taken, since there's no way to prove otherwise.

[SpursWoman]

that's right!! We can talk about blow jobs and sex and slick Willie all we want but when it comes to talking about this idiot President Bush,you numbnuts forget about lying in your freaking faces!

just :flipoff



You have some serious anger issues.

[MiNuS]

He shifted th blame to someone else so no recourse can be taken, since there's no way to prove otherwise.
so what good is having a President like this? He shifts blame for everything!
he shifts blame for the 2000 crash,he shifts blame for 09/11,he shifts blame for the increasing gas prices,he shifts blame for his lack of leadership in EVERYTHING!

As I have said before,it's better not to have anyone in the OVAL office.
The US Government is on freaking cruise control! No sail for this boat!

[MiNuS]

You have some serious anger issues.I know you are not taking me seriously. Once October 10 rolls in I don't care
if the Bush's steal all of the US gold reserves and leave to Switzerland!

I-don't-give-a-damn!

[Trainwreck2100]

so what good is having a President like this? He shifts blame for everything!
he shifts blame for the 2000 crash,he shifts blame for 09/11,he shifts blame for the increasing gas prices,he shifts blame for his lack of leadership in EVERYTHING!

As I have said before,it's better not to have anyone in the OVAL office.
The US Government is on freaking cruise control! No sail for this boat!


Shifting blame gives you plausable deniability, it's an easy tactic. He was lied to so that lead him to lie to us. The election was the opportunity to get rid of Bush even with all the stuff he did, he was voted in because the Demos threw out a crappy canidate. Even if he does somehow get impeached, it would be cheney as pres anyway.

[mouse]

It's not. But lying under oath is.


Then Bush lied when he said he would protect and serve Americans.

[MiNuS]

Shifting blame gives you plausable deniability, it's an easy tactic. He was lied to so that lead him to lie to us. The election was the opportunity to get rid of Bush even with all the stuff he did, he was voted in because the Demos threw out a crappy canidate. Even if he does somehow get impeached, it would be cheney as pres anyway.

I agree.The Democrats threw a "stick" for candidate and of bunch of yahoos. The American people are really getting robbed in these presidential elections!

[Trainwreck2100]

Then Bush lied when he said he would protect and serve Americans.


See, that's a broad term though, he easily protecting and serving himself and his family, they are Americans, so technically he is protecting and serving Americans.

[Useruser666]

Since when is a blow-job, or any "sexual relatons", between consulting adults a "criminal offense"?

Personally, I never cared about the sexual relations aspect of what was going on. The only thing that bothered me about that, was it reflected poorly upon Clinton's sense of judgment at the time. It cast doubt for me on how someone could do something so stupid at the same time they are running the country.

The legal issues of lying under oath are what instigated legal and impeachment issues comming to light. If he would have just told the truth in the first place it would have taken all the air out of his critic that were calling for his head in an instant. All that would have been left were the moral issues.

Now it's easy to say Bush lied about the WMD. Maybe he did. But do you have any proof? Has he come out on TV and said he lied about that? No? I tend to think that WMD issue was just one of many reasons for the war. Going there doesn't stand on that issue alone, atleast for me. Even if the threat was exaggerated or intelligence was faulty, I still do not count that as irrefutable evidence of lying. But coming out on TV, giving a speech, and telling the american people that you lied to them, that's proof.

[Trainwreck2100]

Personally, I never cared about the sexual relations aspect of what was going on. The only thing that bothered me about that, was it reflected poorly upon Clinton's sense of judgment at the time. It cast doubt for me on how someone could do something so stupid at the same time they are running the country.



I don't know what the hell Clinton was thinking, hell I'd lie too if I had relations with a whale like Monica.

[cecil collins]

Now it's easy to say Bush lied about the WMD. Maybe he did. But do you have any proof? Has he come out on TV and said he lied about that? No? I tend to think that WMD issue was just one of many reasons for the war. Going there doesn't stand on that issue alone, atleast for me. Even if the threat was exaggerated or intelligence was faulty, I still do not count that as irrefutable evidence of lying. But coming out on TV, giving a speech, and telling the american people that you lied to them, that's proof.

That's a high fuckin' standard to be able to call someone a liar. Do we have proof that Saddam Hussein is not the new coming of Jesus. I have never heard him say that he was not Jesus, so he may be Jesus. You'll never get that kind of proof, but it's a nice security blanket for the powers that be.

[Nbadan]

That's a high fuckin' standard to be able to call someone a liar. Do we have proof that Saddam Hussein is not the new coming of Jesus. I have never heard him say that he was not Jesus, so he may be Jesus. You'll never get that kind of proof, but it's a nice security blanket for the powers that be.

Nice, but some Republicans and critical thinking don't mix well. It's much easier for them to just shift responsibility to the CIA, or some other agency that can't publicly defend itself, and then when a ex-CIA official dares to speak out and contradict the 'new and improved' official story, they call him a liberal traitor.

[jochhejaam]

Nice, but some Republicans and critical thinking don't mix well. It's much easier for them to just shift responsibility to the CIA, or some other agency that can't publicly defend itself,


Dan, you wouldn't know critical thinking if it bit you in the butt.
Don't confuse being an insatiable critic with critical thinking.




and then when a ex-CIA official dares to speak out and contradict the 'new and improved' official story, they call him a liberal traitor.

Which may very well be the case.

[jochhejaam]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Useruser666
Now it's easy to say Bush lied about the WMD. Maybe he did. But do you have any proof?





That's a high fuckin' standard to be able to call someone a liar.


An accusation of that magnitude had better carry a high burden of proof!

There certainly has to be a lot more than "oh, he knew".

[cecil collins]

I guess that's your logic, but it is very convenient for the administration. You are rarely gonna pin down the proof you guys want, so I guess all their misdoings will be excused as an accident.