Have we lost our Country?

Well you wanted what if, and we have the history as it unfolded, so what if the election had went the other way, just maybe with out Carter and the Fall of the Shah, to biggest problem today would be the Palestinians and the Israels killing each other, and just maybe, that problem would have been settled too?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You seem to be ducking the central question

Indeed, and one also might suggest that we might have avoided these problems had we never overthrown Mossadegh. Yet you still haven't explained how Carter is responsible for the overthrow of the Shah, and that question, sir, is fascinating.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

He cut U.S, foreign aid to the Shah and Iran, and then colluded with the British to force the Shah in to a oil deal that was a sellout to the British.

(This is called knowing your history)

http://www.aryamehr.org/eng/carter/wieng/carter.pdf

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I want to know this. IF they truely lied, and by lied I mean, they were as confident as they could be that Saddam did NOT have uranium or other WMD, and knowingly led us to war - does everyone agree they should be imprisoned?

 

Good point, the fact that Sarah Palin was potentially a heartbeat away from the presidency is a sign of something disturbing about our electorate.

 

The fact that Barack Obama is the president is a sign of something disturbing about our electorate.

 

I agree, but even if charges came up, Obama would pardon him. There is no way in hell a sitting President would let a former President go to trial.

 

In most cases, I would agree. But this is different. The list of charges that should be brought up on this Admin is staggering, and I would fully support President Obama if he moved in this direction.

 

And guess what will happen when Obama leaves office, and the Republicans come to power, yes, let watch the Democrats open that can of worms, and see what it leads to.

It would absolutely freeze any Presidents freedom of action, to make decisions about security, because if he failed to protect that security He then could face charges for dereliction of duty, and face trial.

It would be fun to bring those charges against Clinton for his failure to deal with O' Bin Lid, yes a can of worms.

 

I don't think Osama the issue, if they can muster evidence that proves the Bush administration manipulated intel to enter into a war with iraq that would make for a good criminal case against Bush and his cronnies, but for now I think maximum focus should be made on fixing the economy and moving on, I think the democrats might just 'open that can of worm' in 2010-2011 so the court trails will be ending just time for the next elections to remind everyone of the republican Bush administration

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Clinton was as successful at killing Bin Laden as Bush. Anyway, I don't think Bush will ever face criminal charges. He should have been impeached, but it's not good for the country to have an ex-president on trial for using powers we (sort of) gave him.

 

There is a slight problem, it is the fact that the Congress has committee's on security, and they had access to all the same information that the Bush Administration had, and they voted to go to war, the Democrats insisted on having that vote, and they voted to authorize the Use of Force, on the information forwarded by the, Senate Intelligence Committee, and the House Committee on Foreign Intelligence, which these committee's provide to them, so if the President is Culpable so are the Democrats, as they had people on both committee's and they authorized the, Authorization for the Use of Military Force.

Democrats controlled the Senate in 2002. As Majority Leader, Daschle did not have to put the war resolution up for a vote, but he did, and the Democrats Voted for It, 29 v 21 in Favor, something that they insisted on doing.

The elections were coming up and they were afraid that if they didn't they would be seen as weak on protecting the Nation, and take a pounding in the up coming election.

 

And who gave the senate intelligence committee its intel, I'm not saying there is evidence of the Bush administration manipulating the data, I'm jsut saying if there is such evidence (which those you call "liberals" assume) then I see nothing against putting Bush and his cronies against the wall.

Of course they did, their politicians, a trait shared by both republicans and democrats in the government. Which is one of the many failings of a democracy because the people in charge care more about getting re-elected then about the people.

 

No, they didn't.

And 21 Senate Dems voted against, because they did not believe the assertions of W&Co. They were correct.

He should have been impeached as soon as the FISA bypass was discovered, if he hadn't already been. We paid a very heavy price for his continued presence - the Justice department took a big hit, the Court was crippled for years, the national debt added a decimal place, etc.

But failing that, a good time to impeach him might be after Obama has settled in. That would give the criminal investigations, necessary for a restoration of the balance of powers and reformation of the various security and intelligence agencies, better subpoena leverage and greater scope, without too badly screwing up the working government in a likely difficult time.

 

And 29 Democrats did, because they agreed that the Intel was correct.

The Senate and House Committees get the same raw intelligence as the President, and then they get the opinions from the Briefing Staff's both Pro and Con, and Neutral, on the confidence levels of that information, and then they make their own assessments.

The Senators and Representatives, on those committees have the same clearances as, the President and his Intelligence Staff, with the same access to the same information.

:roflmao:

Absolutely Obtuse, absolutly frigging Obtuse.

 

They didn't. They got rigged info from the intelligence agencies, and misrepresentations from the Briefing Staffs.

So they were fooled - if they were indeed honestly convinced. Too bad. But they weren't the ones rigging the intelligence.

Again: whenever you say "the Democrats" agreed and went along, you are leaving out close to half of them.

 

No. All the people involved seem to be as American as other real Americans.

Also, the man in the office is a church-going Christian. Every Sunday for over 20 years, by some accounts. Why, he just sent his kids to a quaker school.

Maybe his name might activate a conditioned response to think otherwise.
But what's in a name?, I could rattle off at least a dozen people with biblical names that committed crazy crimes - timothy comes to mind..... hey, even a guy with 2 of them, James Joseph Bulger, on the FBI most wanted list for a string of murders.
:shrug:

 

We might note that declining educational standards have favored conservative outcomes.

I know you hate conservatives and all that, but this is the most asinine statement I have ever read. The tremendous fall of education has clearly favored the left. This is so obvious that I am totally shocked that anyone would say otherwise.

The evidence is in the previous election and the follow up poll conducted by Zogby. I am so appalled that you would even say such a thing.

I get all the religious concerns by the left, and even agree in some cases. I get the marxist view of conservatism. I really do. I can see why marxists are against conservatives/capitalist. I cannot agree with it, but I see it.

But to say the lowering standards of education have favored conservatives is simply stupid. I am sorry, but it is stupid. I think you better truly study what goes on in the schools today. Read the curriculums and read some of the teaching practices, and definitely study the discipline standards practice by most schools. This does not even mention some of idiotic incidents that are reported in the media.

Seriously, you truly need to take the blinders off.

Take them off!!!!!!!!!

Yes, the child that is taught all about global warming will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught all about why there is Thanksgiving according to the public schools will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught about the redistribution of money is the proper economic practice will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught that success is bad will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught that ambition is bad will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught that there are no consequences for his/her actions will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught that 2+2=5 until they understand it is 4 will grow up to vote conservative.

Yes, the child that is taught that cultures of other nations are more important than the culture of the United States will grow up to vote conservatives.

I could go on and on.

Your comment is stupid, not ignorant, stupid.

 

Is there a way you can prove causality between low education and high obama support?

 

Radican you need to do some primary research because surveys have repeatedly shown the more educated you are the more likely you are to vote for Obama and the less educated an individual is, they are more likely to vote Republican.