Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
MikeYou appear to be someone who does research and uses facts and I respect you for that. I agree with you on the government's use of the first half of the TARP funds and believe we would have had a total financial collapse without that action. My concern is about the trillions of dollars the government has spent this year and the effect of that on the future of our children and grandchildren. We have not been able to borrow enough money to pay for this spending. The Federal Reserve has been issuing T-Bills and buying them back to add to their balance sheet, creating money that taxes all with inflation.Mike, we cannot change the past and I would like to see you focus on the future and where our country is headed.thanks
BigJ, thanks - very informative.
So invading Iraq was all Bush's idea. Hmmmm !!!
No need for a source Legion…I have been on this forum for nearly four years and that cut & paste has been used about ten times by the right-wingers as some sort of justification….I will help you out so you don’t pull up all the pre-Iraq invasions rhetoric by Bill Clinton and all the senators prior to the war….72% of the American people were duped..That’s the number that thought it was right to invade Iraq..The American people trusted Colin Powell ‘speech to the U.N...Colin Powell apologized for the lies taken from a tortured detainee.
Powell has said he regrets that the Iraq invasion was launched on the basis of false intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs and Hussein's relationship with al-Qaeda, information that he vouched for in an address before a hostile United Nationshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
I have read 6 books on Iraq but your information has nothing to do with the information I posted.
BTW all 23 Democrats that voted for the resolution are either gone are have apologized for their vote…Dodd,Edwards,Clinton & Biden lost to Obama and the Iraq war vote was a major reason.
You have a great 4th of July
Oh, and of course, I have to post the source...
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AMRequired For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution PassedMeasure Number: H.J.Res. 114Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.Vote Counts: YEAs 77 NAYs 23
77% approval, dang Mike, I didn't know the republicans had a super majority in 2001
Loyal Bushies …lol Think they can name drop a little known war correspondant to justify a claim to set the record straight.
The Bush administration began planning to use U.S. troops to invade Iraq within days after the former Texas governor entered the White House three years ago, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill told CBS News' 60 Minutes.
It has long been known that American military planning for the Iraq war began as early as Nov. 21, 2001, after President Bush directed Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to begin a review of what would be required to oust Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi leader. By July 2002, the war planning was sufficiently advanced that newspaper accounts that month reported details of some of what was being considered. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage...
res=9804E4DD1439F933A15756C0A9639C8B63U) In its July 2004 report, the Committee concluded that:Most of the major key judgments in the Intelligence Community'sOctober 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), Iraq'sContinuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction, eitheroverstated, or were not supported by, the underlying intelligenceReport on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq, Senate SelectCommittee on Intelligence, S. Rept. 108-301, July 7, 2004.2Chairman Roberts and Vice Chairman Rockefeller Issue Statement on Intelligence Committee's Review ofPrewar Intelligence on Iraq, Press Release, February 12, 2004.Page 5________________________________________Page 9http://126.96.36.199/search?q=cache:b...7This is the Senate Intellegance Report Phase II..Read the 50 page report.
In a press statement on February 24, 2001 he had said that sanctions against Iraq had prevented the development of any weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein. As was the case in the days leading up to the Persian Gulf War, Powell was initially opposed to a forcible overthrow of Hussein, preferring to continue a policy of containment. However, Powell eventually agreed to go along with the Bush administration's determination to remove Hussein. He had often clashed with others in the administration, who were reportedly planning an Iraq invasion even before the September 11 attacks, an insight supported by testimony by former terrorism czar Richard Clarke in front of the 9/11 Commissionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Po...
THAT’S THE RECORD
Face-palm is that a treehugger term??
ex-resident,If you want to follow the pide pipper over that cliff you go right ahead. Those voters have now found out, opps I might have made a mistake..
the sky is falling!
Wayward, I wasn't trying to be funny, the point is I just don't how these moron's get elected. I think we can all be asured that the next election will change the tune in Washington DC, you want see the run of the mill political nuts be re-elected. The Dem's are driving this country into the ground. Nancy Pelosi needs to go to jail, that woman has no concept of the constitution and if she could she would re-write it. The republicans need to be run out of town as well. I sick and tired of the Dem's pandering to a handful of nuts.Obama has never bulilt anything above one story, I don't no where he gets off thinking he can change the world. Obama, we can't handle 8 years of his vision of change, he will bankrupt this country, ding we are there now, he clearly stated we are broke. One thing about it he wanted the job, he's got it, he owns it.. If he wanted to blame Bush for every thing he should have stayed as a moron senator.
To set the record straight, the threat of terrorist getting WMD from Iraq was the reason Bush started planning for the invasion. According to Tommy Franks he started working on the invasion as early as November 2001 and his main concern was the use of WMD by Saddam. It was the controversy over Nigerian "yellow cake" that ensnared Bush and resulted in him over reaching. But his concern for WMD in general was shared by many including the Democrats, Joe Galloway and the British to name a few.
As far as the tax cuts, they were done to stimulate the economy by encouraging private investment, which they did. The deficits were shrinking because tax revenues were increasing due to the improving economy. The economy improved until it hit the "end of the chain" caused by the "affordable housing" fiasco. Congress mainly caused this economic meltdown, not Bush. He tried to stop the madness but he got no help from the Democrats, particularly Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the rest of their merry band.
Vic..."This dem lead congress is a JOKE.."
I've got to disagree, pardner. Ain't nuthin' funny 'bout it.
Tea party, it's great, we live in America we can do that, we have right under the 1st amendment. Although it may not be for much longer, because the left will try to repeal the 1st, 2nd 4th, 5th,14th and God help us on the 22nd which was offered up in Jan, 09. I can see it now Obama President of Earth..
Pelosi, Reid, President Obama, these three are nothing but pathological narcissists, I'm telling you Washington DC is just not big enough for these three powers, they all want the same thing, POWER POWER.. They couldn't care less about the American people it's all about power and money...
These states are going bankrupt because of all of the social programs. Obama should learn from their mistakes, but he has on ego to feed. Wow, he stated on ABC America is broke, but needless to say he is cashing checks as fast as they can print them.
Now I understand the why for TEA PARTIES, OUT OF CONTROL GOVERNMENT SPENDING. Lets tax those hard working Americans some more they can handle it. This dem lead congress is a JOKE..
WaywardI noticed you use the word bail-outs…. The initial bailout was to avoid a total financial collapse, but we know very little how or what banks got the money, and how they spent it… The other bail-outs belong to President Obama and he will be judged accordingly.
We will probably not ever hear the true facts because each side is still spinning the Great Depression.:-)
Evidently I did not make myself clear enough…. President Bush was in the driver’s seat at the time of the collapse and the bail-out was unpopular for democrats and republicans…. I’m well aware that the president has advisers but the fed chairman does not answer to the president of the United States. In that context with the information I have read, I (, although the investigation is ongoing), I still have not have changed my mind about the bail-out. This really did not have anything to do with who the president was at the time.
I was not trying to please anyone with my statement but since you mentioned Iraq, I will tell you why I think it is entirely different.
1.Partisan war mongering advisers are one thing; evidence is another.2.Wanting to invade Iraq came away before they cooked up WMD excuse.3.There is that Senate Intelligence Committee Phase II report.4.Tortured detainee testimony was the basis for the intelligence report ,in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq….Basis for Gen.Powell speech to the U.N.5.Based on his eight year history, I still believe George W Bush was the most incompetent president in my lifetime… I could write several blogs detailing the reasons.6.I never gave Bush a pass on the economy(just the bail-out) if you have been paying attention, I have always said that being involved in two wars and cutting taxes for the top 2% with borrowed money from China cannot be discounted.7.I am being consistent
Mike...you're the one who always wants people to be consistent in their political gripes. Why then, would you give Bush a pass on the economy: "I still think that any rational leader, after hearing that our economy was about to collapse, would have trusted the word of his fed chairman and treasury secretary" but you say he was wrong for listening to the advice that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction before he went to war?
That's why presidents have advisors -- experts because the president can't be an expert in everything. Bush listened to his advisors and they were wrong, but he did the same thing with the bail-out -- he listened to the advisors. Hind-sight, always being twenty-twenty, tells us that the advisors were wrong about Iraq. We're still waiting to see how the economy is going to play out on the bail-outs. I'm glad you're willing to give Bush a pass on something, though.
MIKE: BACK ATTCHA AND TO ALL OUR READERS. RUSTY