|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:19 AM Original message |
Poll question: Do You See Any Meaningful Distinction Between... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dem Agog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:22 AM Response to Original message |
1. HUGE distinction! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:26 AM Response to Reply #1 |
6. It wasn't obvious except to anyone who'd watched his campaign?! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:30 AM Response to Reply #6 |
9. Or Had Ever Heard Of The PNAC For That Matter. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:33 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. I've said this before. If they now need political cover |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:38 AM Response to Reply #12 |
16. All The Cover They Need Is The Bad Intel They Were Fed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:42 AM Response to Reply #16 |
18. Yep. And while they were lied to, the intel they got |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:49 AM Response to Reply #18 |
24. But the intel they did NOT see basically said the whole thing was |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:32 AM Response to Reply #1 |
11. I disagree. There were millions in the streets all over the world |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beam Me Up (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:40 AM Response to Reply #11 |
17. Congress wanted this 'war' as much as * did. Look how they voted. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:42 AM Response to Reply #11 |
20. I think your "read" is correct. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:45 AM Response to Reply #1 |
21. I agree, there is a distinction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:56 AM Response to Reply #21 |
27. That Falls Apart When The Guy Asking For The Gun Is KNOWN To Have An Old |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:02 PM Response to Reply #27 |
29. Ahhh, but the wife has post-traumatic stress of the worst sort, ya see!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:09 PM Response to Reply #29 |
34. That Bastard! Sure Did Make A Lot Of Folks Lose Their Minds. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:12 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. It could well be--also, that was an incestuous marriage!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:08 PM Response to Reply #21 |
33. Good analogy but.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:14 PM Response to Reply #33 |
39. He brought her a photo of a bear in the street! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:16 PM Response to Reply #39 |
40. Satelite Imagery Of The Bear (Well Not The Bear So Much) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:39 PM Response to Reply #40 |
48. Heh, heh! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:43 PM Response to Reply #48 |
50. You Simply MUST Read This Then... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:51 PM Response to Reply #50 |
55. Hahahahahahaha!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrBenchley (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:05 PM Response to Reply #1 |
30. Exactly so.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:51 PM Response to Reply #1 |
78. Members of Congress are expected... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:44 PM Response to Reply #1 |
111. The answer to that question is obvious... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Dec-02-05 08:06 AM Response to Reply #1 |
127. Deleted message |
Nicholas D Wolfwood (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:24 AM Response to Original message |
2. There is absolutely a distinction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:00 PM Response to Reply #2 |
91. If their wish was for weapons inspectors, then they should have voted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nicholas D Wolfwood (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:02 PM Response to Reply #91 |
94. Well, if Democrats were in charge, perhaps that's what would've happened. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:02 PM Response to Reply #94 |
114. So they voted to authorise Bush to go to war |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nicholas D Wolfwood (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:27 PM Response to Reply #114 |
120. Most of their constituents did not. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
3. I think it's a split decision, DA, depending on how |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:02 PM Response to Reply #3 |
93. It's their job to pay attention |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 07:32 PM Response to Reply #93 |
123. Well, I see degrees but on the whole, I agree. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:26 AM Response to Original message |
4. If IWR was for war then Bush executed it faithfully and legally. If IWR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:36 AM Response to Reply #4 |
13. That's a pretty astute analysis blm. Why don't our reps say that? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:04 PM Response to Reply #13 |
82. Left media always focused blame on IWR over Bush's violation of the IWR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:36 AM Response to Reply #4 |
14. self-delete -- accidental double post eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:37 AM Response to Reply #4 |
15. Yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:48 PM Response to Reply #4 |
53. IWR is posted in the research forum |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
napi21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:26 AM Response to Original message |
5. When Shrub asked for this authorization, he said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:29 AM Response to Reply #5 |
8. IMO, Such A Failure Of Judgement On Their Part, Makes Them Bad Leaders |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Individualist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:24 PM Response to Reply #8 |
42. One would have had to be deaf and blind |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:26 AM Response to Original message |
7. No. Only a fool would have thought Bush wouldn't go to war... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:31 AM Response to Reply #7 |
10. Agree. And it's sophistry, like saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RethugAssKicker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:42 AM Response to Original message |
19. Anyone whou couldn't see throught Bush BS. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:45 AM Response to Original message |
22. Congress should have moved in the days after 9/11 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TahitiNut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:45 AM Response to Original message |
23. "voting Bush the authority to go to war" was both more cowardly ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
frogmarch (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:53 AM Response to Original message |
25. Oh, for chrissake! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:56 AM Response to Reply #25 |
26. "trusted the word of the president of the United States" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
frogmarch (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:10 PM Response to Reply #26 |
35. I should have added |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:23 PM Response to Reply #35 |
41. Here are the no voters |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:25 PM Response to Reply #41 |
43. Hopefully That Is RELIABLE Enough! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:30 PM Response to Reply #43 |
45. Yes it proves, as Frogmarch says, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:31 PM Response to Reply #45 |
47. Um, How So? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:44 PM Response to Reply #47 |
51. Because |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:48 PM Response to Reply #51 |
54. Nanci Pelosi And Many Others In The House Rejected |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:00 PM Response to Reply #54 |
62. I don't assume anything |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:59 PM Response to Reply #51 |
61. Doesn't that damn them, too, rather than exonerate the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:04 PM Response to Reply #61 |
66. I'm glad you said that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:07 PM Response to Reply #66 |
68. But, I didn't do that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:21 PM Response to Reply #68 |
72. They did not abdicate their powers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:35 PM Response to Reply #72 |
75. Why Was It A Blank Check! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:58 PM Response to Reply #75 |
81. What blank check? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:38 PM Response to Reply #81 |
86. The One That Did Not REQUIRE Another Vote Before Going In. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 07:31 PM Response to Reply #72 |
122. Parsing again. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Dec-02-05 08:25 AM Response to Reply #122 |
129. No! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:54 PM Response to Reply #41 |
57. Oh, really? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:29 PM Response to Reply #35 |
44. The no-voters would never say such a thing. That's just silly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:31 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. One Correction: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:42 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. Lol! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:00 PM Response to Reply #25 |
28. Ok, Captian "Oh, for chrissake!", Talk To Me About The House Vote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:56 PM Response to Reply #25 |
58. When has Bush *NOT* landed at "the last resort" or beyond? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dora (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:08 PM Response to Original message |
31. I voted "no difference," and here's why.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:08 PM Response to Original message |
32. None. A criminal and his accomplices in a crime against humanity. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wellst0nev0ter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:12 PM Response to Original message |
36. The Majority of The Democrats In The House Voted Against It |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:58 PM Response to Reply #36 |
59. That's right! Nancy pointed that out last night on TSD. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:12 PM Response to Original message |
38. No, in this instance I think that the distinction is meaningless |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:47 PM Response to Original message |
52. I voted yes because I read the IWR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:52 PM Response to Reply #52 |
56. This Is Not An Either Or Situation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 12:59 PM Response to Reply #56 |
60. were they opposing the resolution or Bush violating the resolution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:03 PM Response to Reply #60 |
64. Ah, weren't the inspectors ALREADY in Iraq? Anyone know? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:04 PM Response to Reply #64 |
65. Inspectors were not in Iraq until late 2002 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:04 PM Response to Reply #65 |
67. Okay. All these Bushyears have fried my timelines. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:07 PM Response to Reply #67 |
69. more details |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:12 PM Response to Reply #69 |
71. Yes, Bush was really pushing for those unfetter inspections. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:34 PM Response to Reply #60 |
74. The Congress Also Knew The Inspectors On The Ground Were Finding Nothing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:36 PM Response to Reply #74 |
76. your timeframe is off |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:58 PM Response to Reply #76 |
89. According to your own source, Iraq had already agreed to allow inspections |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:08 PM Response to Reply #89 |
95. That Is What I Both Remembered And Find Here As Well. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:16 PM Response to Reply #89 |
98. and yet there was nobody actually in Iraq at the time of the vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:20 PM Response to Reply #98 |
99. How About A Resolution That Required Another Vote Before Military Action? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:26 PM Response to Reply #99 |
101. fair enough |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Marr (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:03 PM Response to Original message |
63. Only a rhetorical distinction. It's an out for chickenshit politicians. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
G_j (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:08 PM Response to Original message |
70. what I want to know is: where were these people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:32 PM Response to Original message |
73. Making excuses for dems who voted yes... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheFarseer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:48 PM Response to Original message |
77. This resolution was tought to vote against |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:54 PM Response to Reply #77 |
80. Saddam had let the inspectors back in... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheFarseer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:07 PM Response to Reply #80 |
84. I can't remember if |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:19 PM Response to Reply #84 |
85. inspectors were not in Iraq at the time of IWR vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:00 PM Response to Reply #85 |
90. But Iraq had already agreed to inspectors coming in in September. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:40 PM Response to Reply #80 |
87. THANK YOU! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:56 PM Response to Reply #80 |
88. Inspectors let back in only AFTER the IWR. Does Hans Blix ring a bell? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yollam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:02 PM Response to Reply #88 |
92. Iraq had already AGREED to allow them in in Septemmber. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:10 PM Response to Reply #88 |
96. Not True. See The Timeline Posted In Reply 76 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:23 PM Response to Reply #96 |
100. Because he knew it would be in the resolution - it's not like he did it on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:44 PM Response to Reply #100 |
103. Again I'll Ask Why The Blank Check? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:49 PM Response to Reply #103 |
105. That means Bush FAITHFULLY executed the IWR according to you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:23 PM Response to Reply #105 |
106. That Is Not The Bottom Line. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:29 PM Response to Reply #106 |
107. Because the issue is whether the IWR was a vote for war or was the IWR a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:37 PM Response to Reply #107 |
109. A Resolution With A Provision For Another Vote Would Not Have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:51 PM Response to Reply #109 |
112. Looks to me like YOU BLAME IWR and I BLAME BUSH FOR VIOLATING IWR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:11 PM Response to Reply #112 |
116. If So, It Would Have Been The First "War Resolution" To Do So. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Dec-02-05 08:18 AM Response to Reply #112 |
128. Bush wanted to start a war and had public support |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sendero (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 01:52 PM Response to Original message |
79. I really do think there is a big distinction... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:13 PM Response to Reply #79 |
97. We NEVER Needed A Blank Check Resolution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sendero (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:15 PM Response to Reply #97 |
117. Well... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:18 PM Response to Reply #117 |
118. BINGO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
freestyle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 02:04 PM Response to Original message |
83. No distinction. IWR leaves war solely to bush's determination. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenArrow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:30 PM Response to Reply #83 |
121. "IWR leaves war solely to bush's determination" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EstimatedProphet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:36 PM Response to Original message |
102. This is the crux of the biscuit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 03:49 PM Response to Reply #102 |
104. I Guess It Is Time For Some DUers To Run. We Apparently Can See |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Swamp Rat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:31 PM Response to Reply #104 |
108. "If I knew he was full of shit, they should have too." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 04:42 PM Response to Reply #108 |
110. They Believe It Because It Is The Party Line Spin. They Want To. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenArrow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:23 PM Response to Reply #104 |
119. "I think most of them have decided we are stupid" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AntiCoup2K4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:02 PM Response to Original message |
113. With a more reputable president, there might have been benefit of doubt. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 05:10 PM Response to Reply #113 |
115. Not Only Is It Not A Defense, It Is A Crime In Itself! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Usrename (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-01-05 11:22 PM Response to Original message |
124. The two are definitely not the same thing- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yurbud (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Dec-02-05 12:50 AM Response to Original message |
125. Democrats supported same goals but expected subtler methods |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DistressedAmerican (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Dec-02-05 07:48 AM Response to Reply #125 |
126. Dumb Asses... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun May 05th 2024, 03:15 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC