I thought that, too, at first. Then decided it was his new George Washington-esque (Father of your Country) look, done for subliminal effect, LOL.
I thought the reporters were pretty disrepectful, especially that dude from MSNBC, Jim (?) what's-his-face.
You Have My Support, Mr. President
Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by KenH, Apr 13, 2004.
Page 2 of 3
-
-
-
He was asked twice. (There was a follow-up question asked after his first non-answer.)
-
-
My Mom used to say, if you told the truth, you didn't have to be careful.
-
-
The 4 gospels were written by 4 men who had witnessed the events in Jesus' life. They each wrote about them in their own perspective. Since none of the gospels matches up, word for word, exactly like the others, they are said by outsiders to be false. Now, we know they are all absolute truth, but written from different points of view. But, had all the writers written their accounts together, a lot of the criticisms about the gospels would be put to rest.
Anything said from a different point of view by Cheney or Bush that even remotely looks contradictory would be construed as a lie by those who want to see Bush and Cheney fail.
It's like when you go into an interview with police. You always want to take your lawyer with you as well as anyone else who may have witnessed anything. Witnesses are used all the time to discredit one another just because their accounts of a crime seem contradictory when actually they are just seen in two different perspectives.
Bush did indeed dodge the question though. I forget who asked it, but when Bush didn't answer that point the journalist interrupted and asked that specific point again. Bush still dodged the question, and when the journalist tried again the ask that specific question his microphone was taken away and Bush looked away and quickly started talking about something else before calling on the next reporter. I still say it was a smart move not to fully answer that question. That reporter was trying to make him seem shady. -
Of course, if they did testify separately and did contradict each other about a material fact, we would still have Bush II supporters who would come and, based on an analogy to Gospel Truth, explain that it wasn't really a contradiction...they were each just telling the truth from their own perspectives.
-
I have always heard good things about Pat Toomey. I never hear anything about Senator Specter except near election time. Senator Specter's ads are vicious and I really doubt the credibility of these political ads.
Senator Specter goes way back to the time of the Warren Commission. -
Some of us in PA would take almost anybody other than Specter.
-
The primary will be April 27th. With Bush's help, Specter will likely be re-elected and continue his work to continue abortion. How can you support these guys? -
Months ago, I suggested that conservative Christians would be angry about the liberal policies of the Bush administration, but when push came to shove, they'd line up to vote the way they are told.
Remember, I said it first. -
Yes, I remember, and had little doubt that you were right. One person at a time it seems to be happening here on the BB.
-
I am amazed that the establishment of the Party...along with "conservative" voices such as Limbaugh's...would support a liberal over a conservative in the primaries.
Of course, they supported Bush II over Keyes.
The establishment's support of liberal Republicans, such as Bush II, who has increased social spending more than Clinton did through his newfound compassionate "conservatism," has truly transformed the Republican party...and not in a good way. -
-
LTG Vines had a few comments a couple of days ago that are relevant. Here's the report that was released by the American Forces Press Service:
-
-
I understand...I've been affected by the kool-aid also. ;) -
Tastes good to the last drop. -
Page 2 of 3