Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

More contradictions....

by Bo Boggs Apr 16, 2004 1:13AM PDT

'Consider their audacity and hypocrisy in seeking Bush's head for not doing enough against terrorism prior to 9-11, when they have opposed fighting terrorism aggressively both before and after 9-11.

The people now condemning President Bush for not combating terrorists prior to 9-11 through profiling, preemption, intelligence sharing, unilateralism and a warlike approach, are the ones who have repeatedly castigated the president for pre-emption, the Patriot Act, unilateralism and denying enemy combatants their civil rights.'

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20040416.shtml

Bo

Discussion is locked

5 Posts

- Collapse + Expand Details

- Collapse -

Re:More contradictions....

by Roger NC Apr 16, 2004 2:20AM PDT

With apologies to lawyers (at least some of them), reminds me of the old description of lawyers.........

Can swallow a camel while choking on a knat.

About the same degree of contradictions and absurdity.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -

Lawyers?

by Dan McC Apr 16, 2004 2:44AM PDT

Wasn't that description first used in a diatribe against priests a Pharisees?

Dan

- Collapse -

(NT) could be

by Roger NC Apr 16, 2004 3:18AM PDT

- Collapse -

That's the current modus operandi.

by Kiddpeat Apr 16, 2004 2:02PM PDT

The louder they scream, the surer it is that they've done it themselves, and probably created the current situation.

- Collapse -

There's another, Kiddpeat...

by J. Vega Apr 16, 2004 9:53PM PDT

Kiddpeat, there is another motive, to keep the spotlight off of Kerry. Yesterday, did you notice in another thread when Dave K. used the words, "OTOH, the various Kerry-bashing reports from conservative sources (which mercifully have decreased in the last week or so)..."?
Think about those words. On most days, especially weekdays, he arises in the morning and posts anti-Bush articles that he has gleaned, sometimes en mass. Usually around noon his time, he does the same (on his lunch hour, I assume). Later, in the P.M. hours, more anti-Bush posts. It's so continuous, it's almost become a hallmark. Yet yesterday, we heard those words about "conservative sources", which is the label slapped onto anything or anybody who doesn't have the same political views as he. Also, note, that label of "conservative" (and/or Republican) is used to imply an entire range of assumed viwepoints on no end of things with just that one label.

Back to Speakeasy forum