Freepers and Bush bots in denial to the bitter end...

[The Doctor.]

Having watched the debate between Liberals and 'Conservatives', Democrats and 'Republicans', Empiricists and Ideologues, DU'ers and Freepers; I have found one great consistency...

The use of fact and logic seems almost exclusive to the 'Left' lately.

I found this out when, through my use of uncomfortable facts and logic, I was labeled a 'commie lefty' and accused of not being at all conservative.

Well, I don't mind saying that it's nice to see what eventually happens when the truth bubbles to the surface. And it's just a little sad to watch the self-deluded hold on to the belief that nothing's happening and it will all just go away soon;

formerlurker Yesterday, 02:10 PM Post #1


Half my heart is overseas


Group: News Hound Mod
Posts: 7657
Joined: 31-May 04
Member No.: 7919

There's something big coming in this city

Hardblogger/MSNBC
October 19, 2005 | 11:42 a.m. ET



'Hardball' host Chris Matthews discussed the latest in the Plame leak case with MSNBC's Amy Robach on Wednesday morning. Here's an excerpt of what he had to say:

It's serious business.

It all begins with a big fight between the CIA and the White House, especially the vice president's office. Scooter Libby, his chief of staff, is also his WMD expert.

The vice president has made the case for war very effectively on programs like 'Meet the Press,' that we had to go to war with Saddam Hussein because he possessed the potential to make nuclear war against the United States - to somehow deliver a nuclear weapon to this country.

For a lot of people, that was the deal maker for the war. They had a lot of problems invading a third-world country, but they said 'Well, if he has a nuclear program over there that is threatening us, we have to act.'

Well, we got over there, and our troops took that country, and there was no WMD, no nuclear, no nothing, so there is a lot of concern about how we could have gotten into a war based on false pretenses.

All of the sudden, Joe Wilson comes up and starts leaking to the New York Times' Nick Kristoff, 'Wait a minute, they not only don't have any WMD to justify the war, they knew there wasn't going to be any WMD because they knew, based upon my trip over there, that there was no deal to buy uranium by Saddam Hussein in Africa.' That's the big picture here.

What happens (then) is that the president of the United States gets upset, apparently, and wants to know what happened with the WMD, why there isn't any -- the vice president's office had said there are going to be WMD, the CIA was going along with it, even.

So there's a huge problem for the vice president to justify his behavior. Why didn't he pay attention to this trip that had been made to Africa? Why didn't he see that there was no WMD before we went to war, no uranium deal?

That's the heat about this. What did the vice president and his people do, faced with the hot seat that they were sitting on, that they had somehow gotten accused of taking us into war under false pretenses.

That's the environment in which this whole thing may have been hatched. If there was law-breaking, it came out of the vice president and his people's determination to protect themselves against the charge that they led us into a corrupt war, a war based on false pretenses.

That's how hot this thing is.

If there are indictments, they're going to be probably in the vice president's office, they're probably going to come next week and they are going to blow this White House apart.

It's going to be unbelievable.

I think the people watching right now who are voters better start paying attention to this issue. It's not just about whether somebody's name was leaked, it's about whether we went to war under false pretenses or not, whether people knew about that or not, and what they did when they were charged against that kind of offense against the United States.

It's serious business.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9601200/

Gee for Chris's sake this better happen, I don't think he will recover if it doesn't.

:giggle:



:lol3: .. :rofl:


Sorry, my bad -- this is *serious business.*


^rolling eyes^

- Yes formerlurker... hysterical.

[benburch]

1. Freepers are funny!

I find them and their ilk hilarious.

Always good for a laugh!

[The Doctor.]

3. I find them amusing as well...

but after one has dealt first-hand with their inability to utilize logic, and then one realizes that nearly half of an entire country are likewise handicapped... it becomes something of a real concern.

[benburch]

5. When the time comes...

we can send them all to re-grooving camps.

[bee]

2. haha! And when it does happen.....

Im going to spend the whole day over there watching their heads explode. :bounce: I can hardly wait! :bounce:

[mwb970]

4. It's their premises that are wrong.

If you start with faulty assumptions, it doesn't matter how good or bad the associated "logic" is, you will still get false results. The Freepers appear to believe a great many things which are simply not objectively true. Applying logic, good or bad, to such a contradictory mass of falsehoods will produce gibberish.

Garbage in, garbage out.