Only Three years left

[froedrick]

Ever heard about about JFK and his friends in the mob? His adultery? Or perhaps the Bay of Pigs?
Nixon and his coverup and lies?
How FDR wouldnt allow the White House Press to tell the nation he was in a wheelchair?

This is a bad argument eph. Honestly, to argue, 'well other people did it too' is not a viable way to defend someone who does something wrong.

[genocidal]

Actually, he was arguing the exact opposite.

[froedrick]

I read it wrong.

[Ephemeral]

The individual act of lying isn't so much the issue here for most people--as it's been stated, everyone knows that politicians lie. No one's happy with it, but at this point, no one seems really willing to do anything about it.

The problem with not having any "degrees" in these moral issues is that there certainly are varying shades of grey within each problem. For instance, yes, Clinton was a liar. But his lies hurt (at most) his family and close relations. Was I affected directly by Bill Clinton's cigar antics with a fat chick? No. Not even remotely.

Bush is a liar. His lies have cost the lives of more than 2000 Americans and a much larger number of Iraqi citizens (not to mention other coalition/innocents). War isn't pretty, you're kidding yourself if you think it's totally surgical and clean. However, lying to an entire nation in order to start a war is pretty much inexcusable. Was I affected directly by George W. Bush's lies? Yes. I have family friends who have died because of it. I am not alone.

Both men are liars. There's no doubt in that. But 99 times out of 100 I'd pick the guy who hurt the least amount of people over the guy who hurt the most (I can safely say no one died because of Clinton's mistake). I'd wait for a time where I could afford to look at things in such stark contrast as you do, but I'd be waiting an awfully long time.

Isn't saying 'everyone knows that politicians lie' and 'no one seems really willing to do anything about it' just giving up? My personal position is that I am not giving up on moral issues and elected people. I hold them to a high moral standards.

Additionally Clinton did not just lie to his wife and family, he lied in grand jury testimony.

I also feel that if a person is willing to lie to the people closest to him, then he is likely to lie to others not as close to him. I can't even imagine a conversation with my wife that started, 'yes dear, I told the truth to all the general public and all these people I don't really know, but I lied to you'.

Taking a position that 'it's ok to lie in some ways' with elected people, or supporting 'degrees' of lying is only going to open the door for more lame-ass people seeking public office. And I don't support that at all. When someone runs for office they should expect that they will be held to the highest standards.

.

[DoTheFandango]

Can you explain what that chart shows the decline of?

Bush's Approval rating.

Put simply:

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Isn't saying 'everyone knows that politicians lie' and 'no one seems really willing to do anything about it' just giving up? My personal position is that I am not giving up on moral issues and elected people. I hold them to a high moral standards.

Essentially (and reprehensibly) yes, it is "giving up." For the time being, if nothing else. And yes, you should hold government officials to high moral standards.

Taking a position that 'it's ok to lie in some ways' with elected people, or supporting 'degrees' of lying is only going to open the door for more lame-ass people seeking public office. And I don't support that at all. When someone runs for office they should expect that they will be held to the highest standards.

The problem is that we agree. I'm not saying any of it is right or that I condone this or that. The problem I'm seeing is that we had a grand jury trial for a president who messed around with a woman who wasn't his wife, and yet there's no such call in a presidency that led the entire nation to frickin' war under false pretenses. It's laughable to me. To compare this president to Clinton is hilarious.

[Ephemeral]

Essentially (and reprehensibly) yes, it is "giving up." For the time being, if nothing else. And yes, you should hold government officials to high moral standards.


The problem is that we agree. I'm not saying any of it is right or that I condone this or that. The problem I'm seeing is that we had a grand jury trial for a president who messed around with a woman who wasn't his wife, and yet there's no such call in a presidency that led the entire nation to frickin' war under false pretenses. It's laughable to me. To compare this president to Clinton is hilarious.

This was not some woman who he found at the local motel. It was a subordinate. That is a big no-no in ANY organization, and certainly is against every military rule in the book. (A President is the Commander in Chief.) I won’t digress into how just plain stupid and complete lack of good judgment it was for him to do it.

But don’t you feel that the President lying to a grand jury is not only a violation of a core principal of our judicial system but also complete disregard and disrespect of that system? And was he not lying to all of us when he took the oath, before taking the stand, to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?

So no, I don’t see how people can be critical of Bush for flipping off the other branches of government and the rest of society when Clinton did the same thing. They are equally bad in my book.

[T3l Ca7]

Question: It is time to elect a New World leader, and only your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.


Candidate A - Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists. He has had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B - He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.

Candidate C - He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.

Which of these candidates would be your Choice?












Candidate A: is Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Candidate B: is Winston Churchill.

Candidate C: is Adolph Hitler.

[genocidal]

TelCat:
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader

YOU ARE A REVOLUTIONARY THINKER

[T3l Ca7]

TelCat:
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader
http://forums.trenchwars.org/showthr...t+World+leader

YOU ARE A REVOLUTIONARY THINKER

Okey, since you are so stupid, I probably have to be a bit more explicit:

people like Bill Clinton lies somewhere between Candidate A and B.

People like Bin Laden alikes Candidate C, and so is George W. Bush(minus the vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife part).

[froedrick]

here's the difference. Adolf Hitler commited genocide.

[genocidal]

And Bush used to be an alcoholic and do cocaine. You're the dumbass, yet again TelKitty.

[T3l Ca7]

Annnd American troops has committed less murders in Afghanistan and Iraq?

I didn't say Bush was not a alcoholic and didn't do cocaine, but alike Hitler, he too, persued radical policies and caused many unnecessay deaths of innocent civilians.

[genocidal]

You are werrwee smart and won this argument.

[GoldenPlums]

Is it just me or is genocidal a complete fuckwit?