posted April 01, 2008 04:57 PM            

Perhaps leftists are infected with the lying gene, in addition to the treason gene.

One by one, their lying myths have exploded. Now one would expect that when caught red handed with their deliberate lies that they would apologize, if not to the country then at least to those against whom their lies were directed.

We have yet to hear any apology...except from the Washington Post...which wasn't really an apology...for the 2 years of daily lies generated by lying leftists against the Bush administration regarding the Joe Wilson/Valarie Plame fiasco.

We have yet to hear any apology by lying leftists regarding the phony story of Saddams ammo depots looted by terrorists right under US military forces noses. I calculated it would take about 40 semi truck and trailers filled to overflowing to move the amount of explosives lying leftists claimed simply vanished while US military forces were in the area.

As with these or any lies of lying leftists they just pretend they never lied. No apology, not even an acknowledgment they were wrong. They just go silent on the subject.

The latest liars myth to explode is the story out of Iraq where US military forces went berserk after a roadside IED exploded and killed a US service man. The lying myth generated by the lying press said military personnel retaliated and deliberately killed innocent Iraqi citizens in a murderous rage.

The lie originated with an al-Queda propagandist who told the lying story to a member of the lying press...who, without checking a damned thing took the terrorists words in whole and printed the lying story.

After all, it was in a good cause and lying is certainly permissible...even laudatory..in a good cause.

Jack Murtha, D PA, then jumped in front of the network television cameras and accused these military personnel of cold blooded murder of innocent Iraqi civilians. This, before the investigation was even off the ground.

Well, the lying myth of Haditha is another lying leftist myth which is exploding. I really don't expect any apologies coming out of lying leftists mouths or off their keyboards, that's not their style.

posted April 01, 2008 05:06 PM            

Jack Murtha, Democrat Pennsylvania

THE COLLECTED TALES OF AMERICAN ATROCITIES, WHICH LEFTISTS RELY UPON THE WAY OTHERS SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES FOR SOLACE, is getting shorter. Like allegations of torture at Guantanamo, Koran desecration, and detainee murders in Afghanistan, the Haditha “massacre” is increasingly being exposed as a fairy tale. Unfortunately, this canard was invented and popularized, not by terrorist propagandists to discredit an enemy army, but by American politicians to demonize U.S. soldiers and drain their own nation's will to fight an ongoing war – a war which we are winning and which the same politicians voted to authorize.

Last Friday, the government dismissed all charges against the third of four defendants accused of perpetrating the aforementioned atrocities in Haditha. All charges against Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum, 26, were dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning Tatum cannot be tried again for the incident, although by the time the trial commenced, the Haditha “massacre” had already shrunken considerably.

Tatum and three others stood accused, not of murdering “innocent civilians in cold blood” as Congressman John Murtha characterized it, but of failing to properly identify every target before opening fire. In reality, terrorists had fired on the squad from inside the house, and the room where innocent people had been killed was smoke-filled; moreover, according to multiple witnesses, everyone heard an AK-47 “racking” – that is, getting ready to fire upon them. A positive identification would have been both impossible and suicidal. The investigating officers report further observed, according to the prosecution's case, Tatum would have been absolved of throwing a grenade into the room without positively identifying everyone inside, but not firing his rifle. The government ultimately found his actions had not violated the rules of engagement.

That did not mean accusations of premeditation had not been leveled. The prosecution’s star witness, Lance Cpl. Humberto Mendoza, testified that Tatum ordered him to murder the innocent members of the household, then Tatum did it himself when Mendoza refused. Tatum denied the charge. Tatum also passed his lie detector test, while Mendoza failed his. And at the time Mendoza, a native of Venezuela, was “trying to get his application for U.S. citizenship released by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which is holding up his papers.”

Nonetheless, the accused was not unrepentant for his actions, inadvertent of not. Far from the emotionless warmonger often depicted by the leftist press, Tatum nearly broke down on the stand last July, telling the judge: “I am not comfortable with the fact that I might have shot a child…That is a burden I will have to bear.”

Ultimately, the case could not stand. The Marines' statement declared prosecutors acted “in order to continue to pursue the truth-seeking process into the Haditha incident.” Although some have speculated Tatum struck a bargain to testify against the remaining defendant, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, Tatum's lawyer Jack Zimmerman insists, “Absolutely, there is no deal.”

Tatum is the third of four suspects to have all charges dropped, demolishing the Haditha myth.

Last April, the government dropped charges against Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz in exchange for his testimony. However, defense attorneys noted that Dela Cruz had discredited himself, changing his story five times.

Last August 9, Lt. Gen. James Mattis went further in his ruling clearing Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt of all charges, including “unpremeditated murder,” finding Sharratt not merely “not guilty” but “innocent.” Gen. Mattis concluded his statement by noting Sharratt “has always remained cloaked in the presumption of innocence, with this dismissal of charges, he remains in the eyes of the law – and in my eyes – innocent.”

Of the four charged in the Haditha incident, only Frank Wuterich has yet to be exonerated. He faces nine counts, including “manslaughter, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and obstruction of justice.”

This should have come as no surprise. Indeed, as early as March 2006, military investigators concluded, “there is no evidence that the Marines intentionally set out to target, engage, and kill non-combatants.”

Nonetheless, as David Horowitz and I note in our new book Party of Defeat, the Haditha myth would become one of the most erroneous, and shameful, incidents of domestic political sniping. Two full months after this report, Jack Murtha seized upon the investigation as a way to promote his bill to withdraw all troops from Iraq in six months. Late the previous year, he had asserted the war was “unwinnable” and the military “broken.” On May 17, 2006, citing inside sources, Murtha insisted, “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.” In his view, the strapped military had gone crazy from the president's unnecessary war, and only withdrawal could prevent future atrocities from being committed by American men in uniform.

The Left's media echo chamber quickly spread news of the alleged slaughter. A June 5, 2006, editorial in The Nation, the flagship publication of the Left, asserted:

Enough details have emerged from survivors and military personnel to conclude that in the town of Haditha last November, members of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment perpetrated a massacre...Marine payoffs to survivors imply a cover-up that may extend far up the chain of command...Whatever the responsibility of the unit commanders in Haditha, it is George W. Bush as Commander in Chief who has sent the clear message that human rights abuses and violations of international law are justified in the “war on terror.”...[T]he moral damage from the Iraq War is broader than a single debased unit. That is what so powerfully motivates Murtha, a Marine and Vietnam veteran.

What actually motivated the Left was two-fold. Many noted the Left's desire to topple an opposing party's president, even at the cost of establishing a terrorist base-of-operations in oil-rich Baghdad. However, more dangerous was its deep-seated view that the American military, and the Bush administration, are evil incarnate. Haditha filled a need for the Left it had long pined to fill. Months before the Haditha story broke, on Face the Nation, John Kerry accused U.S. troops of of “going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children – you know, women.” (He added, “Iraqis should be doing that.”)

This followed, and preceded, endless accusations of mistreatment of detainees around the world, some literally taken from the al-Qaeda handbook.

If leftists genuinely cared about U.S. troops, they would have protested the conditions of the Haditha soldiers' interrogations. Investigators refused to provide attorneys when requested, questioned the men for 12 hours at a time, and did not allow them to take bathroom breaks, forcing the men to relieve themselves into bottles. This far outstrips most of the accusations made against U.S. soldiers. Nonetheless, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate would compare U.S. soldiers, and not Islamist terrorists, to Pol Pot and the Nazis.

[i]Such an invidious comparison can only be made, during a time of war, if an ideologically charged opposition has broken the traditional boundaries of dissent and cast its lot against its own country.]/i]
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=37CC9EFF-E81B-49C2-AFF8-A39989D871 85

posted April 01, 2008 07:49 PM            

I remember your attempt to inflate the bravery of terrorists to "ballsy"...because they were deliberately killing innocent Iraqi civilians they didn't even know. Ballsy. how about butchers instead.

I remember you calling Bush a "murderer"..based on your reading of the Commandments.

I remember your nonsense that Bush hyped intelligence and pressured intelligence analysts to distort their findings...to lead America into war.

I remember you calling America and Americans oppressors/repressors for denying the chief component of WMD gas, chlorine to be sold to Saddam when Iraq was under an arms embargo by the UN.

I remember you thought the US should package up a water treatment plant..non chlorine to send to Saddam.

I remember you defending Saddam by chiding him lightly..with the words..."Saddam wasn't a good leader for his people". Saddam, the butcher of Iraq.

Your nonsense is too extensive to list it all and there's really no need. You've been on the wrong side of virtually every topic of disagreement here...from the beginning when you called a "liberal" who had graduated from irrational leftist ranks...a conservative.

On the wrong side right up to this current instant in time.

TORTURE
1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
2. a method of inflicting such pain.
3. Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4. extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5. a cause of severe pain or anguish.
–verb (used with object) 6. to subject to torture.
7. to afflict with severe pain of body or mind: My back is torturing me.
8. to force or extort by torture: We'll torture the truth from his lips!
9. to twist, force, or bring into some unnatural position or form: trees tortured by storms.
10. to distort or pervert (language, meaning, etc.).

10 is what you and other leftists do when you attempt to define words or give voice to your illogic.

5. the deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons in an attempt to force another person to yield information or to make a confession or for any other reason; "it required unnatural torturing to extract a confession"

End of the discussion on torture acoustic. The word is and has long been well defined...except in the "tortured minds" of leftists.

posted April 01, 2008 08:57 PM            

Yeah, that'll shut me up: your recollection of things you consider to be my blunders. Good luck. We both know I've not been on the wrong side of every topic of disagreement here. We also both know that what I post gets attacked on a factual basis far less and by far less people than what you post. Reality is reality. Get a grip.

quote:

---

End of the discussion on torture acoustic.

---

Excuse me? What did you say? This, your posting of a definition of torture, is the end of discussion on it? Not hardly. Not here. Not in the halls of Congress or the White House either.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344730,00.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iakd9i9QHJn3MgPadkhBZT4X2-HAD8VPD2S80
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/06/waterboard.poll/index.html
http://www.military.com/news/article/general-defends-gitmo-trial-process.html?col=1186032310810
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/407233

posted April 01, 2008 09:38 PM            

Now, if leftists want to trump up a different definition then it's only more proof of leftist lying and I don't really give a damn where those leftists are or where they work.

And here you are again acoustic. You cannot discuss from the basis of reality but rather, you're always on the fringe of arguments and never directly on point.

You need to get it right acoustic. Words have definite well defined meanings. To assign different meanings is the mark of liars, the irrational or those who for political purposes don't like the definitions used by those operating in the real world.

The most common usage of the word torture is the infliction of severe pain...for whatever purpose.

Waterboarding is not torture. Holding prisoners in uncomfortable settings is not torture. Asking prisoners questions is not torture. Withholding sports or physical activities is not torture. Failing to feed prisoners what they like to eat is not torture. Non observance of prisoners religious rites is not torture.

Inflicting severe pain deliberately is torture...for what ever purpose it's done.

Your attempt to tie the US military, Bush or the Bush administration to torture is just one more nail in the coffin of your irrationality.

posted April 01, 2008 10:47 PM            

And let's get something straight: IT IS NOT DEMOCRATS WHO ARE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF TORTURE. If anyone was looking to change the meaning of torture it HAS to be Republicans. Who took issue with John McCain's call for a ban on torture? WHO? Yeah, that's right: Republicans. Who drafted the "Rumsfeld memo," which decided that Presidential powers supercede international and domestic laws against torture? Republicans.

U.S. Cites Exception in Torture Ban: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/02/AR2006030202054.html

So don't even give me that. There is absolutely no way for you to win on this subject.

quote:

---

Your attempt to tie the US military, Bush or the Bush administration to torture is just one more nail in the coffin of your irrationality.

---

Obviously not! Not by a long shot! Like I said, my own sister upon trying to get back into active duty (from active reserve status) decided she was done after Indoc for being a prison guard in Afghanistan. I didn't need convincing, but I certainly got it. Torture does not fit in with the morals of this country.

It's weird that you'd mention someone else being irrational in the same post you're trying to defend waterboarding.

"CIA members who've undergone water boarding as part of their training have lasted an average of 14 seconds before begging to be released. The Navy SEALs once used the technique in their counter-interrogation training, but they stopped because the trainees could not survive it without breaking, which was bad for morale." http://people.howstuffworks.com/water-boarding1.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/legal-torture.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/legal-torture1.htm

posted April 02, 2008 12:50 AM            

Bush has declared the US does not torture.

I don't care what McCain says. McCain needs a good dictionary. What McCain endured by your friendly communist pals in Vietnam acoustic, that was torture. Attempting to use Republicans to bolster your absurd arguments won't fly. If every Republican in Congress formed an committee and attempted to change the commonly accepted dictionary definition of torture, that still wouldn't fly.

If Congress, including Republicans don't want the things I listed done to prisoners, that's fine. Write laws excluding them. Just don't attempt to define those things as torture.

Nevertheless acoustic, the subject here is lying leftist myths. So far, you haven't addressed the issue of leftist liars and the lies they've told and continue to tell.

If you have a factual problem with what I said in my opening statements on the first post I'd like to see it.

If you have a factual problem with the focus or accuracy of the article itself, let's see it.

Here's some more factual information for you acoustic. Exactly what I said was going to happen to the lying leftist press has happened to the lying leftist press.

When I saw the breakdown of press credibility in the Pew poll, I knew it was the sounding of the dirge for the lying leftist press...primarily because only a few believe them anymore.

Since I last posted the stock price of the Treason Times, their stock price is down about another 40% and it was already down about 40% from it's normal stock price ranges. Today, NYT closed at $19.20 per share. Their shareholders are attempting to take over the Times and kick the little leftist weenie publisher out on his butt.

Leftist newspapers have been forced to reduce staff...all over America. Even CBS has announced lay-offs or buyouts for news staff.

You may be one of the only people left in Amercia who believes a word they print or broadcast.

Your inability to read factual information, connect the dots and arrive at a rational, logical conclusion is a handicap I wouldn't want. you're welcome to it.

I have educated myself acoustic. Your statements prove you have not. Posting the story about military personnel only being able to withstand 14 seconds of waterboarding IS THE VERY REASON IT SHOULD BE A STANDARD TOOL IN THE INTERROGATION OF HIGH VALUE PRISONERS

None, not one suffered an instant of pain so it's not torture. It's unpleasant and sets off a reflex reaction but it doesn't cause any harm, it doesn't hurt and it's not torture.

posted April 02, 2008 02:50 AM            

quote:

---

The notion nations define or redefine torture for the United States is not sublime...except for leftists.

---

Every nation not only defines torture for themselves, but also other nations. How we treat prisoners and detainees is how we should expect our servicemen and women to be treated. As such it's critical to manage perceptions of torture.

quote:

---

Just don't attempt to define those things as torture.

---

Just don't attempt to define torture as torture? Yeah, that's smart.

quote:

---

Posting the story about military personnel only being able to withstand 14 seconds of waterboarding IS THE VERY REASON IT SHOULD BE A STANDARD TOOL IN THE INTERROGATION OF HIGH VALUE PRISONERS

---

Posting the story about military personnel only being able to withstand 14 seconds of waterboarding is PROOF THAT WATERBOARDING CONSTITUTES TORTURE. To suggest otherwise is idiotic, and shouldn't be tolerated by any American.

quote:

---

Nevertheless acoustic, the subject here is lying leftist myths. So far, you haven't addressed the issue of leftist liars and the lies they've told and continue to tell.

---

The person who posts out and out lies here the most, dear Jwhop, is you.

• Democrats killed the economy by talking, forced lay-offs, and forced companies to leave our country for cheaper labor ring a bell? All unsubstantiated doozies.

• Opening ANWAR would increase oil production even though Exxon has stated very plainly that it doesn't intend on increasing production?

• Democrats increased gasoline prices [by unknown means]

• Democrats increased unemployment [through talking]?!

• The size of the national debt increased due to Democrats despite the fact that it always increases under Republican presidents and decreases under Democrats (in modern times).

• Congress's approval ratings are a result of the majority party, and not a matter of the fact that both parties hands are tied in Congress as neither party has enough votes to overcome the other. Democrats cannot force an agenda if met with a veto.

• Similarly we have "Demoscat Congress," a term used by you to imply that Congress is somehow being driven by Democrats when in actuality Democrats hold just a slim majority, and don't have the numbers to push legislation over a presidential veto.

• Democrats voted in a pay increase when in actuality pay increases are automatic unless voted against, which happened for the first time in years when the Democrats came into the majority.

• Democrats killed the stock market and pension funds by talking.

• 2/3 of Americans do not oppose the war in Iraq. Not a lie, but a misinterpretation of the data, which stated that a certain percentage of people believed we are going to be successful in Iraq. The data regarding support or opposition to the war directly contradicted your assertion.

• "If 20% of democrats defect to McCain, there's no way in hell either Hillary or O'Bomber could possibly win the general election or even come close." Starting with higher numbers of devoted voters than Republicans have, Democrats could actually sustain a 20% loss and stay competitive.
  

posted April 02, 2008 07:35 AM            

quote:

---

Waterboarding is not torture. Holding prisoners in uncomfortable settings is not torture. Asking prisoners questions is not torture. Withholding sports or physical activities is not torture. Failing to feed prisoners what they like to eat is not torture. Non observance of prisoners religious rites is not torture.

---

I guess we are all just a big bunch of tortured humans, most often by our parents. Even waterboarding, as nasty as it is, finds us in common form was a swirly. Guess a bunch of kids I went to school with are survivors of the most hideous form of torture. I'm sure they haven't recovered from the indignity and should be payed compensation by all the rest of us.

posted April 02, 2008 10:11 AM            

But pain is subjective, thus, so is what we each consider torture...

posted April 02, 2008 12:07 PM            

quote:

---

Now acoustic, let's face facts. You would rather see Americans killed by terrorist attacks which could have been thwarted by good intelligence gleaned from terrorist prisoners than have terrorist prisoners discomforted. Since it's obvious you and the rest of your insane leftist friends feel this way, why don't you volunteer to be at ground zero for the next attack?

---

I wish I had your mirror, jwhop. You have one of those satirical mirrors, don't you? Where the writer sees everyone but themselves? Lucky you!!!

posted April 02, 2008 12:37 PM            

It's leftists who have printed American means to track terrorist telephone conversions in newspapers and it's leftists who have attempted to block US intelligence agencies from listening in on terrorist conversations.

acoustic has hewed the leftist line from the beginning...including the insanity the US must observe the definitions of other nations when they "torture" the commonly accepted definitions of words with their substitutes.

So, do all that, all of which puts Americans at risk of their lives to future terrorist attacks and one is permitted to draw conclusions which follow naturally from those actions.

posted April 02, 2008 12:45 PM            

• Part 1, Article 1 and the US Reservations of the UN Convention Against Torture: The term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

• The US Reservations for the UN Convention Against Torture: In order to constitute torture, an act must be specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) the threat of imminent death; or (4) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.

• 18 United States Code Title 18, §2340(2) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.
  

Waterboarding induces panic and suffering by forcing a person to inhale water into the sinuses, pharynx, larynx, trachea, and lungs.

The head is tilted back and water is poured into the upturned mouth or nose. Eventually the subject cannot exhale more air or cough out more water, the lungs are collapsed, and the sinuses and trachea are filled with water. The subject is drowned from the inside, filling with water from the head down. The chest and lungs are kept higher than the head so that coughing draws water up and into the lungs while avoiding total suffocation. "His sufferings must be that of a man who is drowning, but cannot drown."

Waterboarding is not:

• upright or face-down dunking: People dunked face-first in water can keep water out for as long as they can hold their breath. When one is inclined with the head back, holding one's breath will not prevent the upper respiratory tract from filling with water.

• asphyxiation: Survivors of near-drowning experiences report that the sensation of water flooding down the larynx and trachea as they struggle to breathe is the most terrifying aspect of the experience. In waterboarding, this begins quickly, long before the onset of oxygen starvation.

• submersion: Waterboarding does not require immersion in standing water. Someone can be waterboarded with as little as a canteen or two of water.

• slowly dripping water on the forehead: Several types of water-based tortures have been used in Asia, but the famous "Chinese Water Torture" demonstrated in Mythbusters Episode 25 is very different than waterboarding.

• a simulation: Waterboarding is actually forcing large quantities of water into the pharynx, trachea, and lungs, inducing choking and gagging in the subject.
  

quote:

---

The inability to look at factual data then draw reasonable, rational, logical conclusions from what you see is the hallmark of leftists.

---

That's weird, because it seems that you are always the one experiencing lapses of rationality at the hands of actual facts.

You should know by now that when I tell you you can't win something, you can't win it.

quote:

---

Perhaps your problem stems from illiteracy. For someone who can't define "most" or divine it's proper usage when "most" is used as an "indefinite quantifier", perhaps you also can't define "lie". But then, such illiteracy is common among the "Bush lied, people died" leftist fraternity.

---

Weird that you bring up two arguments you lost severely to try to make a point. In the case of "most" you failed repeatedly to understand how polling on a SCALE works. With regard to "lie," you left out a definition that is included in every dictionary definition of lie you can possibly find: an inaccurate or false statement. Your definition requires intent, but there is absolutely no intent necessary in order to constitute something as a "lie." Now you want to talk about illiteracy?

posted April 02, 2008 01:07 PM            

quote:

---

Leftists, including those in the press, those in leftist groups and those in Congress have been "talking down the economy" for years. Their comments don't go unnoticed by business. Neither does talk of raising taxes. Business owners and CEOs are not stupid acoustic. They fully understand the consequences of higher taxes on their business operations and what undermining the economy by talk does to consumer confidence. They make their plans accordingly.

---

And yet under Clinton we had an economic boon. Your theory is completely and utterly unfounded.

quote:

---

Exxon Mobile is one (1) oil company acoustic. Why would Exxon increase production acoustic. They can't refine more crude oil into cracked distillates including gasoline now. Refineries are running at near 100% capacity now.

---

On the contrary, it's not about refineries. It's about profit pure and simple. Exxon, as the leader of the pack, is showing that keeping production at a standstill increases demand. Demand causes prices to go up. It's an easy equation.

Regarding ANWAR, and for that matter your suggestions on alternate energy sources, we had a Republican Congress and President for 6 years. If you guys couldn't get the votes together in that time, it's not Democrats fault.

quote:

---

The democrat controlled Congress is a fact acoustic. Congressional job approval ratings are the lowest in recorded history. They're in charge and the public is less then thrilled by their abysmal performance.

---

We've been over and over and over this, and I've explained how it works above, so I'm going to skip this one YET AGAIN!

quote:

---

Your contention that it's Republicans blocking demoscat efforts to surrender which is causing the low Congressional job approval ratings fails on logic acoustic. The President, who says we are not going to leave Iraq until the job there is finished has job approval rating about twice that of the leftist demoscat Congress. Would it be helpful to you if I used words with fewer syllables?

---

The President's approval rating is in the low 30's where it's been for a long time now. That means that 2/3 of the country don't approve of his job.

And it has nothing to do with "surrender."

quote:

---

Now acoustic, if anyone is lying, it's you. I never said 2/3 of Americans do not oppose the war.

---

You never said it, huh?

"2/3 of Americans do not oppose the war in Iraq." - Jwhop March 20, 2008 10:27 PM http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/003883.html

Why is it there? (It's less than 2 weeks ago you said that.) It was untrue, and I challenged you on it, and I was right.

quote:

---

Hahaha, automatic pay raises for Congress was passed into law in 1989 by the majority party in power in both Houses of Congress...democrats.

---

"Hahaha?" What? You're laughing about an argument you lost whereby you attempted to make it look like Democrats are voting themselves raises when the truth is that their raises have been automatic, signed by the President, and the only time in recent years that Congress voted against a raise was when Democrats came back into the majority? If you can't recognize how irrational that is, then there's a problem.

quote:

---

acoustic, if 20% of either O'Bomber supporters or 20% of Hillary supporters abandon the demoscat party and vote for McCain, it will be a demoscat wipe out in the November elections. Your math is predicated on democrats voting democrat which never happens anyway.

---

My math is based on a recent Pew poll that is pretty large in scope when compared with the typical polling of a thousand people. We can only find out for sure when the event goes down, but there is no indication at this point that any candidate will win by a landslide.

posted April 02, 2008 01:20 PM            

inflict..intentionally or otherwise..severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental as specified in Part 1, Article 1 and the US Reservations of the UN Convention Against Torture

Fails to...inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering and that mental pain or suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from (1) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering as specified in US Reservations for the UN Convention Against Torture

And fails to.... inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering...as specified in Title 18 USC

Further acoustic, no one has been drowned as a result of waterboarding by US military personnel or CIA agents

The fact waterboarding sets off an involuntary reflex is not evidence of "torture". Unpleasant probably even certainly. But severely painful or painful at all... no.

You do however continue to be a lot more concerned with what we do to terrorists in captivity than what terrorists do to captured Americans. You are a lot more concerned by what we do to captured terrorists....than what terrorists do to innocent Iraq and Afghan citizens. You may call what terrorist do "ballsy" acoustic, I call it butchery.

Of course, you were always more concerned about what America was doing to poor Saddam...than what Saddam was doing to his own citizens...Saddam merely "wasn't a good leader for his people".

Some things never change do they acoustic. Blame America, first, last and always at every opportunity.

Once again acoustic:

I notice you're still ducking the issue acoustic. Exactly what lies are contained within my commentary in the opening statement on this tread...or within the article I posted. Your lies here are legion. Perhaps your problem stems from illiteracy. For someone who can't define "most" or divine it's proper usage when "most" is used as an "indefinite quantifier", perhaps you also can't define "lie". But then, such illiteracy is common among the "Bush lied, people died" leftist fraternity.

posted April 02, 2008 01:36 PM            

quote:

---

The fact waterboarding sets off an involuntary reflex is not evidence of "torture". Unpleasant probably even certainly. But severely painful or painful at all... no.

---

I don't think it's reasonable for someone who's not gone through it to comment on whether or not it is severely painful or causes prolonged mental anguish.

quote:

---

You do however continue to be a lot more concerned with what we do to terrorists in captivity than what terrorists do to captured Americans. You are a lot more concerned by what we do to captured terrorists....than what terrorists do to innocent Iraq and Afghan citizens. You may call what terrorist do "ballsy" acoustic, I call it butchery.

---

I don't have a say in what terrorists do, Jwhop.

I do have the chance here in this forum, however, to educate people and more specifically United States voters regarding pertinent issues, especially when the issue is one that contradicts America's highest standards. You think it's a public service to cut and paste skewed commentary from the Right. I think it's more of a public service to ensure that you're providing accurate information.

quote:

---

Of course, you were always more concerned about what America was doing to poor Saddam...than what Saddam was doing to his own citizens...Saddam merely "wasn't a good leader for his people".

---

quote:

---

Blame America, first, last and always at every opportunity.

---

Correction: You mean hold America to the highest standards, first, last and always at every opportunity.

quote:

---

For someone who can't define "most" or divine it's proper usage when "most" is used as an "indefinite quantifier", perhaps you also can't define "lie". But then, such illiteracy is common among the "Bush lied, people died" leftist fraternity.

---

Do you know the definition of insanity? http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/q109067.html

posted April 02, 2008 01:48 PM            

Another Lying Leftist Myth Explodes

I think I've shown quite conclusively that lying takes place here most often by you, a Republican. How much stock do people put into liars calling other people liars? Let's not be hypocritical shall we?

Regarding your first post, one man is still up for nine counts of manslaughter. The fact that civilians including children were killed is not disputed.

posted April 02, 2008 01:56 PM            

You have no say in what terrorists do acoustic but you sure fluffed up their bravery...by calling them ballsy..."for killing people they don't even know". That apparently didn't bother you in the least.

You need to drop the act acoustic and the self righteous mantle you attempt to wrap your nonsense in. You are not the conscience of America acoustic. Fact is, America could never live up to....what you say...is acceptable. As long as there's one homeless person, one hungry person, one example of anything you can use to tar America...then, America has failed.

acoustic the "educator"? Oh, I hardly think so acoustic. Those who can't define common words are hardly in a position to educate anyone. Educator, educate yourself.

If you meant that site quotation to be a serious attempt to define insanity acoustic then let me remind you it's the political left who have been playing with the Karl Marx playbook expecting a different result each time socialists take over a country and destroy it. That's more than 150 years acoustic and there's nothing new. Just the same old failures and destruction of peoples, economies and nations to show for their efforts. On that basis acoustic, just whom keeps repeating history and expecting a different result?

Another attempt to get a straight answer from you acoustic.

I notice you're still ducking the issue acoustic. Exactly what lies are contained within my commentary in the opening statement on this tread...or within the article I posted. Your lies here are legion. Perhaps your problem stems from illiteracy. For someone who can't define "most" or divine it's proper usage when "most" is used as an "indefinite quantifier", perhaps you also can't define "lie". But then, such illiteracy is common among the "Bush lied, people died" leftist fraternity.

*edit

posted April 02, 2008 02:36 PM            

quote:

---

You have no say in what terrorists do acoustic but you sure fluffed up their bravery...by calling them ballsy..."for killing people they don't even know". That apparently didn't bother you in the least.

---

It still doesn't bother me in the least. When it comes to a normal human, killing requires bravery. Your attempt to misconstrue that as something that's praising terrorists is a bit of a head-scratcher and always will be. It's illogical to think that killing doesn't require courage.

quote:

---

You are not the conscience of America acoustic.

---

I'm head and shoulders closer to it than you are.

quote:

---

If you meant that site quotation to be a serious attempt to define insanity acoustic then let me remind you it's the political left who have been playing with the Karl Marx playbook expecting a different result each time socialists take over a country and destroy it.

---

It was in reference to your repeated attempts to use a p*ss poor argument about words and their definitions as a means of trying to prove my illiteracy, when by any objective qualification it's your grasp of english that's caused you embarrassment over and over again. The Pew report wasn't about the definition of "Most." To say that is to miss the point. They asked people to rate things on a scale, and that is a fact that you refuse to understand. Regarding "lie," it's in the dictionary. There's no need for comment beyond that. Bush, by objective measure, did make an inaccurate and false statement. He conformed to the definition of "lie." It's insane for you to keep trying to make these points from these arguments you've lost over and over again. It's like your "Demoscat Congress" bs. The facts are the facts, and they directly contradict your version of the truth.

quote:

---

Not nearly good enough acoustic. You said lies. Now back that up with some proof.

---