Obama is the living breathing embodiment of American leftism. That's basis enough to hate him. But there is also the element of payback for the destruction of George Bush. Bush was an idiot just like Obama. But the left taught us lessons about how one treats presidents with hostile ideological agendas. Bring him down. No matter how the election turns out this approach is going to continue.
hostile to whom ? his agenda is to improve the lives of most americans, thats why he wants to cut their taxes
Then, you take him and put him in charge of Scotland......wou'll be a world superpower in no time.....
Let's start again. What was the specific lie, and who told it? Who do you hold responsible for lying? And I don't mean the government, that's a cop out. I mean a person specifically.
Colin Powell admits he lied to the UN about WMD's. He says that was the fault of the bad intelligence he was given and ultimately assigned blame to GWB. The buck does stop with the President.
General Powell knew what he was saying at the UN briefing was untrue when he said it? First I've heard that. That would certainly change my evaluation of him if true. I assume you have some documentation of that?
Never said he knew at the time. He learned he had been lied to and lied himself later. Does it really make a difference?
It does matter to the person who is telling it. If you tell me something that is untrue, but you honestly thought it correct, it's not a lie; you were just wrong. You were not lying to me. You would have to know that what you were telling me was untrue. Powell didn't lie.
Powell says he lied, not intentionally but it was still lies. And others in the administration knew it. Powell is not happy about how he was used. Powell is on youtube talking about if you care to go see.
"Not intentionally" isn't a lie then. If Powell knew that the information he presented to the Security Council was wrong, and presented it anyway, then he lied. To my knowledge, that has not been Powell's story.
Here I got the youtube link for you. You can't watch it and not come away with the fact that LIES were told IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZTLmOoPzjs
"Lies were told." We are getting awfully 3rd person aren't we? I think the video you were really looking for was the BBC one. But you said Powell was the one who lied. Did Powell intentionally deceive the security council or not?
I personally do not care about his intention. Powell was just the tool the administration used to spread the lies of WMDs. He knows it now. We all know it now. Too bad lot of people died for it.
powell didnt know he was lying at the time, but others in the administration who actually formed the information in his briefing did, they used him to present it as he was the most acceptable face of that adminstration, whether powell lied or not is irrelevant, the bloody government did, the president of the usa did, defence secretary, all of them. it was also made a lot of fun of over here straight away, we had specialists on tv that night pointing out the 'mobile laboratories' he showed diagrams of in his presentation were an impossibility you cannot possibly do that and they were even shown to have tarapualin sides and stuff we had chemical weapons experts actually laughing at that on tv within 24 hours. it was all lies.
Back to Obama Last night in Cairo Stadium Barak Obama was sitting front row over President Morsis right shoulder for 2 hours learning how Presidents give a 2 hour speech with no teleprompter, no notes. You can see him in white shirt and tie waving our flag behind Morsi [video=youtube;zgKpM3MM0ik]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgKpM3MM0ik[/video]
An interesting topic and I've read many of the responses. I've also seen a lot of extremist hatred and that is bothersome from both a political and personal perspective. I understand opposing policies and positions in our political system but that is not grounds for hatred. Obviously some of it is "racist" and that could answer why some are so hateful of the President but I see this as a small and ignorant, albeit vocal, component of those that oppose Obama. There is also a mythical Obama out there apparently because I read a lot of objections that are certainly based upon myths or misinformation. What many fail to acknowledge was that Americans were given a crappy choice in 2008. Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin and neither of these were good choices. It's as if both the Democratic and Republcian Parties intentionally dig the dregs from the bottom of the barrel in selecting their candidates. I don't support Obama but acknowledge that he was the lesser of two evils in 2008 and is the lesser of two evils today when compared to Romney/Ryan. I won't vote for him but I acknowledge that Romney/Ryan would be worse for America than Obama/Biden. I opposed much of what Obama has done. I opposed the Stimulus Package, one-half of which were tax cuts that generated even greater deficits than under President Bush. We need to remember that former President Bush promised in 2001 to reduce the national debt to less than $3 trillion but instead increased it to $10 trillion. That's a $7 trillion swing based upon tax cuts that we, America, couldn'f afford. More tax cuts in 2009 were irresponsible and have lead to an additional $6 trillion of debt that is going to bury the future economy. Today both Romney and Obama want to make some of the Bush era tax breaks permanent and the problem is that we, as a nation, can't afford those tax breaks. Most of the "Stimulus" money spent was issued as grants to the States for infrastucture and to provide additional funding where State budgets were facing huge shortfalls in revenues. Yes, there were also loan guarentees to private industry, such as alternative energy corporations, but this didn't include direct funding but instead were loan guarentees. I was opposed to all of this but remember that Bush had TARP so there wasn't much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans in addressing the recession. The ACA (Obamacare), while I oppose it, was based upon Republican proposals. Republicans advocated the "individual mandate" and they proposed private insurance companies to provide health care. Both of these were incorporated in the ACA. Today Romney proposes some changes to the ACA but there isn't that much difference. Romney has stated that this should be addressed by the States and the ACA does delegate the role to the States in establishing the private health insurance cooperatives. Obviously if Romney were to fulfil what he's "promised" it would also require a Federal mandate to the States to establish the same private insurance cooperatives. Romney has proposed the same federal subsidies for low income workers and coverage for pre-existing conditions and the only difference is that he hasn't said how he'd pay for it. When he was governor he did it with tax penalties which is what "Obamacare" does. Obama has failed, IMO, on foreign policy because he's continued the same policies as Bush in most regards. Where he made promises that were positive, such as closing GITMO and prosecuting terrorists in criminal courts where they should be prosecuted, he was blocked by Congress. The number one problem with US foreign policy is our military involvement in other countries where we, more often than not, are supporting tyrannical regimes and were we apply two different standards in addressing nations. A perfect example is Iran which doesn't have nuclear weapons and where we impose draconian economic sanctions but ignore the actual nuclear weapons in India, Pakistan and Israel. This international hypocracy by the United States is not being ignored anywhere except in America. Romney recently stated that "America should lead" the world but we should be leading by example and not by force. There are some on this thread that have stated they believe Obama should be impeached but they fail to provide an impeachable offense. I've also called for impeachment of Obama, as well as Bush and Clinton but the difference is that I've provided impeachable offenses. Obamacare and the stimulus package are not impeachable offenses but extra-judical executions are. Extra-judicial execution is murder and murder is a "high crime" in the United States that violates the US Constitution. I called for the impeachment of Bush because torture is also a "high crime" in the United States and violates the US Constitution. Clinton, who was impeached, should have been removed from office for perjury and obstruction of justice which are also "high crimes" in the United States. Former President Nixon resigned when it was established that he committed obstruction of justice related to Watergate and Clinton's crimes were no less. It is also a certaintly in my mind that Romney would also violate the US Constitution if elected. He's literally promised to deny equal protection under the law for gays and lesbians related to the legal institution of marriage and is willing to deny equal protection under the law for women related to abortion. Sorry, but "Republicans" are living in igorance and denial if they don't understand that Romney's position on both of these issues violates the Constitution. In all of this I don't hate either Romney or Obama but I oppose their anti-American political agendas.
It's obvious why we have such a disagreement. We can't even agree on definitions and terms. That's why I challenged you about the "lie" in the first place. I wanted to pull out what specifically you thought was the lie. I think (and most dictionaries agree) that to tell a lie requires a deliberate intention to deceive, not just saying something that after the fact was proven incorrect. So dismissing Powell's intentions is dismissing whether he actually told a lie or not.
he was speaking on behalf of the entire administration and country, that was america's seat at the un addressing the whole world, not just colin powell, he didnt write the speech he didnt formulate the information in it, the people who did knew it was all lies
