Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you, no they didn't demand any of the Bush admin. As usual context is lost on conservatives, they don't know the difference between large scale, expensive formal investigations (ie. Hillary's emails and Benghazi) and mere peanut gallery commenting from the public.
If they were Obama early in his term, they would have investigated and prosecuted Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etal. at enormous cost and lost time. Obama took the high road and got on with trying to improve the country. Instead of appreciating him for it, somehow they hated him more.
Spot on Ringo, that's where all their arguments break down. Did you see or hear any republicans screaming for hearings after 60 people died during Bush's administration...nope. Did you hear them demanding something be done about his emails disappearing...nope? Were there inquiries into the Carlyle Group and the relationship between the Bin Laden's and Bush...nope. Did they drag George 2 in and find out why he lied about the weapons of mass destruction...nope.
All of which begs the question...why not? I suppose they could argue it was the democrats job to do that, hence my comments, the republican's are better at playing the game. And that's where it breaks down for me. It shouldn't be a game, it should be about leading this country through the myriad of problems we face. And for that, both parties are abject failures.
Many Americans (both democrats and republicans) questioned and opposed acts and policies of the Bush administration. You would know this if you had been paying attention.
Sorry to disappoint.
Your condescension nothwithstanding, I was paying very close attention, along with all the other non-Bush supporters who were against an unnecessary, expensive war initiated with a preemptive strike on a sovereign nation, from the start, who wondered why Bush/Cheney ignored and back-burnered their terrorism expert's (Richard Clarke) briefings and warnings on the imminent threat of bin Laden (preferring to concentrate on Saddam) and was never even questioned about it, who ignored the exact same email issues Hillary is being investigated over, and who also did not know why Cheney was not investigated and/or prosecuted over publicly releasing the name of a covert CIA agent.
I was also paying close attention to the 1983 Beirut Marine barracks attack that killed hundreds of American military personnel due to Reagan's refusal to increase security.
And for the record, the majority of Republicans supported the Iraq War and the majority of Republicans were foolish and gullible enough to believe the lies and disinformation put out by Cheney that Saddam was behind 9/11.
Don't take my word for it--you are welcome to go look up the stats yourself.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Go further back, where was the righteous indignation when Reagan skated with "Well, I don't remember"? As if everything a POTUS does isn't recorded everyday of his term.
I've been back on this site just near on week now and have read countless threads where our friends on the right have questioned how democrats can even consider voting for Hilary Clinton? The constant lament is "she lied." Or she let those 4 guys get killed at Benghazi. Or she's a criminal.
All of which begs the question: Where was all this Righteous Indignation when the same kinds of events happened under Bush II? Really? Well actually it was much worse, but ya know, the argument goes, that was different. Really?
See, in the end history does matter. You all can sweep it under the rug and say it doesn't count, but for many of us on the left, it does. And rather than just saying it, i'll put it in front of you (not that it matters), and let you play your weasel games to help mollify your consciences.
Fox News had you all convinced that Benghazi was going to be Hillary's death knell. Oops, 8 hearings and millions of tax payer dollars netted you nothing but Hillary looking and sounding good on camera. so let's start there:
* Under Bush there were 13 Embassy attacks in one manner or another. 60 people lost their lives in those assaults. I'll spare you the rebuttal, i read a good number of them, here's a few of my favorites: They really didn't happen (OMG). This one's a killer: Of the 60 people killed (guess it did happen eh?), only 10 of them were American's. 9 were sub-contractors for the government and 1, David Foy was a embassy employee who was blown up by a suicide bomber. You'll love this because the argument was his was different because he died instantaneously. The 9 sub-contractors get no mention (job hazards i guess) while the other 50 people killed were locals defending or working at the Embassy. The best argument on the sites was "they weren't American's. Maybe you righties ought buy t-shirts and start a group; Only White American Lives Matter.
Where was the righteous indignation?
* Weapons of Mass Destruction: Here's the whooper of them all which led to how many American service men and women killed? I know the argument, the congress approved it. Sure they did, the sentiment in the country was such that killing anyone we could that was remotely tied to 9/11 was an easy sell. And boy did that work out well for Dick Chaney and the Halliburton crew. They raked in a tidy 40 Billion dollars from that Iraq incursion. But they weren't alone, another 100 billion was spent, and all for what? Weapons that didn't exist. When you all tell me that's different, go tell that to the parents of the young men and women killed there.
Where was the righteous indignation?
* And while i should ignore this one, it's just too serious to ignore. The Carlyle Group is a private Investment Firm that has ties to the Bush family, James Baker and any number of Saudi Royal family members including some with the last name of Bin Laden. I won't bore you with the volumes of information regarding this company but here's one paragraph from an article in the Economist that is interesting: In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when no one was being allowed in or out of the United States, many members of the bin Laden family in America were spirited home to Saudi Arabia. The revival of defense spending that followed greatly increased the value of the Carlyle Group's investments in defense companies. Here's a link to the rest of the article.
Where was the righteous indignation?
*Last but not least is the Bush email questions. I've read the rebuttals that his failures were different, and the laws have changed and all of the other tripe about why his are different, so i went looking and found this paragraph from Wikipedia (save the arguments, i know the whine) that is especially insightful: The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007 during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million emails may have been lost.[2][3]Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove emails, leading to damaging allegations.[4] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been lost.[5]
Where was the righteous indignation
All in all, excuse us lefties who struggle to understand why you are screaming about some high moral ground when in fact you ignored everything that preceded Hillary. Wait it minute, i think i get it, those guys were republicans and well, it just doesn't count. But it does gang, if you truly are convinced integrity matters, it either always does or it just plain doesn't.
Requesting permission to copy and paste this all over the place.
I notice a lot of people here weren't here back in 2008 when people were posting about the Iraq war.
I can remember many rightwingers telling me how we were bringing Democracy to the people of Iraq and how they were going to greet us with flowers and other things.
So, how did that work out? If you WERE here back then, the Republican party thanks you for spreading the BS.
I've been back on this site just near on week now and have read countless threads where our friends on the right have questioned how democrats can even consider voting for Hilary Clinton? The constant lament is "she lied." Or she let those 4 guys get killed at Benghazi. Or she's a criminal.
All of which begs the question: Where was all this Righteous Indignation when the same kinds of events happened under Bush II? Really? Well actually it was much worse, but ya know, the argument goes, that was different. Really?
Or under Reagan.
Remember when 17 Americans were killed when Islamic Jihad blew up the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in April 1983? (yes, Islamic Jihad - Iran's Lebanese proxies - yet the Reagan hagiographers blather on about how Reagan had Tehran quaking in its boots)
And then, later that same year in the same city, the same group blew up the Marine barracks, killing 220 marines, 18 sailors, 3 soldiers, and 2 civilians?
260 dead Americans. Not 4... 260.
Imagine the ****storm today if that happened under the watch of a Democratic President. But under St. Ronald of Simi Valley? Whatever. He gets a free pass. Why? Just 'cause...
Requesting permission to copy and paste this all over the place.
Knock yourself out brother, unless there's rules against it on this site. Don't want to p-off the powers that be (i do that enough without any help from you guys).
Please note: Not commenting on the moderation, just my inability to contain myself some days.
He's "Black" only in the minds of liberals. To others he's just another left wing progressive. Being born of a white mother and African father, raised in a white household by white grandparents and not having a single ancestor who was a slave in the America's, he's hardly "Black" except that's how he chose to define himself since it was beneficial for him to do so in regards to getting into the best schools and into politics.
I've been back on this site just near on week now and have read countless threads where our friends on the right have questioned how democrats can even consider voting for Hilary Clinton? The constant lament is "she lied." Or she let those 4 guys get killed at Benghazi. Or she's a criminal.
All of which begs the question: Where was all this Righteous Indignation when the same kinds of events happened under Bush II? Really? Well actually it was much worse, but ya know, the argument goes, that was different. Really?
See, in the end history does matter. You all can sweep it under the rug and say it doesn't count, but for many of us on the left, it does. And rather than just saying it, i'll put it in front of you (not that it matters), and let you play your weasel games to help mollify your consciences.
Fox News had you all convinced that Benghazi was going to be Hillary's death knell. Oops, 8 hearings and millions of tax payer dollars netted you nothing but Hillary looking and sounding good on camera. so let's start there:
* Under Bush there were 13 Embassy attacks in one manner or another. 60 people lost their lives in those assaults. I'll spare you the rebuttal, i read a good number of them, here's a few of my favorites: They really didn't happen (OMG). This one's a killer: Of the 60 people killed (guess it did happen eh?), only 10 of them were American's. 9 were sub-contractors for the government and 1, David Foy was a embassy employee who was blown up by a suicide bomber. You'll love this because the argument was his was different because he died instantaneously. The 9 sub-contractors get no mention (job hazards i guess) while the other 50 people killed were locals defending or working at the Embassy. The best argument on the sites was "they weren't American's. Maybe you righties ought buy t-shirts and start a group; Only White American Lives Matter.
Where was the righteous indignation?
* Weapons of Mass Destruction: Here's the whooper of them all which led to how many American service men and women killed? I know the argument, the congress approved it. Sure they did, the sentiment in the country was such that killing anyone we could that was remotely tied to 9/11 was an easy sell. And boy did that work out well for Dick Chaney and the Halliburton crew. They raked in a tidy 40 Billion dollars from that Iraq incursion. But they weren't alone, another 100 billion was spent, and all for what? Weapons that didn't exist. When you all tell me that's different, go tell that to the parents of the young men and women killed there.
Where was the righteous indignation?
* And while i should ignore this one, it's just too serious to ignore. The Carlyle Group is a private Investment Firm that has ties to the Bush family, James Baker and any number of Saudi Royal family members including some with the last name of Bin Laden. I won't bore you with the volumes of information regarding this company but here's one paragraph from an article in the Economist that is interesting: In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when no one was being allowed in or out of the United States, many members of the bin Laden family in America were spirited home to Saudi Arabia. The revival of defense spending that followed greatly increased the value of the Carlyle Group's investments in defense companies. Here's a link to the rest of the article.
Where was the righteous indignation?
*Last but not least is the Bush email questions. I've read the rebuttals that his failures were different, and the laws have changed and all of the other tripe about why his are different, so i went looking and found this paragraph from Wikipedia (save the arguments, i know the whine) that is especially insightful: The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007 during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million emails may have been lost.[2][3]Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove emails, leading to damaging allegations.[4] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been lost.[5]
Where was the righteous indignation
All in all, excuse us lefties who struggle to understand why you are screaming about some high moral ground when in fact you ignored everything that preceded Hillary. Wait it minute, i think i get it, those guys were republicans and well, it just doesn't count. But it does gang, if you truly are convinced integrity matters, it either always does or it just plain doesn't.
More US vs. THEM nonsense. Plenty of people who are critical of Hillary aren't Republicans (I'm not), never supported George W. Bush (I didn't), and aren't Fox News people (OTA broadcasts = no cable or sat channels). Criticism of Hillary stands on it's own merit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
