I read your posts and you simply did not. All he asked for was one specific lie (quote) where you could show proof. It sounds pretty simple to me is you know so many. Select only one lie (quote). The most clearly dishonest statement that Mr. Bush has made and then show the source. Next post the reason it is a lie, and source.

Welcome to the debate, or I guess the reason there is no true debate.

One side want to address issues, the other scorns such things as wimpy intellectual exercises.

Critical thought is the enemy, the gut is where decisions should be made. Once you commit to the gut, facts become mere obstacles made up or dismissed to suit your needs. The gut, that's where it's at.

Really? East to prove? And how much money did we spend trying to bring down Clinton on really serious s__t like Whitewater (that he was more than likely guilty of) and the best that the right could do was get him censured, not impeached, censured, for "fibbing" (I'm sure he's as scared of Hillary as the rest of us, can you blame him?) about getting a bj from an intern.

Good night, goin to bed but I'll leave you with this.

Oh, Go Hillary in 08.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1132286477.jpg

And that folks is why you shouldn't post while drunk. We can all learn a lesson from the monkey. Thank you monkey.

Pssst, monkey....He was impeached. Edit man, edit!!!!!!!!!!

Please list these politicians, their position in government and their political life during and after the war. TIA for proving my point.

Don't cum too fast Tim, the Cap'n has some work to do.

And the issues that they want to discuss are "quotes" that they make up themselves.

I guess that is the only way they could even hope to win a debate.

The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed,for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies....Geublers,Minister for Adolf Hitler.

And acquitted.

Only because the DNC circled the wagons and violated their "oath of impartial justice."...Their (DNC Senators) criminal complicity is clearly demonstrated by the subsequent penalties and disbar of Clinton for "obstructing the judicial process."

When Nixon did far less his party told him to step down...When Clinton did far more his party launched a full-court obstruction of justice and assault on the Constitution.

Yes, he was impeached. He was able to plea bargain his way out of jail. He was banned from practicing law, assessed a $90,000 fine for contempt of court and settled his sexual harassment lawsuit out of court for $850,000. All in all, a pretty sleazy performance. IMHO, the only thing that saved him were the confidential FBI records that he had on the folks that he needed to acquit him.

half truths again. You guys want to have strict definition of lie, then abide by it.

nigh impossible for mul

If you are referring to my post, please point it out.

Fint,
From what I could find, your last was mostly factual. He has a 5 year suspension on practicing law and cannot ever practice at Supreme Court.

The use of the term "lie" has strict standards. Most people don't lie. They evade, mislead, misstate and deflect. Just think back on your own childhood and what your children tell you. Are you always forthright with the whole truth?

Nixon's crew lied, were criminally convicted and served time
Reagen misstated and deflected.
Bush sr comment of "read my lips, no new taxes" might be construed as a broken promise. But he basically called it as he saw it.

Clinton evaded and misled. ( and, no, I don't like his personal morals, but we answer to God on that)

Bush makes statements that he has to revise. I think he is a basically honest guy who gets trapped assuming some of his people are as honest. I dislike his policies. And I think the intelligence that gets to him is filtered and tuned and that he did have an agenda wrt Iraq when he took office.

The only one I think came close to lying on TV so far is Rumsfeld when he said he knew where the WMD were. The use of the term "knew" implies absolute certainty with confirmation. He quickly caught himself and continued on to say the WMD were in Tikrit and all the areas around there. He watered down the certainty of his knowledge. He restated himself quickly, IMO, because he knew he didn't really "know" where they were.

So, the term "lie" has been grossly enlarged to mean broken promises, restatements, etc

Now mul uses the term in the broader sense in most of his posts as do many presidential detractors on both sides.

One more time.

Still not one verifiable Bush lie? Anyone?

Um, well ... let's see. You will not concede that there are no WMDs in Iraq, nor will you concede that Saddam and Al Queda had no operational ties, yet you want to debate someone on pre-war intelligence lies?

Have you ever heard the term "fool's errand?"

I do not believe I have heard that term but after hearing no evidence yet in this post that Bush ACTUALLY LIED about Iraq prewar intell, I think I canspot a fool!:)

No kidding! About half the folks who post here claim that turbo tie rods make 100% difference in a 911's handling. The other half claim no difference. Does that make half of the Pelicans liars?

Still no actual quotes that you can prove are lies? Looks like we know who the liars really are.

Already proven: The biggest group of proven liars so far has been Nixon and his crew.