tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post113223150813722253..comments2023-11-03T04:39:50.760-05:00Comments on Galley Slaves: Differing Evidentiary StandardsJonathan V. Lasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17426165197358366129noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132260987727909022005-11-17T15:56:00.000-05:002005-11-17T15:56:00.000-05:00KwAwk - Just give us one example of Clinton taking...KwAwk - <BR/>Just give us one example of Clinton taking the terrorist threat seriously during the last months of his presidency? Oh, yeah. That's right. The massive retaliation that he called up in response to the Cole bombing.<BR/>You are being dishonest when you accuse "righties" of believing that the president can do no wrong. Many have criticized and continue to do so (some with better motivations than others). The reality is that Bush is the one that actually has to do the tough things and make the tough decisions and not just talk about them. I wish he could articulate it better, but I understand what the goal is.<BR/>What is most offensive to me (and I bet I speak for a lot of people) are those who take potshots at the president and do not offer any serious alternatives. The fact is we are there in Iraq and it does no good to bitch about the past. Let's have some serious thoughts and analysis from those on both sides as to what should be done and not this let's admit the mistakes crap. There is a time for that but that should not be the only focus like you want it to be.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132255285460339732005-11-17T14:21:00.000-05:002005-11-17T14:21:00.000-05:00Why do people keep talking about the intelligence ...Why do people keep talking about the intelligence the president "provided" to congress? Congress has it's own intelligence commttee. They can subpoena anyone they want to come and brief them. They're privy to everything the White House is. IT'S THE LAW THAT THEY ARE AND THEIR JOB TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132243906192346142005-11-17T11:11:00.000-05:002005-11-17T11:11:00.000-05:00This debate isn't going anywhere until it is ackno...This debate isn't going anywhere until it is acknowledged by those that accuse the President of cherry-picking which intelligence to share with Congress that Congress got exactly the same intelligence as the President got.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132241611158647322005-11-17T10:33:00.000-05:002005-11-17T10:33:00.000-05:00This debate isn't going anywhere until it is ackno...This debate isn't going anywhere until it is acknowledged that the President cherry-picked which intelligence to share with Congress.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132238524886125072005-11-17T09:42:00.000-05:002005-11-17T09:42:00.000-05:009.16 Anon, stuff a sock in it already. Engel isn'...9.16 Anon, stuff a sock in it already. Engel isn't blurring the distinction at all; he's pointing out that Bush was roundly castigated for not responding to a thinly intel'd threat on the one hand, while at the same time getting grief for formulating a response to a massively (albeit incorrectly) intel'd threat on the other. <BR/><BR/>If you want to harp on something, why not point out that "alleged failure to prevent 9/11" is a curious turn of phrase, since Bush *undeniably* failed to prevent 9/11, even if his culpability for that failure is open to debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7871003.post-1132237003754519742005-11-17T09:16:00.000-05:002005-11-17T09:16:00.000-05:00Give me a break:"Much of the country is calling fo...Give me a break:<BR/><BR/>"Much of the country is calling for your head regarding your alleged failure to prevent 9/11..."<BR/><BR/>And when are you yahoos going to stop blurring the distinction between 9/11 and Iraq?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com