Home › Forums › Open Discussion › For All the Liberals Who Believe Everything They Hear
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 9, 2008 at 4:53 am #586935
AnonymousInactivehttp://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_president_bush_call_the_constitution_a.html
I actually think this could be an informative thread, on both sides, in the times to come (although, I’m sure you would all like to title the thread something else, but I just wanted this to get attention)
May 9, 2008 at 6:30 am #624156
AnonymousInactiveI never heard this story to begin with. Reading the the quote, it doesn’t even sound like him or his speech writers for that matter. The words, that is, not the sentiment. I think it’s always a good idea to be careful of what we throw around as facts. Might come back and bite you in the … Now, I do think it’s a fact he doesn’t care about the constitution:)
May 9, 2008 at 4:10 pm #624157
JenVMemberI am surprised that doofus can even pronounce “constitution”
May 9, 2008 at 4:29 pm #624158
JoBParticipantNewResident…
good sourcing..
and another case illustrating the difference between unproven and disproven.
There is no corroboration for President Bush using those words other than unnamed sources.. so it is unproven.
But the original post was by a respected journalist who posted in a national venue…
and the comments and his sources have never been challenged legally.. which is why you can still link to them.
That leads to several questions…
if President Bush was present, the meeting was likely recorded.. it seems vanity rules over prudence even now:)
If there was no recording, there certainly were witnesses…
So, why hasn’t this been challenged?
Would a challenge have revealed more than just an unwise comment?
who knows?
maybe it’s a matter of national security.. everything else seems to be:)
but the journalist is right to keep the column in the public domain until is is actually proven to be based on false evidence…
is it unproven… but not disproved.
May 9, 2008 at 4:34 pm #624159
JoBParticipantNewResident…
that wasn’t a fancy way of saying you are wrong…
it’s just a way of saying that we don’t know what is true in this case.
if we were in a courtroom.. i am afraid the corroborating evidence of President Bush’s disregard for the constitution… along with his pattern of disregard for law (all those signing statements saying basically he chooses to disregard the law congress just passed).. would lend credibility to the charge…
but probably wouldn’t be enough to convict him of that one statement.
May 9, 2008 at 7:58 pm #624160
AnonymousInactiveSo, as Democrats, you say that you all want your Constitution back? What can you say about this and what are your thoughts?
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gunning_for_obama.html
May 9, 2008 at 8:04 pm #624161
AnonymousInactiveJoB – Regarding your courtroom analogy, it would be hearsay and not even be admissible in a courtroom. Funny that the one who claims the President made that statement has a history of telling falsehoods. This is who the Democrats get their information and facts from? I can only assume that when JenV used the term “doofus”, she was referring to the fabricating journalist.
May 9, 2008 at 8:38 pm #624162
AnonymousInactiveI’m having trouble with my posts recently, so I’m just adding this to test something.
I really would like, though, for a Democrat to explain to me why they talk about wanting their constitution back, and yet don’t believe in the 2nd amendment. Please?
May 9, 2008 at 11:10 pm #624163
JenVMemberI am a Dem, and I firmly believe in the 2nd amendment. I also firmly believe that there should be mental health screenings for gun ownership. Yes, you should have the right to bear arms- but please, for the love of all things holy, no more crazy mo-fos with guns shooting up schools! PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY goes along with having rights.
yes, I am also a gun owner.
by the way, every time I read the 2nd, I always think of big, fuzzy bear arms. shouldn’t everyone have the right to those?
May 9, 2008 at 11:17 pm #624164
JoBParticipantNew Resident,
“Funny that the one who claims the President made that statement has a history of telling falsehoods.”
actually, we don’t know who made the statements so we don’t know whether they have any history of telling falsehoods..
tho to be honest.. my inclination would be that anyone privy to that kind of conversation with President Bush probably does have a history of telling falsehoods:)
However, you were probably referring to the journalist, who was duped before by sources…
even after acquiring caution from what must have been expensive lessons for him… when challenged on this post, he removed it, checked his sources.. and reposted it.
That would imply some confidence in the sources.
May 9, 2008 at 11:48 pm #624165
AnonymousInactiveWhy does the NRA spread the false myth that democrats want to take away your guns? There’s no great conspiracy to incrementally get rid of them. Gun control is not a euphemism for that. We just want to work out a way to get them out of the hands of criminals and those who are mentally unstable.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.