Stu Ghatze
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 531
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Old and wise said:Must be nice to be able to see into the future. Is this a gift from God?:roll:
Probably more like ignorance squared. For anyone to pretend to have any clue as to how a trial will go before hearing the evidence is further proof of one's ignorance.TurtleDude said:probably more likely a sound understanding of criminal law and jurisprudence
26 X World Champs said:Probably more like ignorance squared. For anyone to pretend to have any clue as to how a trial will go before hearing the evidence is further proof of one's ignorance.
I think it's logical and fine to write that you support DeLay, but support and being a blustery blowhard are two different animals.
I also find it remarkeable that any of you believe that Democrats are so omnipotent that we can control the American legal system, whether it's nailing DeLay or Rove or Scooter or whomever.
Maybe some of you are so ignorant and/or so cynical that you have zero faith in our justice system? DeLay was indicted by a grand jury, not by Ronnie Earle. If Rove, Cheney, Libby et al are indicted next week it will not be because of the media or Democrats. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is, IMHO, an imbecile.
The whole basis of this thread is BULLSHIT. I realize who started this thread, so I am not at all surprised by the intelligence quotient revealed by the thread starter.
Why do I get the feeling that had the thread starter been posting to this board in August of 1974 that he would have made the same claims about Nixon! I'm also certain that he would have written something like "take it to the bank, Clinton will be convicted by the Senate."
My bottom line is that making uninformed and ultimately unintelligent threads detracts from what shred of creditability someone of this ilk had left.
Freedom of speech is quite cool! It allows us to see people's best, and in this instance, people's worst sides...
His crystal ball was a fundraising gift from Delay. :dohOld and wise said:Must be nice to be able to see into the future. Is this a gift from God?:roll:
:rofl Now that is hilarious! Good job!scottyz said:His crystal ball was a fundraising gift from Delay. :doh
TurtleDude said:amusing:roll:
knicksin2010 said:I consider myself to be a democrat but even I can see the higher ups in the party played this very badly. It doesn't look like Delay will be found guilty at this point, and they made fools of themselves by assuming he was guilty. :doh
I highly doubt any apology will be made, but if he’s found innocent it will be used against democrats in 06 and 08. I can’t/won't speak for anyone but myself, and I think they handled this very badly.Stinger said:Do you think Pelosi and Reid and Kennedy and Schummer et al will take it all back and applogize? Does the rest of the Democrat party see that these people and the vitriol they and they partners in arms spit out only drive people like me away from event he state Democrats whom I sometimes vote for?
knicksin2010 said:I highly doubt any apology will be made, but if he’s found innocent it will be used against democrats in 06 and 08. I can’t/won't speak for anyone but myself, and I think they handled this very badly.
Are you on the Bush payroll? Come on, at least rephrase it. Whether or not there was a crime committed in the releasing the cia agent's name remains to be seen. But if it wasn't a crime why cover it up? Why lie under oath? If someone did lie under oath and/or commit a crime in a cover up, then shouldn’t they be punished just as you or I would?Stinger said:i think once again the Democrat's can't see thier own noses to spite thier faces as the saying goes. This is one more step in the attempt to criminalize politics. This is dangerous. Delay is not a criminal anymore than 90% of politicians who do the same thing he did. Nor is Rove or Libby or anyone, if anyone indeed did, speak Plame's name to a reporter. But the Democrats can't win in then venue of ideas so this is all they have left.
galenrox said:then why do you care enough to post this?
knicksin2010 said:Are you on the Bush payroll?
Come on, at least rephrase it.
Whether or not there was a crime committed in the releasing the cia agent's name remains to be seen.
But if it wasn't a crime why cover it up?
Why lie under oath?
If someone did lie under oath and/or commit a crime in a cover up, then shouldn’t they be punished just as you or I would?
galenrox said:Indeed, we on the left are the only ones that like bullcrap
That's why we're the ones that bought the story about WMDs
wait....
Hoot said:What does any of this have to do with Tom Delay?
But while you mention it, why would Saddam attempt to purchase yellow cake from Niger when he already had an abundance of the stuff? This whole Niger episode has been proven over and over again to be a clumsy forgery, completely without merit.
Stinger said:He had approx. 500 tons or which 1.8 tons was paritially enriched. This could have produced one maybe two bombs of consequence. So the answer is, he wanted more and bigger bombs to go on the missles he was researching and testing.
Hoot said:And what, pray tell, was the date of Saddam having apprx 500 tons?
Long since destroyed before March of 2003, the date that Bush took us into this mess?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?