quote:

Originally posted by imokruok The man is a convicted felon and served time in prison for misleading investigators.

That’s quite a fitting line considering the theme of Occrider’s thread.

I've noticed that this is the standard response to criticism given by most Republicans.

When in doubt, use character assassinations, personal attacks, or (my favorite) simply fabricate an intern scandal!

The very fact that Dean served in the Nixon White House (with Cheney and Rumsfeld), and experienced that degree of corruption gives him a significant degree of credibility.

Oliver North is also a convicted felon, but that obviously hasn't stopped him from moving on to a successful career as a Fox News "analyst."




http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

Last edited by DaveSZ on Apr-06-2004 at 18:16

Speak of the devil, Dean's on Air America right now on the O'Franken Factor:

www.ofrankenfactor.com

Edited for correct link.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Oh well, I'll be waiting for the content assassination to corroborate the character assassinations before I become disinclined to believe Dean's analysis.

As for the need for secrecy to protect national security interests, in what way was the nation's national security interests protected by Bush's disguised motivation's for going to war with Iraq? What, congress can't handle all the facts? The public can't handle all the facts?

___________________
Retro ...

Last edited by occrider on Apr-06-2004 at 20:00

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Oh well, I'll be waiting for the content assassination to corroborate the character assassinations before I become disinclined to believe Dean's analysis. As for the need for secrecy to protect national security interests, in what way was the nation's national security interests protected by Bush's disguised motivation's for going to war with Iraq? What, congress can't handle all the facts? The public can't handle all the facts?

the question, congress and the public can't handle all the facts, is a fairly broad statement.
Of course select members of congress are privy to classified ways and means for national security intel gathering. The public, on the other hand, it should be obvious.

I'm at work right now. I have to go.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo the question, congress and the public can't handle all the facts, is a fairly broad statement. Of course select members of congress are privy to classified ways and means for national security intel gathering. The public, on the other hand, it should be obvious. I'm at work right now. I have to go.

I'm not talking about intelligence data. I'm talking about the rationale and motivations behind policy decisions. It's fairly clear that the Bush administration simply chose WMDs as the reason for invasion simply because it was the "easiest" thing to use. But that's not what motivated their Iraq policy. That much should be clear to everyone. So instead of the whole wmd circus games they fed to the public and congress, why not be truthful about their case for war? There's a reason why congress is the sole branch of power that has the authority to declare war. Therefore they should be privy to ALL the facts and motives when making a decision to proceed. The actions of the Bush administration clearly tip-toes around the concept of democracy and the separation of powers since their root motivation in the middle east was not removal of wmds as they presented, but regime change regardless of the excuse needed to accomplish that.

I suppose it is, in part, congresses' fault since the congressional approval for war, while good intentioned perhaps, contained holes that Bush was able to utilize and trample over what good intentions it may have had.

___________________
Retro ...

Last edited by occrider on Apr-06-2004 at 21:28

King George believes "his" democracy is too precious to leave it in the hands of the people. Anyone can see that releasing internal documents related to the work of Cheney's energy task force would jeopardize our national security.

___________________
GIGANTIC CUNT

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 So he was a Republican lawyer who represented Nixon during Watergate. He, along with Nixon and many others in his Republican Administration, lied, in attempts to protect that lying Republican Administration. So what better of a source could you ask for to give his opinion on a current lying Administration than a Republican lawyer who knows all about previously lying Republican Administrations?

It's not "character assassination" to question someone's motivations. Yes, he was a member of the Nixon administration, but he didn't necessarily leave on amicable terms. Since the 1970's, Dean has had public disputes with several former members of that administration, including books and articles blasting his former colleagues.

So, it's perfectly legitimate to ask why he would release a book in an election year that concerns several of his former colleagues. One can argue that it's so he can prevent some of the things from happening that happened while he was in the White House. One can also argue that this is the easiest way for him to get back at his former colleagues.

___________________
FLUSHED THE JOHNS!

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok The man is a convicted felon and served time in prison for misleading investigators.

If only his daddy was as powerful as Dubya's, he could have gotten away clean.



The Newest Figure for Character Assassination: John Dean

Fitting title, occrider!

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow King George believes "his" democracy is too precious to leave it in the hands of the people.

You forgot to mention that Bush has sealed both his father's and Reagan's presidential files as well. I wonder what they're hiding now?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X You forgot to mention that Bush has sealed both his father's and Reagan's presidential files as well. I wonder what they're hiding now?

Ahem...and Clinton's.

___________________
FLUSHED THE JOHNS!

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok Ahem...and Clinton's.

I'm surprised the GOP didn't dredge Clinton's files for some dirt in order to make Shrub look a little bit better before election. Oops, nevermind.

http://prorev.com/wwduncan.htm

http://mena.pamrotella.com/