Democrats are Hypocrites..........proof

#8
#8
lol at threads like this and the circle jerk of right wingers on here thinking they have found some blaring example of hypocrisy the dems can't possibly defend.

The General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly. "The speech itself and the use of the department's funds to support it, including the cost of the production contract, appear to be legal," the GAO wrote in a letter to Chairman Ford. "The speech also does not appear to have violated the restrictions on the use of appropriations for publicity and propaganda."
Click to expand...

Sounds like this set a precedence. Why have hearings again? The repubs are free to call for them if they want.
 
Last edited:
#10
#10
rjd970 said:
lol at threads like this and the circle jerk of right wingers on here thinking they have found some blaring example of hypocrisy the dems can't possibly defend.



Sounds like this set a precedence. Why have hearings again? The repubs are free to call for them if they want.
Click to expand...

Based on this logic we would only need one level in the court system... no need for an appeals process, right? I can't believe this wasn't thought of sooner by our forefathers... "once a verdict has been issued it shall stand as precedence, and there shall be no need for any further deliberation".

Now that I think about it, maybe we should also eliminate instant replay in football since the refs have already set a precedence by their initial ruling! :unsure:
 
#12
#12
rjd970 said:
lol at threads like this and the circle jerk of right wingers on here thinking they have found some blaring example of hypocrisy the dems can't possibly defend.



Sounds like this set a precedence. Why have hearings again? The repubs are free to call for them if they want.
Click to expand...

So, what your saying is, since the Dems could not prosecute Bush they will not go after BHO for the same thing?
 
Last edited:
#13
#13
there's a girl on fb who is an obama supporter who always makes some stupid fb status comment after every speech. this time she added that she also is a huge fan of obertool
 
#14
#14
I'm sorry, I didn't see this thread until just now. This was actually brought up soemwhere else and I did respond there.

My repsonse would be that I'd like to see what was in that Bush speech and see how it compares to Obama's, but assuming it was the same stay in school and study hard kind of thing, then it, too, was a massive overreaction and much ado about nothing.

Neither one would justify the other.
 
#15
#15
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Based on this logic we would only need one level in the court system... no need for an appeals process, right? I can't believe this wasn't thought of sooner by our forefathers... "once a verdict has been issued it shall stand as precedence, and there shall be no need for any further deliberation".

Now that I think about it, maybe we should also eliminate instant replay in football since the refs have already set a precedence by their initial ruling! :unsure:
Click to expand...

Your comment would be anything other than worthless if we were actually talking about court hearings.
 
#17
#17
T-TownVol said:
So, what your saying is, since the Dems could not prosecute Bush they will not go after BHO for the same thing?
Click to expand...

In a sense, yes. The repubs are free to if they wish. But like LG said, it is more a matter of the substance of the speech. If Obama's speech isn't substanitively different, why go through the charade again? If the GAO found nothing wrong before why would they now?

As has come to be expected from the whining right lately, the usual crowd in this thread is stretching things. And then to make them feel better about themselves they call out the left wingers in here for not coming in to defend what most likely is going to be a waste of time and effort on their part.
 
#18
#18
rjd970 said:
In a sense, yes. The repubs are free to if they wish. But like LG said, it is more a matter of the substance of the speech. If Obama's speech isn't substanitively different, why go through the charade again? If the GAO found nothing wrong before why would they now?

As has come to be expected from the whining right lately, the usual crowd in this thread is stretching things. And then to make them feel better about themselves they call out the left wingers in here for not coming in to defend what most likely is going to be a waste of time and effort on their part.
Click to expand...
This whole thing exists because Obama was asking kids to "help" him personally. Once he ended that, this should have been over.
 
#20
#20
rjd970 said:
Your comment would be anything other than worthless if we were actually talking about court hearings.
Click to expand...

I believe we were talking about precedents, at least that's what I was referring to. And it would seem from your comment that you believe precedents applies differently to congressional hearings than courtroom hearings.

rjd970 said:
As has come to be expected from the whining right lately, the usual crowd in this thread is stretching things. And then to make them feel better about themselves they call out the left wingers in here for not coming in to defend what most likely is going to be a waste of time and effort on their part.
Click to expand...
Pot... meet kettle.

Regardless, I completely agree with BPV. Initially there was a substantive difference in the speeches, but once that was no longer the case the issue should have been dropped.
 
#21
#21
but cnn just cried about some school district in Texas giving kids the opportunity to go on a field trip to hear Bush speak.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top