www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Sen. Clinton/Other candidates talk about their faith

Dear Ryan,

I have to respond to this part, if nothing else. The Democrats were depending on information provided by President Bush, yet President Bush was depending on information provided by George Tenet...who was the only person that was in the Presidents office every morning, (I have a long memory). So I repeat, who was to blame for the wrong information that was being fed to the President? The CIA director George Tenet, or those that were giving George Tenet faulty information because of his tight budget...caused of course by the Democrats.

Let's start placing the blame where it belongs...the Democratic Congress and Pres. Clinton.

God Bless,

Zenovia

George Tenet says that certain members of the Administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz) wouldn't listen to him and forced him to present pointed documents; he never once blamed a tight budget for any problems.

Clinton a "hardcore socialist".. hardly. The US has no hardcore socialist party and one could hardly ever win a national (even a state)Presidential ticket on a socialist (let alone 'hardcore socialist') platform. The first socialist in the US Congress was Victor Berger and he was hardly "hardcore", in fact the "more democracy oriented" tried underhanded techniques and false charges to prevent him from taking office.

Ask the real "hardcore socialists" in Europe, Asia, and Canada if Clinton is "hardcore" or even a "socialist" at all.

Zenovia:

It boggles my mind that you can't see that President Bush, or at least his administration, for which he is responsible, is dishonest. I am not guilty of slandering President Bush, and if I have claimed or implied that you have slandered me for my accusation that President Bush is a liar, then I retract that accusation, because I know that you are sincere in your belief that President Bush is not a liar. I am sincere in my belief that he is. As to your claim that I will not prove it, I don't see the point in trying when it comes to you. You have shown over and over again that you blame this country's every woe on the Democrats and that you won't entertain criticism of President Bush, so what's the point? In my opinion, all the evidence that anyone needs to conclude that President Bush is plain as day. You have taken all that same evidence and interpreted it differently, which is surely your right. I see no point in rehearsing that again, since I know in advance you will reject my arguments, because I have already made them, and you have already rejected them. So, I reject your claim that I won't offer proof for my claim that President Bush is a liar. I have offered it already, and you have rejected my "proof" because you took that same evidence and drew different conclusions, which, as I said before, is your right. However, I ask that you not accuse me of slander, because, in my opinion, the proof that President Bush is liar is there-to me, it is plain as day. I am sincere in my belief that he is a liar. In turn, I will not accuse you of slandering me, provided that you are willing to accept that the judgments I have offered about President Bush are sincere (regardless of whether you agree with them), and stop accusing me of slander.

Ryan

One of the Administrators suggested that I close this thread, as it has gone a bit too far.

I respectfully agree, and ask that all the posters calm down a little until the next political thread gets going!

Alice, Moderator