Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (491860)	11/13/2003 2:38:14 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Re: "My God, I said that at least two posts ago. There would be no way to prove it. Where were you?" I've been right here...smiling. If you've in fact said you can't prove Bush lied as you claim above, why do you continue to insist he did rather than be honest and carefully say you THINK he did? Re: "Bushed lied! Deal with it" There you go again! LOL. By the by, you sell short the available methods of proving lies, not that it matters since none of them have come to pass here. Re: "Of course, I don't have proof that he was intentionally lying." So, you think if it is not intentional it can still be a lie, obviously. Look it up, you'll think twice. It's as I've been saying, you truly haven't yet understood the definition of "lie." Re: "We know he distorted the truth but I can't prove that he lied intentionally without a some sort of judicial inquiry where records are seized, witnesses interrogated etc. If that's what you need to make a decision, like I said earlier, it may be too late by the time you get around to figuring things out." That's very similar to the way so darn pesky many of us feel about the question of going into Iraq, if YOU get my drift. But frankly there is much more obvious evidence concerning the need to straighten things out in Iraq for our own safety, than there is that Bush hasn't believed as he's stated things. Re: "Impeachment requires proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. I have said repeatedly that it would be difficult to come up with that quality of proof. However, for your own personal decision making process, that quality of proof normally would not be required." So now you believe the war is an insidious crime on Bush's part, but just don't think impeachment is appropriate because you haven't enough evidence that said insidious crime has actually been committed. Very noble of you. You win one, IMO. Re: "You think by responding the way you are that you are being clever and managing to entrap me!" You've entrapped yourself, IMO. Dan B.