Decker is a Hypocrite !

[Eldon]

Decker wrote the following :

  'I don't support the troops either.  I don't support their mission so how on earth could I support them.  That doesn't mean I wish them harm. '


Yet Decker says that John Edwards is the person he is supporting, and John Edwards vote was part of what authorized sending our troops to Iraq.

So lets see,  You support John Edwards, his vote helped send our troops to Iraq, and now that they are in Iraq, you don't support them. 

You are a hypocrite.

[Decker]

How do you know that I support John Edwards? 

I never posted my choice of candidate on the public forums. 

I only told Ozark that I supported Edwards in a private message.

Eldon, do you know Ozark?

On to the matter at hand.  Edwards did give the president authority to use force against Iraq if necessary.  (We can go into the cooked evidence of Iraq's threat if you like)

Since any use of force wasn't necessary against Iraq, it stands to reason that Bush misused the authority granted to him by the Congress.

I mean you just can't declare another country a threat and attack it without justification, can you?

Edwards acknowledged that giving this criminal president any authority was a mistake.

So much for your charge.

[Eldon]

Fact :  John Edwards vote helped send the troops to Iraq

Fact :  Now that the troops are their, they just can turn in their hat, and walk home.

Fact :  You support John Edwards

Fact : You don't support the troops,, who in part, are over their because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker is a Hypocrite !

[Decker]

Fact :  John Edwards vote helped send the troops to Iraq

Fact :  Now that the troops are their, they just can turn in their hat, and walk home.

Fact :  You support John Edwards

Fact : You don't support the troops,, who in part, are over their because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker is a Hypocrite !

How did you know that I supported Edwards?

"Fact :  John Edwards vote helped send the troops to Iraq"

Wrong-O Mary Lou.  Edwards cannot as a matter of law authorize Bush to do something illegal. 

Congress gives the Commander and Chief of the Military the authority to use force and Bush breaks the law to use that force.

You have lost Eldon.  Your argument does not hold up.

[kh300]

"i didnt vote for the war, i just gave the president the authority" is such a bullshit answer.

did you listen to the hearings? president Bush made the case very clear that they were going to war. he didnt tell the senate, MAYBEE we'll go. he said we WILL go. Edwards and every other senator knew exactly that they were voting to go to war.

the president wasnt asking for permission. but like good politicians they spin the words to make it look that way.

[Decker]

"i didnt vote for the war, i just gave the president the authority" is such a bullshit answer.

did you listen to the hearings? president Bush made the case very clear that they were going to war. he didnt tell the senate, MAYBEE we'll go. he said we WILL go. Edwards and every other senator knew exactly that they were voting to go to war.

the president wasnt asking for permission. but like good politicians they spin the words to make it look that way.

Only the president, as commander and chief of the armed forces, can order an attack.

He made the case (total BS) that Iraq was a threat and that use of force may be necessary.

He was given the authority to use force if necessary in a legal manner.

The only way Bush is exculpated from breaking the law is if the UN Charter does not exist and the Nuremberg holdings never happened.

Cmdr. and Chief Bush misused his authority to use force in ordering the attack.

Why is that so hard to understand and why do Bush supporters look to spread the blame for that crime?

[kh300]

Only the president, as commander and chief of the armed forces, can order an attack.

He made the case (total BS) that Iraq was a threat and that use of force may be necessary.

He was given the authority to use force if necessary in a legal manner.

The only way Bush is exculpated from breaking the law is if the UN Charter does not exist and the Nuremberg holdings never happened.

Cmdr. and Chief Bush misused his authority to use force in ordering the attack.

Why is that so hard to understand and why do Bush supporters look to spread the blame for that crime?

the president didnt say the force may be necessary. he said it WAS necessary.

he made it clear there wasnt a possibility of war, that a war was in fact going to happen.

edwards didnt even read the intel report. he went on the advice from his advisors and from clinton and his group. so saying bush convinced him is wrong. he said he didnt even listen to bush, only his people.

[Hugo Chavez]

Eldon, have you ever found a candidate you agree with 100%  I never have.  What is one to do if the best matching candidate meets 8 of 10 requirements you have and the next in line is 6 of 10 requirements?  Do you just not vote?  With what you're saying, if you don't agree with an item on that candidate's resume, you're a hypocrite voting for him.  I have a feeling that's going to make for a lot of hypocrites out there.

[240 is Back]

"i didnt vote for the war, i just gave the president the authority" is such a bullshit answer.

did you listen to the hearings? president Bush made the case very clear that they were going to war. he didnt tell the senate, MAYBEE we'll go. he said we WILL go. Edwards and every other senator knew exactly that they were voting to go to war.

the president wasnt asking for permission. but like good politicians they spin the words to make it look that way.

He WAS asking for permission - but - since 83% of Americans at the time beleived Bush was going to use this power for war... and congress is supposed to be smarter than the average joe schmoe... well, congress knew.

so kh300, you're right in this aspect.

But eldon's argument about decker is very poorly constructed.  Edwards is a snake lawyer.  Is he better than a man (rudy) who bragged to CNN he knew the WTC towers were falling when no one else knew, then later denied ever saying it on camera?

[kh300]

He WAS asking for permission - but - since 83% of Americans at the time beleived Bush was going to use this power for war... and congress is supposed to be smarter than the average joe schmoe... well, congress knew.

so kh300, you're right in this aspect.

But eldon's argument about decker is very poorly constructed.  Edwards is a snake lawyer.  Is he better than a man (rudy) who bragged to CNN he knew the WTC towers were falling when no one else knew, then later denied ever saying it on camera?

ok, but bush was saying -you are voting for an invasion.

first of all rudy didnt say that. second of all i could care less about him. he takes credit for cleaning up ny? what the fuck did he do. he didnt get shot at, he didnt get into gang fights, he didnt go undercover, he didnt go after the Mafia.. he gives the pd no credit, we did all the work then hands out a pay cut. Bernard Kerik and Ray Kelly should be the only ones taking credit for anything. but that doesnt stop rudy from running as the savior of ny, and 911.

[240 is Back]

kh300-

Bush never said 'youre voting to invade' - but everyone knew it.  The dems are being deceptive when they say they thought he wouldn't use it.  80+% of America, and all of Congress, and certainly all the military moving into position, knew war was inevitable.  Dems suck for that.

You're absolutely wrong on the Rudy 911 thing - he was interviewed on CNN and told the reporter that he was in the lobby of the south tower, and that a voice came over his walkie and told him the tower was coming down, get out.  He did.  10 min later it fell.  Officially, that call was never made, according to 911 commission.  scorew of firefighters rushed IN, during those last 10 minutes.  So please, google it.  You can watch the clip of Rudy, in his own words, telling CNN. Then you can watch the clip from 2007 where he is confronted by 911 truthers and denies what he said, even as they hold up laptops playing his words on youtube, from CNN.

RUdy did a great job as mayor, I agree completely.  But you're not talking facts - if you want to challenge me, make it worth my time.  Promise you'll post 500 porn pics on the politics board, and i"Ll look up the rudy clip myself for you

[kh300]

are you talking about tower #2.. because theres a big difference between tower and tower's..

if you are talking about #2 ya, they knew it was comming down. i remember the call after the first went down. "everyone evacuate the south tower"

im at an airport. no porn

[240 is Back]

are you talking about tower #2.. because theres a big difference between tower and tower's..

if you are talking about #2 ya, they knew it was comming down. i remember the call after the first went down. "everyone evacuate the south tower"

im at an airport. no porn

they dont allow porn in airports?  That is sad

Yeah, one of the 911 truthers' big pieces is the fact that Rudy somehow knew the south tower was coming down when no one else did.  He said his walkie talkie told him.  For 5 years, he's been peppered with "How did you know when no one else knew", and no doubt he slipped by telling CNN he was warned.

Denying he ever said it... why would he do that?  There is video evidence of him on CNN that morning.  Why deny it in 2006? 

[kh300]

they dont allow porn in airports?  That is sad

Yeah, one of the 911 truthers' big pieces is the fact that Rudy somehow knew the south tower was coming down when no one else did.  He said his walkie talkie told him.  For 5 years, he's been peppered with "How did you know when no one else knew", and no doubt he slipped by telling CNN he was warned.

Denying he ever said it... why would he do that?  There is video evidence of him on CNN that morning.  Why deny it in 2006? 

you can have porn, but theres people around

how many people died in the south tower? not many. maybee you didnt see what i wrote so ill say it again. we all got the call over the radio. the first tower went down, they assumed the same thing was going to happen to the 2nd. it was evacuated, so i dont know what the secret is

[Decker]

the president didnt say the force may be necessary. he said it WAS necessary.

he made it clear there wasnt a possibility of war, that a war was in fact going to happen.

edwards didnt even read the intel report. he went on the advice from his advisors and from clinton and his group. so saying bush convinced him is wrong. he said he didnt even listen to bush, only his people.

It is not relevant how or what Bush said to Congress about the use of force.  It is the president’s responsibility and sworn duty to discharge his duties legally.  That, he did not do. 

Anyways, here is Bush’s resolution language to Congress re his request to use force for the armed meteor that was Iraq:

The resolution reads, in part: "The President is authorized to use all means that he determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council resolutions referenced above, defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region." http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2002/September/20020919182724mkellerh@pd.state.gov0.751034.html

Bush ran to the UN to ask permission to enforce the disarmament resolution.  When that fell through b/c Iraq had no WMDs since the WMD inspectors were finding nothing, Bush resorted to “regime change” for Iraq.

Regime Change may have been US policy and that’s fine, but the US cannot attack another country to change the regime.  That’s a war crime.  Iraq didn’t attack us, an ally or our interests, yet Bush attacked anyways.

These calls were made by Bush…not Congress and not Edwards.

[Eldon]

Fact :  John Edwards vote helped send the troops to Iraq

Fact :  Now that the troops are their, they just can turn in their hat, and walk home.

Fact :  You support John Edwards

Fact : You don't support the troops,, who in part, are over their because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker is a Hypocrite

Which  of the fabove facts are untrue ?

John Edwards  voted to send the troops into Iraq, anyone on here that says different is full of shit.

whether John Edwards, Decker, or Santa Claus think's they should be their is not the question, the fact is they are their, an thanks in part to John Edwards vote, this is a fact.

You don't like the war, fine, great,  but Decker is a hypocrite, plain and simple, as you cant say you support the candidate that  voted to send the troops to Iraq but now that they are their, that you don't support them.

If Decker wants to support Edwards,and not be a hypocrite, then he should say : " I am against the war, I think Bush is a liar, and in doing so,  my man John Edwards voted "yes "on sending the troops to Iraq,  and I would like the troops out of Iraq asap, but until then I support the troops, and will continue to, as the soldiers over their, had no say in this,  and in part are over their because for John Edwards vote.


Decker is a Hypocrite.

[kh300]

It is not relevant how or what Bush said to Congress about the use of force.  It is the president’s responsibility and sworn duty to discharge his duties legally.  That, he did not do. 

Anyways, here is Bush’s resolution language to Congress re his request to use force for the armed meteor that was Iraq:

The resolution reads, in part: "The President is authorized to use all means that he determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council resolutions referenced above, defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region." http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2002/September/20020919182724mkellerh@pd.state.gov0.751034.html

Bush ran to the UN to ask permission to enforce the disarmament resolution.  When that fell through b/c Iraq had no WMDs since the WMD inspectors were finding nothing, Bush resorted to “regime change” for Iraq.

Regime Change may have been US policy and that’s fine, but the US cannot attack another country to change the regime.  That’s a war crime.  Iraq didn’t attack us, an ally or our interests, yet Bush attacked anyways.

These calls were made by Bush…not Congress and not Edwards.

the inspecors didnt find anything because they wernt allowed to enter.

we didnt, nor are we at war with iraq. we are fighting with iraq. the enemy we are fighting happens to be in iraq.

[Decker]

Fact :  John Edwards vote helped send the troops to Iraq

Fact :  Now that the troops are their, they just can turn in their hat, and walk home.

Fact :  You support John Edwards

Fact : You don't support the troops,, who in part, are over their because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker is a Hypocrite

Which  of the fabove facts are untrue ?

John Edwards  voted to send the troops into Iraq, anyone on here that says different is full of shit.

whether John Edwards, Decker, or Santa Claus think's they should be their is not the question, the fact is they are their, an thanks in part to John Edwards vote, this is a fact.

You don't like the war, fine, great,  but Decker is a hypocrite, plain and simple, as you cant say you support the candidate that  voted to send the troops to Iraq but now that they are their, that you don't support them.

If Decker wants to support Edwards,and not be a hypocrite, then he should say : " I am against the war, I think Bush is a liar, and in doing so,  my man John Edwards voted "yes "on sending the troops to Iraq,  and I would like the troops out of Iraq asap, but until then I support the troops, and will continue to, as the soldiers over their, had no say in this,  and in part are over their because for John Edwards vote.


Decker is a Hypocrite.

How did you find out that I supported Edwards?

Could you answer that question?

Now we'll address your asinine argument with the assumption that Edwards authorized Bush to break the law and murder Iraqis. 

When you support a candidate, do you support everything that candidate's done or every plank in his platform?

You might, but rational people generally don't.

Do you support Ron Paul's support of White Supremecist Literature?

I support Edwards b/c he has the best healthcare plan which is currently our #1 domestic issue.

[Eldon]

     Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards was skeptical about voting for the Iraq war resolution and was pushed into it by advisers looking out for his political future, according to an upcoming book by one of his former consultants.

    Democratic strategist Bob Shrum writes in his memoir to be published in June that he regrets advising Edwards to give President Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq. He said if Edwards had followed his instincts instead of the advice of political professionals, he would have been a stronger presidential candidate in 2004.
"

[kh300]

what gets me is these people that say we need to get out of iraq, and i dont support the troops.

if thats how you think, then how is it possible that you like to hear good news out of iraq? you want out, so what helps support your case? -more dead soldiers. does it make you happy when that number goes up?

you cant tell me that more dead soldiers doesnt help support your agenda of getting out of iraq.  

maybee thats why edwards voted against raising the budget for body and truck armour. the more deaths you get the better your case is. unfortunately isnt that why you want out, to save the soldiers? if no more soldiers die, then why the urge to get out?

thats hypocrisy

[Decker]

the inspecors didnt find anything because they wernt allowed to enter.

we didnt, nor are we at war with iraq. we are fighting with iraq. the enemy we are fighting happens to be in iraq.

"Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming."

"This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that have never been declared or inspected, as well as to presidential sites and private residences."
http://216.219.216.117/news/2003/bfeb/20_blix.html

That's from Blix's report to the UN.

He's the expert WMD inspector.

"The justification for the war - the existence of weapons of mass destruction - was without foundation," Blix said. "The military operation was successful, but the diagnosis was wrong.

     "Saddam was dangerous to his own people but not a great, and certainly not an immediate, danger to his neighbors and the world," he added.

 Again on Tuesday he criticized the United States and Britain for trusting their own intelligence more than that of the weapons inspectors, who had not found "a smoking gun."

[Decker]

     Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards was skeptical about voting for the Iraq war resolution and was pushed into it by advisers looking out for his political future, according to an upcoming book by one of his former consultants.

    Democratic strategist Bob Shrum writes in his memoir to be published in June that he regrets advising Edwards to give President Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq. He said if Edwards had followed his instincts instead of the advice of political professionals, he would have been a stronger presidential candidate in 2004.
"

Hearsay and Irrelevant.

Bush had no legal avenue to attack Iraq.

Of course he had the authority to use force.

You are confusing issues to fit your prejudice that Congress shares equal blame with Bush for the Iraq invasion crime.

[kh300]

"Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming."

"This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that have never been declared or inspected, as well as to presidential sites and private residences."
http://216.219.216.117/news/2003/bfeb/20_blix.html

That's from Blix's report to the UN.

He's the expert WMD inspector.

"The justification for the war - the existence of weapons of mass destruction - was without foundation," Blix said. "The military operation was successful, but the diagnosis was wrong.

     "Saddam was dangerous to his own people but not a great, and certainly not an immediate, danger to his neighbors and the world," he added.

 Again on Tuesday he criticized the United States and Britain for trusting their own intelligence more than that of the weapons inspectors, who had not found "a smoking gun."

whats your point. were talkin  pre invasion

[Decker]

what gets me is these people that say we need to get out of iraq, and i dont support the troops.

if thats how you think, then how is it possible that you like to hear good news out of iraq? you want out, so what helps support your case? -more dead soldiers. does it make you happy when that number goes up?

you cant tell me that more dead soldiers doesnt help support your agenda of getting out of iraq.  

maybee thats why edwards voted against raising the budget for body and truck armour. the more deaths you get the better your case is. unfortunately isnt that why you want out, to save the soldiers? if no more soldiers die, then why the urge to get out?

thats hypocrisy

Thank you for making my argument for me and then dismantling it.

That is called a straw argument.

I don't support the troops in Iraq b/c I don't support the mission.

From that you mistakenly conclude that I wish harm on the troops.

That's bush league on your part.

For the record, there is no good news coming from Iraq.  The dead are still dead.

[Eldon]

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/8/17/222725.shtml?s=ic

John Edwards says he voted for the War !:

John Edwards: Wrong Vote on Iraq War


Former Sen. John Edwards said Thursday he made a mistake in 2002 when he voted to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq.

Edwards was the keynote speaker at a rally with Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, the Democrat who defeated U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman in last week's primary. Edwards said Thursday he also believes the U.S. needs to withdraw its troops from the war-torn country.

"I voted for this war. I was wrong," Edwards, of North Carolina, told a crowd of about 300 people gathered outside the Yale University School of Medicine. "I should not have voted for this war and I take responsibility for that."

Lamont was able to defeat Lieberman by criticizing his support of the war. Many Democrats also believe Lieberman, a well-known centrist, has been too supportive of President Bush and the Republicans.

Lamont defeated Lieberman, an 18-year-incumbent, by 10,000 votes. Lieberman is now running in the general election as an independent.






Now that we see even John Edwards says that he "voted for the War "

Fact :John Edwards himself says he voted for the war

Fact : The troops are their, and in part because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker supports John Edwards

Fact : Decker does not support the troops,  ( that are over their risking their lives in part because of John Edwards vote.

Fact : Decker is a hypocrite !