libbynomore2: more libtard nonsense.

If you're too stupid to understand that she meant post 9-11 then that's on you!

What about the Antrax attack? the DC Sniper?

hubiestubert: That as Republicans, we're supposed to be about responsibility. Our leadership points to it all the time. But all you hear from the Bush and Cheney camps--even today with Dick and his dissembling daughter--is how everything was someone else's fault.

Having read lots of American literature from the 1970s, 80s, and 60s, I am confident that only total illiterates would ever vote republican. You Americans do yourself no favours by pretending that the GOP ever had credibility or that your GOP voters have any, either.

Uchiha_Cycliste: thamike: rnld: What about the Antrax attack? the DC Sniper?

I've already mentioned it. Others too. F*ck that clown.

Holy crap! The dc sniper was the Anthrax guy?!? =P

As with Bin Laden, the "Antrax guy" has not been found - dead or alive.

FlashHarry: ROTFLMAO.

that, in a nutshell, is republican cognitive dissonance:

truth: during bush's presidency, america suffered the worst terrorist attack in its history
republican version: during bush's presidency, america suffered no terrorist attacks

absolutely amazing. absolutely farking amazing.

Because it in no way might have been a gaffe and intended to mean anything else....there is no wharrgble like lib wharrgble...

but by all means blow a blood vessel...maybe you should try decaf

Jeager76: Because it in no way might have been a gaffe...

If you think she meant "Since 9/11", then what about all the other events that have been brought up in this thread which occurred during Bush's tenure as President and have been widely referred to by his own party as "terrorism"?

Care to address those?

Republican mouthpiece forgets 9/11?

They finally milked it dry and forgot about it. The deaths of 3000 people have outlived their usefulness as a catch-all justification for all acts, constitutional or otherwise.

Perhaps some modicum of reasoned discourse will...

*sigh*

No it won't.

Would still pull her hair.

IrateShadow: GWShenlong05: This would now be 2nd time I've seen an employee of the Bush administration caught using this lie. Give it another year, and Gallup will find that half of the polled Republicans think 9/11 happened while Clinton was President.

I think it's much more likely that people are only going to remember that 9/11 happened as part of the war on terror, but not who was in office at the time. It'll be like vietnam, where people may have some familiarity with the players but no real recollection of who was around when it started.

I think you are correct, and I cannot express how much that notion depresses me.

can't read the whole thread at present, so..
has no one run with the 'Dana is admitting the Truthers are right!' thing yet?

A Dark Evil Omen: hubiestubert: Swampthing in Korea: ilikeracecars: Swampthing in Korea: The absence of terrorists attacks in the US after this wake-up call, and when the conflict against Islamic fundamentalism intesified, is factual, despite any rock/tiger comparisons a Farker wants to make.

Which is a good point, except that it has nothing to do with the fact that Dana Perino claims no terrorist attack occurred during Bush's term.

But it is to the credit of the Bush regime.

That they allowed a report by the Cabinet level Counter-terrorism specialist to sit unread and ignored for ten months, and that act of willful ignorance allowed for the largest scale terrorist attack on US soil ever?

Yes. Kudos to them. Whooo. They really knocked it out of the park there. Eggs cracked, omelet made.

Well, you know what they say, you wanna make an omelet, you gotta kill 200,000 people.

I mean, I know that's how I make my omelets.

what the fark do you do to make a quiche? planet level genocide?

Even if she misspoke and meant "after 9/11, there were no more Domestic terror attacks under Bush," she was wrong.

The D.C. Snipers (2002), Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, (2002) Naveed Afzal Haq, (2006) Mohammed Taheri-azar, (2006) and Sulejman Talovic (2007), and Anthrax guy, all committed domestic terror attacks after 9/11, under Bush.

It's really not that hard.

mrshowrules: thrips: can't read the whole thread at present, so..
has no one run with the 'Dana is admitting the Truthers are right!' thing yet?

I haven't seen that so you get +1. Also, if you believe the Birthers, Obama is a foreigner who saw the warning signs about Fort Hood and did nothing so he should be considered a terrorist as well.


Thanks for the crib notes. Astonishing miss, but the thread looked sort of 'Why-so-serious'-y.

And really, in both cases the suffix covers it.

/-hurr

Well, you know what they say, you wanna make an omelet, you gotta kill 200,000 people.

I mean, I know that's how I make my omelets.

what the fark do you do to make a quiche? planet level genocide?

you should see what can be done with toasters.

The bottom line is she flat out lied and Hannity let the lie go out over the air.

There's your unfair and unbalanced.

This isn't too shocking. Rush is openly and repeatedly saying that Obama signed TARP into law.

El Morro

All phil saw on your post was: (singsong) 'I'm getting attention! I'm getting attention! Someone's talking about me! Hip hip hooray, attention for me! I got him annoyed enough to respond to me, which was the only goal! I got my victory!'

Dude, don't respond to him at all. He wanted you to post that, and you gave him exactly what he wanted. That's how he wins. He only has power when people respond to him.

Most of us realize the average member of the Bush administration has their head stuck far up their own ass. Best not to dwell on the incompetence and failure because it makes our country a bitter place. Best to move on and not take anything from this lot too seriously, which is easy given the heavy prefacing.

RockIsDead: Well, since we're now treating them as common criminals, I guess she's CORRECT.

Obama made it so!

Terrorists are criminals. Was Tim McVeigh not a terrorist?

RemyDuron: RockIsDead: Well, since we're now treating them as common criminals, I guess she's CORRECT.

Obama made it so!

Terrorists are criminals. Was Tim McVeigh not a terrorist?

And a Republican!

FlashHarry: why do republicans insist on lying about stuff that's easily confirmed?

Because most of their supporters do not fact check and their network of choice, Fox, helps spread the lies. Karl Rove is their big political consultant and little opposing view is presented.

thamike: Phil Herup: Ignore is for retarded pussies

Can a you guys quit making me agree with the Phil?


Threadshiatting is for retarded pussies. Ignoring people who threadshiat is just commmon sense.

Swampthing in Korea: ilikeracecars: Swampthing in Korea: The absence of terrorists attacks in the US after this wake-up call, and when the conflict against Islamic fundamentalism intesified, is factual, despite any rock/tiger comparisons a Farker wants to make.

Which is a good point, except that it has nothing to do with the fact that Dana Perino claims no terrorist attack occurred during Bush's term.

But it is to the credit of the Bush regime.

Except for the whole "not taking terrorism seriously" thing, yes.

Is there a term for the next level past cognitive dissonance? Where you have gone beyond the point of not just believing the lies so much your brain is not simply functioning improperly, but has gone on to the level of say a computer that is actively trying to infect other systems with viruses and malware? What do you call that in human terms?

I'm pretty sure that it has been termed by the medical and mental health field as "Sociopathic" or "Psychotic". Where the truth no longer matters and neither do the consequences of your actions, the feelings of others, or the well being of anyone other than yourself.

I'm pretty sure many of these politicians, pundits, and our own dear posters have reached that point, and they're spreading the disease.

thamike: Coco LaFemme: Threadshiatting is for retarded pussies. Ignoring people who threadshiat is just commmon sense.

Yes. But it doesn't work, and "ignoring" is not what's happening because the weirdos who enjoy using the feature won't shut up about it, making them much more annoying than Phil. Phil's a schmuck. The CHronic Ignorers have deep psychological issues.

So, ignoring users who do absolutely nothing but attention whore and threadshiat is actually worse than attention whoring and thread shiatting. O...K...that's some amazing logic there. Do you treat someone who calls the cops to report a robbery as the bad guy instead of the robber?

Phil: 'Blah blah blah.'
User: 'Wow, you offer nothing worth reading and a waste of screen load time. I'll ignore you, not that you'll care.'
You: 'God, you have mental issues, you disturbed little f*ck. Go get some help before you kill someone.'

NeverDrunk23: El Morro

All phil saw on your post was: (singsong) 'I'm getting attention! I'm getting attention! Someone's talking about me! Hip hip hooray, attention for me! I got him annoyed enough to respond to me, which was the only goal! I got my victory!'

Dude, don't respond to him at all. He wanted you to post that, and you gave him exactly what he wanted. That's how he wins. He only has power when people respond to him.

I know, I farked up. But I just had to get that out of my system. When I see his shiat it makes me realize how many more people in this country are like him and just how much better off the world would be if there weren't. So frustrating sometimes.

El Morro: NeverDrunk23: El Morro

All phil saw on your post was: (singsong) 'I'm getting attention! I'm getting attention! Someone's talking about me! Hip hip hooray, attention for me! I got him annoyed enough to respond to me, which was the only goal! I got my victory!'

Dude, don't respond to him at all. He wanted you to post that, and you gave him exactly what he wanted. That's how he wins. He only has power when people respond to him.

I know, I farked up. But I just had to get that out of my system. When I see his shiat it makes me realize how many more people in this country are like him and just how much better off the world would be if there weren't. So frustrating sometimes.

Well, take solace in this: at least Phil doesn't believe one thing he spews.

He doesn't?