There has been a lot of criticism of Clinton...

[lyonspotter]

There has been a lot of criticism of Clinton, both he and she, being the type of politicians that will do anything to win: Tell half-truths, distort the facts, etc.

People make that statement as though the Clinton team is the only of its kind who desire to win at all costs. Bush stole two elections, and seems to my mind the greatest distorter of facts for pushing forward his own power and agenda.

But let's take things to another place on the concept of truth. If Obama is truly that seaker after truth that he claims himself to be, the person that refuses to engage in campaigning tactics that involve distortion and personal attacks, then why has he not focused on what is probably the most important truth anyone should be advocating: that our country has lost its way if we do not impeach Bush/Cheney?

There is something drastically wrong with this entire election process, an elephant in the room that none of the candidates will address frankly.

In many respects, their fear to address it means we have lost the concept of democracy we so cherish (at least that is to say that the illusion of democracy has been forcefully ruptured to even those who are not well-read).

[MADem]

1. Sorry. Obama isn't my candidate, but that is a bullshit argument.

If Obama doesn't screw himself and eliminate his legitimacy as a candidate by taking on an impossible and divisive impeachment effort with less than a year to go before the inauguration of a new President, he's no good?

All I can say is :


:rofl:

That's a Faulty Logic Award winner!!!

[lyonspotter]

3. I didn't raise the issue...

of pragmatics. I raised the issue of truth. If he stands for truth, if he stands up for the 100s of thousands of Iraqis killed for a lie, then he would demand that justice is served on President Bush. Any candidate would. Any person should.

Your appeal to pragmatism is in fact what gets the 'faulty logic award', for it was a herring of the highest order. A diversion from the concept of "truth" that Obama has been campaigning on.

[MADem]

4. So, you're saying "Stand up for truth, and get your ASS handed to you on election day!"

First, your truth is not THE truth, that's just an asinine assertion.

Your absurd little plan doesn't help him achieve his goal. His goal isn't to throw himself on his sword, his goal is to WIN.

That strategy sounds like the GOP ginned it up!

Why not have the guy self-immolate as a form of dramatic "protest?" That would make about as much sense.

:rofl:

[lyonspotter]

5. It is not...

my absurd little plan. I don't support Obama. I don't have an agenda here.

I'm plainly asserting that if one believes Bush has committed crimes of the highest rank, which he has (do you not agree?...or are you a part of the GOP as well?), then Obama should at the very least be denouncing everything Bush has done that lead to this immoral war initiated through lying.

I couldn't care less about Obama's goal, per se. I care that if he says he stands for truth, that he actually be consistent in his word and deeds.

[MADem]

7. Well, we're done here.

No, I am NOT "part of the GOP as well" (way to sling a little shit there, noob) but you're affiliated with that portion of the world that doesn't let reality get in the way of your imaginings.

You have a nice day now.

[lyonspotter]

9. We should point out...

...that you were the first to sling anything, saying that my ideas were akin to what would be dreamed up by GOP circles.

You take care as well. Can't say it has been the slightest amount of fun discussing with someone as unprofessional as you have conducted yourself in this thread.

[lyonspotter]

6. Read carefully...

If you read my initial post, I brought up the issue a criticism that the Clintons have faced is they try to win at all costs. Obama claims that will refuse to do so, for he favors truth over "winning at all costs."

I pointed out that if he favored truth over winning at all costs, he would stand for the trial of George W Bush, who has committed ills of the highest rank.

That Obama refuses to push that issue, and ultimately will let Bush get away with such crimes, means that he has put winning at all costs and avoiding "getting his ass handed to him on election day" higher on the priority list than absolute truth.

[Bright Eyes]

2. Has Edwards?

Not calling you out, I just can't seem to find any reference to Impeachment he's made except:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nATKGBpgR2o

[lyonspotter]

8. Again...

...Edwards is more concerned with what is pragmatic, than what is truth-seeking.

If the Democratic party lets Bush walk away without punishment, they have ultimately been complicit. Edwards admits the Bush Admin has committed various illegal acts, and yet he does nothing.