AuntyM, Chives or any other 'enlightened' Liberals out there,

When did President Bush ever say that Saddam or Iraq were responsible for 9/11?

All the Lib's continuley suggest that he did (and in doing so lied to the American people), but I haven't seen one verifyable quote attributed to him where he actually made such an allegation.

I'm always willing to look at new evidence, and if presented effectively I can be persuaded~however if the 'Bush lied-People died/No Blood for Oil Man/Suburu Stationwagon driving' crowd doesn't offer up some actually evidence that proves Bush did say that Saddam/Iraq were responsible for 9/11 they need to get off the pot already (litterally and figuratively) and find a new theme song.

Who are you refering to? Are you trying to demean us with a stereotype?

I drive a Tbird or an F350.

AM,

"ties to" does NOT mean any responsibility "for." It can quite easily mean any "indirect" connection. Period. "

We have killed or captured 1000's with ties to Al Queda. We have said we will pursue those with ties to AL Queda. they did not have to do anything. Just being at a camp etc. is enough for a trip to Club Gitmo. That standard has been used here for many years with the war on organized crime and the war on drugs.
Zawquari lived in Iraq for the last 15 years. With the protection of Sadam. He is tied to Sadam and he is tied to Al Queda. I bet we kill him the first chane we get or send him to the club.

"Not all women squat to pee either. You sure lead a sheltered life TK."

Certainly the majority do. A friend of mine dated a girl that hung out with us in college she could pee over the hood of my camaro. We called her the little man. You can see her in any warren miller movie filmed in the 80's.


I do know that the new age sensative guys are bowing to their wives wishes and sitting down vs standing up.

And you see how well THAT's turned out.

With Bush's popularity at an all time low, even AFTER the London attacks, don't you think all the above would be used by this administration if it were provable?

TK, I was 100% accurate with my statement. "Ties to" is simply one phrase utilized by those who practice doublespeak. These days, most citizens of our country do not recognize the tactic when it's used. I'm not one of those citizens. "Ties to" can mean so many "other" things, that it isn't a term you can rely on. All that you can be sure of is that the user is aware that the term can't be turned against them in the future, just like the other attempts to mislead.

Politicians and career government folks learn those tactics early on. In fact, that's EXACTLY what Wilson did and you didn't pick up on it.

------------------------------------------------------------

Good for you--you're not a vegan and you like to fish so despite our political differences your OK in my book.
------------------------------------------------------------

I've just noticed that almost without exception, every time I see a Suburu Stationwagon in Seattle it has interesting bumper stickers on it like:

Vote Your Vagina!
P.E.T.A
Kerry/Edwards '04 (covering up a Kusinich '04 bs)
Darwin walking fish
Screw Abstinence--NARAL
Re-Elect Ron Sims
No Iraq War
Re-Elect Jim McDermott

And I've never once seen a N.R.A. bumper sticker on a Suburu Stationwagon so I just thought it was like the official car of the far left leaning crowd--if I'm wrong I apologize.

I DO get grossed out or embarrassed by some of that garbage. Probably why I dislike so many female politicians with feminist leanings.

Wait till "they" find out the US military policy is going to revert back and attempt to restrict women from support positions close to combat areas. The libbers will be livid.

"Once again, I asked YOU (not some poll) to show me a specific person who would say "Iraq bombed wtc"."

-dude this is the internet. You want me to point over there to Cletus standing at the bus stop and "show" you someone who beleives that? How the hell am I gonna "show" you anything over the net? Want me to post a pic of one of the toothless goobers who beleives that tripe? I "showed" you a poll in which 44 percent of americans beleived the hijackers were Iraqi. You can choose not to beleive that if you want but dont ask me to show you someone in the flesh. You gonna invite me and a dozen Bush voters over for dinner so I can "show" you one of these idiots? They are out there and they are BUsh voters, these people who beleive "we'd all be speaking Iraqi bu now if it werent for Dubya".


As for Bush personally impacting my fishing.
I post links to all these scientists telling you this stuff is bad for fish and the environment, but since you dont see an IMMEDIATE impact you refuse to beleive them? You want to quibble because two of the links were regarding reclassification of hatchery fish?...note the articles some five or six of em, were all posted in a 10 minute span. I just googled and pasted the first of hundreds of articles that came up. PLease feel free to look into it a little on your own if you dont like my sources. Im not asking you to take my word for it. Take sciences word for it. Better still ask anyone on this board if its a good idea to classify hatchery fish as wild..right or left i think they will all respond it is not.

I have lived here only three years. In those three years the fish on the river I fish have steadily declined in return numbers, had early closures and are forecasted to continue that slide. Fish from Lake Washington seems to have some mercury problems or whatever? I would not blame those things on Bush any sooner than I would say he is good for sport fishing just because the damage he is doing isnt immediately apparent yet.

I like a good argument and i enjoy to hear others views even when i disagree, but your just asking the same thing over and over and then closing your eyes when you dont like the answers.

Who here wants to defend Bush on sport fishing and the environment? Who has the guts and the ability to totally divorce oneself from reality enough to attempt to defend his record????

Anyone?

*crickets

Not that "they" would agree that the new policy does just that, but if you WERE to ask Smalma or Salmo g JUST the above, it would likely be a big NO. Not speaking for them mind you, but both know their bio stuff big time and are well respected by their perrs. (We who know who they are never reveal their true identity... wink wink... bad net manners etc...)

Both are VERY pro fish and the environment.

Oh... and TK already knows that. Don't try to confuse him with facts.

Elvis is cool. I would never confront him with ugly facts. I totally disagree with the bulk of his views but at least he's reasonably coherent at times.

This Phish guy on the other hand just has an impenetrable melon. I have a hard time understanding people like that.

TK KNOWS we have several "top" fish bio's on this board and that they speak primarily from the scientific view regarding fish issues. TK is not impressed by science. He is impressed with Dumbya.

"these people who beleive "we'd all be speaking Iraqi bu now if it werent for Dubya".
"

Once again you post a stupid quote, but I doubt you ever met a person who would actually say that. Sure, you could find a poll if you look hard enough...

"note the articles some five or six of em, were all posted in a 10 minute span. I just googled and pasted"

Exactly my point. My 5yr old can do that...

"How the hell am I gonna "show" you anything over the net? "

I'll make it easy for you. Just give me a number of people you personally know who would agree to that quote... I'll trust your word on this...

Aunty.... I worked for the USGS and the Earth and Space Science, and Oceanography departments at the UW. I worked very closely with many scientists from many diffferent economic social and political backgrounds on a daily basis. These are the people who are experts on your local rivers, fisheries, ocean, air, etc and they All expressed their unsolicited extreme displeasure for Bush's environmental policies, and his contempt for science in general.

I am sure there are fish experts here, and Im sure people like Phish are eager to ignore them or discount what they say as liberal propaganda to "put dumbya in a bad light".

"I have lived here only three years. In those three years the fish on the river I fish have steadily declined in return numbers, had early closures and are forecasted to continue that slide. Fish from Lake Washington seems to have some mercury problems or whatever? I would not blame those things on Bush any sooner than I would say he is good for sport fishing just because the damage he is doing isnt immediately apparent yet."

I've lived her my whole life. The runs that have decreased have decreased over a period of time covering both Dem and Repub administrations. The only thing in common is that during that same timeframe, the Dems have been running this state....

My gramps believes that crap Phish. He was at Pearl Harbor and still think the Japs are the enemy too.

as for the other 44 percent who beleive that hooey, they aint exactly good friends or aquiantances of mine. Next time Im in a red state (or near Forks) I'll get a signed testimonial for you.

I dont understand what you want from me? You seem unable to accept that people could believe such a thing despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

again you are not reading what I posted. Did you miss this sentence ?(how could you you quoted it? you dont even read what you are quoting? Can you even read at all?)

The problem is, too many of these scientist types around here have too much trouble seperating science from their personal political leanings.

They love to post PI articles like "Bush bad for environment - tries to kill all fish".

Let's talk about the issues first, then decide if there is a real threat. Some guys on here are good at posting real issues and disussing things openly. If we all conclude that there is some wrong doing that will impact our fisheries, you can bet that 99% of the guys on this site will be willing to take some kind of action. But when you cloud it with bipartisan accustations right out of the bag, most guys tune it out. Just look how many guys post on this site vs how many post in the politics section...

OMG!!! We must NOT allow this thread to become fish oriented. Whatever will Bob think of us?



If one were to read, AND totally understand the above two posts, any intelligent person would conclude that politicans are bad for fish and the environment. The Dems allowed the commercial lobby to coerce them into over harvest policies.

Let us not forget WHO put Koenings in the WDFW leadership roll! A Dem!

Chives, we've had so many of these fishing/politics discussions over the last 4 years that the average PP member is pretty much sick to death of it. Almost every link you posted on that locked thread has made the pages of this board before or at least it's counterpart.