Oh, so it's unreasonable to call Bush a liar?

USAToday, 11/7/05: "President Bush strongly defended U.S. interrogation practices for detainees held in the war on terrorism Monday, insisting, 'We do not torture.'"

ABC News, 11/18/05:

Harsh interrogation techniques authorized by top officials of the CIA have led to questionable confessions and the death of a detainee since the techniques were first authorized in mid-March 2002, ABC News has been told by former and current intelligence officers and supervisors. * * *

Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.

Somebody's lying, aren't they? But if I think the liar is the President, I'm being "unreasonable"?

You say, "reason"; I say "moronic blind faith." Let's call the whole thing off?

Do a google search on "east st louis election guilty", it may help you reconsider your statement that there are "no democrats convicted of election fraud". And this is the old fashioned type of election fraud, paying money to buy votes. But the cockles of your liberal heart will be warmed to know that the price for buying votes for a racist is double.

You might also want to check on a news story run by CBS when you think there are no "swift-boat liar type ads", though technically not an ad, this was only because the leftist who ran the piece gave the air time away, rather than charge the democrats.

Whatâ??s interesting though is that Reagan mysteriously omits all that bombing and murdering stuff that kind of defines the Sunni insurgents and is conspicuously absent among the Democrat â??insurgencyâ?? here at home. Iâ??d say thatâ??s a rather important distinction, wouldnâ??t you?

Clearly, you've never been witness to Seattle, when the World Bank is meeting.

lilly, you utterly nieve about the defining attributes of conservatism.

Can you find a single conservative who has not wholeheartedly supported politicians who ran campaigns for office exactly that way? And if they support their campaigns I would say they obviously endorse the message.

Whatever you may imagine a conservative to be and what the conservatives actually are, are two different things. One is real, the other is imagined.

Tinti, Joyner and others may say now that they do not approve of this behavior but come election time they will endorse candidates who employ them with all their hearts. So another charactoristic of conservatives you missed is hypocracy.

The Democrats have been remarkably restrained. There has been very little ( I can't think of any) swift-boat liar type ads, there are no Democrats convicted of election fraud and certainly no convicts hired to train activists for the party, there is no equivalent of Karl Rove, and Wade whatshisname and Micheal Moore combined don't constitute one Michelle Malkin, let alone her plus Coulter, O'Reilly, Limbaugh Hannity, and most of the Republicans in Congress.
Yes we are going to fight hard to get power back into the hands of reasonable, responsible people who believe in the rule of law and value civil discourse. And we aren't doing it by imitating Republican party campaign tactics or the verbalizations of "conservative" pundits and politicians. I'm putting quotes on "conservative" because you are right--hate and fear mongering, lies, jingoism,slander and out of control vitriol are not the defining attributes of conservatism.

Iraq's national security adviser said Thursday a "huge treasure" of documents and computer records w...