Bush has done so much more to capture Bin Laden than Clinton ever did.
You mean like letting bin Laden go in Tora Bora? And calling the Special Forces off bin Laden a couple of years ago? And most recently letting Musharraf's government enter into an agreement not to pursue bin Laden -- or any member of al-Qaeda -- in the Pakistani territories he's most likely to be hiding?
And let's not forget that when Clinton lobbed bombs targeting bin Laden, right-wing Republican hacks accused him of "wagging the dog." Oh, and Clinton hired Richard Clarke and took him seriously. Bush basically demoted him.
C'mon. Get real.
"Things will just get better and better even though it
doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
Hope! Hope is the underdog!"
The amount of admiration for Bill Clinton on this board never ceases to amaze me. It's as if the guy hands out chocolates to handicapped children all day long. All of you here disdain Bush for participating in this war on terror, and rave on and on about how Bush uses Bin Laden for a straw man, and how Bush is a war monger, and how Bush is this and that, and how Bush can't catch Bin Laden...but when it comes to Clinton...he sure was a great president!!! :rolleyes:
Bush has done so much more to capture Bin Laden than Clinton ever did. I'm sure this attitude of "show a past president some respect" will never carry over in most of your attitudes towards G.W. Bush.
And speaking of smirks, it's not like Clinton didn't have a smirk of his own the whole time. Clinton was the unprofessional, out of control moron during the whole interview. Talk about an over the hill cry baby.
i agree with you about the respect for past president nonsense. i do not respect george bush now, and i do not think he is deserving of respect after he leaves office. it is the media's job to ask these questions, to be hard on the government. ask tough uncomfortable questions. i will probably enjoy fox news when the democrats are in power because they will criticize the authority. the problem with the media is that they too often fail to ask the questions that the public wants answered. a media that simply cheerleeads for the administration is not doing its job. fox news is pathetic in their rhetoric about how unamerican it is to question the president, but you can bet your ass they will be VERY disrespectful to the office when it is held by a democrat. if these same questions were regularly asked of the current administration, they would look far more ridiculous than clinton. this administration is incapable of answering any question without invoking september 11th. i was no fan of bill clinton when he was president, and i do not believe an office is worthy of respect, respect should be earned. the current president will never have my respect. he is deserving of nothing but disdain. and should be treated as such. in this country, you should be able to hold the president accountable.
I just watched this 3 part interview on youtube.......damn!!! That was fucking great!!! President Clinton is the fucking MAN!! Way to put FOX News in check. I sure miss him as president.
America just got reminded what a real president should sound like.
Clinton was just as bad a president as Bush is, just in different ways and for different reasons. When throwing Clinton out there as your parties "best foot forward" is all you have, your party is truly desparate.
Always a riot hearing old Billy tell someone they're not being honest. Even funnier to hear him talk about how bad the Iraq war is, considering his administration killed many more Iraqis (mostly little kids) with almost a decade of sanctions.
The amount of admiration for Bill Clinton on this board never ceases to amaze me. It's as if the guy hands out chocolates to handicapped children all day long. All of you here disdain Bush for participating in this war on terror, and rave on and on about how Bush uses Bin Laden for a straw man, and how Bush is a war monger, and how Bush is this and that, and how Bush can't catch Bin Laden...but when it comes to Clinton...he sure was a great president!!! :rolleyes:
Bush has done so much more to capture Bin Laden than Clinton ever did. I'm sure this attitude of "show a past president some respect" will never carry over in most of your attitudes towards G.W. Bush.
I don't think in this political age that we will ever have a "great" president. There is too much money and influence, and too much media attention on the negative for someone to be considered great, but I do think that the success of a presidency is compairing the state of the nation before and after their terms. Unless something amazing happens in the next couple of years, there is no way that we will be better off in 2009 then we were in 2001. However, with Clinton's presidency, I think that we were better off after his terms were over.
So maybe Clinton wasn't a great president, but he was a leader, and could convey a strong, positive vision for our country to us, and to the world. It's going to take several years of someone with that sort of charisma and humility to start to rebuild all of the international bridges that this administration burned and bombed away.
To take a page from the right wing side, you can't compare what Bush has done about bin laden post 9/11 to what Clinton did pre-9/11. Isn't that what is always said? "it's a different world since 9/11". While Clinton didn't do a very good job with, or maybe pay enough attention to bin laden, Bush did absolutely nothing prior to 9/11... absolutely nothing.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Always a riot hearing old Billy tell someone they're not being honest. Even funnier to hear him talk about how bad the Iraq war is, considering his administration killed many more Iraqis (mostly little kids) with almost a decade of sanctions.
You mean the sanctions that George H.W. Bush's administration put on Iraq?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
The same ones Clinton kept going for his entire term.
Yes, and the ones where this administration kept going for a couple years, even though they now say they went to war in Iraq to help the people there. I guess they didn't care too much during the first couple years if the sanctions were that bad.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Yes, and the ones where this administration kept going for a couple years, even though they now say they went to war in Iraq to help the people there. I guess they didn't care too much during the first couple years if the sanctions were that bad.
Bush 2 has no interest in helping Iraqis. Niether did Clinton, nor Bush 1, nor Reagan.
i love how the topic is now turning to "i did more than them" to catch bin laden... to steal a great line... do or do not there is no try. They both have failed at catching him. I don't get extra points for trying really hard in my job; roy williams didnt get to use the 40 points they almost put up on Seattle. Once again we have a bunch of babies saying i did more...they both have failed at catching him; THAT is the thing to remember.
i love how the topic is now turning to "i did more than them" to catch bin laden... to steal a great line... do or do not there is no try. They both have failed at catching him. I don't get extra points for trying really hard in my job; roy williams didnt get to use the 40 points they almost put up on Seattle. Once again we have a bunch of babies saying i did more...they both have failed at catching him; THAT is the thing to remember.
You mean like letting bin Laden go in Tora Bora? And calling the Special Forces off bin Laden a couple of years ago? And most recently letting Musharraf's government enter into an agreement not to pursue bin Laden -- or any member of al-Qaeda -- in the Pakistani territories he's most likely to be hiding?
And let's not forget that when Clinton lobbed bombs targeting bin Laden, right-wing Republican hacks accused him of "wagging the dog." Oh, and Clinton hired Richard Clarke and took him seriously. Bush basically demoted him.
C'mon. Get real.
it doesnt matter. Neither of them could catch him. "who did more" is a worthless argument.
it doesnt matter. Neither of them could catch him. "who did more" is a worthless argument.
it just goes to reinforce the wussification of america. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23347
everyone is a winner, rather, everyone is a participant and we don't have winners and losers we have people who tried and get rewarded for it.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
it just goes to reinforce the wussification of america. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23347
everyone is a winner, rather, everyone is a participant and we don't have winners and losers we have people who tried and get rewarded for it.
it just goes to reinforce the wussification of america. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23347
everyone is a winner, rather, everyone is a participant and we don't have winners and losers we have people who tried and get rewarded for it.
I saw an interview with a Californian administrator a couple years ago who banned tag at recess for the same reasons as it unnecessarily ostracized the kid who was "it".
Clinton was just as bad a president as Bush is, just in different ways and for different reasons. When throwing Clinton out there as your parties "best foot forward" is all you have, your party is truly desparate.
Clinton is not our parties "best foot forward". There are some shooting stars in the Democratic Party. Think of former Virginia (the mother of all Red states) Governor Mark Warner. He left office with an approval rating of OVER 80%. John Edwards is going to come back and I think be a front runner in '08, I hope so at least, even I am not a huge Hillary fan. Then lets not forget about the biggest shooting star, Senator Obama.
I would take those three any day of Rudy/Bloomberg/Condi
Clinton is not our parties "best foot forward". There are some shooting stars in the Democratic Party. Think of former Virginia (the mother of all Red states) Governor Mark Warner. He left office with an approval rating of OVER 80%. John Edwards is going to come back and I think be a front runner in '08, I hope so at least, even I am not a huge Hillary fan. Then lets not forget about the biggest shooting star, Senator Obama.
I would take those three any day of Rudy/Bloomberg/Condi
McCain though, my jury is still out on him...
Edwards or hilary would be horrible. if I have to stare at the duchbag give me the double thumbs up again, I might puke. and hilary, she can only "effective", i use that term very loosly, run the country 3 weeks a month. (ever hear of PMS). bring it ladies.
I saw an interview with a Californian administrator a couple years ago who banned tag at recess for the same reasons as it unnecessarily ostracized the kid who was "it".
i know, i think we are setting up some kids for a big reality experience when they get older...but that's another thread.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
Edwards or hilary would be horrible. if I have to stare at the duchbag give me the double thumbs up again, I might puke. and hilary, she can only "effective", i use that term very loosly, run the country 3 weeks a month. (ever hear of PMS). bring it ladies.
Obama, now he is a stand up guy. I like him.
but its Rudy in 08.
Edwards has a lot going for him. I think that one thing that will help him is the human element he has since he first came into the spotlight. People have learned about his son who died in an automobile accident, and then his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. That really connects with people. I know being a trial lawyer will hurt him, but if oil men can take over the White House, who can't. Get the bucket ready, you are going to see a lot of Edwards in the months/years to come. The thumbs up is coming back.
Warner is the guy the GOB should fear more than anything, I think Hilary will end up pissing off the base before the primary. She should stay just where she is.
I am quite one sided with my love for Obama, from my past of working with him. However, is '08 too soon for him? I don't know. Part of me wants him to run so there are less votes he has to cast in the Senate that could come back to bite him in the ass, but I think having him as a VP and more in the spotlight before he runs for President would be a great idea. Everyone, red and blue, would fall in love with this guy. I think Obama should be the fire extinguisher behind the glass case, only to be used when you really are in need
and hilary, she can only "effective", i use that term very loosly, run the country 3 weeks a month. (ever hear of PMS). bring it ladies.
The premenstrual period is when a woman's hormone levels are closest to typical male levels. In other words, it's the time when she's most like a man is all month long.
Oh, and here's a news flash, genius .... 60 year old women don't get PMS :rolleyes:
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
The premenstrual period is when a woman's hormone levels are closest to typical male levels. In other words, it's the time when she's most like a man is all month long.
Oh, and here's a news flash, genius .... 60 year old women don't get PMS :rolleyes:
I was waiting for you to come by. relax genius, it was a joke. and your right i should have mentioned her lack of ability to lead with the hot flashes from menopause. how about we lighten up around here
I was waiting for you to come by. relax genius, it was a joke. and your right i should have mentioned her lack of ability to lead with the hot flashes from menopause. how about we lighten up around here
It would have been more recognizable as a joke if it had been "funny" or "humorous".
"Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
Comments
You mean like letting bin Laden go in Tora Bora? And calling the Special Forces off bin Laden a couple of years ago? And most recently letting Musharraf's government enter into an agreement not to pursue bin Laden -- or any member of al-Qaeda -- in the Pakistani territories he's most likely to be hiding?
And let's not forget that when Clinton lobbed bombs targeting bin Laden, right-wing Republican hacks accused him of "wagging the dog." Oh, and Clinton hired Richard Clarke and took him seriously. Bush basically demoted him.
C'mon. Get real.
doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
Hope! Hope is the underdog!"
-- EV, Live at the Showbox
i agree with you about the respect for past president nonsense. i do not respect george bush now, and i do not think he is deserving of respect after he leaves office. it is the media's job to ask these questions, to be hard on the government. ask tough uncomfortable questions. i will probably enjoy fox news when the democrats are in power because they will criticize the authority. the problem with the media is that they too often fail to ask the questions that the public wants answered. a media that simply cheerleeads for the administration is not doing its job. fox news is pathetic in their rhetoric about how unamerican it is to question the president, but you can bet your ass they will be VERY disrespectful to the office when it is held by a democrat. if these same questions were regularly asked of the current administration, they would look far more ridiculous than clinton. this administration is incapable of answering any question without invoking september 11th. i was no fan of bill clinton when he was president, and i do not believe an office is worthy of respect, respect should be earned. the current president will never have my respect. he is deserving of nothing but disdain. and should be treated as such. in this country, you should be able to hold the president accountable.
Clinton was just as bad a president as Bush is, just in different ways and for different reasons. When throwing Clinton out there as your parties "best foot forward" is all you have, your party is truly desparate.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I don't think in this political age that we will ever have a "great" president. There is too much money and influence, and too much media attention on the negative for someone to be considered great, but I do think that the success of a presidency is compairing the state of the nation before and after their terms. Unless something amazing happens in the next couple of years, there is no way that we will be better off in 2009 then we were in 2001. However, with Clinton's presidency, I think that we were better off after his terms were over.
So maybe Clinton wasn't a great president, but he was a leader, and could convey a strong, positive vision for our country to us, and to the world. It's going to take several years of someone with that sort of charisma and humility to start to rebuild all of the international bridges that this administration burned and bombed away.
To take a page from the right wing side, you can't compare what Bush has done about bin laden post 9/11 to what Clinton did pre-9/11. Isn't that what is always said? "it's a different world since 9/11". While Clinton didn't do a very good job with, or maybe pay enough attention to bin laden, Bush did absolutely nothing prior to 9/11... absolutely nothing.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
You mean the sanctions that George H.W. Bush's administration put on Iraq?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
The same ones Clinton kept going for his entire term.
Yes, and the ones where this administration kept going for a couple years, even though they now say they went to war in Iraq to help the people there. I guess they didn't care too much during the first couple years if the sanctions were that bad.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Bush 2 has no interest in helping Iraqis. Niether did Clinton, nor Bush 1, nor Reagan.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/26/rice.clinton.ap/index.html
well put dude. that is the truth.
it doesnt matter. Neither of them could catch him. "who did more" is a worthless argument.
it just goes to reinforce the wussification of america. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23347
everyone is a winner, rather, everyone is a participant and we don't have winners and losers we have people who tried and get rewarded for it.
I wouldnt go that far
I saw an interview with a Californian administrator a couple years ago who banned tag at recess for the same reasons as it unnecessarily ostracized the kid who was "it".
well, that's ok. I think it may be a bit over the top, but i thought it applied a bit.
Clinton is not our parties "best foot forward". There are some shooting stars in the Democratic Party. Think of former Virginia (the mother of all Red states) Governor Mark Warner. He left office with an approval rating of OVER 80%. John Edwards is going to come back and I think be a front runner in '08, I hope so at least, even I am not a huge Hillary fan. Then lets not forget about the biggest shooting star, Senator Obama.
I would take those three any day of Rudy/Bloomberg/Condi
McCain though, my jury is still out on him...
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Edwards or hilary would be horrible. if I have to stare at the duchbag give me the double thumbs up again, I might puke. and hilary, she can only "effective", i use that term very loosly, run the country 3 weeks a month. (ever hear of PMS). bring it ladies.
Obama, now he is a stand up guy. I like him.
but its Rudy in 08.
i know, i think we are setting up some kids for a big reality experience when they get older...but that's another thread.
Edwards has a lot going for him. I think that one thing that will help him is the human element he has since he first came into the spotlight. People have learned about his son who died in an automobile accident, and then his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. That really connects with people. I know being a trial lawyer will hurt him, but if oil men can take over the White House, who can't. Get the bucket ready, you are going to see a lot of Edwards in the months/years to come. The thumbs up is coming back.
Warner is the guy the GOB should fear more than anything, I think Hilary will end up pissing off the base before the primary. She should stay just where she is.
I am quite one sided with my love for Obama, from my past of working with him. However, is '08 too soon for him? I don't know. Part of me wants him to run so there are less votes he has to cast in the Senate that could come back to bite him in the ass, but I think having him as a VP and more in the spotlight before he runs for President would be a great idea. Everyone, red and blue, would fall in love with this guy. I think Obama should be the fire extinguisher behind the glass case, only to be used when you really are in need
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
talk like that will get you banned.
Oh, and here's a news flash, genius .... 60 year old women don't get PMS :rolleyes:
I was waiting for you to come by. relax genius, it was a joke. and your right i should have mentioned her lack of ability to lead with the hot flashes from menopause. how about we lighten up around here
It would have been more recognizable as a joke if it had been "funny" or "humorous".
im sorry you dont find my taste in humor funny. wait no im not. move on.
EDITED for typos.
"wait not im not."
now that's funny.
hey I agree with you, typos can be funnny. you arent such a bad kid after all