Clinton on Fox

Options
1…567810

Comments

  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    I'm not sure if anyone posted this, the video of the interview can be seen here http://www.foxnews.com/

    It's in the upper right of the page.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • DCGARDEN
    DCGARDEN Posts: 515
    bryanfury wrote:
    i feel ya!

    i have to believe that we would not have gotten involved if we thought the mujahadeen could have won without us. why risk getting involved? a long drawn out battle is exactly what we would want, so if I go on your theory, I see no need for U.S. involvement.

    To this you are quite right - I don't think the US or anyone else in the civilized world for that matter, thought that the Soviets would be defeated
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • rarghrargh-brownstar
    rarghrargh-brownstar Posts: 1,272
    argh! he seemed soo mad. :rolleyes:

    :p
    Rarghstarfarian.
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    Not talking about Iraq in this topic -

    It was a direct comparison between a President who took the threat seriously and one who now is trying real hard to make it look like he took it seriously - Responses tell a lot

    He took the response seriously by invading a country 1000 miles to the east of afg where the terrorists are. Real serious.
  • DCGARDEN
    DCGARDEN Posts: 515
    Open wrote:
    He took the response seriously by invading a country 1000 miles to the east of afg where the terrorists are. Real serious.

    Again, you're missing the point. All you're doing is deflecting the issue at hand. You guys cry about invading Iraq, yet seem to want to forget that we did invade Afghanistan FIRST - If your boy had any kind of clue as to how serious Al Qaeda was he would have invaded Afghanistan after the Cole and you damn well know it

    " I had a comprehensive plan drawn up to invade Afghanistan "

    Gimme a break
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    Again, you're missing the point. All you're doing is deflecting the issue at hand. You guys cry about invading Iraq, yet seem to want to forget that we did invade Afghanistan FIRST - If your boy had any kind of clue as to how serious Al Qaeda was he would have invaded Afghanistan after the Cole and you damn well know it

    " I had a comprehensive plan drawn up to invade Afghanistan "

    Gimme a break
    The FBI and CIA would not get on the same page to determine that is what needed to happen....and they are a HUGE part of invading another country to go after a terrorist network. After 9/11 they were on board.....that isn't Clinton's fault and I am sick and tired of you trying to imply that it was. Again, the magnitude of the events of 9/11 SEVERLY out weighed the significance of the USS Cole bombing.....that is no ones fault....and I agree it's sad.....but it is what it is. It was the GOP accusing Clinton of Wag the Dog while he was trying to accomplish something while they were simultaneously asking him about his sex life....as though that was important.
  • DCGARDEN
    DCGARDEN Posts: 515
    aNiMaL wrote:
    The FBI and CIA would not get on the same page to determine that is what needed to happen....and they are a HUGE part of invading another country to go after a terrorist network. After 9/11 they were on board.....that isn't Clinton's fault and I am sick and tired of you trying to imply that it was. Again, the magnitude of the events of 9/11 SEVERLY out weighed the significance of the USS Cole bombing.....that is no ones fault....and I agree it's sad.....but it is what it is. It was the GOP accusing Clinton of Wag the Dog while he was trying to accomplish something while they were simultaneously asking him about his sex life....as though that was important.


    You're a sorry dude. Why do you feel to the need to make excuses for Bill Clinton? He screws up just like every great leader. A lot of the problems that existed ( and still do ) between the agencies could / should have been dealt with by BJ when he had the chance ( or is 7.5 years in office not enough? )
    To use them as a scapegoat for his inability to act is a damn joke.

    I wasn't suggesting the magnitude of the Cole attacks was on par with 9/11
    I was only suggesting that the Cole attack warranted an American Ass-Kicking of the worst kind. Too bad the wrong guy was in charge when it went down.

    And don't speak about his screwing around with an intern as his " sex life "
    A married president's sex-life should pertain to his wife. Trying to cover the fact that he was screwing around with young women in the damn WhiteHouse
    by saying he was only having a sex life is childish to say the least.

    ** And for the 2nd time, I did'nt think what he did warranted an impeachment**
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    You're a sorry dude. Why do you feel to the need to make excuses for Bill Clinton? He screws up just like every great leader. A lot of the problems that existed ( and still do ) between the agencies could / should have been dealt with by BJ when he had the chance ( or is 7.5 years in office not enough? )
    To use them as a scapegoat for his inability to act is a damn joke.
    The fact that you fail to recognize that is was the MAGNITUDE of 9/11 that got the federal agencies on the same page, not your good buddy GW, is astounding and more than not shows your unwillingness to allow GW to take any responsibility at all….when the fact is he had a fucking report that said the terrorist were planning on flying planes into buildings in our country and he did nothing.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    I wasn't suggesting the magnitude of the Cole attacks was on par with 9/11
    I was only suggesting that the Cole attack warranted an American Ass-Kicking of the worst kind. Too bad the wrong guy was in charge when it went down.
    You did compare the USS Cole attack with the 9/11 attack and tried to slam President Clinton....when it is GW Bush who screwed the pooch with his response to 9/11. And we both agree 9/11 was a much LARGER event that the USS Cole.....no disrespect to the soldiers at all who lost their lives on the USS Cole....but the same goes for the people who lost their lives at the Pentagon...sorry, the trade center victims get more sympathy.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    And don't speak about his screwing around with an intern as his " sex life "
    A married president's sex-life should pertain to his wife. Trying to cover the fact that he was screwing around with young women in the damn WhiteHouse
    by saying he was only having a sex life is childish to say the least.
    A president sex life should in no way, shape, or form ever be discussed ever again. That was a huge embarrassment for our country. I blame the GOP for making that such an issue…while at the same time accusing Clinton of Wag the Dog when he was actually trying to accomplish the very thing they are now accusing him of doing nothing about.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    ** And for the 2nd time, I did'nt think what he did warranted an impeachment**
    What he did was lie to the grand jury about a subject and line of questioning that should have NEVER been asked. And who came up with that line of questioning and what in GODS name did that have to do with President Clinton’s ability to run this country? Why do you care who gives him a blow job? You act as though he was the first president in US history to have extra marital affairs. As though it’s any of our business.
  • DCGARDEN
    DCGARDEN Posts: 515
    aNiMaL wrote:
    The fact that you fail to recognize that is was the MAGNITUDE of 9/11 that got the federal agencies on the same page, not your good buddy GW, is astounding and more than not shows your unwillingness to allow GW to take any responsibility at all….when the fact is he had a fucking report that said the terrorist were planning on flying planes into buildings in our country and he did nothing.


    You did compare the USS Cole attack with the 9/11 attack and tried to slam President Clinton....when it is GW Bush who screwed the pooch with his response to 9/11. And we both agree 9/11 was a much LARGER event that the USS Cole.....no disrespect to the soldiers at all who lost their lives on the USS Cole....but the same goes for the people who lost their lives at the Pentagon...sorry, the trade center victims get more sympathy.


    A president sex life should in no way, shape, or form ever be discussed ever again. That was a huge embarrassment for our country. I blame the GOP for making that such an issue…while at the same time accusing Clinton of Wag the Dog when he was actually trying to accomplish the very thing they are now accusing him of doing nothing about.


    What he did was lie to the grand jury about a subject and line of questioning that should have NEVER been asked. And who came up with that line of questioning and what in GODS name did that have to do with President Clinton’s ability to run this country? Why do you care who gives him a blow job? You act as though he was the first president in US history to have extra marital affairs. As though it’s any of our business.

    a) Typical bitchy liberal crap coming from your mouth. Please show me where
    and when I said GW organized the agencies......quote me....I'm waiting...oh right....you're talking out of your ass again ....I did'nt say that.....we're not gonna get far in a discussion if you are going to put the words in my mouth

    b) Where exactly did you ask me a question regarding GW's responsibility? Show me? Unlike you, I do not think he's a God, whereas you seem to think Clinton is untouchable - I can and will if so asked name plenty of things Bush has fucked up - you've got the wrong guy here, pal. But I guess that would'nt matter to you, as long as you get to blowhard, huh?

    c) You speak of a report that says planes were to be flown into buildings. Not quite. Do your homework. The report said planes were to be used in some capacity in the US. Everyone questioned by the 9/11 commission seems to have been leaning towards planes being hijacked and blown up in the sky.
    Even so, if you call a report that says Bin Laden determined to strike in US, something to " take action " on as you say Bush should have done, Then what can be said of Slick Willie when THE FUCKING ACTION WAS TAKEN ALREADY!!!!!!!!! Are you that dense? The hit us, he did shit about it - He was weak, and you know it - but you seem to be afraid of that truth

    d) 9/11 vs Cole - you're once again missing what I wrote about this, so I beg you to open your mind - An attack on a US Military ship warrants a response-
    You cannot tell me that 9/11 warranted a response and the Cole did'nt. You cannot say that to me. No matter how large the damage caused, no matter how much attention one event got vs another, BOTH WERE ACTS OF DISPICABLE TERRORISM - you don't brush one under the rug, pal and say it's ok your president did'nt do anything because it pales in comparison to something that took place a year later - all your doing with that is excusing him, and that was my original point

    e) The sex-stuff, whatever. It's not that big a deal to me honestly. It was wrong, but not impeachable. He lied under the grand jury, which I suppose was impeachable, but he was slick enough to convince me that he was trying to tell the truth by playing with the words. I could care less. Nothing you say will make me believe that he did'nt use military options to deter the press from the Lewinsky stuff, however

    f) I enjoy discussing this stuff with you , and if it seems like I'm angry, please don't take it as such. I think we are both very passionate about what we believe and could have some useful discussions, but don't put words in my mouth, man.
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    a) Typical bitchy liberal crap coming from your mouth. Please show me where
    and when I said GW organized the agencies......quote me....I'm waiting...oh right....you're talking out of your ass again ....I did'nt say that.....we're not gonna get far in a discussion if you are going to put the words in my mouth
    You implied it with your implication that Clinton could have done something that GW was able to do. Again I point out that GW was able to act on it because he HAD all the government agencies on the same page….without that, he too wouldn’t have been able to act. How is that Clinton’s fault?
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    b) Where exactly did you ask me a question regarding GW's responsibility? Show me? Unlike you, I do not think he's a God, whereas you seem to think Clinton is untouchable - I can and will if so asked name plenty of things Bush has fucked up - you've got the wrong guy here, pal. But I guess that would'nt matter to you, as long as you get to blowhard, huh?
    So we agree that no president is flawless. Now we are just discussing which one’s mistakes has cost us more lives, I guess.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    c) You speak of a report that says planes were to be flown into buildings. Not quite. Do your homework. The report said planes were to be used in some capacity in the US. Everyone questioned by the 9/11 commission seems to have been leaning towards planes being hijacked and blown up in the sky.
    Even so, if you call a report that says Bin Laden determined to strike in US, something to " take action " on as you say Bush should have done, Then what can be said of Slick Willie when THE FUCKING ACTION WAS TAKEN ALREADY!!!!!!!!! Are you that dense? The hit us, he did shit about it - He was weak, and you know it - but you seem to be afraid of that truth
    Who did you want Clinton to go after right after it happened? It wasn’t even known who was responsible for the terrorist act on the USS Cole until the final days of Clinton’s administration. Considering the timing of it all; it would have been more efficient (due to the fact that Bush was in the oval office by then) for Bush to act on it…but as you know, he never did neither. Just like he never followed through with the comprehensive plan Clinton left for the Bush administration to continue to work towards getting Ossama & Co.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    d) 9/11 vs Cole - you're once again missing what I wrote about this, so I beg you to open your mind - An attack on a US Military ship warrants a response-
    You cannot tell me that 9/11 warranted a response and the Cole did'nt. You cannot say that to me. No matter how large the damage caused, no matter how much attention one event got vs another, BOTH WERE ACTS OF DISPICABLE TERRORISM - you don't brush one under the rug, pal and say it's ok your president did'nt do anything because it pales in comparison to something that took place a year later - all your doing with that is excusing him, and that was my original point
    Read my above statement. Who again did you want Clinton to respond to? It wasn't clear until the final days of the Clinton administration who was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole. Bush had had way more time to act on it, but he didn’t do anything until after 9/11/2001.
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    e) Nothing you say will make me believe that he did'nt use military options to deter the press from the Lewinsky stuff, however
    That is just absurd!!!!!
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    f) I enjoy discussing this stuff with you , and if it seems like I'm angry, please don't take it as such. I think we are both very passionate about what we believe and could have some useful discussions, but don't put words in my mouth, man.
    Same goes for me! :)
  • DCGARDEN
    DCGARDEN Posts: 515
    aNiMaL wrote:


    So we agree that no president is flawless. Now we are just discussing which one’s mistakes has cost us more lives, I guess.



    ****( I suppose you are correct on this- not my intent, but I suppose that's where it's headed)****



    Who did you want Clinton to go after right after it happened?


    *** ( You cannot be serious! Now you're making Clinton look silly! He was "obsessing" over Bin Laden for a long time I thought.....funny
    Bin Laden had declared war on us already. They knew all about Al Qaeda -
    you would'nt know it from their responses, but they knew) *****



    Same goes for me! :)


    *** ( Ok - you are human - peace to you - I like going back & forth like this)***



    Excuse the way I presented this stuff, I can't figure out how to wrap the quotes around just a portion of the statement and then respond, and then quote something else - help a brother out!
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    Again, you're missing the point. All you're doing is deflecting the issue at hand. You guys cry about invading Iraq, yet seem to want to forget that we did invade Afghanistan FIRST - If your boy had any kind of clue as to how serious Al Qaeda was he would have invaded Afghanistan after the Cole and you damn well know it

    " I had a comprehensive plan drawn up to invade Afghanistan "

    Gimme a break


    Your first problem is that you look at things con v lib. It seems like you have no ability to look at things from the middle. I dont give a shit if its a rep or a dem in office, if any party acts the way this pos shit admin is acting i would be speaking out against it, rep or dem or ind. For one day in your life give that a shot, it's pretty refreshing. We did invade Afg and didnt come close to finishing the job. This isnt some sports game, it's not the nfl where you root for a team. We're talking about lives!
  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    Open wrote:
    Your first problem is that you look at things con v lib. It seems like you have no ability to look at things from the middle. I dont give a shit if its a rep or a dem in office, if any party acts the way this pos shit admin is acting i would be speaking out against it, rep or dem or ind. For one day in your life give that a shot, it's pretty refreshing. We did invade Afg and didnt come close to finishing the job. This isnt some sports game, it's not the nfl where you root for a team. We're talking about lives!

    And the pot calls the kettle black yet again.
  • Open
    Open Posts: 792
    If you dont have anything to contribute, dont post.
  • jsand
    jsand Posts: 646
    Open wrote:
    If you dont have anything to contribute, dont post.

    Nah. I'll do whatever the hell I want. Thanks.
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    Again, you're missing the point. All you're doing is deflecting the issue at hand. You guys cry about invading Iraq, yet seem to want to forget that we did invade Afghanistan FIRST - If your boy had any kind of clue as to how serious Al Qaeda was he would have invaded Afghanistan after the Cole and you damn well know it

    " I had a comprehensive plan drawn up to invade Afghanistan "

    Gimme a break
    Going to Afghanistan first doesn't over ride the fact that we should have never gone to Iraq and we should have "stayed the course" in Afghanistan. Talk about not getting the job done.
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    DCGARDEN wrote:
    Falsify what exactly? Falsely portray what? Clinton finger pointing and getting mad does not mean that he was telling the truth. That man put his penis first and the enemy second. Believe it. Say what you will about Bush, we got hit, he hit back. BJ Clinton developed a very disturbing pattern of handling this shit, and now he wants to re-write history. Does'nt work that way. He did a lot of good things, was a great speaker, but don't confuse what you want a president to be with what the man actually was -

    August 20, 1998. Look it up. We retaliated with missile strikes to Al Qaida terrorist training camps for the US embassy bombings in Nairobi, Tanzania, and Dar es Salaam.
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    YieldInHiding wrote:
    August 20, 1998. Look it up. We retaliated with missile strikes to Al Qaida terrorist training camps for the US embassy bombings in Nairobi, Tanzania, and Dar es Salaam.


    I just wanted to add that yes missiles were launched at training camps. OBL wasnt hit, clinton knew this, but felt it was enough to scare him or something.

    but should also be noted that bush tried an all out invasion and failed also. and then went to Iraq without finishing the job in afgahistan.

    bottom line. both failed.
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I just wanted to add that yes missiles were launched at training camps. OBL wasnt hit, clinton knew this, but felt it was enough to scare him or something.

    but should also be noted that bush tried an all out invasion and failed also. and then went to Iraq without finishing the job in afgahistan.

    bottom line. both failed.

    The poster I quoted said Clinton "developed a disturbing pattern of handling this shit" and Bush hit back. Well Clinton did hit back. It's a fact, but people who are brainwashed by the right-wing propaganda of the time (see: Blow jobs are a more important issue than national security) don't bother to learn the facts.
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    YieldInHiding wrote:
    The poster I quoted said Clinton "developed a disturbing pattern of handling this shit" and Bush hit back. Well Clinton did hit back. It's a fact, but people who are brainwashed by the right-wing propaganda of the time (see: Blow jobs are a more important issue than national security) don't bother to learn the facts.

    while I don't disagree with you. throwing up a few missiles and calling it a day isn't the greatest response to being attacked on our own soil. that being said, bush failed to kill osama but at least succeeded in taking away a base of operations.

Categories