I've said it before and I'll say it again I voted for Bush both times. Why? Cause look at the crap the democrats were putting up as candidates. I also voted for Clinton. I vote for who I feel is the best one for the job NOT just which party offiliation I am. BTW I'm registered independant IF its any of your business. I just get MORE then a little sick of everyone bashing Bush thats all. But when you say 1 bad thing about Clinton its like your an instant idiot. Got a news flash for you guys Clinton was NOT that great of a president. He wasn't bad but come on exactly what did he face during his 8 years in office would make someone say hes great? Did he help the Berlin wall to come down? OH wait that was Regan, Now that was a great president thats why hes got his own aircraft carrier named after him. I don't see anyone looking to name anything after Clinton. Bush senior even has a Union Pacific locomotive named for him. Now I doubt Bush JR will have anything named for him but damn enough is enough don't you think?




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Regan didn't do anything to hasten along what was already happening. Russia was already crumbling behind the Iron Curtain in the late 70's. The only things Reagan is responsible for is upping defence spending to obtuse levels, and creating a situation where those forces would HAVE to be used, as well as de-stabilising the mid-east, South america, supporting terrorists... well.. you get the picture.

Clinton: For such a so-so president,
- Enacted crime bills that not only successfully lowered crime rates EVERY YEAR after they passed (with bi-partisan support I might add).
- Brought the USA out of a very deep recession (near-depression) and balanced the budget for the first time in about 30 years, not only that but had a modest surplus.
- Upped the Military budgets enough to model them into a highly deployable force (just remember, the War on Terrorism is beign fought with CLINTON'S Military).
- Also laid the ground work for the HLSA (Read the Rudman report... it was comissioned just after the first Trade Center bombing).

There's more, but it's all for naught I suppose... I mean.. there's an AIRCRAFT CARRIER that's named after a former president.

There are bigger things than having your name plastered on a ship.

Dubya isn't half the president that Clinton was or even close to being the president his father was. To be brutally honest, he's been lauded as a lot of things, and he's not one of them... He's become a LOT like Joseph Stalin in the image department... Now before you jump on me for saying that: Stalin was widely regarded as the absolute best of everything in the Soviet union, if he said he was a doctor, he was regarded as the best doctor of the land, he was called a master strategist, but inevitably, Russians took the heaviest of losses in WWII.. but he was still called a great tactician (I guess being told that your country is being invaded you can easily say "attack" and have someone else do the greater part of the work... ). What I'm getting at is Bush's PR far exceeds his actual deeds. That's the hallmark of a small, and ineffective person.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

You have some things a little wrong Gam. Here let me help you out there. Clinton enjoyed the results of Regans trickle down economics that everyone poo pooed when he enacted it. As a result Clinton was able to raise taxes thru the roof on the the middle class that he claimed he was protecting. This coupled with him and his friends ccloseing more military bases and putting thru more military cut backs then ever before in history. He basicly desimated the armed forces all you need do is look at troop numbers during his 8 years and you'd see that. All Clinton did in office was inherit what Regan had started and keep the chair warm. Which is all Bush is doing in my opinion too.

How many times have I said I know Bush is not a good president? More then I can recall. But when you look at the U.S. pesidency the last GOOD one was Regan. Now I realize that because he was a republican you can't admit it and I understand that realy I do. But I hope you can at least admit it to yourself.

I realy do hope that either party can put forth some decent people this time around. This country despritly needs good leadership. And its sad to think we've gone so long without any at all.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Jackalope wrote:You have some things a little wrong Gam. Here let me help you out there. Clinton enjoyed the results of Regans trickle down economics that everyone poo pooed when he enacted it. As a result Clinton was able to raise taxes thru the roof on the the middle class that he claimed he was protecting. This coupled with him and his friends ccloseing more military bases and putting thru more military cut backs then ever before in history. He basicly desimated the armed forces all you need do is look at troop numbers during his 8 years and you'd see that. All Clinton did in office was inherit what Regan had started and keep the chair warm. Which is all Bush is doing in my opinion too.

This would be a great argument if it weren't for the fact that George HW Bush was the one that inheirited a bull market and Tail-spinned the economy into a post-war rut... THAT's what Clinton inheirited (remember this? "READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES," only to start having to pay 3-4% income taxes? Thank a Bush for that one). I broke down the utter fallacy of trickle-down economics earlier (and probably summarily pissed Sappy 96 off... ). Clinton had to raise taxes, definitely, however, He didn't force base closures, They were already slated for closure under Reagan's Military renewal plans (which are still being financed..)

Also, there are a few different angles on "Decimated troop numbers." I seem to remember that there has been no point in the last 30 years (after the end of the war in vietnam) that troop strength has declined significantly.

Quote:


How many times have I said I know Bush is not a good president? More then I can recall. But when you look at the U.S. pesidency the last GOOD one was Regan. Now I realize that because he was a republican you can't admit it and I understand that realy I do. But I hope you can at least admit it to yourself.

Depends on what you term Good...
- Heavy defense spending and (at the time) record budget overruns?
- Iran Contra?
- Record high inflation and interest rates and unemployment
- Afghanistan

I think the last "Good" President would have been Kennedy had he not been shot.

Financially, there hasn't been a "good" Republican President since Eisenhower, and sadly, before Clinton, the last fiscally responsible president was Carter.

Quote:

I realy do hope that either party can put forth some decent people this time around. This country despritly needs good leadership. And its sad to think we've gone so long without any at all.

I think the problem is party politics to begin with... Wasn't Congress and the Senate designed originally as a quorum?



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

So what did Kennedy do exactly that would earn him that title? And Carter was the biggest do nothing president in the history of the U.S. good grief man! And no Clinton
didn't do anything either hes next in line after Carter. All Clinton did was raise taxes thru the roof and suck the money out of Americans pockets well that and spooge on a fat chics dress and then lie about it. Clinton closed more bases and mothballed more ships then any other U.S. president in history. He was HORRIBLE for the armed forces. Bush is haveing to spend more money to make up for Clintons attempt at shutting down our armed forces. So to re-cap Bush takes office things are good, world trade center gets hit, forced to spend more to ramp up the military that Clinton desimated. Seems to me maybe you should be condemming Clinton for cutting the military so bad Bush had no choice to spend big to get us back to where we were pre Clinton. I wouldn't expect you to see what I'm talking about 1st your Canadian ( no nothing wrong with that your just wired differently thats all ) And 2 nd you've never been the the U.S. armed forces and seen first hand what good old Bill did.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Kennedy: 25% drop in Personal Income Taxes. It's what kept the American economy going into the crush of the late 60's.

Carter: Energy Crisis? remember when paying over a dollar a gallon in the 80's was considered stupid? That was being reigned in near the end of his term, but the problem was that his energy policies meant serious cutbacks in consumption (IIRC it was 5.

As for the supposed cut and slash military budgets: Bush's first defence budget was tabled in 2002... You went to war in Afghanistan, and Iraq on Clinton's military.

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=124&subsecID=159&contentID=251793
^^^ Worth reading:

Quote:



The Bush administration had barely started to make its mark on defense policy before hostilities in Afghanistan began. In the spring of 2001, it requested and received a $5 billion supplemental appropriation for the 2001 defense budget, but that constituted less than 2 percent of defense spending for the year -- mostly for pay raises -- and went largely unnoticed before the war began. The most recent defense budget submitted to Congress by the Bush administration would increase defense spending significantly, but it fails once again to make tough choices and provide a necessary vision of leadership. While U.S. forces in Iraq were a model of what a transformed U.S. military should be, the Pentagon continues to invest in Cold War military hardware -- fighter aircraft, destroyers, and other weapons designed to fight advanced Soviet military capabilities.

Oh, and I guess a $124 BILLION cash infusion in 1996 was a prime example of Defence decreases in spending..
http://www.themodernreligion.com/terror/defence-spend.html

Handy that eh?

Basically, yeah, a lot of ships were mothballed, a lot of other defence projects got put on hold, but then again, my being a Canadian and not knowing that the ultimate idea behind this is that you want a force that can be spun up and deployed fast must mean dick-all.

Bush has asked now (4 years on) for a ton more money, and I have no doubt whatsoever that its going to be lobbed @ defence contractors in a bid to make more cold-war era (read heavy and near useless in modern offensive urban combat) weapons available. How many battle ships did you see pounding inland targets during the invasion?

Also, Jack, please, with your extensive military knowledge, inform me on how many of the ships that were moth-balled under the Clinton administration were over their operational life span? Again, wow me with your omniscience, that Aircraft Carrier that bears Reagan's name (and it's sister ships, as well as the Seawolf Class subs, the Commanche project... ad nauseum)... praytell, under what administration were they planned, constructed and financed? Clinton's? Yes, I'm being extremely sarcastic... The cuts in military spending were used to make everyone's life a little easier, and your military didn't suffer, it changed to meet the new battle conditions. You ever heard of a military that fails to adapt? It gets overcome.

Let me put it this way: Clinton did a lot more than screw around in the oval office, he's not the first, nor will he be the last president to have his dalliances and lie about it to someone (be it the US public at large or his wife). The bigger picture is that under his administrations, the Economy was set right and the budgets were balanced, the military was brought out of the cold war and streamlined for the new century's combat (IE, Iraq and Afghanistan), terrorism's reach was first realised and planned for (although, it wasn't perfect, but then again, Dubya's dropped the ball on that one but good even though he had about a year's worth of lead-time), His anti-crime legislation put over 100,000 more cops on the streets, and, while you paid more taxes, the lion's share of hikes went to balancing a perpetually red-ink budget and even started paying dividends.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Gam once again your only reading part of my postings and argueing over the part your reading. ( SIGH ) I said for the who knows how manyth time that Bush is NOT what I would call a good president. Let me repeat it for you BUSH IS NOT WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A GOOD PRESIDENT. Now that said and hopefully out of the way can we please move on? I wasn't around to know what the Kennady presidency was like but I hadn't heard of anything spectacular that he did other then get shot oh and throw the U.S. into a bull sh-t war that we had no business sticking our noses in in the first place.
Second those ships you claim were past there due dates are still kept in a state of readieness if there needed again. A ship doesn't have a good till date stamped on its side there retrofitted and kept in service till there sunk. Why do you think that the ships that Clinton the wonder president mothballed are still in dock still floating and still have there key systems in tack. Thanks largely to the military's refusal to scrap them outright. Now I will say again and hope you read it this time I DO NOT CARE WHO HE SCREWED IN THE OVAL OFFICE. Once again I DONOT CARE WHO HE SCREWED
IN THE OVAL OFFICE. I do however have a problem with him being a BOLD FACED
LYER not just to his wife which I could care less about but no rather he went on national T.V. and LYED to the whole world about it and then this is great you should LOVE this his answer was "It depends on what your definition is" Isn't that a great BS line!! I would have expeted that from a republican not a democrate and certainly one that I voted for........ TWICE !!! Thats why I can't stand him I hope you can see a difference there. But just to re-cap for you Don't care who he screwed or where I just don't like being lyed to and made a fool by someone because of there lyes.

Ok now I hope I was clear. If you have any more questions please feel free to ask away.

But PLEASE for the love of GOD!! STOP bashing someone you didn't even vote against. If you didn't vote you don't have the rigt to bitch its that simple. If you don't like the way someone acts in office VOTE THEM OUT!!! But if you just sit there and do nothing then whos fault is it if he gets re-elected?




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Hey Gam explain away "WHITE WATER" for good old slick Willie.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Jack: I did in fact read your entire post

I'm not arguing that Bush isn't a good President, I'm saying that Clinton wasn't as bad as the republican noise machine makes him out to be.

As for Kennedy, I wasn't but composite elements (heck, my Mom was 6 when Kennedy was assassinated), but looking back over his contributions, he did a lot in 3 years.

Regarding the ships that were mothballed, True, there's no best before date, but, they had been slated to be de-commissioned before Clinton was on the presidential tack, and retro-fitting ships is usually a very expensive and time consuming endeavor... In the case of mid-60's era war ships, it was more cost effective to either scrap or de-commission the ships until they were scrapped. Ship building techniques have advanced considerably in the last 40 years, so why have out-dated platforms for the newest defence packages, when a new platform can be had (tailor made in most cases) for equal or less than the cost of refurbishing?

Simple point of fact I'll keep bringing up, Sure, I didn't vote for Bush, nor would I have. We already know how ineffective he is, I'd give Nader a chance over Bush. Sometimes, the devil you know is worse than the one you don't.

As for White Water: Read the Ray Report, and then look up the fact that the republican controlled Senate acquitted him of all charges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_scandal

The worst of it is that Clinton can't practise law in Arkansas anymore.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Nader??? DEAR GOD Gam tell me your kidding? Why do you think Clinton is know as the teflon President? Nothing can stick to him. But hey that would mean nothing good either. Hes a good speaker and very carismatic I'll give him that. But thats about all and those are the only 2 saving graces he had that kept him from getting into more crap then he did. When historians look back at Clintons presidency he'll be seen as a lyer that screwed that intern and for nothing else. Hes just as useless as Bush is now there chair warmers untill this country can pick a decent leader for itself. I just hope that that happens in our lifetime as I'm sick of haveing to defend the people that we elect as not being the worthless crap morons that we all know they are.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Well, I'm just saying that he gets more crap than he's due... I think the same thing for most presidents, but few get less... Bush... much less, he's done a little good, but it was a handshake to his buddies more than anything (back on topic ).

Anyhow...




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

I didn't know we left topic ( Jackalope looks left then right puzzled trying to see where he left the topic. )




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

The thread is about Bush, not Clinton, friend.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

I thought what I was doing was showing how all the past pesidents aren't worth a crap since Regan. Bush included. Then you started as to how wonderfulisious Clinton was
and I said HA!




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Reagan wasn't worth a damn either, let's not forget. You slagged Clinton as though he was the root of the problem, I differ on that, and I attached proof of it.

IF you mean as a man, I don't know.. never met any of them. If you mean as a president, well, look at what you had at the beginning and end the Clinton administrations.


Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Yes at the beginning we had a country that noone else would mess with. Clinton comes in and wham trade centers are hit, the Coal is bombed and he stood there doing nothing. 2 thumbs WAY up are in order I guess. If slick Willie hadn't taken so much funding from the intell community maybe 9/11 wouldn't have happened. But hey he was a great president right? Bush inherited the resesion that Clinton started by taxing us to death. So lets see Bush had to turn around the ecconomy that Clinton killed. Bush had to re-build the military that Clinton destroyed. And Bush is haveing o try to re-build the intell comunity that Clinton also destroted with his budget cuts. Truthfully the only thing I see that Bush screwed up on was going into Iraq. True thats a pretty big screw up but no worse then Kennidy sending us into Nam. and hay he was a great president even with Nam. so I guess that makes Bush a pretty damn good president actualy doesn't it?

Someone needs to come along that can go right up the middle between Bush and Clinton and maybe this place will start to turn around.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

WTC bombings? http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm
USS Cole? Same link.

Again, I linked to an article earlier that showed he pushed for (and got) $124 billion in funding primarily to get the counter terrorism units spun up. Did you not see that? Even Cheney agreed that you "you make war with the last president's military." I guess 2 major liberation campaigns that were moderately successful (Afghanistan is still not very safe, and Iraq was botched from the outset, and if you read Battle Ready by Tom Clancy and ret. Gen. Tony Zinni you'll find out about the decreased numbers that were ordered by Pres. Bush) is the sign of a bad military... or is that, bad leadership? I'm inclined to think the latter.

Bush didn't do squat about the military's budget until later in 2003, ie, after invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. He also had TONS of available intel and warnings for 4-6 months prior to Sept 11/01 and did exactly squat.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Gam He couldn't do "squat" as you put it cause the democrates didn't see the need for a big military. Hell there comander and theif Clinton said they didn't need a strong military so why should they give up there hard earned tax money that they sucked from everyones wallets the past 8 years when slick Willie was in office? The military that Bush recalled from the middle east was because those generals who later complained about it SAID they weren't needed. Bush got this country OUT of a resesion that Clinton started from taxing us to death! And it took less then a year to do it. I'm at work so I can't read your link right now but I will tonight. But let me ask you
What did Clinton do after those attacks? NOTHING that anyone can remember without finding a link to re-fresh everyones memory. Clinton was a do nothing president even more so then Bush. Bush for all his faults #1 has pulled us out of resesion in less then a year. #2 did that while dealing with the dot com businesses going bust at the end of Clintons term. #3 Delt with the worst attack on the U.S. EVER !! #4 Sent those responcible for the attacks scurring into caves. #5 liberated a country from a murdorous dictator and is helping said country re-build its govt. #6 has delt with the worst natural disastors this country can remember and has pleged to re-build this country. Those are just off the top of my head Gam no reseach needed. Any other president would be praised for his handleing of these but because hes republican hes demonized and everything hes done is tryed to be made to look bad. Look Gam I know you don't agree with me and thats just fine I realize that you see things a little differently then I do, Fine again. But you MUST admit that what Bush has had to endure dureing his time in office is W A Y more then anyone else has had to endure during there time in office. Has he made mistakes? Sure has but thats just cause hes a human we all make mistakes. When history looks back at Bush I bet they'll agree that he did a good job under extraordinary hardships and kept this country from falling apart.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

I am sorry for saying this but if we would have voted for Al Gore as president we (United States of America)wouldnt have a Army or Military and Now if we voted for John Kerry Kerry would be same as Al Gore we wount any military at all. So I dont like the democrats because they want to take away the US military and I voted for bush at aleast bush jr actually when to iraq and got sadaam out of power and when we when to iraq when bush sr was president he didnt even get sadaam all we did just made sadaam even more madder when we went over there first time.


Xtreme PC Concepts Opening Up Soon In Decatur Indiana

"What if?" is a fun game Xtreme96Sunfire, but deal with reality.

Jack:

Quote:

Gam He couldn't do "squat" as you put it cause the democrates didn't see the need for a big military.

A big military that was hamstrung by being unable to move forces where they were needed. Recall: 1991, the build up in the gulf took over 4 months before the "war game" that preceeded Desert Storm/Desert Shield. The same build up in 2003: 8 weeks. Rapid deployment was seen as the better option for an invasion.

Quote:

Hell there comander and theif Clinton said they didn't need a strong military so why should they give up there hard earned tax money that they sucked from everyones wallets the past 8 years when slick Willie was in office?

Before you start talking about thieves, lok a dubya in 2000. Nuff said.

And before you talk about money being sucked out of wallets, look at George HW Bush in 1991. 'Nuff said.

Quote:

The military that Bush recalled from the middle east was because those generals who later complained about it SAID they weren't needed. Bush got this country OUT of a resesion that Clinton started from taxing us to death!

First: the recession that happened at the beginning of 2001 was due to massive investor confidence shakers (remember Enron? Worldcom? Yeah... fortune 500 MNC's that got rocked by scandals tend to diminish a bull market), lest you forget... Oh, and if you want to talk about slick deals, 2 major corporations' heads getting away with dumping stock that was about to tank while employees had to watch their retirement options go down the toilet... and the CEO's getting a slap on the wrist? That's Gangsta.

Here's the thing you have to get acquinted with: Bush nor Clinton can control the markets, but they can influence it through taxation efforts, public works projects and fiscal restraint. Bush has only made it somewhat through those 3, and really, he's still spending the US government into the red, devaluing your dollar, and generally setting whomever takes over up for a real bad try for the 1st 4 years.

Please, post your link, but if it's a Rush Limbaugh link, I'm going to reserve the right to vomit first... might take a minute or 2 to get back to the keyboard.

Quote:

But let me ask you
What did Clinton do after those attacks? NOTHING that anyone can remember without finding a link to re-fresh everyones memory.

Read the snopes link. He did all that could be done given the climate politcally. Mind you, Clinton knew enough to not piss off friends.

Quote:


Bush for all his faults #1 has pulled us out of resesion in less then a year.

By introducing economic measures that allow corporations to move jobs out of the country, and giving principally the rich a massive tax break, and creating measures that allow illegally squirrelled away money reserves (offshore) to be returned without penalty.

Quote:

#2 did that while dealing with the dot com businesses going bust at the end of Clintons term.

First off, you make it sound like Clinton was responsible for startup's bad business decisions, and second, you make it sound like Bush did that... the tech melt-down happened in 1998... and was covered and rebounded by 2000. Would you like another try?

Quote:

#3 Delt with the worst attack on the U.S. EVER !!

Which his adminsitration had prior knowledge to, and did nothing about, don't forget.

Quote:

#4 Sent those responcible for the attacks scurring into caves.

And yet, where's Bin Laden?

Quote:

#5 liberated a country from a murdorous dictator and is helping said country re-build its govt.

Have you been paying attention to what's happening in Iraq? The country is still on the verge of civil war, this isn't a news flash.

BTW, there are still a bunch of murderous dictators around the world, nothing's being done about them yet.

Quote:

#6 has delt with the worst natural disastors this country can remember and has pleged to re-build this country

Yeah... but it's funny that he was all up and on it in 2004 (Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne) pushing FEMA to dispense billions of dollars ($42 billion according to FEMA) in reparations with the abandon of drunken sailors on their first shore leave in months. Now, however, FEMA's a lot more miserly when there are harder hit regions (IIRC, NOLA clean up and rebuild will be over $20 billion over 10 years just for infrastructure alone... Hurricane Andrew in 1992 was $14 Billion, and that was helped out fast even in a post-election year, thanks Bill).

Performance? There's little comparison.

Quote:

Those are just off the top of my head Gam no reseach needed.

Jack, that's the problem... it's off the top of your head, and you don't have a very good memory. I post links because a: I trust my memory, but I don't remember specifics extremely well, and b: Recorded information is a lot more accurate.

What I want to know is, why is it that you're not reading them? I refuted at least one of your points with one link, it has footnotes that relate back to published sources, and those sources are ultimately liable for their mistakes.

Do me a favour, if I post a link, please read it. I took the time and energy to look it up, I only ask that you go there, and at least read it, it's only common courtesy. I do the same for you, when you post links, and if I don't, I admit it up front.

Quote:

Any other president would be praised for his handleing of these but because hes republican hes demonized and everything hes done is tryed to be made to look bad.

It's not because he's Repbulican, it's because he's not a good President. Look, his performance aside, he's at least as shady as Clinton was, and the bigger problem is that he's been supported heavily by interested parties (read big business energy firms) that have been having their hands shook back (or washed in the case of Worldcom and Enron).

Quote:

Look Gam I know you don't agree with me and thats just fine I realize that you see things a little differently then I do, Fine again. But you MUST admit that what Bush has had to endure dureing his time in office is W A Y more then anyone else has had to endure during there time in office. Has he made mistakes? Sure has but thats just cause hes a human we all make mistakes.

Agreed, and agreed whole-heartedly. Being human is fine... I don't hate the guy, I've never even met him. I don't agree with his decisions, no, why? They add up to being far too convenient for interested parties. Plus, the guy has more people on his staff that really SHOULD know what they're doing, but, they ultimately have dropped the ball again, and again and again.

I hate to fall back on an old addage, but how many times do you let someone kick you in the gonads before you've had enough?

Quote:

When history looks back at Bush I bet they'll agree that he did a good job under extraordinary hardships and kept this country from falling apart.

Or they'll see a proud underachieving straight-C student that ducked out of the lesser of armed service when his country needed him, led several formerly prosperous corporations into the ground, chaired a baseball club into disastrous seasons and obscene payrolls, became governor of Texas and pushed for the legalisation of executions for mentally handicapped individuals, and then marginally stole an election (using attack ads, and the republican noise machine, slander and innuendo.. fine qualities that the other sides abstained from lets not forget), took the best economy for 20 years preceeding his administration and drove it into the ground, and pre-remptorily pissed off half the arab world that it was trying to liberate after standing idly by and allowing the worst incident of terrorism to happen on his watch even though there was advanced warning.

Bang up job.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

To be honest, i thik the worst attack on U.S. ever was when a british garrison burned the white house down back in the war of 1812.

The biggest problem with americans nowadays is they forget torealize that their forefathers, civillian or otherwise, didn't expect life to be Candyland and expected a few hard knocks from whatever the enemy-du-jure was at the time.

Now, we expect someone to take care of our issues rather than take care of them ourselves.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

Gam I'll go in order it easier that way. The reason it took less time this go round was we had troops over there allready and didn't need to pull them for deploment.

What did Dubya do ? Win the election ? Uh how was it HIS fault if Florida screwed up ?
He didn't steel the election he won it get over it and move on.

So are we talking about Dubya or his dad? Remember stay on topic

So it wasn't Bushes tax cuts that pulled us out of resesion? Ok what did? I didn't blame Clinton for makeing it happen but the fact that the dot com bubble was bursting at the end of his term while coincidence still did happen. And I guess Envron was Bushes fault too? Like you said post that link please.

Had prior knowledge that an attack was coming BUT when from where? Your saying Bush knew we would get nailed on 9/11? Again link please I'd LOVE to see where you got that from.

Uh, Hideing in the caves? Did you not read where I said that? Its in the quote you took from my post so I don't see how you missed it.

On the verge of civil war yes thats true but I guess Bush is the cause of that too right?
And yes there sure is and how many U.N. resolutions did Saddam ignore? How long was he supposed to get away with it? Forever? BS someone needed to step up and knock his ass down and since the U.N. is too be a bunch of wussies then we steped up to the plate and did what needed to be done. I'd rather have the teriorists over there fighting our military then here fighting our cops.

Gam, How does our system of govt. work? Here I'll simplify it for you. First the local govt. then the state govt. Then went ASKED the feds come in. Bush wanted to enact federal legislation so the federal govt. could just come in when needed before saked by the states and everyone threw a fit. So his hands were tied. Again hows that his fault?

Gam I said off the top of my head cause thats what it was and I WAS AT WORK!! the internet is limited to me there I said I'd read your links CHILL!

Lastly what is going to be said of your hero Clinton? A womenising lyer of a cheet that did nothing when this country suffered from terrorist attacks. Stole money from tax payers and lost his licence to practice law came a hairs breath from being impeached for illegal doings when he was in his state and they apparetly continued while he was in office used Haliburton as a sole unbidding contractor on more then one occation.
Wow seems like he did a fan-damn-tastic job as well.


Like I said BOTH of them suck ass as a president. I'm not gonna fight you on this one cause you know they are damn near just as bad as the other and to fight over which is worse is just silly. They both blow!!

This is the problem lately in politics they don't give you someone good to vote for we're forced to keep the worst one out of offfice.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Regarding the 9/11 information:

Quote:

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [-] service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.

Items in [ ] have been redacted or blacked out.

From the 9/11 Commission report: http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch8.htm

ie: he had the information over a month before hand. The president has the authority to direct congress to enact changes in the federal laws that establish the FAA's security protocols.

okay.. After that,

Dubya didn't win the 2000 election. Gore acquiesced. Fine distinction, and don't forget it.

George HW Bush instituted Tax hikes (monutmental don't forget) during his administration... You posed the point that Clinton hiked taxes, I didn't rebuke that it's true, but I also pointed out that another Bush decided the nation's wallets were ripe for the picking as well. BTW, you don't know jack (pardon the pun) about paying taxes.. I lose 30% of my pay off the top before I even get a cheque... pardon me for not thinking you're over taxed.

Bush's Tax cut really didn't do anything... A recession is defined as 2 consecutive quarters of downward or even trading. The downward trades were because of Enron... after that, the market corrected. Bush's tax cuts (implementation in april 2002, not the proposals) came 4 full quarters after that disaster (Enron: Oct 2000), and 2 quarters after 9/11. The markets opened down, but were bouyed after strong consumer spending projections.

I'll get into it more tomorrow... I'm tired.





Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

GAM, your patience truly amazes me sir. You should teach special-education children. You'd do a fantastic job.

/\ /\ /\ My mom always said i was special does that count?

He could only teach the ones that were left leaning tho. Thats ok left or not Gams an ok guy.




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.