« The White Man's Burden, Part V: Who's Next, or Where Do We Go From Here? | Main | The Blogatorium Is Open »

Clinton Meltdown Over Failure To Capture Bin Laden

bc.jpg
I still can't believe this guy was president for eight years. It is amazing that a majority of the American people would elect this guy twice. (Oops, forgot -- they didn't.) If you haven't seen the video of Bill Clinton's meltdown yet, check it out now.

Update; One thing that you can say about Bill Clinton is that he is consistent. The first press conference he held after becoming President was striking to me in that he spent an incredible amount of time blaming the evil Republicans for everything. At the time I thought he sounded so unlike any other president in my lifetime and I just knew he would not be successful by blaming others rather than taking responsibility for his own actions (or inaction). I was wrong because he did enjoy success in the opinion polls by bashing his opponents. (A big dot com bubble that boosted the economic outlook didn't hurt either.)

I was right too though, partially at least, because he never did really win over those on the other side of the aisle, at least not at the ballot box. Listen to any of Clinton's speeches or interviews and you will hear at least some form of blame being placed on his opponents. Like I said, he is consistent.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton Meltdown Over Failure To Capture Bin Laden:

» American Conservative Daily Blog linked with Bill Clinton Is Wagging His Finger Again

» Right Moment linked with More Quickies

» Mary Katharine Ham linked with Clinton Flips Out on Fox Over Osama

» Mike's Noise linked with Clinton out of control: "At least I tried"

Comments (143)

I did not have sex with tha... (Below threshold)
Bob Jones:

I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky!

I tried to get Bin Laden, really I tried! More than those Right Wingers. Yeah, that's it, That's the ticket.

What a lying sack of Arkansas hillybilly crap.

/spit

Clinton is a proven liar. ... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Clinton is a proven liar. Why on earth would anyone but a blind lefty democrat believe him? Berger probably stole the proof that Clinton did nothing to get Bin Ladin. He said in his interview (a portion was shown on Fox) Willy said at least he tried. He failed but he tried. The hell you say. When Bush tried, he didn't get him either, but he sure changed his comfort level.

Looks like the Clinton Lega... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Looks like the Clinton Legacy is being writeen and he don't like the way it's goin'.

Life's a bith when you no longer conrol the spin ey Bill.

That depends on your defini... (Below threshold)
VagaBond:

That depends on your definition of what "tried" is.

Clinton never got 50% of th... (Below threshold)
bill:

Clinton never got 50% of the vote, a fact lost on todays donks.

Sure it depends on the defi... (Below threshold)

Sure it depends on the definition of tried.

I don't blame Clinton overly much. I'd really hate for us to be assasinating every Tom, Dick, and Abdul who makes it to our sh*t list. Hind sight is 20/20 as they say. NOW it seems obvious. Then it didn't.

I *really* don't think he does himself any favors, though, by getting all self-defensive and animated. It makes people think he's guilty of something.

Hey Phant, er I mean Bill:<... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Hey Phant, er I mean Bill:

What percent did the Boy Emperor get in 2000? It's a fact lost on you I guess.Here it is: 47.87 to be exact. You people can really be friggin idiots, even without trying.

Still less than half, dumba... (Below threshold)
Bob Jones:

Still less than half, dumbass

Hugh, Bush got 51% ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Hugh,
Bush got 51% in 2004! Clinton never got 50%. That 's a fact that seems to be lost on you.

Here is the really sad part... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

Here is the really sad part.

Today there is a drumbeat on the news media to call Bush a failure in some way or another. A failure on the war on terror because he has not yet gotten Bin Laden, a failure in Afghanistan and Iraq, a failure on the economy, you name it.

Yet, you will not see Bush on television pointing his finger and blaming the "left wingers" for this message. Instead, he remains possitive, ignores the noise, and continues to do what he believes is right for this country. It is because of that he will go down in history like Reagan did, as one of the great Presidents of the United States, despite his failings, like in No Child Left Behind and Immigration and in spending too much of our money on social welfare, failing to fix Social Security, etc.

On the other hand, Clinton has lot's of allies and supporters out there who admire and adore him, even some in the media who say they'd love to have sexual relations with him because he's such a handsome guy and charismatic.

And yet, his legacy is written and its name is Monica Lewinski. He spent his time in office betraying this country and his oath by diddling his interns, sexual harrasment under the law for which any CEO would be fired, and "trying" in some attempt or other to get bin laden.

You'll notice nothing but excuses out of the Clinton administration for its failures. They are very vocal and "angry" about being accused of failures during Clinton's two terms in office.

It's nice we don't have to hear that out of President Bush and his administration. Refreshing, actually. The contrast is alarming.

One President points his finger at us, opens his eyes wide, and lies to our faces while blaming his opponents. The other President puts his head down, ignores the noise and really tries his best to get the job done in order to keep the American public safe from harm.

May God Bless George W. Bush.

History can be written anyw... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

History can be written anyway you want. The facts are what matters. The facts are Clinton was doing a lot to curb terrorism. And he was doing it in a way that didn't rally the worlds terrorist against us. Bush completely ignored the threat until 7 minutes after the second plane hit. Then he over reacted costing us billions and increasing the number of global jihadist out to get us. And he truly did let bin Laden get away.

Anyone wanna look at the facts on the issue and I'll be sure to club you with them.

And as far as re-electing Clinton his economy blows the doors off of this one AND it was far better for the middle class and the working class then Bush's.

If you are voting for Bush you are simple voting for Corporate rule and an end to democracy. And you call the Clinton voters stupid?


Methinks he doth protest to... (Below threshold)

Methinks he doth protest too much.

History can be written anyw... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

History can be written anyway you want. The facts are what matters.
-------------------------------------------------
That is a good point and Clinton has been shown to be a liar. Even Clinton admitted that he didn't want to get Bin Laden when it was offered to him by the Sudanese. The fact that Sandy Berger had to destroy classified documents to cover up their sorry legacy on terrorism. Finally as you said Clinton was clubbed with the truth and he was upset because he couldn't get away with lying and intimidating people into silence anymore.

Baggi, that was good. The left despised and smeared Reagan when he was in office. History and truth showed that he is a hero to millions of oppressed people in Eastern Europe while the left stood by and even covered up for the communists during the cold war. Clinton 's history is linked with Monica Lewinsky. The sad part is that Clinton is the hero of the left and that 's why they have to spin for him

History can be written anyw... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

History can be written anyway you want. The facts are what matters.
-------------------------------------------------
That is a good point and Clinton has been shown to be a liar. Even Clinton admitted that he didn't want to get Bin Laden when it was offered to him by the Sudanese. The fact that Sandy Berger had to destroy classified documents to cover up their sorry legacy on terrorism. Finally as you said Clinton was clubbed with the truth and he was upset because he couldn't get away with lying and intimidating people into silence anymore.

Baggi, that was good. The left despised and smeared Reagan when he was in office. History and truth showed that he is a hero to millions of oppressed people in Eastern Europe while the left stood by and even covered up for the communists during the cold war. Clinton 's history is linked with Monica Lewinsky. The sad part is that Clinton is the hero of the left and that 's why they have to spin for him

Just for the record, the re... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Just for the record, the real "Clinton Legacy":

“The cowards who committed this murderous act must not go unpunished,” he said angrily. “Let me say again: We will pursue this. America takes care of our own. Those who did it must not go unpunished ... Let me be very clear: We will not rest in our efforts to find who is responsible for this outrage, to pursue them and to punish them.” (June 1996, Khobar Towers bombing)

"At least I tried."

"“We will use all the means at our disposal to bring those responsible to justice, no matter what or how long it takes. . . . We are determined to get answers and justice.” (August 1998, embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya)

"At least I tried."

“We will find out who was responsible and hold them accountable ... if [the terrorists’] intention was to deter us from our mission of promoting peace and security in the Middle East, they will fail utterly.” (October 2000, USS Cole bombing)

"At least I tried."

Go read for yourselves Chapter 4 of the Official 9/11 Commission Report, which details numerous opportunities to kill or capture Bin Laden. Here is one:

It was in Kandahar that perhaps the last, and most likely the best, opportunity arose for targeting Bin Ladin with cruise missiles before 9/11. In May 1999, CIA assets in Afghanistan reported on Bin Ladin's location in and around Kandahar over the course of five days and nights. The reporting was very detailed and came from several sources. If this intelligence was not "actionable," working-level officials said at the time and today, it was hard for them to imagine how any intelligence on Bin Ladin in Afghanistan would meet the standard. Communications were good, and the cruise missiles were ready. "This was in our strike zone," a senior military officer said. "It was a fat pitch, a home run." He expected the missiles to fly. When the decision came back that they should stand down, not shoot, the officer said, "we all just slumped." He told us he knew of no one at the Pentagon or the CIA who thought it was a bad gamble. Bin Ladin "should have been a dead man" that night, he said.

Bill Clinton deserves to be judged based on the actual decisions of his administration, not his "save my legacy" spin.

"The facts are Clinton was ... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

"The facts are Clinton was doing a lot to curb terrorism."

Really? Was he curbing terrorism when the WTC was bombed in 1993? How about our embassy in Bali? How about the USS Cole? How about our soldier being dragged thru the streets? Yeah, Clinton was doing a lot, but it wasn't to curb terrorism (if you get my drift).

Why do you liberals continue to make complete fools out of yourselves like this? Not only are you ignorant, you fail to understand that we conservatives are very well educated on the issues and can easily counter you arguments with FACTS.

And as far as the economy goes, the unemployment rate is lower than it ever was under Clinton, a figure you guys used ALL THE TIME to measure the economy by in the 90's.

You're a typical liberal who just throws statements out there with no facts at all to back them up. Just a lot of rhetorical hot air.

Thanks for coming Muirgeo.

Goodnight.

One President points his fi... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

One President points his finger at us, opens his eyes wide, and lies to our faces while blaming his opponents. The other President puts his head down, ignores the noise and really tries his best to get the job done in order to keep the American public safe from harm.

May God Bless George W. Bush.

Posted by: Baggi

On President lied about a personal matter that didn't get ONE person killed.
The other read My Pet Goat for 7 minutes while our country was being attacked then he lied us into a war that has cost us half a trillion dollars, far more lives then were lost in 9-11 and in the process he committed a felon by violating the wiretap laws and he is guilty of war crimes by violating the Geneva Conventions. He's set up an economy that only advances the very wealthy and will ultimately lead to the 3rd Republican lead Depression as out debt and trade balance grows. Meanwhile he's totally ignored out three biggest threats from WMD from Korea, Pakistan and nuclear material in Russia.

For Bush's efforts Afghanistan is a Taliban strong hold and the poppy business is booming, Iraq is on the verge of a civil war, Hamas , and Hezbolla are as defiant as ever, the economy is on a knives edge from disaster, our infrastructure and our National Parks are crumbling, science is ignored, the debt is the largest ever, middle class America (THAT'S YOU DING DONGS) are falling behind in spite of working harder then ever, Corporations are stealing the treasury, corruption and graft is everywhere, the electoral process is completely untrusted and the world looks at us in disbelief.

And good people who call themselves Christians rally behind the war loving poor hating Administration as if Jesus is right with them....daohohohohoh....shakes my and rubs my eyes...WTH are you all drinking??? You clueless Hypnotized Bushbots....you are the biggest cult this country has ever seen.....

And as far as re-electing C... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

And as far as re-electing Clinton his economy blows the doors off of this one AND it was far better for the middle class and the working class then Bush's.
-----------------------------------------------
This is wrong on the facts. Clinton inherited a growing economy and the peace dividend of the end of the cold and gulf war. Oil price was $60. Yup, which is better on the economy?

If you are voting for Bush you are simple voting for Corporate rule and an end to democracy. And you call the Clinton voters stupid?
------------------------------------------------
So why are you voting for the filthy rich like Kerry, Kennedy, Boxer and George Soros? Why do you want to vote for a party that enables dictators like Chavez and Castro (eg. Carter)? Why do you vote for a party that cannot muster 1/10 of their hatred for Bush towards the terrorists?

Muirego,Thanks for... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

Muirego,

Thanks for proving my point that all you can do is just spout out rhetoric without facts.

You need to stop vomiting the liberal talking points and do a little THINKING for once.

Geez you people are so stupid!

And as far as re-electing C... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

And as far as re-electing Clinton his economy blows the doors off of this one AND it was far better for the middle class and the working class then Bush's.
-----------------------------------------------
This is wrong on the facts. Clinton inherited a growing economy and the peace dividend of the end of the cold and gulf war. Oil price was

Bush inherited a recession and 9/11. With all the cost of the war on terror and
Oil price above $60, the economy seems to grow quite nicely. At the same time, the liberal economies of Europe and Canada haven't grown much while they spent little on defense. Yup, who is better on the economy?

muirgeo, Again you ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

muirgeo,
Again you proved that thuggish dictator like Chavez simply repeated the left 's talking points (or lies). No wonder the left loves this guy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13401534/
Chavez says U.S. may have orchestrated 9/11
‘Those towers could have been dynamited,’ says Venezuela’s president

Methinks he doth protest to... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Methinks he doth protest too much.

Posted by: Jim Addison

Trying to speak Shakespearian English doesn't make you smart especially when the content of your message screams out that your a contented ignorant fool.

Oh I'm a happy ignorant fool...Falalalalalal.LLALALALALAL...

the debt is huge, the armies in shambles, terrorist are multiplying like rabbits, China owns us, the globe is warming and corporations are taking over my country but I'm a happy happy guy because I got 1000 cable channels and Fox news has washed my brain and all i think are happy happy thoughts lALALALALALLAL all the day long....

That is a good point and Cl... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

That is a good point and Clinton has been shown to be a liar. Even Clinton admitted that he didn't want to get Bin Laden when it was offered to him by the Sudanese. The fact that Sandy Berger had to destroy classified documents to cover up their sorry legacy on terrorism.
Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigrant

You call Clinton a liar then you follow it with two sentences that are lies. Good job junior.....remind me not to bother posting back to you anymore because you lie.

1835 days since Bush swore ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

1835 days since Bush swore he wouldn't rest until he got bin Laden...

muirgeo, Seems lik... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

muirgeo,
Seems like you don't believe your own rhetoric. If you really believe what you are writing, you would have moved to your utopia in Iran, Venezuela. We risked our lives to come to America and i can tell you from first hand experience that America is a great country. If you don't believe that, then you should try to move to another country.

Hey Muirego,There'... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

Hey Muirego,

There's audio of Clinton explaining why he didn't get Bin Laden when the Sudanese offered him to us you moron.

Or was that doctored by those evil right wing Republicans?

Wasn't Alec Baldwin going t... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

Wasn't Alec Baldwin going to move to France if Bush won the election in 2004?

You can't depend on liberals for ANYTHING.

You call Clinton a liar the... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

You call Clinton a liar then you follow it with two sentences that are lies. Good job junior.....remind me not to bother posting back to you anymore because you lie.
-----------------------------------------------
Where are your facts to back it up? Oh, you didn't hear about Sandy Berger, right? Are you too busy reading Chomsky?

Fact-free posting. IF you believe what you wrote, you would have left America a long time ago.

"Chris, I never...I did not... (Below threshold)
Insomniac:

"Chris, I never...I did not have sexual relations...with Osama bin Laden!"

Wow, the BDS-afflicted poo-flingers are out en masse tonight! Ya'll have fun, but I just don't have the patience anymore to talk to these people. Banging one's head against the wall is less painful and about as productive...

Funny thing is, as soon as ... (Below threshold)
smartguy:

Funny thing is, as soon as Bin Laden DOES get caught, there will only be two reactions in the MSM:

1. Bin Laden is irrelevant now anyway
and
2. Hmm...election coming up...the timing of the capture sure seems suspicious

Bush is suuuuch a goooood p... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Bush is suuuuch a goooood president because first he makes me scared...then he tells me he'll protect me and that makes me feel better. Then he blows stuff up and that makes me feel ever better. He is so authoritarian that I just love it because he tells me what to think and when to think it....he says I'm a patriot because I think like he does. Usually its hard for me having to choose between black and white but Mr President tells me what is black and what is white and I like that. I wonder what he'll want me to think tomorrow?


Man are you people great Matrix material or what. For you guys definitely take the blue pill when offered.

Smartguy, The reaso... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Smartguy,
The reason is simple. The liberals don't have any solution to offer. So people who don't have solutions can only find faults and criticize to cover up their incompetence. For the dems, not only their incompetence but their corruption.

Evertbody RUN!!!!! mun-go s... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Evertbody RUN!!!!! mun-go says the sky is falling, the sky is falling------

muerigo, Bush must ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

muerigo,
Bush must have done a good job keeping you safe here in America. He even protected your freedom to post your rant against him. If he is bad as you said, you would have moved to another country.

The fact that you are still here posting on this forum at least a proof that Bush has done his job despite the sell out by the liberal left.

"Then he blows stuff up and... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

"Then he blows stuff up and that makes me feel ever better."

In your incoherent ranting, I think that now you've confused President Bush with Monica Lewinski.

Sorry I couldn't resist.

Muirego, you f*cking idiot.... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Muirego, you f*cking idiot. You are incapable ot distingushing between truth and lie. Sandy Berger stole (proven, he admitted guilt) documents from the National Archives just prior to the 9/11 commission meeting. What do you suppose was so important that he would ruin his shining reputation by this repugnant act? Copies of Clinton war plans. Go away.

People sure have short memo... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

People sure have short memories. It's news today that Slick has collected several millions/billions of dollars for some phony project. I remember a project called 'white water' where all of the money went into an off shore account is someone else's name. Want to bet what percent of this money will end up in the same account. A career criminal and liar will always rip you off, it's in their blood. Remember he is a lawyer (disbarred but still a lawyer and the Weasel is a lawyer and bigger criminal than he is), so the where abouts of the money will never be known.
Anyway today he blew a cork, is that different from the BJ's he was getting in the white house. Maybe Hillary will don the knee pads and let off the pressure before his head explodes. If his head explodes there will be little pussies all over since that's all that has ever been on his mind.

Yes, Mungo and Publicus hav... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Yes, Mungo and Publicus have no penis.

Sad for them. Maybe one day they will find it in the ass they left it in . . .

Clinton spent most of his t... (Below threshold)

Clinton spent most of his time in his eight years in office on "feel-good" activities and used the military for important strategic places such as Haiti. He only discovered the need to bomb Iraq and bin Laden when he was trying to distract the American people from his womanizing.

Last word in Clinton's rant? Failed. The truth accidently slipped out.

People like Muirego are ent... (Below threshold)
kirktoe:

People like Muirego are entering insanity. They are incapable of discerning the truth or even really caring too. They accuse us of being parrots for Bush when it is them who just soak up whatever their leaders tell them.

I guess he missed the debate over immigration, the NSA wiretap program, and the CIA program among Republicans while the Dem's stood on the sideline offering nothing.

I'm just wondering how much more is going to happen before some of these people start acting out their hateful thoughts on others. What are they going to do on November 8th when the GOP still controls Congress. I just hope Bush and his people have tightened security around them.

In one sense it's very comical to listen/watch these idiots but in anther way it's very scary.

You know his "wife" sat on ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

You know his "wife" sat on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart, don't you???

EEEEEKKKK!

And they reigned over Global Warming per Mr. Bore.

ACKKKK!

And, and, everybody started hating us in the whole wide world when we--bombed aspirin factory, invaded Bosnia without U.N. approval, declared Saddam's regime illegitimate, etc.

But, but, that was during Slick's Presidency, ...ACKKKK, BLECHHHH, PLTSZXCVJ:LJj!

Liberal dweeb weenies.

muirgeo, Seems like ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

muirgeo,
Seems like you don't believe your own rhetoric. If you really believe what you are writing, you would have moved to your utopia in Iran, Venezuela. We risked our lives to come to America and i can tell you from first hand experience that America is a great country. If you don't believe that, then you should try to move to another country.

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigrant


No doubt this is a great country but I want to keep it that way. Selling it off to Multinational Corporations is NOT the way to do that.

Plane and simple the Republican party as it is now stands for nothing more then Corporate rule. I'm a capitalist for sure but I put democracy first. This is supposed to be a government OF, BY and FOR the people. And anyone who doesn't understand how corporate influence is undermining democracy is simply not paying attention.

The Democrats while not perfect are the party of the people, the party of democracy and the party of the Constitution.

What we have now is an undermining of the Constitution, of democracy and f the people in favor of corporatism......you don't see that????

People who put corporate interest above the peoples, above democracy and above the constitution are neither patriotic or democratic.

Hey Muirego,There'... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Hey Muirego,

There's audio of Clinton explaining why he didn't get Bin Laden when the Sudanese offered him to us you moron.

Or was that doctored by those evil right wing Republicans?

Posted by: kirktoe


And in that audio did he say HE DIDN'T WANT TO GET HIM? or did he say they had no legal grounds on which to take him at the time???

Oh, you didn't hear about S... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Oh, you didn't hear about Sandy Berger, right? Are you too busy reading Chomsky?

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigrant

I don't think you are lying. I think you are just an ignoramus spouting talking points you heard else where.

Berger DID NOT DESTROY ANY ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS!!!!

Muirgeo: I believe a mult... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Muirgeo: I believe a multinational corporation owns your brain. They only had to pay $.02 for it, but they still got a bad deal.

If you don't like Multination Corps, then please do move to the Peoples Republic of __________ whatever. They get rid of them at the stroke of a pen, along with the rest of their economies.

You sir are a fucking idiot. Sorry, but you really, really are. Just listen to yourself.

You are the political equivalent of Clay Aiken.

No doubt this is a great co... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

No doubt this is a great country but I want to keep it that way. Selling it off to Multinational Corporations is NOT the way to do that.
-----------------------------------------------
That 's why you shouldnot vote for the Dems who are in the pocket of the filthy rich like Goerge Soros and Hollywood left. Bush has done a good job and you are a proof of it.


The Democrats while not perfect are the party of the people, the party of democracy and the party of the Constitution.
What we have now is an undermining of the Constitution, of democracy and f the people in favor of corporatism......you don't see that????
-----------------------------------------------
This is CONTRARY to the facts: The Dem party now is a party of the filthy rich like Kerry, Kennedy, Boxer and Hollywood. Moreover, the Dem party is in the pocket of the the mega filthy rich like George Soros. The Dem was willing to abandon the oppressed people under the communist countries during the cold war. The Dem party is willing to abandon the poor/oppressed people in Iraq/Afghan and now Iran/Cuba/Venezuela for example. They embraced these rich thuggish dictators like Chavez, Adm at the expense of the people. IN America, what have the Dems done for the poor black people?

Berger DID NOT DESTROY ANY ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS!!!!
------------------------------------------------
Oh, why did he try to destroy any classified documents at all? If you said that he is sloppy, remember he was the NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR. So all your points about clinton national security effort was simply fact-free talking points. Using your own lingo you are either don't know what you are talking about or you simply not trying to tell the truth

Seems like you may use more... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Seems like you may use more facts that Clinton is a pathetic liar.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/197861.php

Clinton's legacy is 9/11, t... (Below threshold)
jjp:

Clinton's legacy is 9/11, this is proof. Its amazing to see the grace George W. Bush gives his enemy and true to the history of what grace does to the godless, it drives them nutts

Mitchell has a good point. ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mitchell has a good point. You should try to live in Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, or North Korea for example. These countries have no multi-national corporations. All industries are nationalized and supposedly to serve the interest of the people. Looks like these are utopia for you.

Muirego, you f*cking idiot.... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Muirego, you f*cking idiot. You are incapable ot distingushing between truth and lie. Sandy Berger stole (proven, he admitted guilt) documents from the National Archives just prior to the 9/11 commission meeting. What do you suppose was so important that he would ruin his shining reputation by this repugnant act? Copies of Clinton war plans. Go away.

Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III


He didn't take or destroy any originals and the documents he took were supportive of Clintons actions against the terrorist.

He took them simply because he was being lazy and stupid and not to cover something up. So IT IS A LIE to say he DESTROYED documents. GOT IT!!!

He took them simply because... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

He took them simply because he was being lazy and stupid and not to cover something up. So IT IS A LIE to say he DESTROYED documents. GOT IT!!!
-------------------------------------------------
So you basically said that Clinton appointed a lazy and stupid man to be his NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR. In other words, you admitted that Clinton was stupid for choosing Sandy Berger. That 's why he was so lousy about national security issue, esp terrorism. OK, all your previous talking points about how good clinton was wrt terrorism was simply spouting our incoherent talking points.

"1835 days since Bush swore... (Below threshold)

"1835 days since Bush swore he wouldn't rest until he got bin Laden..."

No wonder he keeps f#@^&*g up he needs some sleep!

May god bless George Bush huh? Soooo your god doesn't bless me, or Hugh,or muirgeo? Oh that's right, god is a republican. Hey,does karl rove & frat boy have a personal line to the big guy. I mean, after all, they have sent quite alot of people to meet him.

BTW,your frat boy leader was declared a winner of an election by people his daddy gave jobs to. -How is that for irony?-So for Low-rie Bye-rd to make an issue of Clinton not getting 50% of the vote, is kind of like a crack dealer calling a whore a law breaker.

BTW, who is stupid here for... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

BTW, who is stupid here for believing that Sandy Berger was not trying to cover up for Bill Clinton? Esp after all the rant against Bush.

Liberalism is bad for your thinking, it really is.

5 years and the liberals st... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

5 years and the liberals still haven't changed their appeasement and terrorist enabling way.

30 years and the liberals still haven't apologized for their complicity in the murder of millions of people by the communists.

If you don't like Multinati... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

If you don't like Multination Corps, then please do move to the Peoples Republic of __________ whatever. They get rid of them at the stroke of a pen, along with the rest of their economies.

You sir are a fucking idiot. Sorry, but you really, really are. Just listen to yourself.

You are the political equivalent of Clay Aiken.

Posted by: Mitchell


Dude moving to any other country doesn't protect you from MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS you ding dong.

You guys are so afraid of One World Government and the United Nations and instead you're gonna get One World Corporate Rule ya dope azz.

the most damning thing for ... (Below threshold)
jp:

the most damning thing for Clinton's legacy is the 1993 attack on the WTC right after he took office and his view of it. Ramsey Yousef came to America with an Iraqi Passport and bombed the WTC on the 2nd anniversary of the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq/saddam!!!! his uncle, khalid sheik mohammed of course is the 9/11 mastermind

Dude moving to any other co... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Dude moving to any other country doesn't protect you from MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS you ding dong.
------------------------------------------------
Again here are the countries that are supposedly free of the multinational corporations: Cuba, North Korea, and Iran for example. They are against capitalism with multinational corporations and practice the statist economics for the sake of the people. These are exactly your utopia.

It would appear the Clinnoc... (Below threshold)
Jim:

It would appear the Clinnochio is back!

Muerigo,You guys are... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Muerigo,
You guys are so afraid of One World Government and the United Nations
-----------------------------------------------
So you like United Nations? Yup they are so good for the poor that they are deeply involved in the oil-for-food corruption to keep Saddam in power so that he can have real torture and rape. The Human Rights Commission is a den of thuggish dictators like Mugabe (of Sudan), Syria etc... I don't know whether you know about the congo sexual abuse of refugees by UN troops. What have the UN done for the poor people of Sudan?

What was George Bush doing ... (Below threshold)
KimsBlackChild:

What was George Bush doing about Bin Laden prior to 9-11?

...enemy and true to the hi... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

...enemy and true to the history of what grace does to the godless, it drives them nutts

Posted by: jjp

Dude we're ALL godless...you're just to week and needy to admit it.
Oh and no Santa either...sorry to ruin your week end but truth is important for a rational perspective on the REAL world.


No god dude. Just think back to one year before you were born, then think back 100 years or 1 million years before that...that's your eternity when you die. It's not that bad....now lets focus on the here and now instead of planning for the nothingness.

LoveAmerica Imm: we need m... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

LoveAmerica Imm: we need more like you.

You are a better American than many who were born here! I assume because you didn't grow to take it for granted like these lazy, privileged bastards, mungo, et al.

My wife is an immigrant from Latin Am. She marvels at the stupidity of those on the Left in this country who would not, for one second, stand for the kind of stuff they expect the "3rd world" to put up with.

It used to be that the Left/Dems. feigned interest in the "little people" in Lat Am and other hard places. But they betrayed their true lack of interest in anyone beside themselves when we tried to free Afghans and Iraqis.

Same for their love fest with Chavez. The man is a dictator, and no one, NO ONE, would enjoy living in his impoverished country. More impoverished now than when he took over in 1998, and since oil has goine from $20 to recently $80 a barrel.

Lefties never did understand economics. Don't trust them with that, or something serious like liberating oppressed people. They would say, Darfur, Smarfur, let someone else worry with it.
We're with France and Russia--it's just too hard and dirty.

I am so glad I don't exist in their petty, afraid, small little world.

What was George Bush doing ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

What was George Bush doing about Bin Laden prior to 9-11?
-----------------------------------------------
He was trying to put together his admistration after a long delay by AlGore's contest and put together a plan to take care of AlQ. What did Bill Clinton do after the 1993 WTC attack, the Khobar tower, the embassy attack, the Yemen attack etc ...?

---------------------------... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

---------------------------------------
Again here are the countries that are supposedly free of the multinational corporations: Cuba, North Korea, and Iran for example. They are against capitalism with multinational corporations and practice the statist economics for the sake of the people. These are exactly your utopia.

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigran


I didn't say I supported communism. I support democracy. What do you put first Capitalism or Democracy? Answer that. It's a straight forward question.

Muiergo seems to be trying ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Muiergo seems to be trying to post jibberish to distract attentio.

So you like United Nations?... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

So you like United Nations? Yup they are so good for the poor that they are deeply involved in the oil-for-food corruption to keep Saddam in power so that he can have real torture and rape. The Human Rights Commission is a den of thuggish dictators like Mugabe (of Sudan), Syria etc... I don't know whether you know about the congo sexual abuse of refugees by UN troops. What have the UN done for the poor people of Sudan?

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigrant

Absolutely I like the United Nations. Its not perfect but with good leadership it can be better and it has done loads of good things since its inception.

Now there used to be The League of Nations, but a certain country thought it was TOO GOOD for the League of Nations and left it to attack France instead.

I didn't say I supported co... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I didn't say I supported communism. I support democracy. What do you put first Capitalism or Democracy? Answer that. It's a straight forward question.
------------------------------------------------
You said you don't want MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS. So i simply follow the logic of your arg: I provide you with the list of countries that are free of MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS.

Next time, make sure you think through your args before posting.

Mitchell, thanks. I... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mitchell,
thanks. I marvel at the people who can believe that the modern Dem party is a party of the people. Just like the people who believe that the communists care about the poor.

What was George Bush doing ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

What was George Bush doing about Bin Laden prior to 9-11?
-----------------------------------------------
He was trying to put together his admistration after a long delay by AlGore's contest and put together a plan to take care of AlQ. What did Bill Clinton do after the 1993 WTC attack, the Khobar tower, the embassy attack, the Yemen attack etc ...?

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigrant


You are wrong Bush did nothing to address the Al queda threat up until 7 minutes after the second plane hit the world trade centers.

Actually here is some stuff Bush did related to Al qeueda

http://www.questionsquestions.net/bushladen/bushladen_chart.htm

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushabdullahhands.htm

Here's what Clinton did:

http://www.cdt.org/security/usapatriot/19950427clinton.html

Absolutely I like the Unite... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Absolutely I like the United Nations. Its not perfect but with good leadership it can be better and it has done loads of good things since its inception.
------------------------------------------------
Using your own standard, if you can put up with all the craps the UN has done. Then America under Bush is much better than the UN for sure!

Looks at the fact: Europe is willing to sell out the poor Iraquis for Saddam 's oil. UN is simply a den of thuggish dictators. Russia, China, France were willing to sell out the poor for oil-for-food bribes.

I didn't know that your standard was so low that can support such a corrupt and ineffective institution like the UN. So all your rant about Bush is again fact-free talking points. Bush adm is far more competent and caring about the poor/oppressed people in the world.

Muergio, All your p... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Muergio,
All your posts are simply wrong. Bush was in office barely 8 months and Condi Rice talked about Alq way before that. You should learn by now that the left doesn't care about the truth and the facts as I have shown you so far in this thread.

You couldn't even follow your own logic. Can we agree now that Clinton was stupid for choosing a lazy and stupid man like Sandy Berger to be his NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR (this is your own point).

Here is what Clinton did


http://ace.mu.nu/archives/197861.php

So IT IS A LIE to say he... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

So IT IS A LIE to say he DESTROYED documents.

Well, he did plead guilty to it.
-=Mike

Mitchell,thanks. I m... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Mitchell,
thanks. I marvel at the people who can believe that the modern Dem party is a party of the people. Just like the people who believe that the communists care about the poor.

Posted by: LoveAmerica Immigran

Did middle class purchasing power go up or down under Clinton? Bush?

Did the poverty rate go up or down under Clinton? Bush?

How did Clintons job numbers compare with Bush?

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet

How was the deficit under Clinton? Bush? The stock market?

I'm going to bed. Here's a ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

I'm going to bed. Here's a goodnight song for all of Bush's "Christian" soldiers.

WWJD

http://peacetakescourage.cf.huffingtonpost.com/animations/wwjd.html

Sleep tight!!!

Muerigo, The unempl... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Muerigo,
The unemployment numbers under Bush this year was even better than Clinton. Remember the internet bubble in 1999-2000? Clinton had to inflate the GNP by 20% to cover up the declining economy. Clinton had the peace dividends of the end of the cold war and the Gulf War. He basically squandered it. If not for the Rep taking over in 1994, the economy would have been worse. Clinton had oil price at $20 or less.
Bush inherited 9/11 and a recession. The war on terror costs money too. Oil at $70. Bush had a much tougher economic env and he managed it reasonably well so far. Black home ownership under Bush is higher than under Clinton!

Muerigo, Good night... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Muerigo,
Good night and best wishes with the left 's secularist utopia.

Wizbang and specially Kevin... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

Wizbang and specially Kevin, thank you for having this site and the ability to respond here in a comments section.

Muirgeo needs to be fisked. The reason is simple and due to a statement I made above. Clinton was a talker, not a doer. He made folks like Muirgeo feel good but he didn't accomplish much. It was easy for us back then to call President Clinton a liar because it was demonstrated to be so. Even his supporters like Muirgeo admit it now.

Muirgeo wrote;

On President lied about a personal matter that didn't get ONE person killed.

I'd like to differ with this. Yes, no one got killed thanks to President Clinton's lie, we can agree that far. But was his lie about a personal matter? When we are married we tend to be so in public, in front of family and friends and make a vow before them, not in private. Weddings and marriage are public events. This doesn't appear to be a private matter to me, but a public matter. But even if President Clinton was not married, he was working as our countries CEO and what he did is called sexual harrasment. You cannot be having sexual intercourse with your subordinates on the job and try and use the excuse that it is a private matter. We call them public officials for a reason.


The other read My Pet Goat for 7 minutes while our country was being attacked

This seems like a childish complaint. No one knew what was happening that day. Most of us are old enough to remember it quite vividly still. Were we under attack? All kinds of questions were being asked and confusion reigned during that day. I would hope that our leaders would take their time to respond to such an attack with wisdom and not lash out irrationally, looking at their watches, trying to get off a quick response rather than a wise response.


then he lied us into a war

No he didn't. What else is there to say to this? It is an article of faith by some that President Bush and his administration lied us into a war but if, as Muirgeo claims above, the facts are important to him, it is quite clear that there were not any lies told here. This is what I was talking about earlier concerning legacy. Once we are out of the political immediacy of his Presidency, this false accusation will wither and die on the vine and the next generation will get the facts rather than the faith.

that has cost us half a trillion dollars

It doesn't matter what it costs us, as long as it is worth the cost.

far more lives then were lost in 9-11

We lost almost 3,000 lives on 9-11. How many more have we lost since then to equal "far more"?? Or is this like the rest of your statements, hyperbole?

and in the process he committed a felon by violating the wiretap laws

You're welcome to this opinion but you'll have to accept the fact that many in this country disagree with you, lawyers and constitutional scholars included, some of which do not support the President but believe it is in his power to protect you and I through wiretapping.

It is educational to know, however, that Democrats complain loudy about this. We havn't been attacked here in the United States since 9/11 thanks to Bush's wiretap program.

and he is guilty of war crimes by violating the Geneva Conventions.

This is a new one to me, i'm not even sure what this is refering to.

He's set up an economy that only advances the very wealthy and will ultimately lead to the 3rd Republican lead Depression as out debt and trade balance grows.

I do not own a crystal ball, so I cannot tell you what the Bush Presidency will lead us to, but I can tell you what it has given me thus far. Perhaps, because I make $50,000 a year and my wife stays home and takes care of our four children that i'm considered the very wealthy that you are referring to but somehow I doubt it. I'm doing very well under President Bush, last year I only had to pay California State Taxes but not any Federal taxes, thanks to President Bush. Also, under the Bush Tax Cuts, it is a fact, not my opinion, that out of all of the taxes paid the wealthiest pay a larger percent than they did prior to the Bush Tax Cuts. This one is easy to know the truth about, so its difficult to think you are being honest with the facts when you get this one wrong.

Meanwhile he's totally ignored out three biggest threats from WMD from Korea, Pakistan and nuclear material in Russia.

Ignored isn't the word I would use. For example, he's trying to have built a missle defense system here in the United States. That's not ignoring a WMD threat, like Nuclear weapons, that's addressing the problem by protecting the people.

I propose a challenge, Muirgeo, pick just a single one of the above talking points that I just fisked and try to focus on it and it only and I can bet you won't be able to provide facts to back up even one of those talking points.

But then what will you do without facts? Change your mind and allow the facts to dictate reality to you, or force the square peg into the round hole?

May God Bless President George W. Bush.

Hey muirgeo, thanks for the... (Below threshold)

Hey muirgeo, thanks for the factual and informative links. It was really nice to see someone posting who can actually back up what they say. Unlike my god fearing friends on the right.

BTW Mithcell, have YOU ever lived in a Third World country? Or are you just an honorary member of the Third World club because you are married to a person from the Third World? You see big guy, I have, and I have seen first hand what multi national corporations can do to these countries when they rape them for profit. I have also seen what the CIA can do to disrupt a country's government whose policies they don't agree with. I have lost loved ones because of JLP thugs, financed by the CIA in Jamaica, who killed them because they supported the Manley government. So don't tell me about living in the Third World or caring about people who live there. You and your sorry ass pals have probably never contributed a dime, or your time to a worthy cause in your miserable lives.(Tithe on Sunday morning doesn't count)

All your money goes to the repub-lie-cans so that you can get the next thief elected to steal more money from OUR government. Or better yet, to pocket more money from lobbyist who represent big corporations, who might as well be stealing from our government with their huge tax breaks, and IRS loop holes. All this while they out-source jobs to the very Third World countries they continute to exploit.

You gotta love it!

Does anyone see the irony h... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Does anyone see the irony here?

These bug-eyed, vein-popping kooks on the right are the ones who always, everyday, accuse many who legitimately criticize the Boy Emperor of BushDerangementSyndrome. Mention the name Clinton and these folks start to foam at the mouth, convulse, spew obscenities, beat their children, clean their weapons and watch their blood pressure go through the roof. Talk about a DerangementSyndrome. Good god almighty some of you are down right nuts.

Now here's the delicious part. Should Hillary become president (I personally hope not) I will have 4-8 of the most enjoyable years of my life reading the posts on this site.

Hugh

Why do you call yourself "f... (Below threshold)
sang:

Why do you call yourself "field-negro"?

"I didn't say I supported c... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

"I didn't say I supported communism. I support democracy. What do you put first Capitalism or Democracy? Answer that. It's a straight forward question."

Posted by: muirgeo

I wasn't ask the question, but will answer it.

Democracy! However, they are not mutually exclusive.

Now I have a question for you. Is G.W. Bush your president?

I am continually reading comments by the left, that "he isn't my president". It would seem that if you agree with this statement, you only believe in Democracy, when you win.

Hugh-It's a shame ... (Below threshold)
PHIL:

Hugh-

It's a shame you are going to be disappointed.

Even if a Democrat gets elected, we right wingers have jobs, so we will just continue to drive that economy you like to take credit for when the numbers look good.

It's you left wingers who are unemployed so you can be "off the grid" (or in your seventh year of taking classes towards your sociology degree) that have the time to let politics consume your lives and drive you insane.

It has been said that terro... (Below threshold)
heymike:

It has been said that terrorism was not mentioned even once during the 2000 campaign. The second most powerful man in the free world, running for president doent mention terrorism ONCE in his campaign..

Dont tell us Bush had 8 months to catch him-that's bunk. This guy is so worried about his legacy, he's been making shit up ever since he left office.

PHIL:As you righti... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

PHIL:

As you righties usually do, you missed the boat. I have a college and post-graduate (not in sociology), served in the army for six years and owned my own business for 18 years.

Today I am happily retired. I keep busy with many projects. Years ago I was amused by the funny papers. Today I am amused by reading the nonsense many of you righties post (such as yours).

I almost sound like a Republican, don't I?

Now I have a question for y... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Now I have a question for you. Is G.W. Bush your president?

I am continually reading comments by the left, that "he isn't my president". It would seem that if you agree with this statement, you only believe in Democracy, when you win.

Posted by: USMC Pilot


If you win the election by cheating then you are not the President. Much evidence shows he did just that. Further if you have committed felony crimes (breaking the NSA wire tap law) and broken the Laws of the Geneva convention you are not my president....Likewise a Congress that has allowed NO investigations on the many issues surrounding Bush's actions are negligent of their duty to oversee and balance he power of the President.

Posted by: muirgeo... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Posted by: muirgeo

I wasn't ask the question, but will answer it.

Democracy! However, they are not mutually exclusive.

Now I have a question for you. Is G.W. Bush your president?

I am continually reading comments by the left, that "he isn't my president". It would seem that if you agree with this statement, you only believe in Democracy, when you win.

Posted by: USMC Pilot


Pilot,

In a democracy should there be any doubt about the election results? Should they not be absolutely verifiable?

In a democracy should people with the most money get more access to influence the electoral process, to influence policy and to create the laws?

Should superwealthy people be allowed to walk up to the President and hand him a million dollars to do them a favor?


In a democracy shouldn't the people will come before that of corporations?

Bottom Line: GOP are winne... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Bottom Line: GOP are winners, Democraps are losers.

Our President doesn't demean himself responding in kind to the likes of Mungo, Huge, Fieldcrapper, Pee, etc. He's a gentleman and cares about what he's doing, unlike the unserious on the Left.

You guys whine and bitch, and that's all you have. Just like your boy, Bubba Clinton. Because it's all about perception, and little about substance with you poor fools.

If you guys were such winners, what are you doing over here on a conservative/libertarian website. You are, again, wasting your time. No one here buys your delusional thinking.

Two legacies etched in ston... (Below threshold)
KobeClan:

Two legacies etched in stone:

Bill Clinton: BJ Bill.

Muirgeo: basement-dwelling parasite.

If you win the election ... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

If you win the election by cheating then you are not the President. Much evidence shows he did just that.

But Chavez...yeah, he was cleanly elected. This is quite ironic. Zero evidence exists that Bush did anything improper.

You keep referencing exit polls, when the results were well within the margin of error...but ignore that the exit polls in Venezuela showed Chavez LOSING by 18 points and he WON by 18 points instead.

A 36 percent swing --- or 6 times the margin the error.

But, yeah, Chavez was legally elected while Bush "stole" an election.

Got it.

There is no limit to the thugs progressives will embrace to attack Bush.

Further if you have committed felony crimes (breaking the NSA wire tap law) and broken the Laws of the Geneva convention you are not my president.

Except no crime was committed. There is much case law completely supporting Bush's actions.

Likewise a Congress that has allowed NO investigations on the many issues surrounding Bush's actions are negligent of their duty to oversee and balance he power of the President.

So you only support democracy when you win. Got it.

In a democracy should there be any doubt about the election results? Should they not be absolutely verifiable?

There is no doubt. There are only insepid insinuations.

In a democracy should people with the most money get more access to influence the electoral process, to influence policy and to create the laws?

Hate to break it to you --- but that's THE LEFT. Soros ain't poor. Hollywood ain't poor.

Heck, look at the fund-raising, for example, of the election recount funds in 2000. The Dems were bankrolled, by about an 87% margin, by less than 100 people.
-=Mike

"If you guys were such winn... (Below threshold)

"If you guys were such winners, what are you doing over here on a conservative/libertarian website. You are, again, wasting your time. No one here buys your delusional thinking."

Actually, we are doing what wiiners do. Learning about other points of views and debating them. Which, by the way, is something you might want to consider; it will do wonders for your intellect. As far as no one buying our "delusional thinking", trust me,we are well aware of your predilection towards ignorance on this site, but still enjoy exposing you for the frauds you are.

BTW, the key word -not sure about Hugh,and muirgeao-with me is "libertarian",so I am glad you put that in your post.

"Why do you call yourself "field-negro"?"

Sang, I have explained that on this site before, and I don't feel like explaining it again. But I am sure you have a computer, so look it up. Just point and click where is says field-negro ;) I am always glad to educate folks in "the greatest country on god's green earth" :)


Hmm, your side has pulled d... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Hmm, your side has pulled down a majority in a Presidential election once in 44 years.

I'm not sure I'll listen to you on what "winners" do.

After all, your side was convinced Kerry would win, even though we told you he was a shit candidate.
-=Mike

Exactly, MikeSC. ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Exactly, MikeSC.

If they're winners, I'd hate to see what the losers look like.

Hey, if all you have is winning in your own mind, then that's something, at least. Makes those fevered, Bush-hating evenings go faster, I guess.

"If they're winners, I'd ha... (Below threshold)

"If they're winners, I'd hate to see what the losers look like."

Look in the mirror ;)

...At least he did try. Why... (Below threshold)
M.A.:

...At least he did try. Why isn't the MSM asking Bush why he didn't try for the first year of his presidency?

Also, I think one sign of Clinton's greater maturity compared to Republicans is that Clinton doesn't try to blame the 1993 bombing on Bush I, the way Republicans keep trying to blame 9/11 on Clinton instead of the guy who was actually in charge.

Also http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_09_01_digbysblog_archive.html#115896507286191947

"And back in the day Republicans were so concerned about encroaching federal police power that they routinely watered down Clinton's anti-terrorism proposals...

"Yes, they cared a lot about a police state when a Democrat was in office. So much so that looking back you'd have to conclude that by their standards today they failed to properly anticipate the threat."

Actually, that the Dems try... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Actually, that the Dems try to blame Bush for 9/11 is a sign of immense immaturity.
-=Mike

I still can't believe I vot... (Below threshold)
Peg C.:

I still can't believe I voted twice for Clinton, that utter boob. How can someone supposedly so smart continuously spew such self-centered inanities? And he's the BEST they've got.

Bottom Line: GOP are winner... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Bottom Line: GOP are winners, Democraps are losers.

Posted by: Mitchell

Or Bottom Line: Multinational Corporations, the Wealthy Elite, the Robber Barrons, the Chickenhawks, the War Profiteers and thier ignorant minions (who think they are winners but are NOT) are winners and Democracy, the middle class, the working poor , the poor, peace, reason and government OF, BY and FOR the people are losers.


Now why are you happy about that why??.....oh that's right your a delusional ignorant uninformed minion. Fricking Matrix material!

Or Bottom Line: Multination... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Or Bottom Line: Multinational Corporations, the Wealthy Elite, the Robber Barrons, the Chickenhawks, the War Profiteers and thier ignorant minions (who think they are winners but are NOT) are winners and Democracy, the middle class, the working poor , the poor, peace, reason and government OF, BY and FOR the people are losers.
--------------------------------------------------
Perfect description of the corruption of the modern left: supporting the corrupt UN with oil-for-food bribing of big national corporations in France, Russia, China (basically selling the poor and oppressed people in the ME for oil). Then sexual abuse of poor refugees in Africa. In America, the liberal dems are willing to sell out the poor blacks in inner cities asking for school vouchers to gain the favor of the liberal mega filthy rich like George Soros and Hollywood left.

Thank you for the self description of the intellectual and moral corruption of the modern left.

BTW, the left 's hypocrisy ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

BTW, the left 's hypocrisy is amazing. They constantly using the word chickenhawks, but the love the chickenhawk country France. France is a perfect symbol of the chickenhawk left: France destroyed the air force of Ivory Coast, a little country whose president tried to apologize for a mistake they made. They didn't care about these poor little countries while kissing up to the big bad boys to get their oil. The hypocritical behavior is just astounding: the left in this country can diss out the beyond the pale accusation/attack against America and Bush and the pope knowing that they are safe. At the same time, they dare not utter an ounce of outrage against the atrocities of the terrorists. Not only that they enable and promote the worst kinds of dictators like Adm and Chavez.

The left is truly the chickenhawks: talk tough against the people who protect them but wag their tails before the terrorists. Beyond contempt in my opinion.

There is really nothing to ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

There is really nothing to respond to here. I provided factual links that document what Clinton did in the fight against terrorism and the only replies are in the form of unsubstantiated innuendo.

Likewise they are completly unable to find any evidence of action taken by Bush until 7 minutes AFTER the second plane hit....."Duhh I wonderr if I should take this terrorism stuff seriously...duhhhhhh!

But coming from a group of people who think the Earth is 6,000 years old, that evolution and global warming are hoaxes and that if they heard it on Rush it must be fact what more do I have to prove.

A thread like this is just validation that these Bushbots are incapable of logical discussion and debate and can NOT support their innuendo with references while I can support my claims.


Like shootin fish in a barrel.

Kimsblackchild"... (Below threshold)
914:

Kimsblackchild

"What was George bush doing about Bin Ladin prior to 911"

What were You doing about it?

muirgeo, I have giv... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

muirgeo,
I have given you the facts of Clinton lying. You yourself admitted that Clinton chose a lazy and stupid man like Sandy Berger to be his NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR. Then you expect us to believe that Clinton was telling the truth about his effort in terrorism. How do you know the websites you provided are telling the truth?

If you want I can show you what the chickenhawf liberal left has been doing: these chickenhawks are willing to compare America and its military to the Nazis and Bush to Hitler. Yet at the same time, they embraced people like Michael Moore (a propagandist for Saddam Hussein) who was seated next to Carter at the Dem convention. Carter enabled the election fraud of Chavez, another thuggish dictator. Do you know Clinton went oversea and smear America with his lies.

I have shown you facts and logic from your own arg. Do you want to follow the logic of your own arg or you just want to spout fact-free talking points?

Do you agree that the left has been chickenhawk in terms of their behavior (attacking America and Bush far more than the terrorists)?

HE LIKES TO WAVE THAT FI... (Below threshold)
914:

HE LIKES TO WAVE THAT FINGER WHEN HE'S TELLING THE TRUTH DOES'NT HE.

muirgeo,But coming f... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

muirgeo,
But coming from a group of people who think the Earth is 6,000 years old, that evolution and global warming are hoaxes and that if they heard it on Rush it must be fact what more do I have to prove.
------------------------------------------------
No one is talking about the age of the earth here yet. The fact that you have to resort to this strawman to justify your name calling shows that you have neither logic nore facts on your side. You cannot even follow the logic of your own arg.

Talking about Bin Laden. Th... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Talking about Bin Laden. The guy didn't dare to show up his face and the chickenhawk left is talking tough about getting him while they want to cut and run from the terrorists. The liberals in Canada and Holland even want to allow Sharia laws. Truly chickenhawk!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060923/D8KAHRNG0.html
France Looks Into bin Laden Death Report

That's because there is no ... (Below threshold)
914:

That's because there is no logic thereof to follow..

Dont waste Your time arguing with a certifiable lunatic.

BTW... a fact that many peo... (Below threshold)
Hogan:

BTW... a fact that many people forget is that we do not live in a democracy. "What?" you ask, "are you crazy?!" In fact I'm correct... we DO NOT live in a democracy. We live in a democratic republic... there is a distinct difference look it up.

http://www.chrononhotonthologos.com/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm

Irony time for the likes of... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Irony time for the likes of muir.

In 2001, David Halberstam wrote a book entitled "War in a Time of Peace". He was detailing the issues of combat in times without "official" wars and profiled Reagan, Bush, and Carter.

The book dealt, EXTENSIVELY, with Somalia, Haiti, and Yugoslavia.

One thing it didn't even mention --- not one single time --- was OBL or terrorism.

If this was a major issue with Clinton, Halberstam (who interviewed him and his advisors extensively) would have mentioned it AT LEAST ONE SINGLE TIME.

The Khobar Towers. The US embassies. All had been attacked before the book was completed. The Cole was attacked during the writing of the book.

Not a single Clinton official mentioned terrorism at all for a book that would likely find it quite fascinating as it deals with the book's basic premise.
-=Mike

I tried to get bin Laden be... (Below threshold)
Clay:

I tried to get bin Laden before I didn't try to get him.

muirgeo, I have to say you ... (Below threshold)
Wingwiper:

muirgeo, I have to say you hear, only what you want to hear.

"On President lied about a personal matter that didn't get ONE person killed."

Ron Brown, Vince foster, Jim McDougal and then the Bombing of the Plant in Sudan, the Bambings of Iraq and let us NOT forget the Trade off with China. Who was stealing secrets from Los Alamos? Who gave the W-88 Multi Strike Warhead to China? Who gave 600 Super Computers to Chinca? Who gave them the Delivery System Tech? who now has a man in Space, or is Long Range Weapon Devlopement? Not ONE Killed? hmmmm 9-11-01 was months several years in the planning and Bush jr was only President for 7 months.


"The other read My Pet Goat for 7 minutes while our country was being attacked" What would you have preferred him to do, panick?
"then he lied us into a war that has cost us half a trillion dollars, far more lives then were lost in 9-11" Slow down... What was the lie? Understand LIE means with INTENT. Are you referring to 17 IGNORED U.N. Resolutions? WMDs, we have found over 500 WMDs, except the Liberals refuse to beleive they are WMDs, well the Three biggest would be Saddam, Ousay and Ouday but I guess WMDs only come in Metal Containers???
"and in the process he committed a felon by violating the wiretap laws" He never tapped a phone and Norad monitors tranmissions and has over two dozen key words that interact a trace ASAP and have for decades. How did Bush Tap, did he have a pocket recorder hooked up to a Party line?
"and he is guilty of war crimes by violating the Geneva Conventions." What War Crimes? abuse? are you saying it is ok to beat POWs and Cut their heads off but not ok to humilate them? These are not people who wore a uniform nor flew a flag, they are terrorists who would love to Blow themselves up where there are women and children and you defend them?

"He's set up an economy that only advances the very wealthy and will ultimately lead to the 3rd Republican lead Depression as out debt and trade balance grows."
The debt has been growing since World War II and is not something that came with the Republicans, you should take note that before Reagan became Pres the DOW hardly ever went over 1000 pts, since Ronnie we are kissing 12,000 due to the Reaganomics that Clinton rode on. Also look at the amount that the National Debt Grew with Bill and remember Bill used the Social Security money to cover his spending and Bush tried to make the SS money off limits to the Government and it has been the Democrats blocking passage.
Only Advances the Wealthy? how is that? Bill Gates pays hundreds of millions of U.S. Dollars in taxes, what do you pay?
"Meanwhile he's totally ignored out three biggest threats from WMD from Korea, Pakistan and nuclear material in Russia." Has he?

"For Bush's efforts Afghanistan is a Taliban strong hold and the poppy business is booming,"
You mean Pakistan.
"Iraq is on the verge of a civil war," yeah so?
" Hamas , and Hezbolla are as defiant as ever," what do you expect Bush to do, give them medications?
"the economy is on a knives edge from disaster,"
No it isn't.
"our infrastructure and our National Parks are crumbling," What????? Did I miss the news one night??
"science is ignored," Why? because he refuse to accept Embryo Stem cell Research? so don't i and I am also against abortion after the 12th week but Clinton passed the Partial Birth Abortion.
"the debt is the largest ever," of course it is, want to cash in the foriegn IOUs and Bonds? what a collasp that would create.
"middle class America (THAT'S YOU DING DONGS) are falling behind in spite of working harder then ever," Bush is to blame? how is that?

"Corporations are stealing the treasury, corruption and graft is everywhere, the electoral process is completely untrusted and the world looks at us in disbelief." I miss another night of News, wow! I bet you carry a gun and you pull the shades and you never leave your house.

"And good people who call themselves Christians rally behind the war loving poor hating Administration as if Jesus is right with them" He is, Iraq is home to many of the Christian Biblical happenings. Don't you think the people of Iraq have as much a right to basic life as YOU do? If you don't want to help, fine.. LEAD, FOLLOW OR GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY.

"....daohohohohoh....shakes my and rubs my eyes...WTH are you all drinking??? You clueless Hypnotized Bushbots....you are the biggest cult this country has ever seen....." I feel good about what we are doing, I support the war, I beelive it is working and you ca learn more to by going to http://www.defendamerica.mil/iraq/rebuilding.html

When we are married we t... (Below threshold)
Rob:

When we are married we tend to be so in public, in front of family and friends and make a vow before them, not in private. Weddings and marriage are public events. This doesn't appear to be a private matter to me, but a public matter.

Cheating spouses are public matters? What time period do you live in, the 1600s? I challenge you to find two people who agree with you that the average citizen's infidelities are a matter of public import.

>>The other read My Pet Goat for 7 minutes while our country was being attacked

No one knew what was happening that day. Most of us are old enough to remember it quite vividly still. Were we under attack?

Obviously you don't remember that day vividly enough. Yes, we were. That 7 minutes he was referring to were the minutes after Andy Card whispered in Bush's ear "America is under attack." It's a lie for you to suggest that "no one knew what was happening that day." Bush knew exactly what was happening, because he was told by those who knew exactly what was happening.

>>and in the process he committed a felon by violating the wiretap laws

You're welcome to this opinion but you'll have to accept the fact that many in this country disagree with you

Three separate federal judges concluded that Bush's actions and directives violated laws, and were therefore felonies. This is judicial fact, not opinion. You're welcome to disagree, but you'll have to accept this fact.

but believe it is in his power to protect you and I through wiretapping.

It is absolutely within his power to wiretap. No one has disputed this. The law says he can. He just needs to get a warrant first, and then off he can go! What makes you think that anyone has said otherwise?

We havn't been attacked here in the United States since 9/11 thanks to Bush's wiretap program.

There hasn't been a zebra attack in NY either. Bush must be doing something right!

>>and he is guilty of war crimes by violating the Geneva Conventions.

This is a new one to me, i'm not even sure what this is refering to.

Try picking up a newspaper from time to time. Best to educate yourself on the world around you before spouting off.

Also, under the Bush Tax Cuts, it is a fact, not my opinion, that out of all of the taxes paid the wealthiest pay a larger percent than they did prior to the Bush Tax Cuts.

Hey, you economic genius. That's because they are receiving a higher percentage of total income than they did in years past! Take some math classes before posting again.

I propose a challenge, Muirgeo, pick just a single one of the above talking points that I just fisked and try to focus on it and it only and I can bet you won't be able to provide facts to back up even one of those talking points.

You lose, though it was hard to pick just one. But I'm not Muirgeo, so I suppose it's a draw.

But then what will you do without facts? Change your mind and allow the facts to dictate reality to you, or force the square peg into the round hole?

It's clear what you do without facts. Make up your own.

Mungo, and his Pooh-Bear de... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Mungo, and his Pooh-Bear devotees wish for World Peace in their Christmas stocking every year, and dang burn it, they just don't get it on Christmas Day.

Nice Utopia ya got there. Let me know when it doesn't look like a socialist or communist dictatorship.

They want a "soft" war, and all al Quaeda gives them is the hard one. Dang!

Please go back to your happy place and don't bother us over here in the Real World.

Wow, I just saw that unhing... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Wow, I just saw that unhinged, illogical rant by Rob.

What a prick, huh?

Actually, I found that the ... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

Actually, I found that the lack of response from Muirgeo quite responsible, what could he say? Rob on the other hand wasn't so wise.

Rob wrote;

Cheating spouses are public matters?

Actually, yes they are. This is why in many states you can bring evidence before the judge that your spouse cheated on you (That is, in public court) and it counts against your spouse in the proceedings.

It's a lie for you to suggest that "no one knew what was happening that day."

This just goes to show what simpletons some folks can be. What sort of attack was American involved in? Nuclear attack, ground war, some sort of invasion? I'm sure you would have preferred for President Bush to go running out of the room immediately screaming with his hands waving in the air yelling, "We're all going to die!"

I prefer my President to sit calmly for 7 minutes, finish reading the book to the children, and remain calm and poised. I'm sure you do to and if it was Clinton, you'd praise the action.

Three separate federal judges concluded that Bush's actions and directives violated laws, and were therefore felonies. This is judicial fact, not opinion. You're welcome to disagree, but you'll have to accept this fact.

And they then threw President Bush in jail for committing these felonies and Cheney is now the President of the United States. Oh, wait.... hmmmm, what's wrong with these "facts" of yours? Making stuff up and facts are two seperate things.

He just needs to get a warrant first, and then off he can go!

Perhaps you can explain to me how one can obtain a warrant to wiretap millions of phone calls in order to spread a net wide enough to capture terrorists?

This is what the President has the authority to do in a time of war and he does not need to appeal to a co-equal branch of government. The President is a branch of government.

There hasn't been a zebra attack in NY either. Bush must be doing something right!

You lost me, are you saying New Yorkers are in danger of Zebra attacks, or are you saying New Yorkers are not in danger of further terrorist attacks?

Try picking up a newspaper from time to time. Best to educate yourself on the world around you before spouting off.

I'll note that you didn't bother to provide any evidence to the assertion. You must not know what he's talking about either.

Hey, you economic genius. That's because they are receiving a higher percentage of total income than they did in years past! Take some math classes before posting again.

I'll assume you misunderstood what I wrote as your response does not make any sense in light of what I wrote.

The highest possible tax bracket for income is $250,000.00. This is true under Bush as it was under Clinton. Those making $250,000.00 or more pay a larger percent of taxes under Bush than they did under Clinton. In other words, a progressive tax.

You lose, though it was hard to pick just one. But I'm not Muirgeo, so I suppose it's a draw.

Yes, it is difficult to pick just one. If you did so it would be rather easy, in a short period of time, for you to trap yourself in a corner and be forced to try and change the subject. But, if you use the shotgun blast method of argumentation, where you can jump all over the place and not get caught in any one argument, it makes it looks as though you've got something to say.

C'mon, I dare you to focus on only one of the above. Pick your strongest one. Yes, its hard for you, I know, but you can do it!

Baggi, what's all this abou... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Baggi, what's all this about zebras? I don't see the relevance.

I insist you make sense of Rob's lame diatribe so I can satisfactorily harass him about his lack of serious, intelligent posts.

But first, we have to figure out if Osama is flying zebras in to buildings. Sounds intriguing, doesn't it. Those al Quaeda are so dang inventive.

Why? because he refuse t... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Why? because he refuse to accept Embryo Stem cell Research?

Actually, to be technical, he's the first President to allow ANY embryonic stem cell research. Clinton opposed it consistently.
-=Mike

muirego,You are so... (Below threshold)
Matthias:

muirego,

You are so full of your own rhetoric you think that Clinton didn't benefit from $10 a barrel oil or the bloated inventories of companies for the Y2K scare and the dot.com weenies and crazy Democrat billionaires who made gazillions off of middle class folks like the previous DNC chairman or Gates and Buffett or Soros or Feinstein or Pelosi or Rockefeller or Kennedy or Ted Turner and Hollywood leftist- Fabian socialists and agitprop Leni Riefenstahl's like Michael Moore.

How many limousine loony-left liberals does it take to sell off our MIRV missile capability to Red Chinese like that Democrat quack Norm Augustine becuase Clinton got donations from the Chinese or the Riady family of Indonesia (overseas Chinese)? Does "Wag the Dog" Clinton's bombing of an aspirin factory in the Sudan or launching ill-timed cruise missile launches make us safer? Think again you wooly-haired liberal--we know the facts and the selective use of facts undermines your supposition.

Remember when middle class folks could convert IRAs to Roth IRAs--who benefitted--the IRS and the federal govt--Rubin's Treasury Dept.--he was no genius--but another pathetic liberal gazillionaire who has his money in tax-shelters and trust funds and non-taxable bonds.

You can't fool us patriotic red-blooded Americans who have immigrated from corrupt and undemocratic societies. You are the nomenklatura that regards government as the opiate for the masses!!

muirgeo,Do you rea... (Below threshold)
Matthias:

muirgeo,

Do you really think that terrorism is multiplying because of Bush in Iraq? Are you out of your wooly-haired mind? Terrorism has always existed--Symbionese Liberation Army and Patty Hearst, Charles Manson, the Puerto Rican terrorists, the Bolshevik terrorists, the Nazi terrorists, George Habash, Abu Nidal, the Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic weightlifters, Entebbe, the Polisario rebels, Mogadishu, Somailia and Clinton's abandonment of Army rangers, the 444 days of US Embassy hostages in Teheran, Cuban soliders and the takeover of Grenada, Jonas Savimbi and the UNITA rebels in Angola, Tamil Eelaam Tigers in Sri Lanka, the raping and taking of Tibet by the Red Chinese in 1961/1962, the Soviet Bloc terrorism of democracy in Hungary, and Czechoslovakia in the 1950s and 1960s.

By the way, smarmy pants George, do you know who ocuupies illegally one-third of Kashmir? Is it the Indians or the Chinese---no my half-learned friend--it is the Red Chinese

>>Cheating spouses are p... (Below threshold)
Rob:

>>Cheating spouses are public matters?

Actually, yes they are. This is why in many states you can bring evidence before the judge that your spouse cheated on you

Oh, OK. I didn't realize that Hillary initiated the proceedings against Bill. Boy, you sure set me straight.

This just goes to show what simpletons some folks can be. What sort of attack was American involved in? Nuclear attack, ground war, some sort of invasion?

Please tell this simpleton which of those has as its preferred immediate response NOT seeking more information about what's going on?.

Besides, Bush knew what kind of attack it was... the one where two planes were deliberately flown into buildings. Could it have been nuclear? By all means, continue sitting there for 7 minutes wondering, instead of finding out. After all, a nuclear attack on America wouldn't require the attention of the President.

No one said Bush should have launched a counter-attack within 7 minutes. But he could have grounded all civilian aircraft (as he did, later), scrambled fighters to NY and DC, and started asking questions in those 7 minutes.

I'm sure you would have preferred for President Bush to go running out of the room immediately screaming with his hands waving in the air yelling, "We're all going to die!"

You must think Bush an idiot to give him only those two choices: do nothing or run screaming from the room. How about saying, "Excuse me children, I have an unexpected matter to attend to. Please, keep reading." Or "Mrs. Bush is on the phone." Are you saying it's impossible to excuse yourself from a group of children when the country is under attack without sending them into a panic? Even if not, if you KNOW about the first two planes, and you know nothing else, you must at least THINK "are there more coming?" And in that case, who cares about scaring a bunch of children when there's the possibility that the White House could be next? Or that it could be nuclear? Your own "he didn't know" scenario only illustrates the idiocy of doing nothing.

I prefer my President to sit calmly for 7 minutes, finish reading the book to the children, and remain calm and poised

While another plane strikes the Empire State Building? Or the White House? You claim he didn't know what was going on. Doesn't that increase the urgency to get off your ass and FIND OUT what's going on? Tell me, what defensive action--when you've been TOLD the country is under attack--does sitting calmly for 7 minutes accomplish?

hmmmm, what's wrong with these "facts" of yours? Making stuff up and facts are two seperate things.

Again, pick up a newspaper once in a while.

Perhaps you can explain to me how one can obtain a warrant to wiretap millions of phone calls in order to spread a net wide enough to capture terrorists?

You can't. Oh, there's that pesky Constitution in the way again!

This is what the President has the authority to do in a time of war and he does not need to appeal to a co-equal branch of government.

He needs to follow their laws. THAT is in the Constitution.

Those making $250,000.00 or more pay a larger percent of taxes under Bush than they did under Clinton. In other words, a progressive tax.

Proof please? Link? Or is this another one of your opinions?

Yes, it is difficult to pick just one.

Yes, when there is so much bulls--t flying by, it's hard to pick which single clump to deflect.

But, if you use the shotgun blast method of argumentation

Just following your example.

C'mon, I dare you to focus on only one of the above.

So you can celebrate how the rest of your BS went unchallenged? Not a chance.

Rob wrote:So yo... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

Rob wrote:

So you can celebrate how the rest of your BS went unchallenged? Not a chance.

I get it. You're afraid if I say something, anything at all, and you don't champion the truth for the masses, everyone will be mislead.

Alright, i'll focus on just one then, but no whining about which one since I gave you the option.

I wrote;

Those making $250,000.00 or more pay a larger percent of taxes under Bush than they did under Clinton. In other words, a progressive tax.

You responded with;

Proof please? Link? Or is this another one of your opinions?

Here is the House Joint Committe Report

http://www.house.gov/jec/publications/109/rr109-36.pdf

Which will get you started. It will tell you that the top 50% of earners in the United States pay 96.54% of the taxes under the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts. The bottom 50% of earners in the United States pay 3.46%.

This is where you are initially fooled when you hear the Democrats claim, "Tax cuts for the rich!" Well, I suppose if the top 50% (Those making over $29,000 per year) are the ones paying most of the taxes, guess who's going to get a tax cut when the taxes are cut?

But that's not even what I claimed and what you want proof of. So let's focus in on specifics here.

If you go here: http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=134951,00.html

You will see that in 2000 the number of zero filers having to pay tax was 29 million and in 2004 it was 44 million. There are now 58 million households that earn income that have to pay zero in taxes thanks to the Bush Tax Cuts. That equals roughly 122 million income earners since usually more than one person lives in a household. 122 million income earners pay zero taxes under Bush.

I was wrong about my numbers though, the top tax bracket is no longer $250,000.00 (Not sure where I got that number from) but it is now (according to Wikipedia) $326,451 and up.

The most important fact you will find at the IRS Stastics is that the "rich" under Bush as a percentage of the total taxes paid are paying just over 37% while the same group under Clinton as a percent of the total taxes paid were paying just over 36%.

So while everyone got a tax cut, including the rich, under Bush's tax cuts, the Rich are paying a larger percentage under Bush than they paid under Clinton. And that is just wrong. Everyone should pay the same percentage.

There is no reason to punish someone just because they make more money.

"Do you really think that t... (Below threshold)

"Do you really think that terrorism is multiplying because of Bush in Iraq? Are you out of your wooly-haired mind"

Hey Muirgeo, I didn't knnow you were wolly haired?
So you are a field negro too?

Give me a break! Matthias, you and your ilk are so predictable, it was just a matter of time before your true nature came out. Anyway, all those terrorist groups you mentioned existed way before Clinton, so what's your point? And yes,to answer your question, frat boy DID create more terrorist by occupying Iraq. Only a fool wouldn't recognize that. But then....

BTW, you left a couple of other terrorist groups off your list. Groups like the Klan, and the Aryan Brotherhood. But then, I suppose you don't consider them terrorist, not when you are working towards the same goals ;)

No one said Bush should ... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

No one said Bush should have launched a counter-attack within 7 minutes. But he could have grounded all civilian aircraft (as he did, later), scrambled fighters to NY and DC, and started asking questions in those 7 minutes.

Not an option since:
1) There WEREN'T planes ready to scramble to inercept flights in the US. The military had no real contingency plan for it.

2) It takes over an hour to manage to intercept anybody.

3) You assume Bush DIDN'T ask questions. He could've told his advisors to find out who did it. Would've taken more than 7 minutes for an answer.

You must think Bush an idiot to give him only those two choices: do nothing or run screaming from the room. How about saying, "Excuse me children, I have an unexpected matter to attend to. Please, keep reading." Or "Mrs. Bush is on the phone." Are you saying it's impossible to excuse yourself from a group of children when the country is under attack without sending them into a panic? Even if not, if you KNOW about the first two planes, and you know nothing else, you must at least THINK "are there more coming?"

So, you want Bush to act out of ignorance?

Good plan.

While another plane strikes the Empire State Building? Or the White House? You claim he didn't know what was going on. Doesn't that increase the urgency to get off your ass and FIND OUT what's going on?

Running around isn't going to answer the questions. It's not an answer you'll get in a whopping 7 minutes.

Tell me, what defensive action--when you've been TOLD the country is under attack--does sitting calmly for 7 minutes accomplish?

You can't scramble aircraft. You need to discuss with aides, who are ALSO unavailable temporarily, the political ramifications of allowing an order to shoot all aircraft that is flying over the U.S.

Yes, you can do much --- in 7 minutes.

Funny, Clinton took more than 7 minutes to act on the OKC bombing. Or the first WTC bombing. Or the Khobar bombing. Or the embassy bombings.

Again, pick up a newspaper once in a while.

When her decision is overturned --- and, yes, it'll be overturned --- will you be here apologizing?

I doubt it.

You can't. Oh, there's that pesky Constitution in the way again!

Except Bush didn't wiretap millions. There isn't enough manpower if he wanted to do it to pull it off.

He needs to follow their laws. THAT is in the Constitution.

He got a declaration of war. Nothing he did was not done before in similar situations.

Anyway, all those terrorist groups you mentioned existed way before Clinton, so what's your point?

They became a massive problem under Clinton. Clinton dithered and did nothing for risk of offending the Saudis and allowed them to slaughter Americans and did not wish to even investigate.

BTW, you left a couple of other terrorist groups off your list. Groups like the Klan, and the Aryan Brotherhood. But then, I suppose you don't consider them terrorist, not when you are working towards the same goals ;)

Well, your preferred party votes for Klansmen. Most Klansmen, historically, were Democrats.
-=Mike

You don't need a warrant to... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

You don't need a warrant to search at the border, the airport, and in a bunch of other situations.

But, you're going to require a warrant to listen to al Quaeda calling the U.S.? Stupid.

And, counter to popular, uninformed opinion, the 4th Amendment does not require a warrant, nor has the Supreme Court found it does in many cirumstances.

What, you getting your legal opinions from Field Negro now? He's too busy in the fields, clearly.

Funny, Clinton took more... (Below threshold)
Clay:

Funny, Clinton took more than 7 minutes to act on the OKC bombing. Or the first WTC bombing. Or the Khobar bombing. Or the embassy bombings.

Yeah, but who can blame the guy? After all, having your dick sucked is more important than matters of national security. At least it was for Clinton. He can wag his finger in self-righteous indignation, but we know he was getting a blowjob in the oval office when he should have been 'working for the American people'. That's just fact, and if you disagree, well, you're just being Monica.

Context and perspective are... (Below threshold)
John Blake:

Context and perspective are always apropos. In context, Clinton was elected first by Ross Perot splitting the Republican vote, second by the monied Senate establishment putting up Bob Dole in 1996-- arguably the weakest major-party candidate since 1936. Moreover, Clinton as an unknown small-State Democrat had neither policy nor principle to offer; in particular, his "I won't raise taxes" pledge was seen even at the time as akin to New Jersey's James Florio's, who literally smirked on camera as he mouthed his scam. To say Clinton "tried but failed" to apprehend bin Laden is to grant him honorable intentions which he entirely lacked. Over eight years, there was no grain of evidence that this simpering vulgarian respected even his own wife (little "Miss Cattle Futures"; "Files Under the Bed"; "Hide the Spoons" MzBill).

In historical perspective, we place Clinton on a par with Presidents Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan-- ineffectual Southern sympathizers quite ready to endorse slavery and American Disunion to spare themselves from bother. We might mention also Benjamin Harrison and Warren Harding... the first a complete nonentity, the second foolish and corrupt.

In fact, with his Riyadi dealings and sellout of Livermore Laboratory nuclear-engineering data to Communist Chinese military intelligence, objectively we conclude that Clinton was not merely incompetent but treacherously corrupt. In that, he mirrors Teresa Heinz [Kerry], who makes large-scale donations to foundations advocating the "return" of five States in the U.S. Southwest to Mexico.

Such are not only Clinton, but his partisan allies today. Fortunately, as Boomer narcissists of Clinton's ilk die out, the American polity should gradually re-assume an even keel.

MikeSC, your ignorance is s... (Below threshold)
Rob:

MikeSC, your ignorance is staggering, overshadowed only by your ability to change the issue when you're cornered to give yourself an out to respond to.

Not an option since:
1) There WEREN'T planes ready to scramble to inercept flights in the US. The military had no real contingency plan for it.

You mean the conversation would have been:
Bush: What?! NY was attacked?! I want fighters in the air over NY immediately!
General: Duh, gee, Mr. President, duh-ayyy, we don't got no plans to put those flying machines in the air, duh-ayyy.

2) It takes over an hour to manage to intercept anybody.

How do you make up such garbage in public?


F-15s soared into the sky "within minutes" of the call, Venable said. Otis Air Force Base is 188 miles from New York City; once aloft, an F-15 fighter plane can reach speeds of 1,875 mph, more than 2.5 times the speed of sound. At that speed, an F-15 Eagle could fly from Otis to New York in roughly seven minutes.

3) You assume Bush DIDN'T ask questions. He could've told his advisors to find out who did it.

What kind of idiot are you? It's right there on videotape. Unless Bush is telepathic, he didn't say a word. Dude, we KNOW exactly what was said to him, and what his response was. Repeatedly saying "but what if something else happened?" is not reality.

So, you want Bush to act out of ignorance?

Your claim that Bush had no information is BS. But let's assume you're right. Then yes, out of ignorance, I absolutely want the president to stand up and start asking questions.

It was known that planes struck the towers, and that "America is under attack". Is that not enough information to begin taking action to protect the country, I don't know what is.

You seem to continue to rephrase the point that Bush did NOTHING in the first 7 minutes, and pretend that the suggested option available was a retaliatory strike. How about addressing the DEFENSIVE options available to him during those 7 minutes?

You can't scramble aircraft. You need to discuss with aides, who are ALSO unavailable temporarily, the political ramifications of allowing an order to shoot all aircraft that is flying over the U.S.

Then start the process NOW! NOT 7 MINUTES LATER!

When her decision is overturned --- and, yes, it'll be overturned --- will you be here apologizing?

What's the matter, can't handle getting facts thrown in your face? You called me a liar for saying that federal judges ruled against Bush, and when I showed you proof, you stammer "oh yeah? Well, it'll be overturned, nyahh!" You dishonest child.

Except Bush didn't wiretap millions. There isn't enough manpower if he wanted to do it to pull it off.

You asked how Bush can wiretape millions. I said he can't. Then you pull out "Aha! He didn't wiretap millions!" Dude, you're incoherent.

He got a declaration of war. Nothing he did was not done before in similar situations.

You are so ignorant of the facts, or such a big liar, that it's not even worth responding to you anymore.

"Why do you call yourself "... (Below threshold)
sang:

"Why do you call yourself "field-negro"?"
"Sang, I have explained that on this site before, and I don't feel like explaining it again. But I am sure you have a computer, so look it up. Just point and click where is says field-negro ;) I am always glad to educate folks in "the greatest country on god's green earth" :) Posted by: field-negro at September 23, 2006 11:10 AM"
Well I declare...how droll :o) BTW, does ur momma know ya'll are hanging out with "these people", "blogger-types"; all puffed up & full of themselves? Would she be proud? Oh well, I've got places to go & people to see and some more learnin' to do. Bye bye ya'll.

Damn Sang , you must know m... (Below threshold)

Damn Sang , you must know my momma. Of course she wouldn't be proud. But then, she always thought me to try to learn something from everybody even the most seemingly ignorant among us.-present company excluded of course, because you want to learn right Sang?-So that's why I hang out with all types, because I want to learn, just like you do ;)

Excerpt from Hot Air... (Below threshold)
sang:

Excerpt from Hot Air
"Following up, Bush gets bashed against the rocks for being decisive and trying to do the right thing on his core file, the war against extremist Islamic terrorists, a file that got rather dumped in his lap.

"While, as a disciplined man, he doesn’t drink or smoke, he exercises to keep himself fit (top 1% of men of his age) 6-days a week, and he returns to be with his lovely devoted wife when he has time for family graces.

"There is a real difference between the two men. Bush the party-going gadfly of his youth is but a shell of his former self… George W. Bush the man of seriousiousness, resoluteness, and focus — a man who places achievement before pleasure — has arisen and stood firm in his stead."
Submitted by:
"ChrisInCanadaOrAussy on September 24, 2006 at 3:21 PM"

These "blogers" are actually conversing; u know exchanging ideas & generally w/o the expletives. Refreshing.

U go "field-negro", "u da m... (Below threshold)
sang:

U go "field-negro", "u da man bro"...

"Well, your preferred party... (Below threshold)

"Well, your preferred party votes for Klansmen. Most Klansmen, historically, were Democrats."
-=Mike

Operative word being WERE genius. As soon as the democrats went after my people's vote down South, your friends left to go to your party, and they haven't left since. Go back and study your history before you come back with another post.
Here, I will even give you a search word: DIXIECRATS. See what a nice guy I am?



whoa...it's fixin to do a l... (Below threshold)
sang:

whoa...it's fixin to do a lightning show, gotta put the dawgs up & roll up the tinted windows in my red F150...l8r ya'll keep it between the lines now hear ;o)

As you all most probably kn... (Below threshold)
sang:

As you all most probably know, Fox News Channel is rerunning "slick willy's" oh, I'm sorry, did I actually say "slick willy" dang I meant to say Mr. Former Prez & Wallace interview At 6PM & again @ 10PM (watch it again & weep or LOL, "whatever"). P.S. Don't eat the spinach :o)

Yes, watch the re-brodcast'... (Below threshold)
wdh:

Yes, watch the re-brodcast's and see a president who can speak in complete sentences. And even think before he speaks. Refreshing. How about a debate on terrorism between the formmer president and the current president. That would be worth watching!

LOL

No it wouldn't. There is n... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

No it wouldn't. There is nothing of Clinton worth watching, unless it's a melt down over UBL or Monica, etc.

For those with longer memories, we remember a bit of trouble with the truth in that administration. It was a sport with that crowd.

Rob, you want scrambled jets in 7 minutes? To where, exactly. There are hundreds of potential targets and covering them all would be fruitless. And, ATC didn't know which of the thousands of jets that day were "off" until pretty late in the game. Certainly more than 7 minutes after the planes hit.

God, you people are fools. Intellectually lazy, and unserious.

In other words, liberals and Democraps(tm)

You mean the conversatio... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

You mean the conversation would have been:
Bush: What?! NY was attacked?! I want fighters in the air over NY immediately!
General: Duh, gee, Mr. President, duh-ayyy, we don't got no plans to put those flying machines in the air, duh-ayyy.

Hmm, you want to fuel jets and have them locate planes with no active transponders (the terrorists turned them off), so they have NO idea who they're looking for and have to hope air traffic controllers can figure out which of the dozen or blips on their screen is the correct one? You want fighter jets to fly over quite busy airspace and, hopefully, not hit a jet with innocent people not being hijacked, which isn't that easy a task?

It took well over an hour to locate Payne Stewart's plane in the 90's when it meandered off-course --- and that was WITH active transponder to make it far easier.

Yeah, the ignorance belongs to one side of the argument. That side, fortunately, is not mine.

How do you make up such garbage in public?


F-15s soared into the sky "within minutes" of the call, Venable said. Otis Air Force Base is 188 miles from New York City; once aloft, an F-15 fighter plane can reach speeds of 1,875 mph, more than 2.5 times the speed of sound. At that speed, an F-15 Eagle could fly from Otis to New York in roughly seven minutes.

Getting to the location isn't the problem.

FINDING THE DAMNED PLANE is the problem.

You seem oblivious to that reality.

What kind of idiot are you? It's right there on videotape. Unless Bush is telepathic, he didn't say a word. Dude, we KNOW exactly what was said to him, and what his response was. Repeatedly saying "but what if something else happened?" is not reality.

No, we do not know what was said.

Your claim that Bush had no information is BS. But let's assume you're right. Then yes, out of ignorance, I absolutely want the president to stand up and start asking questions.

Rather than having his staff ACTUALLY get the info, you assume they'll just sit on their hands?

You know, like the Dems in Congress did.

It was known that planes struck the towers, and that "America is under attack". Is that not enough information to begin taking action to protect the country, I don't know what is.

And do what?

Scrambling jets to intercept the planes was not a remotely viable option.

Then start the process NOW! NOT 7 MINUTES LATER!

"LET'S DO IT RIGHT NOW!!"

"We have to wait for people to become available."

"OK"

Yeah, good plan.

What's the matter, can't handle getting facts thrown in your face? You called me a liar for saying that federal judges ruled against Bush, and when I showed you proof, you stammer "oh yeah? Well, it'll be overturned, nyahh!" You dishonest child.

Can you PLEASE take some Ritalin for the ADD, as you seem thoroughly incapable of keeping up. You REALLY want to stand by this laughable decision? When it's overturned, you'll be gone.

The decision is a joke. Nobody takes it seriously. It has, literally, no chance of standing.

You asked how Bush can wiretape millions. I said he can't. Then you pull out "Aha! He didn't wiretap millions!" Dude, you're incoherent.

You said he didn't LEGALLY do it. I said he can't PHYSICALLY do it.

You know, as it is IMPOSSIBLE to actually pull it off.

Again, Ritalin. Look into it.

You are so ignorant of the facts, or such a big liar, that it's not even worth responding to you anymore.

Read the H.J Res 114.

Passed after the piece you linked to. 2 days later, to be precise.

You're a liar. It goes far beyond simply being a dishonest debater.

Operative word being WERE genius.

http://byrd.senate.gov/

As soon as the democrats went after my people's vote down South, your friends left to go to your party, and they haven't left since.

Republican Klansmen in Congress: 0.
Democratic Klansmen in Congress: 1.

The Republicans only freed your people and gave you the vote. A simple "thanks" is sufficient.

Go back and study your history before you come back with another post.
Here, I will even give you a search word: DIXIECRATS. See what a nice guy I am?

Dixiecrat's official party title: States' Rights Democratic Party

Note: Not Republican Party.

Feel free to support the same people who enslaved your people. God knows wisdom is not a strong suit of yours.
-=Mike

If the Clinton economy was ... (Below threshold)
Teresa:

If the Clinton economy was sooo good...so soon after he took office, what was it he did, to cause it?? And what was it that caused the recession, the month he left office?? Don't give us the same old crap of how he worked as hard as he's ever worked in his life for 3 weeks & found we all needed to 'contribute' more & don't fault the fact that he was leaving office to explain what he didn't & did do, caused the recession that George W. took over. Not to mention, the lack of attention to protection over terrorists, including UBL; he didn't 'try & fail', trying is lying & lying is like breathing to WJC....William Jefferson Clinton. We are a GREAT Country!! We survived 8 years of him & his wife. Thank God Ronald Reagan & George Bush, Sr. preceeded him in Presidency!!

"Dixiecrat's official party... (Below threshold)

"Dixiecrat's official party title: States' Rights Democratic Party

Note: Not Republican Party.

Feel free to support the same people who enslaved your people. God knows wisdom is not a strong suit of yours"

You are a complete moron with a reading comprehension problem. Frankly, I am not surprised given your rants on this site.

But here is a news flash, Lincoln was not the benevolent lover of negroes that you think. [again you might want to read up on your history, you do know how to read don't you?]
So no thanks to you repub massa for freeing my people. You need to free your own feeble mind from the ignorance that engulfs it.

My ancestors didn't need your sorry ass party to free us.[Save that for Mitchell] I happen to be a descendant of the Jamaican Maroons. [go look that up] My people were never enslaved in the Werstern hemisphere,because we fought your people from the moment we got off the slave ships ;)

muirgeo,Bush OVER-... (Below threshold)

muirgeo,

Bush OVER-reacted?

To this day I find the fact that we haven't leveled Meccah to be an act of great restraint.

Then again, I know it's a good thing I'm not in charge.

to reiterate, "we" all need... (Below threshold)
sang:

to reiterate, "we" all need to "get a life". Talk talk talk blog blog blog...not. It will soon be time to walk, drive, run to the voting booth; vote with forethought not malice. It's time for all good men and women to come to the aid of our country. Caution: History has the propensity to repeat itself. Hopefully we will have some who choose to seek our support who can remain stablized and not meltdown to jibberishness "if" and/or when called to due process of accountability. "Time will tell."

But here is a news flash... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

But here is a news flash, Lincoln was not the benevolent lover of negroes that you think.

Nobody said he was.

But when compared to the DEMOCRATIC candidate, he was, to use the term, a "n***** lover".

You know, as the Dems accused him of being.

The party you support want you to remain a slave forever. If you have no problem with that, that is on you.

Personally, I'd be a bit annoyed.

So no thanks to you repub massa for freeing my people. You need to free your own feeble mind from the ignorance that engulfs it.

Republicans freed your people. Like it or not. Not the Dems, who championed not only slavery, but virulent Jim Crow laws (who integrated the schools? Why, a Republican? Stunning).

If you're too ignorant to follow history, that is on you.

My ancestors didn't need your sorry ass party to free us.

Clearly you did as Dems in charge didn't do it. Republicans fought a war, shed a lot of blood, and lost a lot of lives to save you.

Again, just say "Thanks"

I happen to be a descendant of the Jamaican Maroons. [go look that up] My people were never enslaved in the Werstern hemisphere,because we fought your people from the moment we got off the slave ships ;)

This is me REALLY not giving a damn.

You support a party that wanted anybody who looked like you to live in chains.
-=Mike

"This is me REALLY not givi... (Below threshold)

"This is me REALLY not giving a damn."

Well shut the F%&* up then, and don't talk about things you no nothing about. That's the problem with ignorant people like you, who THINK they are smart, but have the IQ of a soccer score. You make moronic satements and can't back them up. And when called on it, make inane pointless comments like the one above.

Now go drink some moonshine,call your cousin for a date, and leave me alone. I have work to do.

MikeSC, all name-calling as... (Below threshold)
Brian:

MikeSC, all name-calling aside, you're (probably intentionally) missing the point. No one actually said the things that you keep dismissing, such as locating and shooting down planes without having all of the information available. You're just weaving straw men there. What was suggested was having fighters in the air, heading to NY and DC. Why do you keep dismissing that as a call to blindly start shooting down planes?

It's far better to have fighters in the air, ready for orders, than it is to have them sitting on the ground waiting for further intel. What if that intel was "a new plane will hit the White House in 5 minutes"? That is the definition of "having your planes caught on the ground".

Let's say your home security company calls you and tells you that not one, but two rocks were thrown through your window, and that in their assessment, it was not an accident, and your house is under a planned assault. Would you think "whew, the threat is over, no need to take any action"? Or would you think "two already... what if there are more?" And then wouldn't you tell them to send a security guard out to your house? Not to start shooting at strangers, but just to be there in case they were needed?

You dismiss the idea of sending fighters to enter threatened airspace because "they have NO idea who they're looking for and have to hope air traffic controllers can figure out which of the dozen or blips on their screen is the correct one". But that's exactly the point. They wait, ready to move the second they receive an order to do so. Better to be in the air, 30 seconds from a potential target, than on the ground, 15 minutes from one.

You sarcastically dismiss this scenario:

-"LET'S DO IT RIGHT NOW!!"
-"We have to wait for people to become available."
-"OK"

But how about this one instead?

-"LET'S DO IT RIGHT NOW!!"
-"We have to wait for people to become available."
-"OK, get the planes in the air immediately, and that way they'll be ready when the people become available."

Finally, you (and as far as I can recall, you're the only one saying this) bizarrely repeat the claim that "No, we do not know what was said". Yes, we do, from Andy Card's own lips:"A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack!" That exchange is available to view on videotape, and it's clear that Bush said nothing in response.

So what exactly is that that "we do not know what was said?" I suspect your response will be something about not knowing what was said once Bush left the room, but that's not what you were responding to in your previous post. You were defending the 7 minutes Bush was sitting there, claiming we don't know what he was told. That's not true. And no trying to weasel out by shifting the issue to a different conversation, as you often do.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy