You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Republicans win a 3rd term in office
- Thread starter 1000
- Start date
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060927/ap_on_el_se/rice_clinton
I support Sen. Clinton and former President Clinton. There is no disputing that the former President is well liked and well received all around the world, and possibly the most liked US President.
In contrast, Secretary of State Rice, didn't or wasn't able to broker much of a deal in the recent Israeli Lebanese conflict. And that just goes to show the difference.
But, after 4 pages of a thread that is bias towards President Bush, there has been ONE democrat post, and there is no Dem rebuttal. So where are the Dems?
I support Sen. Clinton and former President Clinton. There is no disputing that the former President is well liked and well received all around the world, and possibly the most liked US President.
In contrast, Secretary of State Rice, didn't or wasn't able to broker much of a deal in the recent Israeli Lebanese conflict. And that just goes to show the difference.
But, after 4 pages of a thread that is bias towards President Bush, there has been ONE democrat post, and there is no Dem rebuttal. So where are the Dems?
Attachments
Scrambling for evidence that Clinton was extremely focused on terrorism and bin Laden (which they'll never find) and/or concocting new theories to explain Bush's planning of 9/11, whilst consulting with the NY Times on what security leak to next splatter on the front page. So they're pretty busy...Quote from 1000:
So where are the Dems?
Quote from hapaboy:
Clinton was extremely focused on terrorism and bin Laden
Not really but Clinton was more focused on terrorism and bin Laden than Reagan, Bush Senior and Bush Junior (in 2001) combined. While Clinton indeed did not have post-911 mentality five years before 9/11, GWB, his administration and his right wing minions have not developed post-911 mentality five years after 9/11.
While rightwingers were going ballistic during the 90's that Clinton was wagging the dog every time he resorted to a military action, the same rightwingers are whining like crybabies today that he did not wag the dog hard enough.
Quote from hapaboy:
Scrambling for evidence that Clinton was extremely focused on terrorism and bin Laden (which they'll never find) and/or concocting new theories to explain Bush's planning of 9/11, whilst consulting with the NY Times on what security leak to next splatter on the front page. So they're pretty busy...
dude, if anyone's a moonbat it's you. you are SO biased against a specific party you almost sound like an abuse victim or something in your hate-inspired rants. how about some specific information once and a while instead of bald-face generalizations and assertions about ALL democrats being this or ALL democrats doing that
Quote from dddooo:
Not really but Clinton was more focused on terrorism and bin Laden than Reagan, Bush Senior and Bush Junior (in 2001) combined. While Clinton indeed did not have post-911 mentality five years before 9/11, GWB, his administration and his right wing minions have not developed post-911 mentality five years after 9/11.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9115166/AFGHANISTAN
To throw President's Regan and Bush Senior, (just for being Republicans) into this terrorism concept, I don't know. Because the Islamic radicalism seems to have caught hold after the defeat of the Soviet Socialists in Afghanistan around 1993, and by then both President's Regan and Bush Senior were no longer in power.
OK, maybe the Republicans have a policy/agenda rather than a post-911 mentality, but I feel that it is the responsibility of the free world to have a post-911 mentality, not just the GOP. And it is difficult to comprehend the stance taken by some Ex-Generals, showing absolutely no leadership qualities.
Attachments
Good grief, relax your sphincter and read the NY Times once in a while, check out who's making all these conspiracy claims, etc.Quote from Avid_Consumer:
dude, if anyone's a moonbat it's you. you are SO biased against a specific party you almost sound like an abuse victim or something in your hate-inspired rants. how about some specific information once and a while instead of bald-face generalizations and assertions about ALL democrats being this or ALL democrats doing that
I've posted links on other threads, do a search.
Not that it will do you any good, as you live in the World of Denial.
And oh, you are right. I should have said "many Democrats," because there are some sane ones out there, i.e. most of my friends.
And remember....Halliburton is watching you...always!!
generalization is just a bad technique, and you employ it at every turn. appropriate for the chitchat section of a message board
funny coming from someone who claims to be a japanese american who's been discriminated against and generalized by ignorant people his whole life
funny coming from someone who claims to be a japanese american who's been discriminated against and generalized by ignorant people his whole life
Quote from 1000:
To throw President's Regan and Bush Senior, (just for being Republicans) into this terrorism concept, I don't know. Because the Islamic radicalism seems to have caught hold after the defeat of the Soviet Socialists in Afghanistan around 1993
What about Lockerbie bombing, what about the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon, what about the first WTC attack which happened 38 days into Clinton's first term but was conceived and planned when Bush Senior was in charge.
The bottom line is more than 500 americans died in terror attacks under Reagan, less than 60 americans were killed during Clinton years and 3000 americans lost their lives on 9/11 when GWB was running the show. Clinton stopped the bloodshed in Bosnia, Bush started the bloodshed in Iraq, Clinton lost no american troops in Yugoslavia, Bush lost 3,000 (and counting) troops in Iraq.
Now five years later OBL is at large, Mullah Omar is at large and this republican administration has 7 times more troops in Afghanistan than Iraq, god knows why.
Quote from dddooo:
What about Lockerbie bombing, what about the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon, what about the first WTC attack which happened 38 days into Clinton's first term but was conceived and planned when Bush Senior was in charge.
The bottom line is more than 500 americans died in terror attacks under Reagan, less than 60 americans were killed during Clinton years and 3000 americans lost their lives on 9/11 when GWB was running the show. Clinton stopped the bloodshed in Bosnia, Bush started the bloodshed in Iraq, Clinton lost no american troops in Yugoslavia, Bush lost 3,000 (and counting) troops in Iraq.
Now five years later OBL is at large, Mullah Omar is at large and this republican administration has 7 times more troops in Afghanistan than Iraq, god knows why.
Good point. But no tape or video from OBL so far, which may suggest that he must have fluffed off. Its difficult to comprehend, if I had as much money as OBL had, I would have got myself a one way ticket to Las Vegas, instead of the shit hole that he decided to live in.