This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
That said, one has to question as to why there was a "feeding frenzy" here. You have to admit that Bush has become one of the most fiercely hated presidents of all time. Give us "snippets" and we'll attack. We are indeed in a frantic frenzy for regime change in America.
Ask yourself, if he's really hated that much, then maybe we should really take a close look as to why.
I know you'd hate to admit it but tiz the liberal media, that's all. Bush is actually doing quite well in the polls.
This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
I don't think that's true. Read all the quotes and it still paints a very negative picture. Bush continued the Clinton police doesn't mean that their approach was no different.
This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
That said, one has to question as to why there was a "feeding frenzy" here. You have to admit that Bush has become one of the most fiercely hated presidents of all time. Give us "snippets" and we'll attack. We are indeed in a frantic frenzy for regime change in America.
Ask yourself, if he's really hated that much, then maybe we should really take a close look as to why.
Tonton, my opinion of you was just raised. Admitting you are human (as was I this thread) is cool.
I wonder now if with this new info bunge's question reversed will illicit anymore acknowledgements of humanity.
Quote:
To those that always argue that the war was for oil: if these reports are true, would you finally admit that the war wasn't for oil?
Comments
Originally posted by tonton
This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
That said, one has to question as to why there was a "feeding frenzy" here. You have to admit that Bush has become one of the most fiercely hated presidents of all time. Give us "snippets" and we'll attack. We are indeed in a frantic frenzy for regime change in America.
Ask yourself, if he's really hated that much, then maybe we should really take a close look as to why.
I know you'd hate to admit it but tiz the liberal media, that's all. Bush is actually doing quite well in the polls.
Originally posted by tonton
This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
I don't think that's true. Read all the quotes and it still paints a very negative picture. Bush continued the Clinton police doesn't mean that their approach was no different.
Originally posted by tonton
This is big news, and it helps clarify things. I believe O'Neill's assertion that Bush's inital approach was no different than that of the Clinton administration.
That said, one has to question as to why there was a "feeding frenzy" here. You have to admit that Bush has become one of the most fiercely hated presidents of all time. Give us "snippets" and we'll attack. We are indeed in a frantic frenzy for regime change in America.
Ask yourself, if he's really hated that much, then maybe we should really take a close look as to why.
Tonton, my opinion of you was just raised. Admitting you are human (as was I this thread) is cool.
I wonder now if with this new info bunge's question reversed will illicit anymore acknowledgements of humanity.
To those that always argue that the war was for oil: if these reports are true, would you finally admit that the war wasn't for oil?
Nick