No thanks. I'll just wait for the next Bush-bashing thread. It should be along any time now. I can't respond to all of them now, can I? I'd get a terrible cramp in my fingers!
That seems to be the only response that supporters of Bush can legitimately come up with these days . . . rather than address any of the mountain of mis-haps, and treasonous policy debacles that this spoiled failure has foisted on us they bitch about our bringing them up.
BTW, I seem to remembr a time, not too long ago, when AO was a constant onlsought of right wing anti-"liberal" threads . . . the left-leaning (or rather, not even ideological but merely reflectively-critical on these boards were virtually shouted off) . . . if it has gone full-circle that is because the times demand that we take a hard look at what is happening . . . .
Bush makes it seem like we are merely piling on because he constantly presents more and more very important issues that need to be brought to light . . . problems which he has rammed down the throats of the American people
If saying that somehow allows you to overlook what Bush is doing then keep saying your little cutesy stupid ass moronic response and bury your head in the sand.
Clinton testified and put up absolutely no fuss about his participation . . . . can Bush be said to say the same thing?
Doesn't it even grace the little gray matter that you have a little bit, perhaps a feather's touch worth, the question WHY?
What is Bush hiding?
What is he afraid of?
He should be cheerleading the call for everybody's full up-front participation in any investigation that deals with the events of 911
He should be saying: "we need to know what went wrong (something obviously went wrong) and we need to work together as a nation to get to the bottom of it"
But why isn't he?!?!?!
My two cents is simply this: The expressed wishes of The Project for the New American Century (which means Wollfowits, Cheney, Perle and others in very influential places in the admin and Pentagon (see Pentagon thread)) stated quite clearly that in order to put into place their agenda, they needed some event to occur that would provide an umbrlla for the "substantial military presence" in the Middle-East, and the furthering of their Expansionist-"Democratizing" agenda. (read their article: Pax Americana (look it up)
It is simply to much to believe in . . . they could not possible have allowed it to happen simply in order to push start their agenda . . . but nonetheless, questions like that may very well start to surface in official circles rather than just in nutcase-circles, and this would leave Bush seeming very tainted.
Old Billky Bob Clinton needs to be investigated too.
Quite alot of intelligence failure and his failure to act happened during his watch also.
But this is another Bush bash fest so carry on.
Sure...lets investigate Clinton too. Lets find out exactly who is lying to us and fucking up the world and fucking us all over and why. Then we can decide what to do with them no matter what political party they belong to.
The Clinton administration had the same attitude as the UN on how to deal with the WMD issue.
You'll find that intelligence was twisted and sexed up under the Bush administration... you'll notice that Clinton didn't come to the same conclusions and go to war. Yes Clinton favored regime change but different methods to attain it
No body was asking to investigate intelligence under Clinton because he wasn't ABUSING it.
We know what the Bush mantra is now... "It's not my fault!"
Perhaps maybe you should look at Tenet's testimony from this week.
The Clinton administration had the same attitude as the UN on how to deal with the WMD issue.
You'll find that intelligence was twisted and sexed up under the Bush administration... you'll notice that Clinton didn't come to the same conclusions and go to war. Yes Clinton favored regime change but different methods to attain it
No body was asking to investigate intelligence under Clinton because he wasn't ABUSING it.
We know what the Bush mantra is now... "It's not my fault!"
Perhaps maybe you should look at Tenet's testimony from this week.
No thanks. I'll just wait for the next Bush-bashing thread. It should be along any time now. I can't respond to all of them now, can I? I'd get a terrible cramp in my fingers!
Figures. Maybe you should've just said "nuuuuuuhhhuuuhhhhh".
Official: Anything that does not make the current administration look good should be deemed unpatriotic and/or Bush bashing.
About the link. What a weird picture. It's not real is it?
Like Bandar, the bin Laden family epitomized the marriage between the United States and Saudi Arabia. Their huge construction company, the Saudi Binladin Group, banked with Citigroup and invested with Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch. Over time, the bin Ladens did business with such icons of Western culture as Disney, the Hard Rock Café, Snapple and Porsche. In the mid-1990s, they joined various members of the House of Saud in becoming business associates with former secretary of state James Baker and former president George H.W. Bush by investing in the Carlyle Group, a gigantic Washington, D.C.-based private equity firm. As Charles Freeman, the former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, told the Wall Street Journal, "If there were ever any company closely connected to the U.S. and its presence in Saudi Arabia, it's the Saudi Binladin Group."
Bush was given PERMISSION to go to war by our very Congress. Yes, WMDs were one of the reasons for going, but there were others. You CANNOT place the blame for war solely on GWB.
If the things Bush has done are so egregious, why isn't there a *large* public outcry to impeach him? Why isn't his very job in jeopardy? I think the answer is because most Americans realize that even the best intelligence-gatherers can be wrong. It's not exactly a sure thing, folks.
Yes, it's a shame that we didn't catch the terrorists before 9/11 happened, but how many more 9/11s have we had since then? Is the Dept. of Homeland Security completely worthless? Ask your local fire and police chiefs for that answer.
What was happening to the economy on the day GWB was sworn in? Oh yeah, it was already on a downswing. Is that Clinton's fault? Maybe partially, but the president has a lot less to do with that than you all would like to give him credit for.
In these hard times, did Bush not try to do *something* to try to help out ALL taxpayers in America? Yes, we have grown a national debt, but that can and will be payed back down. You appreciated that check in the mail, though, didn't you?
There's a lot of good to go with Bush's bad decisions. Remember that he doesn't live in a bubble and has to do what's best for the WHOLE of Americans, even if that means you disagree with a good portion of his decisions.
I am NOT a Bush loyalist. Do I think Kerry would be a good president? Actually, I'd like to see for myself. I think there are enough sour feelings about Bush in this country that it might be best for someone else to be president this next time around. The jury's still out where my vote is concerned.
Comments
Originally posted by CosmoNut
No thanks. I'll just wait for the next Bush-bashing thread. It should be along any time now. I can't respond to all of them now, can I? I'd get a terrible cramp in my fingers!
That seems to be the only response that supporters of Bush can legitimately come up with these days . . . rather than address any of the mountain of mis-haps, and treasonous policy debacles that this spoiled failure has foisted on us they bitch about our bringing them up.
BTW, I seem to remembr a time, not too long ago, when AO was a constant onlsought of right wing anti-"liberal" threads . . . the left-leaning (or rather, not even ideological but merely reflectively-critical on these boards were virtually shouted off) . . . if it has gone full-circle that is because the times demand that we take a hard look at what is happening . . . .
Bush makes it seem like we are merely piling on because he constantly presents more and more very important issues that need to be brought to light . . . problems which he has rammed down the throats of the American people
Quite alot of intelligence failure and his failure to act happened during his watch also.
But this is another Bush bash fest so carry on.
Originally posted by msantti
But this is another Bush bash fest so carry on.
If saying that somehow allows you to overlook what Bush is doing then keep saying your little cutesy stupid ass moronic response and bury your head in the sand.
Clinton testified and put up absolutely no fuss about his participation . . . . can Bush be said to say the same thing?
Doesn't it even grace the little gray matter that you have a little bit, perhaps a feather's touch worth, the question WHY?
What is Bush hiding?
What is he afraid of?
He should be cheerleading the call for everybody's full up-front participation in any investigation that deals with the events of 911
He should be saying: "we need to know what went wrong (something obviously went wrong) and we need to work together as a nation to get to the bottom of it"
But why isn't he?!?!?!
My two cents is simply this: The expressed wishes of The Project for the New American Century (which means Wollfowits, Cheney, Perle and others in very influential places in the admin and Pentagon (see Pentagon thread)) stated quite clearly that in order to put into place their agenda, they needed some event to occur that would provide an umbrlla for the "substantial military presence" in the Middle-East, and the furthering of their Expansionist-"Democratizing" agenda. (read their article: Pax Americana (look it up)
It is simply to much to believe in . . . they could not possible have allowed it to happen simply in order to push start their agenda . . . but nonetheless, questions like that may very well start to surface in official circles rather than just in nutcase-circles, and this would leave Bush seeming very tainted.
BTW, I seem to remembr a time, not too long ago, when AO was a constant onlsought of right wing anti-"liberal" threads .
When was that?
Originally posted by msantti
When was that?
before you brought your 300 one sentence postings here . . .
Originally posted by msantti
Old Billky Bob Clinton needs to be investigated too.
Quite alot of intelligence failure and his failure to act happened during his watch also.
But this is another Bush bash fest so carry on.
Sure...lets investigate Clinton too. Lets find out exactly who is lying to us and fucking up the world and fucking us all over and why. Then we can decide what to do with them no matter what political party they belong to.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/sto...p-150002c.html
The Clinton administration had the same attitude as the UN on how to deal with the WMD issue.
You'll find that intelligence was twisted and sexed up under the Bush administration... you'll notice that Clinton didn't come to the same conclusions and go to war. Yes Clinton favored regime change but different methods to attain it
No body was asking to investigate intelligence under Clinton because he wasn't ABUSING it.
We know what the Bush mantra is now... "It's not my fault!"
Perhaps maybe you should look at Tenet's testimony from this week.
http://www.iht.com/articles/509613.html
Originally posted by msantti
When was that?
Does it matter?
Originally posted by pfflam
before you brought your 300 one sentence postings here . . .
BABAMMM!!!! OWNNNDD!!!!!! PFFLAM IS TEH WIN!!11
Originally posted by chu_bakka
And maybe the GOP should stop insulting 9/11 families.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/sto...p-150002c.html
The Clinton administration had the same attitude as the UN on how to deal with the WMD issue.
You'll find that intelligence was twisted and sexed up under the Bush administration... you'll notice that Clinton didn't come to the same conclusions and go to war. Yes Clinton favored regime change but different methods to attain it
No body was asking to investigate intelligence under Clinton because he wasn't ABUSING it.
We know what the Bush mantra is now... "It's not my fault!"
Perhaps maybe you should look at Tenet's testimony from this week.
http://www.iht.com/articles/509613.html
WHY are these stories burried in the mainstream media!?"!(*^&)%^
Originally posted by pfflam
Tomorrow Salon.com will post an article about the Saudi flights out if the country . . . or is it the next day?!?!
keep an eye out for it.
now here it is . . . Voila!!
*told you . . .
Originally posted by pfflam
now here it is . . . Voila!!
*told you . . .
< /bows to pfflam's awesome display of magic-8-ball powers >
Originally posted by CosmoNut
No thanks. I'll just wait for the next Bush-bashing thread. It should be along any time now. I can't respond to all of them now, can I? I'd get a terrible cramp in my fingers!
Figures. Maybe you should've just said "nuuuuuuhhhuuuhhhhh".
Official: Anything that does not make the current administration look good should be deemed unpatriotic and/or Bush bashing.
About the link. What a weird picture. It's not real is it?
wow. onto page 2!
Friday's article sounds like a doozie too.
- Bush was given PERMISSION to go to war by our very Congress. Yes, WMDs were one of the reasons for going, but there were others. You CANNOT place the blame for war solely on GWB.
- If the things Bush has done are so egregious, why isn't there a *large* public outcry to impeach him? Why isn't his very job in jeopardy? I think the answer is because most Americans realize that even the best intelligence-gatherers can be wrong. It's not exactly a sure thing, folks.
- Yes, it's a shame that we didn't catch the terrorists before 9/11 happened, but how many more 9/11s have we had since then? Is the Dept. of Homeland Security completely worthless? Ask your local fire and police chiefs for that answer.
- What was happening to the economy on the day GWB was sworn in? Oh yeah, it was already on a downswing. Is that Clinton's fault? Maybe partially, but the president has a lot less to do with that than you all would like to give him credit for.
- In these hard times, did Bush not try to do *something* to try to help out ALL taxpayers in America? Yes, we have grown a national debt, but that can and will be payed back down. You appreciated that check in the mail, though, didn't you?
There's a lot of good to go with Bush's bad decisions. Remember that he doesn't live in a bubble and has to do what's best for the WHOLE of Americans, even if that means you disagree with a good portion of his decisions.I am NOT a Bush loyalist. Do I think Kerry would be a good president? Actually, I'd like to see for myself. I think there are enough sour feelings about Bush in this country that it might be best for someone else to be president this next time around. The jury's still out where my vote is concerned.