Clinton in Denial

wasn't misguided at all, said exactly what I meant to say. You fellows make me laugh say all you want about Clinton but when someone says something about Bush you lose it.

 

Show one of us losing it, Bob.

 

Frankly, it appears there's a great deal of denial, and defensiveness to go around. Why widen the gap? Why not admit there were errors made by both administrations. That neither individual president is capable of all the stupidity claimed by their detractors.

There's an election coming -- get active! Find the candidate that can support the position you've determined needed for this country. Take the time spent posting on boards and work to get voters involved and out voting.

Spend time moving toward positive goals rather than pulling the opponents negative ones along behind. Compromises will have to be made -- be certain the representatives know just where NOT to do so from your perspective!

 

This shows extremely poor thinking on your part. The fact that you said what you intended does not mean it is not misguided. I believe you said what you meant to say. It was misguided. It was a empty personal attack, devoid of all substance.

Who here as "lost it"? I haven't seen anyone lose it. I haven't seen anyone make baseless personal attacks on Clinton. The issues under discussion are issues of fact.

The facts appear to be that Clinton did not leave a good plan to the Bush administration. The fact is that the Bush administration did further terrorist investigations and fighting terrorism.

Clinton did some, but not nearly enough. He had eight years and did precious little. Bush had eight months and probably did about the same.

But there are now five consecutive years with no terrorist attacks on American interests. Who gets the credit for that?

 

This is your sig isn't it?
Go up, thou bald head....

No, it did exactly what I intended for it to do and you fell right into it.

Pastor Larry; But there are now five consecutive years with no terrorist attacks on American interests. Who gets the credit for that? (We already lost more lives in the iraq war than the twin towers, maybe the soldiers don't count but I would think their families think so.)

Peace,

 

Okay, Bob, jokes over. Ha ha ha, it's been funny. I almost fell for it.

:laugh: You....? A Clinton supporter....? :tongue3: :laugh:

Bah ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa!!! Good one!!! OUCH MY SIDE!!!

 

Bush dismantled it. He took terrorism off the list of administration priorities, he shut down Operation Catcher's Mitt, and he stopped the tracking of Islamic militants (for which the FBI agent in charge angrily quit in protest).

The fact is, he shut them down. Until 9/11. So he attacked Iraq. And now his own people say that in doing so, he helped the terrorists and made us less safe.

 

Read the entire NIE, not just a leak. Then try CNN -- and try not to view it as a Clinton defender nor a Bush basher, but someone who lives in this world.

 

It was intended to show that you would rather avoid addressing substantive issues? It intended to show that you would rather make silly personal attacks based on stereotypes than address the actual issues at hand? Because that’s what it did. It just seems a strange way to contribute to the conversation.

I am going on what has been said in the news. I believe in Richard Clarke said there was no plan.

We are to some degree. There are setbacks, of course, as there are in any war. But overall, we are winning. We were told from the beginning that it would be a long war, and it would be time. So this is no surprise. Clinton failed ... which is why the problem still exists. His eight years of failure doesn't look so good against Bush's five years of moderate success.

Nice attempt to not answer. In the Iraq War we have freed 30 million people from a murderous dictator. I know that is distasteful to some, and that is unfortunate.

 

I don't mean to be argumentive Pastor Larry but I was called mean for taking up for Clinton and let the flesh get in the way.
Now, there is no way that anyone is free in Iraq and the whole world knows it except a few americans. We are not winning, it is getting worse by the day to where I fear for this country. We now have the whole world against us and I wouldn't doubt if Britian don't turn on us. This is scary times as I have never known and I am 67 years old.

 

I don't think it was your taking up for him. I think it was hte way in which you attacked Bush while doing so. The particular objection I believe was your post that didn't take up for Clinton; it bashed Bush. And "mean" wasn't the word I would have used.

I think you are not accurately reading the situation. There is no doubt that things are tough. But that doesn't mean we are not winning. Overall, we are winning. At 67, you are close to being able to remembe WWII, where there was real doubt about the outcome. I think the difference now is that we are much more in control, but much less strong-willed. People are used to TV wars, where no one really gets hurt and freedom doesn't cost anything. it just doesn't work that way.

 

We're Not Winning This War

By John Lehman

Thursday, August 31, 2006; Page A25

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/30/AR2006083002730.html

Reagan's former Navy Secretary...

 

"September 11, 2006 · A secret report from the top Marine Corps intelligence officer says it will be difficult for the U.S. military to secure Iraq's Anbar Province -- an area comprising about one-third of Iraq, dominated by Sunni Muslims."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6053466

 

If there is any thing that we have learned, it is that you can find an article from someone somewhere that will support anything you wish to believe. How much better would it be if we simply look at the facts ... and rejoice that this generation was not in charge 60 years ago. If they would have been, Germany and Japan would be ruling the world because of this generation's aversion to sacrifice.

 

Unfortuantly for you, the majority of Americans believe as I do. If you think we are anywhere near in control then you are wrong. The leaders are selling Bush out behind his back.

 

I have children, family, neighbors and friends. How about you?

 

That's me losing it ? :laugh:

You're losing this argument, resorting to personal attacks is just a symptom. You can't show one temper tantrum.

 

So what you're saying is...?

Let's see for me.
Children? 1, but she's in heaven anyway.
Family? My wife, Dad, Mom, Brother Sister, Wife's Dad, Mom, Step-dad, 2 Sisters, and a Half-brother... and a host of cousins, aunts, uncles, etc.
Neighbors? Yep.
Friends? Sure thing.

What does that have to do with anything? While I don't believe we should just turn a blind eye or ear to what's going on in Washington D.C., the Scripture that was quoted is clear... "The LORD is my light and my salvation—whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life—of whom shall I be afraid?" So with your retort are you saying this Scripture isn't valid?

DISCLAIMER: This is not an attack on you, nor is it meant as a sarcastic affront to your intelligence or stance. The question is being asked of you to clarify your position in relation to the above Scripture and your original response to carpro's post.