Dirty Sanchez said:
Couple things here that make me, a educated and informed human being, scratch my head.
Ahh, ignorance is bliss.
I can give at least 5 reasons also.
I've ducked out of this forum for a while but I can't let this stand un-challenged
You're right, he shouldn't have. That sissy Democrat Bill Clinton should have put down his purse and done something about Saddam when he was in power.
Bill Clinton did do something, he kept Saddam boxed up between the two no-fly areas. Sanctions effectively destroyed any WMD programs Saddam had (something the UN weapon inspectors said before the war and has been proven by the obvious lack of WMDs since the war began). Top that off by the fact that Iraq is now a haven for terrorist that world is more dangerous vis-a-vis terrorism now than before the Iraq war according to a new report issued by the state department
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/28/terror.report/index.html
We've got two oil-men in the Presidency, crude is now over $70 a barrel, is there any question why we went to Iraq? Not in my mind. The question I still can't get answered is if Iraq is pumping 2 million barrels (conservative estimate) per day at $70 a barrel = $140 million per day where the hell is that money going?
Enough said?!?! You didn't say anything.
That's okay I'll say it for him.
Are you implying that he should be held responsible for 9/11, or do you not like the way he handled 9/11? Or is there something else entirely?
Well, when Bill Clinton met with George Bush, he told him the biggest threat the US faced was Osama Bin Laden (the Bin Laden family are family friends of the Bushies btw) and Al Qaeda. During the Lewinsky non-scandel Clinton started bombing Al Qaeda training camps, all I can remember is the media screaming, "Wag the dog, wag the dog!!!""
Then we know for a fact that prior-9/11 Bush NEVER met with Richard Clarke the man in-charge of US anti-terrorism coordination. This brings me to the coup-de-grace the 8/6 Presidential Daily Brief titled (cue drum-roll) "Bin-Laden Determined to Strike in US." While the contents of this document are still classified to the best of my knowledge, the fact that the PDB was TITLED as such leads me to believe that this was in fact momentous.
Why, because he's not a great public speaker? I actually like that. You listen to some politicians (ie Clinton) and they can sit there and lie right to you and the majority of people will believe them. He could stand there right in front of you, and tell you he wasn't there, and you'd believe him. At least I believe Bush believes what he is saying to people. The same can't be said about a lot of others.
I'm sorry I've got to completely disagree with you on that, I've met two Presidents and two Vice Presidents and I have never met someone as phony as George Bush. That down-home thing he does is an ACT. HE IS FROM ONE OF THE WEALTHIEST FAMILIES IN THE COUNTRY. This is the Bush clan, he's no rancher, he was a spoiled child who's become a spoiled man used to getting everything he wants. Top that off with the fact that Bush has been SHOWN to have lied to the US people far more often than Clinton ever did.
When it came to Katrina... "We couldn't have known that the leavies would break." Except when video is released showing Brownie telling the President, "we are concerned that the leavies will breach."
When it came to Valerie Plame... "No one in my administration who leaks classified info, will continue to be in my administration." Yet Karl Rove is still there, but I guess turd-blossom gets a pass.
The man lies often but because he puts on this folksy persona people give him a pass.
I guess these rising prices kinda squashes that "Blood for Oil" crap we heard from the red state idiots. Since you blame Bush for rising gas prices, I betcha you wouldn't praise him if they dropped. See how that works. The left wing ignorance is so deep, they can't see their own hypocrisy.
No the rising prices for oil, and the obscene profits that ExxonMobil just posted (8.4 BILLION in PROFITS
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=businessNews&storyid=2006-04-27T122840Z_01_WAA000191_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-EXXON-EARNS.xml) conclusively prove the "No Blood for Oil" claims.
Amazingly, the inadequacies of local and state governments gets over looked and Bush gets the blame for other's stupidity. Unbelievable. Keep that mouth open wide so the liberal media can keep spoon feeding you their bullshit. Hurricanes hit the US multiple times every year. And yet the people of places like Florida don't sit around, ignore the warnings, find themselves stranded on their roofs, then complain that Bush didn't help them. I still will never understand out of everybody, how it is Bush, and seemingly Bush alone, that gets blamed for the handling of these hurricanes.
What you've just displayed here is a classic mis-understanding of government protocols. You see when President Bush declared New Orleans a "federal disaster area" command immediately goes to FEMA, that is by federal statute. I'm going to let that jibe about the so-called liberal media slide for now. As to your attempt to blame the victims, you see its really easy to leave your neighborhood when you have a car, but when you are poor (correction despereately poor) and everyone around you is in the same economic condition things become a little more difficult. And let's not forget that its been shown that for some reason, FEMA was much more effective in Florida than they were in Louisiana. In fact several people I know in Florida said that since Bush took the Presidency, FEMA seems to be just giving money away for free in Florida. Now I can't imagine why that would be but something makes me think that it has something to do with 2000 (and 2004). As to why Bush gets blamed for the hurricanes, I want you to know something, when Harry Truman was president, there was a placard on his desk in the oval office that read, "The Buck Stops Here." That's why, and that's the way its always been.
If you take a decison of ultimate leadership you also take a position of ultimate responsibility. Of course in the Bush White House if you are a failure instead of getting fired you get a Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Remember, Bush is and was far more equiped to be POTUS then John Kerry was. So if you happen to think Bush is terrible, just imagine how bad it would have been if a Demo won.
You really think that? Really? Republicans haven't done a good job since Eisenhower. Nixon was as corrupt as they come, Reagan (as much as conservatives want to idolize him) also was corrupt, do you even remeber the arms for hostages scandel? So much for the US not negotiating with terrorists. Bush the elder couldn't lead himself out of a paper bag. And Bush II will probably go down as more corrupt as Nixon. Wantonly and brazenly walking all over the citizens of this country's civil rights, leading a repressive regime and governing by fear.
Last but not least, I am so sick and tired of hearing, "the media is dominated by liberals." So please just read this post. http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=557156&postcount=25
