Sen Clinton

[Genx87]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/08/clinton.democrats.ap/index.html

I got a good laugh out of this article considering how much fear and gloom democrats run on when it comes to killing old people or starving the poor.

Then her comments about OBL not being captured is priceless considering her hubby had 8 years and failed just as miserably as Bush has at capturing or killing him.

 

[OrByte]

I think she is saying all the right things.

shrug.

If Clinton had declared a "War on Terror" then I would accuse him of failing "just as miserably" as Bush. But Bush started this "War on Terror" and it started with OBL.

IMHO Sounds like she is on the right track.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: OrByte
I think she is saying all the right things.

shrug.

If Clinton had declared a "War on Terror" then I would accuse him of failing "just as miserably" as Bush. But Bush started this "War on Terror" and it started with OBL.

IMHO Sounds like she is on the right track.

Ahh I see provided we dont actually declare a war on it, then you cant fail at it.
Interesting logic.

Better to just stick our head in the sand and pretend nothing is wrong and all is good.

 

[Todd33]

Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

 

[lozina]

I almost want her to win just to hear how much whining the extreme right wingers will be doing and contradicting their stances on the current administration

besides, how could the situation possibly get any worse with her as President? we're at rock bottom!

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: OrByte
I think she is saying all the right things.

shrug.

If Clinton had declared a "War on Terror" then I would accuse him of failing "just as miserably" as Bush. But Bush started this "War on Terror" and it started with OBL.

IMHO Sounds like she is on the right track.

Ahh I see provided we dont actually declare a war on it, then you cant fail at it.
Interesting logic.

Better to just stick our head in the sand and pretend nothing is wrong and all is good.

suuuree Genx... :roll:

what do you expect her to say?

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

That was my point too. If Clinton had started this war then I would be willing to say he failed at it. But Bush is the one with the war agenda. And he can't even do that right.

shrug.

Frankly, I don't think you are going to like anything Hillary says..so whatever. At least she is saying something with substance, she is calling the fear mongers out.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

That was my point too. If Clinton had started this war then I would be willing to say he failed at it. But Bush is the one with the war agenda. And he can't even do that right.

shrug.

Frankly, I don't think you are going to like anything Hillary says..so whatever. At least she is saying something with substance, she is calling the fear mongers out.

And maybe she wont, but that doesnt detract from the pot meet kettle scenario we see here.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: OrByte
I think she is saying all the right things.

shrug.

If Clinton had declared a "War on Terror" then I would accuse him of failing "just as miserably" as Bush. But Bush started this "War on Terror" and it started with OBL.

IMHO Sounds like she is on the right track.

Better to just stick our head in the sand and pretend nothing is wrong and all is good.

Sounds more of a "pot meets kettle" than what Clinton said, eh?

 

[1EZduzit]

Laws are for sissies. :shocked:

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

I concur. Genx87 comparison is irrevalent. Even if Clinton was a bad leader, that doesn't excuse Bush...

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

And? Clinton knew who he was a decade ago and that is all that matters.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

I concur. Genx87 comparison is irrevalent. Even if Clinton was a bad leader, that doesn't excuse Bush...

Where am I excusing Bush on this?

 

[NJDevil]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

And? Clinton knew who he was a decade ago and that is all that matters.

That's like saying someone should have killed Hitler in the 20's because he launched the Holocaust. Clinton knew who he was, but all efforts to go after him (such as the cruise missile attacks) were decried with shouts of "wag the dog" by the Republicans. I don't think Clinton did enough to fight terrorism, but what you're saying is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

And? Clinton knew who he was a decade ago and that is all that matters.

Clinton knew his name and that he was a threat, but Clinton did not have ESP. We do know that Clinton treated the al Qauda threat far more seriously than the Bush admin. So your attack on an ex-president's wife while giving zero criticism where it is due is about as partisan as a Zentroll post. How about you go read up on some of the history first, before you make a larger fool of yourself.

This is an interesting tidbit: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Todd33
Clinton sent troops into Afghanistan and then let OBL slip away at Tora Bora? Clinton let OBL stay alive four years after going to war against Al Quada? I can't believe you have the balls to make this thread, wow.

Clinton did none of the above, in essense he failed at even trying to get him in any significant measure.

The idea Clinton can sit and complain about not capturing OBL while he has been on our radar for over a decade is hilarious.

You defending it is equally funny.

He wasn't on the radar for most people, 99% of Americans and 95% of Congress didn't even know who OBL was in 2000. You are applying post 9/11 hindsight to the mid nineties. How much support did Clinton have to going after OBL? He was attacked by the right for sending cruise missiles after him. Not only that, the Clinton admin had drawn up retaliation plans for the Cole and handed them to Bush, they $hit canned it along with anything related to OBL. They were only interested in missile defense back then. So your thread is not only laughable, you memory lapse of the past is too.

And? Clinton knew who he was a decade ago and that is all that matters.

Clinton knew his name and that he was a threat, but Clinton did not have ESP. We do know that Clinton treated the al Qauda threat far more seriously than the Bush admin. So your attack on an ex-president's wife while giving zero criticism where it is due is about as partisan as a Zentroll post. How about you go read up on some of the history first, before you make a larger fool of yourself.

This is an interesting tidbit: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/

This post is a prime example of people reading what they want.

Who said this and failed just as miserably as Bush has at capturing or killing him.
?????

 

[judasmachine]

Ahh the ole Clintonian Missile Distraction! I remember them fondly. Perhaps if he wasn't worried about being kicked out of office for a BJ, he could have done more.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Genx87

This post is a prime example of people reading what they want.

Yeah, we all have reading comprehension problems except you. :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Genx87

This post is a prime example of people reading what they want.

Yeah, we all have reading comprehension problems except you. :laugh:

Appears that way.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: lozina
I almost want her to win just to hear how much whining the extreme right wingers will be doing and contradicting their stances on the current administration

besides, how could the situation possibly get any worse with her as President? we're at rock bottom!

QFT

 

[Starbuck1975]

I almost want her to win just to hear how much whining the extreme right wingers will be doing and contradicting their stances on the current administration

besides, how could the situation possibly get any worse with her as President? we're at rock bottom!

The Great Depression was rock bottom for this country...we are quite far from rock bottom.

I agree with Clinton that Republicans have been playing the fear card with the WOT...Democrats tend to play the same card when it comes to the economy.

What should be more disturbing to all of us is that both party is more concerned about claiming or maintaining power then doing what is best for the country. With few exceptions, our elected officials have largely abused the mandate we have given them.

Everytime Bush opens his mouth, it makes me cringe...but Kennedy, Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Gingrich, and DeLay.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's hard to believe that with a true enormous American disaster in the office of the Presidency anybody would have time to worry about Hillary. It's like dying of cancer and worrying about a hang nail. But then again, the problem with people who can't see reality is that they are delusional. And as everybody more or less normally formed in their capacities to differentiate between a girl and a boy knows, people who are delusional suffer from delusions that replace reality. And it's a sad waste too, because psychosis causes a mountain of harm to every innocent new generation.

How odd that a harmful person refused to see the harm he does because the realization that he's harmful is painful. Please, I don't want to feel pain. The pretentiousness of delusion beats that any day, right?

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
It's hard to believe that with a true enormous American disaster in the office of the Presidency anybody would have time to worry about Hillary.

They're in love with her--can't you see that?!?!?

I wonder if Genx is sending her a valentine?