Why is there so many Bush Bashers???

[shy007]

When I watch all these folks slam this president, I wonder why??? What did he do that upset everyone so bad??? Was it the election??? Not his fault people can't punch a ballot..... And not his fault the Surpreme Court said you could not count votes because you thought every ballot had to have a vote (hanging chads, etc...... give me a break).....
After 911, I thought everyone would back this man to help protect the country..... I guess I was wrong.... I watched all these actors/actresses give their little speeches..... It was enough to make me vomit.... If you were on the outside looking in, you would have thought Bush was the Nasty Dictator that killed thousands of his own people..... The stars never once said a negative thing about Saddam.....

Then look at the Democratic party, some of them were sickening.... Look at the way Tom "Puffdaddy" Daschle acted..... The man flip flopped every other day.... These same Democrats said Bush would be out to destroy the social security for the older folks..... Well, I know several people on Social Secruity and they still get their money..... I guess this was just a scare tactic..... It's sad that a party has it's own (kinda like CNN) agenda and puts it ahead of the country's need......

Couple of quotes from Puffdaddy.....

This president failed so miserably in diplomacy that we are now forced to war.
--Tom Daschle, last week, when President Bush, struck Iraq

We have exhausted all of our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that . . . we have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily.
--Tom Daschle, in 1998, when President Clinton, struck Iraq

[gcutler]

Whatever you are posting here could have been 100% identical under the Clinton Administration. It isn't that there are so many Bush bashers, there are just plain old Opposition bashers. I know many people who would denounce Clinton no matter what he said or did (even things that would benefit those denouncing him) There are those who Bush can do no right and there are those who say Clinton could do no right.

I think there are two types of opposition, "The Loyal Opposition" who disagree with the current adiminstration and will try to gain power in 4 years, but realize that we are all in the same boat and torpedoing the boat to hurt the opposition also hurts everyone. But you also have the fanatics who will torpedo the boat not caring that it brings everyone down with them.

And for every Democrat you show that is being totally Partisan and selfish I can show you a Republican who does/did the same thing. Neither the Republicans and Democrats are innocent of your charges, just go back to the news from 4 or 8 years ago to see it from the other side of the table.

[firephoto]

I see it as the proactive approach to situations that Bush handles doesn't mesh with the sit back and let things happen approach that most people live by. Peace to a lot of people means doing nothing is peacful. :( You can't offer hugs to everyone when there are people that will stab you in the back when they hug you.

As far as Democrats, Republicans, and <your political party here>, I don't see a need for them. Education, technology and plenty of other things make it very easy for any individual run for any office in this country. I don't see the point in how some primary elections are done since isn't the whole point electing the best person to the job and not just the best person from who you are allowed to pick from?????

I think the hands stuffing $$$ in politicians pockets are doing more than leaving the money in there. :rolleyes:

Bush isn't the best president ever but atleast he has the guts to do a few things that have been needed for awhile even though he isn't doing some other needed things.

[catman]

BUsh asks " where were all these when I was elected " Bush remeberes " oh . they were " hanging with saddam " You see this . O-day had photos of bushes daughter . Not clinton . So we know , Oday is replublic . what else we learn . Oh yes , the replublican sent money to o-day . We found 7 million U.S dollars . That where all the money cable made was sent .

[RichW]

Yep, what goes around, comes around! Much was made about Clinton's victory over Bush Sr. in that he failed to get more than 50% of the popular vote. Ironicly, GWB found himself in the same situation. Mrs Clinton was called a "carpetbagger" because she changed her official residence to NY in order to run for the Senate, but Dick Cheney moved his official residence from Texas so he could run as VP. Lets face it. About one-third of the country are Clinton Bashers, another third are Bush Bashers.

[shy007]

I think ole Clinton caused his own bashing...... He wasn't the most honest or moral person out there...... So far, Bush has been honest......

[gcutler]

Originally posted by shy007
I think ole Clinton caused his own bashing...... He wasn't the most honest or moral person out there...... So far, Bush has been honest......

What politicians are really honest? Every one of them in order to get to national prominance has had to sell out to some "Interest". And Bush is tied into the Oil Companies as deeply as I have ever seen someone, I don't believe anything, anything said by his administration having to do with OIL or Energy is unbiased or even true.

But if you look just a little bit under any administration you will see DISHONESTY in some form so it isn't like I'm singleing out Bush. So to say Bush has been honest, that covers alot of ground (Domestic Issues, Foreign Issues, Energy Issues, Medical Issues) are you sure you are willing to make that statement that he is Honest???

The Dishonesty may be as little as a president supporting something because it will get votes even though he dosen't believe it personally (but the party may use it as a litmus test so he better not diverge on that subject)

[lastmanstanding]

Of course the 2000 election set the tone for the current chorus of complaints, but what really has the Left charged up are the following:

1.) They lost the White House
2.) They lost the House
3.) They lost the Senate
4.) They don't control the Supreme Court.
5.) Their monopoly on the major media is slipping away like never before.
6.) Socialism/Communism is failing around the world.

For the first time in many of their lives, the Left must deal with being out of any meaningful power and must face scrutiny of media elements that do not see things their way. From what we have seen so far, they are not well equipped for this environment. But neither are they completely impotent.

They still control the schools and many colleges. They still have the big three networks even as they dwindle around them. And the hold many of the big news papers, NYT, Washington Post, etc.

And of course they are monarchs of pointless street demonstrations and marches.

The Left is in a fight for its life, and it knows it. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the failure of the revolution in South and Central America, and the leftist ideal standard bearers being the likes of North Korea and Cuba, the Left is facing not only a loss of power, but a failure of concept as well.

A wounded animal is most dangerous when cornered. It snaps and growls savagely, right up until the very end. This is what we are seeing now, here and around the world.

But don't think for a second that they are down and out. Class warfare still has appeal to many. 20% of the people in the former Soviet Union still like Communism. They like poverty shared equally, except for the elites. So we can project that 20% of our people would like it too.

With any luck, as China slips into Capitalism, and the rest of the world follows, the Left will find something else to do. But I doubt it. The world isn't that lucky.

Heaven forbid Kennedy and Daschle should get honest jobs. Besides, would you hire Kennedy to do anything? I wouldn't.

[Scott Greczkowski]

No matter WHO is president there will always be presidential bashers.

Because we only have one president at a time it appears he gets icked on a lot but in reality hes the only one to pick on. :D

[RichW]

"Socialism/Communism is failing around the world"

While I agree that totalitarian communism has failed, socialism is on the rise in the rest of the world, and if you look at the trend even in the USA, we are more "socialized" now than even FDR had ever planned or imagined.

Let us also look at our loss of dominance in certain industies, such as steel production and our general loss of rankings in the Global 500 top companies. Socialized Europe is on the rise.

[Steve Mehs]

No matter what party is in control, the opposite will be the watch dog party hounding the current administrations every move. I can't say I disagree with everything Clinton did, since he did put the 5 year limit on welfare. Although that would not be my ideal solution, but it is an improvement. I take the reactionary position on welfare.

[lastmanstanding]

"Socialized Europe is on the rise."

RichW,

Good point, but not on a productivity per person or per hour worked, compared to the US. Productivity per unit is one measure of the trend in standard of living.

Canada's Finance Minister is complaining that the US will have twice the standard of living of the Great White North by 2010. Their socialist system has reduced productivity and hence the growth of GDP, and impeded the improvement in standard of living that has been seen in the US.

Compared to 1920, the United States has moved very much toward a socialist mode. But our business sector has grown fast enough to stay ahead of it, unlike Western Europe.

I am not sure I understand your point on the Global 500 companies.

Socialism does serve some goals very well. As far as building roads, and providing certain services where market forces wouldn't support them. But when it impedes the growth in the mean standard of living, it becomes a negative force, hurting those it seeks to benefit, whether they know it or not.

If you look at France, which is a republic with a strong socialist tradition, you can see how poorly its state run companies compete in the world market. Let on its own, outside the EU, socialist France will be marginalized to the point of complete non-relevance. In some measures, they are already there. The French have done more to hurt French culture than the Nazis ever would have, but that is another point.

So RichW, I concede that on the world map, we can color more ground socialist than in years past, but on the economic globe, the socialist states are shrinking very rapidly, and will continue to do so.

And even as a monetarist, I concede that the market cannot fill all needs, just as the market tends to be morally blind. The world is better off with a little socialism in the mix, but not to the point of state imposed poverty AKA The Great Society.

[lastmanstanding]

Steve,

~I can't say I disagree with everything Clinton did, since he did put the 5 year limit on welfare

That was just before the 1996 election. He had vetoed the REPUBLICAN bill twice, I believe, but was getting flogged in the polls on the issue, so he signed the third version they sent him to kill the issue. I am sure he thought that he would A): Lose in 1996, so who cares? or B): Win in 1996 and also take back the Congress, so he could "repair" the bill then. What happened was C): Bill won, but the Congress stayed Republican.

Welfare reform survived, but Clinton directed the Reno Justice Department to help the states find ways around the law. I am not kidding.

One path they took was to alter the thresholds needed to get disability. I worked with a person who wanted disability, but didn't have anything wrong with her. The first application was denied.

What followed was interesting.

She called the Clinton White House. Someone there said they would 'take care of it'. She gave her SSN, and a week later, was approved without a second application.

I filled out the forms accurately. There was nothing wrong with the lady, and the application said as much.

Power to the people!

Now we have a disability crisis that has yet to be tackled. But Clinton pleased the Right by reforming welfare, and pleased the Left by keeping the gravy flowing.

The man is a genius by any measure. Thank Heaven for term limits.

[Bogy]

Since my old buddy Tom Daschle has been accused of changing positions, lets take a trip down memory lane, and see how Republicans fare under the same standards.

On March 24, 1999, NATO began a strategic bombing campaign that resulted in the ouster of Slobodan Milosevic, a vicious tyrant currently in jail for his crimes against humanity.

Republicans failed todays "patriotism test." As our troops faced danger overseas, Republicans were strident in their criticism of President Clinton and his foreign policy, even going as far as criticizing the military campaign itself.

President (then-candidate) George W. Bush
"Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton's administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough response. 'Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is,' Bush said." [Houston Chronicle, 4/9/99]

Attorney General (then-Senator) John Ashcroft
"A lackluster air campaign has given the Serb dictator Milosevic time to achieve most of his strategic goals in Kosovo." [New York Times, 4/8/99]

House Majority Leader (then-Whip) Tom DeLay
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy... But before we get deeper embroiled into this Balkan quagmire, I think that an assessment has to be made of the Kosovo policy so far. President Clinton has never explained to the American people why he was involving the U.S. military in a civil war in a sovereign nation, other than to say it is for humanitarian reasons, a new military/foreign policy precedent." [Congressional Record, "Removal of United States Armed Forces from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia," 4/28/99]

House Speaker Dennis Hastert
"Many may question the path that has taken us to this point. I have my own questions about the long term strategy of this campaign." [Dallas Morning News, 3/25/99]

Senator (then-Assistant Majority Leader) Don Nickles
"The Administration, and NATO as a whole, greatly miscalculated the response Slobodan Milosevic would have to a bombing campaign. As I predicted, the Administration has escalated what was guerilla warfare into a much more serious conflict. The bombings have unleashed an evil reign and resulted in a humanitarian disaster." [Senator Don Nickles, Press Release, 4/21/99]

Senator Judd Gregg
"I don't believe that a ground war in Kosovo using American troops is going to be very successful." [NBC, "Meet the Press," 4/18/99]

Senator Richard Lugar
"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." [New York Times, 5/4/99]

This is just a very small sample. If you want more just let me know. Or stop wondering "Why so many bash Bush and don't support him to protect the country." Its called hypocrisy.

[shy007]

Okay my question is...... Do you think Tom Daschle has been a good politician....... Don't answer by telling me how bad others have been......

My thing is Bush has done what he told the American people he was going to do...... Mr. Bush was put in a terrible position after 911, and he has surprised me how well he has performed..... I was thinkful he was in the office when this happened...... I'm just not sure Gore would have handled it the same way..... But who knows, he might have done a great job.....

I do understand politics and how it works.... I know they all do things for their best interest..... I do understand this..... But when it comes to war, we should support the man in office......

[lastmanstanding]

I think the Left have really hurt themselves since the 2000 election. They told us that Bush was stupid. They told us Bush could never be effective. They told us many things that were clearly not true, things that the people can see for themselves that are not true.

Even today, some liberal commentators will role out an "inexperienced" or something like it to describe Bush.

The public has a short memory, but not short enough to save the Left in time for 2004. Bush could still blow it, but he will have to really screw up to out do his opponents' fumbles.

I really think that defending Clinton spent a lot of the Left's political goodwill with the people. They were off balance going into 2000, and lost what should have been an easy win. Gore should have walked away with 5-10% anyway.

I don't believe Hillary ever did apologize for the 'right wing conspiracy' comment when Bill was still covering up Monica. That was expensive credibility wise.

The decline of the dominant liberal media may have something to do with it as well.

The Left has given the American Public many many reasons not to believe them, and even not to listen to them. The protesters look pretty foolish now. I think even a few of them are starting to see it.

Not happy days in Liberalville.

Bogy,

What was Clinton's exit strategy in Haiti and Kosovo? Did he follow through?

[gcutler]

Originally posted by shy007
Okay my question is...... Do you think Tom Daschle has been a good politician....... Don't answer by telling me how bad others have been......

I'm sorry but you can't simplify it like that.

First off these politicians have their first layer of loyalty to their own district/state. I don't know Tom Daschel's record in relation to his home state. How much money had he brought into his state (how many military bases were shut down in his state). All I can say is that Al Gore was probably not a very good politician in that his own state did not vote for him during 2000 (not that I know anything else about his home state)

And on the national level, how can you rate someone without comparing them to other politicians (good or bad is relative). I'm sorry but your question cannot be answered the way you want it. The only way to compare him is to compare him to other Senate or House Majority or Minority Leaders. And I believe he has been selfish and as deviceive as Trent Lott or even worse close to Newt Gingrich (look at Gingrich's comments during his terms and see if they don't sound similar or worse to Daschels). Looking at the quotes of Minority Leaders of both the Senate and House over the years, I think you have to be a big jerk in order to hold the post (as it seems that job is to under all circumstances be a reverse cheerleader against the Majority and only snipe at it and point out the chinks in the armor)

Daschel has little to be proud of, but he just joins the ranks of the other morons who have held similar positions, and I believe Newt Gingrinch was the worst offender in the past 20 years, Daschel has not reached Gingrich's level, but is pretty darn close.

[waydwolf]

Originally posted by catman
BUsh asks " where were all these when I was elected " Bush remeberes " oh . they were " hanging with saddam " You see this . O-day had photos of bushes daughter . Not clinton . So we know , Oday is replublic . what else we learn . Oh yes , the replublican sent money to o-day . We found 7 million U.S dollars . That where all the money cable made was sent .

:scratch: :confused: :shrug:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Cable made money and it was sent to Uday Hussein?

:eek2:

(tongue firmly in cheek)

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I was wondering what old man Rigas was doing with Adelphia subs' payments. And here I thought it was for Viagra.

&nbsp;:lol:

[Bogy]

Originally posted by shy007
Okay my question is...... Do you think Tom Daschle has been a good politician....... Don't answer by telling me how bad others have been......

My thing is Bush has done what he told the American people he was going to do...... Mr. Bush was put in a terrible position after 911, and he has surprised me how well he has performed..... I was thinkful he was in the office when this happened...... I'm just not sure Gore would have handled it the same way..... But who knows, he might have done a great job.....

I do understand politics and how it works.... I know they all do things for their best interest..... I do understand this..... But when it comes to war, we should support the man in office......
Tom Daschle keeps getting reelected by the people of his state (of which I used to be one, and from my comment earlier, if you wondered, yes I have met him.) He has been very successful. Keep in mind that in a heavily Republican state, Democrat Tom Daschle keeps getting elected. (Of course we also elected George McGovern.)

So from you last paragraph, you recognize the unpatriotic attitude of the Republicans when Bill Clinton was in office, and why their comments today ring just a little hollow?

[Bogy]

Originally posted by lastmanstanding
Bogy,

What was Clinton's exit strategy in Haiti and Kosovo? Did he follow through?
Are we still in Haiti and Kosovo? In any major way? The point is, since this was Bush's criticism, just what do you know of President George Bush's exit strategy for Afghanistan and Iraq?

[RandyAB]

US Forces are still in Kosovo, so Clinton was never able to pull our troops out of their during his watch. However I do believe that one of Clinton's finest military moments was in Kosovo. Currently there are around 7,000 US service people stationed at Camp Bondsteel

As for Haiti, Clinton blew it the first time with them when he was too afraid to have another Somalia, but then he went in their a year later and completed the mission.

But getting back on target, unfortunately I do not think the general public can know of an exit strategy until it is done.

[BobMurdoch]

As my wife is a local politician I am well versed on the following statement:

Any time you open your mouth, 1/3 of the people like what you are saying, 1/3 of the people hate what you are saying, and the battle is for the other 1/3 which can be swayed in either direction based on the topic of conversation.

To everyone "mad" at Bush for stealing the election, I say blame Nader. That 4% of votes killed Gore. The same way Perot killed Bush Sr. 10 years ago. When one of the two parties' candidates run against no one else who can muster more than 1% of the vote, then they win. When one of the parties runs against someone who garners more than 3% of the vote from their own side of the aisle, then they lose. That's the way it has been in two of the last three presidential elections. (Dole bumbled his way through the 96 election and lost handily).

[Bogy]

Originally posted by RandyAB
But getting back on target, unfortunately I do not think the general public can know of an exit strategy until it is done.
But that certainly did not stop the Republican Clinton-Bashers from demanding one.

[James_F]

Who makes fun of Dubbya? :confused:

[lastmanstanding]

I believe, I could be wrong, but I believe Clinton told us we would be out of Haiti in a year, and about 18 months for Kosovo.

Either he just didn't know, or he lied, and figured his supporters either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care.

Which was it for you, Bogy. Didn't notice or didn't care?

Also, the Haiti action was to get issue off the news, and Kosovo was to get the issue into the news to displace other 'issues' of the day.

The Left has tried to say that Bush used Afganistan and Iraq to wag the dog to distract from the 'failing economy'. I don't think even they believed it, but they felt the need to say it, figuring someone out there would buy it.

PT Barnum was a wise man.

How about it Bogy. Is Bush wagging the dog?

Oh yes, the war on terror is WORKING.

[BobMurdoch]

The left is losing its grip on the media for one main reason. Eyeballs. Fox News continues to make gains as their conservative views attracts more viewers in an area previously underserved. On the flip side CNN, MSNBC, HNN, and the rest are all fighting over the other half of the country. Now, thanks to the war, those channels have jerked further to the right or at least the center.

The abysmal ratings that Donahue received, one of the more "true" liberals out there, drove home this point as it was cancelled for lack of interest.

For whatever reason, liberal viewers are not watching anymore or are joining the other team. Dennis Miller is the most obvious personality to do this. I saw him on Bill Mahre and he sounded like he could become a commentator for FoxNews tomorrow and he would fit right in. I consider myself a libertarian at heart, and wish I could keep the Democrats out of my wallet and the Republicans out of my bedroom. As a "rich" white man from NJ (hmm. no Lexus in my driveway and no dividends to speak of), I paid $25,000 in federal taxes and about another $25,000 in State, Payroll, and Sales Taxes in 2002. So the whole tax cut plan has some appeal. Then again, I would much rather pay down the national debt first and keep mortgage rates low (which won't happen once the feds start selling all those T-Bills again in full force and rates rise as the private sector has to pay more to attract capital investors) Sorry, for drifting off point here, but I want to point out that America, for whatever reason, has drifted to the right in the post 9/11 world as issues of "security" become more important to people than "fairness" was in the 90's. Until America feels "safe" again, I don't see things changing, no matter how vocal the critics get. People will just change the channel on people they don't agree with (look at the lousy ratings Sarandon's latest TV movie got).

[Bogy]

Originally posted by lastmanstanding
I believe, I could be wrong, but I believe Clinton told us we would be out of Haiti in a year, and about 18 months for Kosovo.

Either he just didn't know, or he lied, and figured his supporters either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care.

Which was it for you, Bogy. Didn't notice or didn't care?

Also, the Haiti action was to get issue off the news, and Kosovo was to get the issue into the news to displace other 'issues' of the day.

The Left has tried to say that Bush used Afganistan and Iraq to wag the dog to distract from the 'failing economy'. I don't think even they believed it, but they felt the need to say it, figuring someone out there would buy it.

PT Barnum was a wise man.

How about it Bogy. Is Bush wagging the dog?

Oh yes, the war on terror is WORKING.
Outline for me Bush's exit strategy from Afghanistan and Iraq. He is one of those who demanded a clear description of the Clinton's exit plan.

Iraq did not attack us. If anything has been proven by the events of the last month is was that the Iraqis were really no threat to anyone. Haiti was at least in our hemisphere, and while they were obviously no a military threat, their economy is a concern, and the flood of refugees was a continuing concern.
Kosovo was a problem for its European neighbors.

Just how much attention has anybody, including the media, given the economy while we have been focused on Iraq? I'd say there's a good possiblity that either none of these was a matter of dog wagging, or all of them could have been. I think it is telling that you are so closeminded that you cannot even see the possibility.

And just how many more times do you think you will have to repeat to yourself the line that the war on terror is working before you will believe it? Are we to green yet?

[lastmanstanding]

Iraq did not attack us

Bogy,

Please get some better arguments. Haiti is in the Western Hemisphere. Kosovo is in Europe. I guess that is justification enough for military action for a liberal trying to change the subject.

This is not about exit strategies. Bush didn't say we are attacking Iraq to exercise an exit strategy.

Clinton certainly didn't value or follow exit strategies in his efforts, but that seems to be OK with you.

I will keep repeating the line that the war on terror is working as long as the Left seems to need the reminder. Some people get lost with details and miss the point rather easily.

~ I think it is telling that you are so close minded that you cannot even see the possibility.~

Look who is calling the kettle black.

You seem to have forgotten what happened on 9/11, or at least it was not important to you. But I am sure you are right. Bush is fighting terrorism by snuffing out their safe harbors just to take attention away from the slow improvement in the economy. Good pick up, Bogy! I never would have seen it, closed minded as I am.

The war on terror is. . . oh yeah, YOU said that already.

Does the warning level really have to be at Green for the war to be over? I am surprised you would put any&nbsp;value on&nbsp;something that Bush came up with. After all, Bin Laden didn't really do anything to us. He was all the way over in Afghanistan while the Trade Towers were falling. And Saddam was no where near New York, or even the United States! Or the Western Hemisphere!

Personal nitting aside, this is one terrible issue for the Left. They used to say that the Russians would never attack us if we disarmed. But 9/11 is very hard to apply revisionist history to. And if the economy recovers like it looks like it will, 2004 will be ugly for the Democrats. Even the old class warfare chant is not getting much traction.

But the Left has some very smart players, and I am sure they will keep trying. The Republicans have the ball right now, but they have been known to throw it away without warning.

I do know that this war on terror is one that we cannot take for granted, and we had better win it.

Did you see that Syria is now doing flips for the US? France wants sanctions dropped. Mother Russia is still acting tough, but they will come along for about $25 billion if we can work out a way to pay them without looking like we are paying them.

Maybe this is not a Just War, but it is the right thing to do. Better Right than Just? Doesn't rhyme. I'll work on it.

Let's try a new line. The Left is losing the War on Terror!&nbsp; You are right again, Bogy.&nbsp; I did need to change that line.&nbsp; Thanks.

[Martyva]

A couple of thoughts. I was not aware that Clinton was on the Left and I didn't know it was Clinton's watch on that terrible day. And i read about revisionist history?

[lastmanstanding]

Martyva,

Clinton is on his own side, but gets more traction with the Left, so they get him. Did I say Clinton caused 9/11 by himself? If I did, I am sorry.

Truly, Clinton is not a classic Liberal. I was in heaven when Mondale was running for Senate. Finally, a REAL liberal who wasn't ashamed of it.

Clinton is a charismatic sociopath, a very intelligent manipulator, and he looks good on camera. And he could have just as easily run as a Republican. Someday someone like him will, and I hope we can see past our party ties long enough not to put him in a place of power. But probably not.

Clinton did try to give us the Hillary Healthcare Holocaust, so every American could learn that having 'coverage' and getting 'care' are two different things. That was pretty Left of him.

No, Martyva, I am afraid the Left has to keep Bill. Sorry. I wouldn't want him either.

And you did read about revisionist history.

[Bogy]

LMS, I give up. This thread started with an example of Tom Daschle apparently changing positions between the Clinton administration and the Bush administration. I countered with a number of Republican politicians who changed position between the two administrations, including the position of George Bush himself. George criticized Bill for not clearly and completely sharing his exit policy. George has recently been criticized himself, by both Democrats and Republicans for not having this war completely thought through, including the exit strategy. I never said it was all about "exit strategies," I was pointing out the change in position between when George was a candidate as opposed to now when he is President. I am not ducking the subject, I am completely on target for the subject of the original post of this thread. You happen to be the one who insists on ignoring the subject and blaming me for trying to be consistent. This may be why you keep missing the intent of my posts.

[BobMurdoch]

Originally posted by Martyva
A couple of thoughts. I was not aware that Clinton was on the Left and I didn't know it was Clinton's watch on that terrible day. And i read about revisionist history?

No, but it was his watch when they blew up the USS Cole and did NOTHING about it, inviting more attacks.

As a 6'3" man in high school, I was constantly targeted by these little Napoleans who wanted to prove themselves to others by coming after me. And if I actually fought back they looked at ME as the bully. That's what is going on right now. These weasels are trying to improve their prestige by punching us in the back and then running away before we can turn around and see who did it.

I see Bush as merely responding to a new game of war with new methods. The difference is that we want to remove the weeds from the garden and then leave. The critics would have you believe that we are there to take the garden, rip out all the flowers, and defecate on the land as we turn around and then leave.

[Martyva]

A couple of thoughts. Flowers came from weeds and i think another name for defecation is fertilizer. The Jewish tradition is an eye for an eye. The Christian tradition is turn the other cheek.