Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
At the very end, does he say we're gonna spend all the money foolishly? He's got THAT part right !




It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Yeah, we really should spend that money wisely - on, say, invading Iraq and occupying it. Now THAT is a smart way to blow a trillion bucks or so...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Yeah, we really should spend that money wisely - on, say, invading Iraq and occupying it. Now THAT is a smart way to blow a trillion bucks or so...

---

Hehe.... plenty of ways to waste money, that's for sure. And it seems the Feds are dedicating to indulging each and every one.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
At the very end, does he say we're gonna spend all the money foolishly? He's got THAT part right !

---

Yeah, we really should spend that money wisely - on, say, invading Iraq and occupying it. Now THAT is a smart way to blow a trillion bucks or so...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sure. Saddam was an o.k. guy. So were his sons too.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sure. Saddam was an o.k. guy. So were his sons too.

---

If you say so. They were irrelevant in any case.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
LOL, Okaaaay. So, you're a follower of Clinton now?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
At the very end, does he say we're gonna spend all the money foolishly? He's got THAT part right !

---

Yeah, we really should spend that money wisely - on, say, invading Iraq and occupying it. Now THAT is a smart way to blow a trillion bucks or so...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Sure. Saddam was an o.k. guy. So were his sons too.






It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You said that Saddam was irrelevant. I disagreed. There was the U.N., and it's 17 Resolutions, and also the Clinton administration, which saw Saddam as a threat, long before W even ran for office.

That's my point.

---

Quote:

---

The Clinton Administration's Case Against Saddam
George W. Bush wasn't the first president to understand the threat from Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
by Daniel McKivergan
06/23/2004 6:30:00 PM


FORMER VICE PRESIDENT Al Gore recently told an audience that "the [Bush] administration did not hesitate to heighten and distort public fear of terrorism after September 11th, to create a political case for attacking Iraq." With this in mind, I would to like draw your attention to a Project brief entitled, The Clinton Administration's Public Case Against Saddam Hussein. Some highlights:

* The New York Times reported that at the November 14 [1997] meeting the "White House decided to prepare the country for war." According to the Times, "[t]he decision was made to begin a public campaign through interviews on the Sunday morning television news programs to inform the American people of the dangers of biological warfare." During this time, the Washington Post reported that President Clinton specifically directed Cohen "to raise the profile of the biological and chemical threat."

* On November 16, Cohen made a widely reported appearance on ABC's This Week in which he placed a five-pound bag of sugar on the table and stated that that amount of anthrax "would destroy at least half the population" of Washington, D.C."

* In an article ("America the Vulnerable; A disaster is just waiting to happen if Iraq unleashes its poison and germs," November 24, 1997), Time wrote that "officials in Washington are deeply worried about what some of them call 'strategic crime.' By that they mean the merging of the output from a government's arsenals, like Saddam's biological weapons, with a group of semi-independent terrorists, like radical Islamist groupswho might slip such bioweapons into the U.S. and use them."
* In Sacramento, November 15, Clinton painted a bleak future if nations did not cooperate against "organized forces of destruction," telling the audience that only a small amount of "nuclear cake put in a bomb would do ten times as much damage as the Oklahoma City bomb did." Effectively dealing with proliferation and not letting weapons "fall into the wrong hands" is "fundamentally what is stake in the stand off we're having in Iraq today."

* He [President Clinton] asked Americans to not to view the current crisis as a "replay" of the Gulf War in 1991. Instead, "think about it in terms of the innocent Japanese people that died in the subway when the sarin gas was released [by the religious cult Aum Shinrikyo in 1995]; and how important it is for every responsible government in the world to do everything that can possibly be done not to let big stores of chemical or biological weapons fall into the wrong hands, not to let irresponsible people develop the capacity to put them in warheads on missiles or put them in briefcases that could be
exploded in small rooms. And I say this not to frighten you."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/262b
qypn.asp

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Oh, and it wasn't just W's idea, either.....

Quote:

---

The Clinton Administration's Case Against Saddam
George W. Bush wasn't the first president to understand the threat from Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
by Daniel McKivergan
06/23/2004 6:30:00 PM


FORMER VICE PRESIDENT Al Gore recently told an audience that "the [Bush] administration did not hesitate to heighten and distort public fear of terrorism after September 11th, to create a political case for attacking Iraq." With this in mind, I would to like draw your attention to a Project brief entitled, The Clinton Administration's Public Case Against Saddam Hussein. Some highlights:

* The New York Times reported that at the November 14 [1997] meeting the "White House decided to prepare the country for war." According to the Times, "[t]he decision was made to begin a public campaign through interviews on the Sunday morning television news programs to inform the American people of the dangers of biological warfare." During this time, the Washington Post reported that President Clinton specifically directed Cohen "to raise the profile of the biological and chemical threat."

* On November 16, Cohen made a widely reported appearance on ABC's This Week in which he placed a five-pound bag of sugar on the table and stated that that amount of anthrax "would destroy at least half the population" of Washington, D.C."

* In an article ("America the Vulnerable; A disaster is just waiting to happen if Iraq unleashes its poison and germs," November 24, 1997), Time wrote that "officials in Washington are deeply worried about what some of them call 'strategic crime.' By that they mean the merging of the output from a government's arsenals, like Saddam's biological weapons, with a group of semi-independent terrorists, like radical Islamist groupswho might slip such bioweapons into the U.S. and use them."
* In Sacramento, November 15, Clinton painted a bleak future if nations did not cooperate against "organized forces of destruction," telling the audience that only a small amount of "nuclear cake put in a bomb would do ten times as much damage as the Oklahoma City bomb did." Effectively dealing with proliferation and not letting weapons "fall into the wrong hands" is "fundamentally what is stake in the stand off we're having in Iraq today."

* He [President Clinton] asked Americans to not to view the current crisis as a "replay" of the Gulf War in 1991. Instead, "think about it in terms of the innocent Japanese people that died in the subway when the sarin gas was released [by the religious cult Aum Shinrikyo in 1995]; and how important it is for every responsible government in the world to do everything that can possibly be done not to let big stores of chemical or biological weapons fall into the wrong hands, not to let irresponsible people develop the capacity to put them in warheads on missiles or put them in briefcases that could be
exploded in small rooms. And I say this not to frighten you."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/262b
qypn.asp

---

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people WILL understand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
it wasn't a waste of $$ or lives, Quite the contrary, it's what our founding fathers had imagined us doing from the very start.

But never mind that. Think more about how we'll ever get out of Obama's Enorumulus tax / spend bill instead.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people WILL understand.

---

Quote:

---

Can you show me the part where Clinton launched an invasion of Iraq, since you claim it wasn't W's idea?


Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Quote:

---

Also, because Clinton's way of doing things failed to yield any positive results, W had that many fewer options to work with.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Also, because Clinton's way of doing things failed to yield any positive results, W had that many fewer options to work with.

---

I could also point out at this juncture a couple of things:

1. Because Bush's way of doing things in Afghanistan and along the Pakistani border failed to yield any positive results, Obama has that many fewer options to work with.

And back to the money question,

2. Because Bush's way of doing things when it came to the economy failed to yield any positive results, and indeed yielded enormously negative results, Obama now has that many fewer options to work with.

See? Look at all the fun you can have with words!

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
it wasn't a waste of $$ or lives, Quite the contrary, it's what our founding fathers had imagined us doing from the very start.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
But never mind that. Think more about how we'll ever get out of Obama's Enorumulus tax / spend bill instead.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Also, because Clinton's way of doing things failed to yield any positive results, W had that many fewer options to work with.

---

I could also point out at this juncture a couple of things:

1. Because Bush's way of doing things in Afghanistan and along the Pakistani border failed to yield any positive results, Obama has that many fewer options to work with.

And back to the money question,

2. Because Bush's way of doing things when it came to the economy failed to yield any positive results, and indeed yielded enormously negative results, Obama now has that many fewer options to work with.

See? Look at all the fun you can have with words!

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Only the problem is, you can't cite for us where Bush's policies " failed " the economy. The stock market tanked in the last 6 months of his last term in office, far too little time for him to do anything about it.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people WILL understand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Just for the record, can you PLEASE give us your definition of what Bush's actual effective term was? You've stated often and repeatedly that 9/11 had nothing to do with him, because he'd only been in office less than a year. Now you say the economic collapse that was a direct result of almost 8 years of Bush's economic policies had nothing do do with him because he was on his way out the door. So WHEN was he actually in there having an effect on things? What was there that Bush ever did that had ANYTHING to do with him?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
For well over 2 years, Bush's economy yielded lower than 5% unemployment while the Dow reached a record 14,000.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
For well over 2 years, Bush's economy yielded lower than 5% unemployment while the Dow reached a record 14,000.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
For well over 2 years, Bush's economy yielded lower than 5% unemployment while the Dow reached a record 14,000.

---

And then the bubble his economic policies created, imploded.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
There's a few moments when a drunk can exhibit unusual strength, doesn't make him exceptional during the whole night.
What's your point?

The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
it wasn't a waste of $$ or lives, Quite the contrary, it's what our founding fathers had imagined us doing from the very start.

---

Quote:

---

Problem was, the tax cuts were too small, and came with too much excessive spending, such as... Iraq Aid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
For well over 2 years, Bush's economy yielded lower than 5% unemployment while the Dow reached a record 14,000.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

A concern of the GOP is that the people aren't informed enough to understand their policies, while a fear of the Dems is that the people WILL understand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

The childish attempt by you to call Bush a DRUNK and ignore dealing w/ the issue only proves my point. Thanks!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Problem was, the tax cuts were too small, and came with too much excessive spending, such as... Iraq Aid.

---

Oh, come ON! You JUST finished telling me that Iraq was NOT a waste of money! Which is it? Was it not a waste, or was it too much excessive spending? I don't really see how it can be both.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

That's how it can be " both ". Capiche ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
How so ? What was it that Bush did which caused that to happen?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Where did I call Bush a drunk?
See little monkey, I was comparing the two situations as having some good results from overall bad decisions, it was in no way calling Bush a drunk. Why? Is he? Do you have some personal knowledge you like to share with the rest of the class?
You are so lost, dude.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You've yet to make a case, either way. This is boring.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Per the discussion, it was clearly implied on your part.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You've yet to make a case, either way. This is boring.

---

Cool, so you agree you've not made your case, and Bush's policy didn't help the economy, thanks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

you've not shown where Clinton should get the credit or Bush get the blame for their respective economies.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
How do you figure on that's what I agree ? I said YOU failed to make YOUR case, either way. As in you've not shown where Clinton should get the credit or Bush get the blame for their respective economies. NOT " you failed to make your case either ".

Reading comprehension - 101.

---

Quote:

---

Inexcusable waste , no question, on part of the rebuilding of Iraq. But not the war.

---

Quote:

---

Notes, for the record, that Rap has still failed to make his case.

---