Clinton Puts the Smack Down on Fox

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
323

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
True or false–Pres. Clinton ordered UAV drone attacks on al Qaeda and bin Laden after the Cole incident and came closer to killing him than the current administration?

HAHAHAHAHAAHA! Where are you getting YOUR talking points from? I’m not even going to humor with a reponse to that shit!
[/quote]
This is a fact and I stated to put to rest everyone’s BS claims that somehow Clinton lacked military tenacity.

So what! He got a little action in the white house…is this what we spend our time worrying about? maybe it’s distasteful so some, maybe he lied about it (i would have too) but it didn’t deserve the coverage it got.

No. This is also true. I served in the USMC during his tenure and all I can remeber my peers and COs talk about was how soft Clinton was and how he only ordered military action to misguide the media.

Do US embassies count as US soil? Do military bases in Iraq count? Does the fact that more islamo-fascist citizens than ever before are standing in line to join al Qaeda ranks count? Does the fact that there is now an al Qaeda faction in Iraq where previously there wasn’t count as a victory?

324

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
having watched what happened with reagan and the soviets i was able to form my own opinions. same with clinton. were you out of diapers yet?

Hack,

This isn’t a shot at you, but how old were you when Reagan first took office? I’m just curious. You seem to have some vivid memories.

nah. the shot will come later, right?

i was old enough to remember. good enough?[/quote]

I think that answers the question better than if you had lied and said you were 54.

325

[quote]doogie wrote:
vroom wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
…

Hack, you are just playing word games man. Twist, twist and twist. I wonder where you get your talking points from?

Come on back when you learn to think for yourself… y’hear?

What the fuck is up with you, Vroom? No matter what someone says, if they don’t agree 100% with your liberal, Canadian viewpoint you respond with, “Think for yourself” bullshit. Good lord, man. Enough of that shit. Address some actual points just once or twice.[/quote]

Doogie,

You’ve been blinded by spin into lapping up dog piss – lap it up Man! You can’t think for yourself and you’ve been caught up in the half-truths that are spun out of the White House and Fox News!

Spin! SPin! SPIn! SPIN! (Wow, I’m kind of dizzy…).

326

[quote]lucasa wrote:
Once Bin Laden is caught and terrorism contained, if he’s caught and if it can be contained, then credit and blame can be doled out and scorecards totalled. Until then, it’s useless finger-wagging.
[/quote]

How can you equate killing or capturing bin Laden with containing terrorism? Does anyone think like me that terrorism is an idea not a tangible object and therefore uncontainable? It’s like racism. You can tell people until you are blue in the face that racism is wrong but people will do what they are apt to do. Poverty, racism, terrorism, greed, hypocrisy…the only way to combat these ideas is to kill EVERY human being on the planet.

327

[quote]tme wrote:
…besides BB linked to a bunch of other right-wingnut opinion, so there’s proof, right?
[/quote]

You looked at it and have some refutations, right? Or you could tell me the right-wing bias behind the assumptions? Or point out the assumptions? You’re actually thinking, right?

Vroom, please check to make certain tme is thinking for himself.

328

[quote]vroom wrote:
doogie wrote:
What the fuck is up with you, Vroom? No matter what someone says, if they don’t agree 100% with your liberal, Canadian viewpoint your respond with, “Think for yourself” bullshit. Good lord, man. Enough of that shit. Address some actual points just once or twice.

This coming from the guy that thinks Rush is a source of something other than half truths and infotainment.

Ahahahahaha. Please. This much laughter can’t be good for me!!![/quote]

Douchebag,

You can’t argue against all of the Richard Clark exerts and quotes that proved Clinton to be a liar, BUT because the easiest way to site them all was using the Rush transcript you are going to dismiss them? Liberal argument at its finest.

329

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

Do US embassies count as US soil? Do military bases in Iraq count? Does the fact that more islamo-fascist citizens than ever before are standing in line to join al Qaeda ranks count? Does the fact that there is now an al Qaeda faction in Iraq where previously there wasn’t count as a victory? [/quote]

No. They don’t count. What counts is that 9/11 was supposed to be the beginning of a long campaign against the US on US soil. That did not materialize because the US took the fight to the terrorists. The U.S. military is bearing the brunt now. Not civilians sitting in their offices in a U.S. city.

Now, as is usually the case with liberals, the enemy didn’t shit themselves and give up on day 1 of battle…So it’s a lost cause, going badly, never going to work.

330

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
having watched what happened with reagan and the soviets i was able to form my own opinions. same with clinton. were you out of diapers yet?

Hack,

This isn’t a shot at you, but how old were you when Reagan first took office? I’m just curious. You seem to have some vivid memories.

nah. the shot will come later, right?

i was old enough to remember. good enough?[/quote]

Nah, no shot intended. I was just curious because there are many on here that claim that they were old enough to remember events during their lifetime, but then when push comes to shove, we find out that they were 5, maybe 6 years old when the events happened. I don’t consider that “old enough to remember”. It’s becomes annoying to those of us that really are old enough to remember.

I can respect that you don’t want to reveal your age on here, so I’ll just say that if you are over 40 then you (generic “you”, not you personally) get the benefit of the doubt. If you are under 40, then it becomes questionable, fair enough?

331

I can certainly see why Clinton thought the right-wing was out to get him w/r/t the missle strikes on Afghanistan and Somalia – look how quickly this guy jumped on him:

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40B1EFD3C540C7B8DDDA00894D0494D81

errr, maybe there’s a bit of selective memory going on as to the genesis or one-sided nature of the critiques he faced…

332

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

Doogie,

You’ve been blinded by spin into lapping up dog piss – lap it up Man! You can’t think for yourself and you’ve been caught up in the half-truths that are spun out of the White House and Fox News!

Spin! SPin! SPIn! SPIN! (Wow, I’m kind of dizzy…).
[/quote]

Hilarious. Maybe we need a thread all its own to chart all the useless Vroomisms?

And Doogie - exactly right.

333

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
No. They don’t count. What counts is that 9/11 was supposed to be the beginning of a long campaign against the US on US soil.
[/quote]
As far as liberals shitting themselves…don’t exagerate. As a liberal I have never done so. Secondly, where did you get this information that al Qaeda planned to bring a long term campaign to US soil? Do you really think that it would be possible in any event? You and the rest of the republican party cries wolf and we are just supposed to believe it and throw all of our principles out the window? Come on, a few attacks does not a war make. We really need to get over this Hatfield & McCoy mentality we’ve taken.

War on Terror is a joke.

334

[quote]tme wrote:

But at least try to get your head out of your ass and realize, as BB and myself said,

Yeah, cause you and BB both are unimpeachable sources of truth, right? If you state your opinion then it has to be fact, and besides BB linked to a bunch of other right-wingnut opinion, so there’s proof, right?[/quote]

Okay, I give up, you win, you’re right. Craig Wallace and all the other partisan-biased (as if it matters) finger-waggers out there are doing us all a huge favor for figuring out which single Pesident is responsible for 9/11.

Maybe next they can find out which President was responsible for the rise of Communism and which one was responsible for the wildly fluctuating energy costs since 1973. Moron.

335

[quote]NE2000 wrote:
If she was so bad, explain her awards while she was at Stanford, specifically 1984 Walter J. Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching and the 1993 School of Humanities and Sciences Dean’s Award for Distinguished Teaching. [/quote]

What part of my criticism of her did you not understand?

It’s fascinating that when it’s a liberal getting an award they question the validity of the awards or of the institution giving them out, but when it’s a conservative, the awards suddenly become really important and relevant.

How convenient.

336

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

How can you equate killing or capturing bin Laden with containing terrorism?[/quote]

Whoever catches Bin Laden deserves credit for catching him, much the same way someone who thwarts terrorism deserves credit for thwarting it. Should I slow down?

Just the very stupid.

You’re right, it’s just like racism. No progress over the last four hundred years of race relations, I don’t know who you insult more (there are so many) Abe Lincoln, MLK Jr., Nelson Mandela, or the millions of others who still suffer (whether they choose to or not).

As a matter of fact, this attitude makes great sense for most of life. I won’t be the biggest/strongest, so why lift? I won’t win every popularity contest why have friends? As a general policy, people should plan and execute methods of killing thousands of innocent people at the slightest inconvenience. Tired of the subway? Sarin gas it. That corner cafe that gave you $10 in change instead of $20? A little ricin in the secret sauce. Those annoying SUVs? Three letters, RPG. Why not?

337

[quote]vroom wrote:
P.S. I was a real Reagan fan, and supported him vigorously at the time of his presidency.[/quote]

Many people over here in California did and still do too. Reagan is an interesting case of an extremely popular president with the general population that is deeply hated within the scientific community.

It’s quite fascinating, really. Even here at Stanford he has plenty of fans on the humanities side but the moment you walk over to one of the science buildings people will jump you for even mentioning his name.

338

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Does anyone think like me that terrorism is an idea not a tangible object and therefore uncontainable?

lucasa wrote:
Just the very stupid.[/quote]

lucasa:

Get over yourself. Please. What YOU said was the stupid comment – in fact, looking at the rest of your post, you didn’t even get what he was saying.

339

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
No. They don’t count. What counts is that 9/11 was supposed to be the beginning of a long campaign against the US on US soil.

As far as liberals shitting themselves…don’t exagerate. As a liberal I have never done so. Secondly, where did you get this information that al Qaeda planned to bring a long term campaign to US soil? Do you really think that it would be possible in any event? You and the rest of the republican party cries wolf and we are just supposed to believe it and throw all of our principles out the window? Come on, a few attacks does not a war make. We really need to get over this Hatfield & McCoy mentality we’ve taken.

War on Terror is a joke.[/quote]

Jesus. I think this about says it all. I have nothing to say to this. It’s just stupid. ‘A couple of attacks’. ‘Cry wolf’. If they had ‘cried wolf’ before 9/11, I think we can be reasonably sure what the reaction would have been, right?

340

[quote]lucasa wrote:
a fantastic post.[/quote]

well done, laughed my ass off.

341

[quote]lucasa wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

How can you equate killing or capturing bin Laden with containing terrorism?

Whoever catches Bin Laden deserves credit for catching him, much the same way someone who thwarts terrorism deserves credit for thwarting it. Should I slow down?

Does anyone think like me that terrorism is an idea not a tangible object and therefore uncontainable?

Just the very stupid.

It’s like racism. You can tell people until you are blue in the face that racism is wrong but people will do what they are apt to do. Poverty, racism, terrorism, greed, hypocrisy…the only way to combat these ideas is to kill EVERY human being on the planet.

You’re right, it’s just like racism. No progress over the last four hundred years of race relations, I don’t know who you insult more (there are so many) Abe Lincoln, MLK Jr., Nelson Mandela, or the millions of others who still suffer (whether they choose to or not).

As a matter of fact, this attitude makes great sense for most of life. I won’t be the biggest/strongest, so why lift? I won’t win every popularity contest why have friends? As a general policy, people should plan and execute methods of killing thousands of innocent people at the slightest inconvenience. Tired of the subway? Sarin gas it. That corner cafe that gave you $10 in change instead of $20? A little ricin in the secret sauce. Those annoying SUVs? Three letters, RPG. Why not?
[/quote]
You are off the mark by a long way.

I think you misunderstand my point. You cannot stop ideas from spreading. The more you attempt to thwart people’s anger by blowing their shit up the more you incite it.

I am in no way apologizing for people’s misguided behavior. One point of difference is that I am sane enough to realize the futility of waging war against the inconceivable.

Furthermore, equating lifting with fighting terror is stupid. I lift not to be the strongest or biggest. I do it because I like the way it makes me feel. I like to be strong but I know within my own mind/heart I am a long way from being freaky-retarded strong.

342

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
If they had ‘cried wolf’ before 9/11, I think we can be reasonably sure what the reaction would have been, right?[/quote]
The ‘wolf’ I am refering to is the MUSHROOM CLOUD that was supposedly awaiting us from Iraq–again had nothing to do with al Qaeda.