im sorry but i dont right down the channel im watching and wen i watch it, i know im not lieing and i dont care if u think im lieing
well thats a tuffy, definately jackson, both bushes, nixon, FDR, ahh the list goes on. i think we really only had one maybe two tops, that werent tottally dispicable.
i remember. they found a truck. wow. clinton was great. he got a bj. and she wasn't that bad looking. not like his wife. but bush, both of them. u kno how to pick em.
Jet, They found ONE shell that contained a small ammount of Sarin nerve gas. It couldn't be determined where it came from, and appeared to be at least 15 years old. Also, you said " its not bush's fault iraq decided to attack us".... It was my impression that WE attacked them, on a regular basis from 1990 to the present day. There was NO connection between 9-11 and Iraq. Not to say Sadaam wouldn't have sent his son to fly the plane. But, as rule we take military action only when its the last option, or when we've been attacked. And for you SUPPORT BUSH 100% thing, I leave you with this-- Bush is said to idolize Teddy Roosevelt, well heres some advice from ol' Teddy straight to you: "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
Heres another one for ya jet: "Why of course the people don't want war...But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering, Nazi leader, at the Nuremburg trials after WWII.
Hmm, which is worse? A president lying about getting a blowjob from a fat chick? Or a president starting a war and lying about weapons of mass destruction putting this country in jeopardy.
Pay attention: 1. Bush ruined the economy, not 9/11. Sure many jobs were effected, but Bush ruined it. Remember that. 2. Iraq did not attack us. You're referring to 9/11? No! Osama Bin Laden attacked us. Say it with me: Osama Bin Laden. He has no affiliation with Sadam Hussein, but you shouldn't always pay attention to that thing called the news. They would have you believe Hussein was in on it simply to provide motive to get him and seize Iraq. Hussein was a tyrant, but he had not part in that attack. Read everything before you make a declaration. Okay? So, class is over today kid, bye now.
Ok, First off Bush didn't lie about the WMDs. Intelligence from both out CIA and the British SOS (is that correct for the intelligence agency) had some almost concrete proof as they thought of WMDs. Second, The president has nothing to do with the economy. It's beyond his controll he can only offer help to it (Bush does so with tax cuts (not just for the uber wealthy) and with low interest rates). This is election is important though, Both sides need all thier supporters out at the polls. In my home state of Kentucky only 20% of those registered voted in the primary. This is a pretty obvious show that for the most part Americans are apathetic to politics. But, will bitch about it even if they didn't vote. I really wish John McCain would run again. He seemed like given his expierence he could have made the world safer after 9/11 and avoided the war in Iraq. Btw JetBlack, You'r really not helping your conservative cause any. Get rid of the typos and provide soucres and you should be able to state your case better. Peace be with you all, and take care of your health and get plenty of rest.
The president does not have much control over the ecnomy. If you took a basic economics class you would know that. Clinton cannot be dubbed the reason for economic growth in the 90's, as Bush cannot take credit for the rebounding economy now. (On the whole that is)
From what i've read the intelligence community was rather unsure over alot of the intelligence, to make an example the whole "uranium from niger" thing: The CIA had learned that the intelligence was faulty, hell I learned the intelligence was faulty, it was on the wrong letter head, it had the wrong signatures and was a world-known forgery. The CIA told the white house of this, and what happens? it makes it into the bloody state of the union address.
Yes, Grant of course. But, in modern times, I would have to say Reagan and Bush Sr. In their way of handling the cold war, including their handling of the middle east and third world nations, they (along with the likes of Ollie North) helped to CREATE this huge mess that Geo. W Bush has managed to screw up even more. By the way, about Carter. He won the Nobel Peace prize for a reason. He was made to look bad here in the US because he wasn't playing by the rules. His turning attention on human rights throughout the world during his presidency along with Soviet Pres. M. Gorbichov's new "openess" policy is what really made the iron cutain fall and the cold war end. Not Reagan's insainity. Reagan saw the wall falling and yelled out, "bring down this wall".
#1 - there's a big difference between "not much control" and "the president has nothing to do with the economy." #2 - don't talk to me like i'm an idiot who needs to go to school or something, geez. #3 - the president's decisions - ie, going to war, definitely have an effect on the economy. don't be silly.
