PDA

View Full Version : Bush running against Clinton again ?



uscitizen
09-25-2006, 10:20 AM
From all the pundits and such's rhetoric one would think bush was running against Clinton, or at least someone is running against Clinton appears to be the case for November.
I find it both pathetic and hillarious.

klaatu
09-30-2006, 06:47 AM
But the shoe is on the other foot as well .USC ... i hear the rhetoric from the Dems side ... using the Clinton vrs. Bush angle... if they are going to use 9/11 and put the onus squarely on the Bush administration they then better be prepared to explain the 8 previous years that led to 9/11.

i agree the finger pointing is pathetic.. and as i stated in a previous post I agree with Gullianni ... the finger of blame should go in one direction and one direction only... those who flew airplanes into our Towers. Nothing wrong with finding out where there were lapses.. but to sit there and blame a previous administration or the current administration who was was in office for a mere 9 mos. .... its a frickin joke and beyond all rational thinking.
Look it... for those who wish to blame Clinton.. it's all about hate ... and for those who blame Bush..its about hate and a desire to conjure up some conspiratorial crap that he was behind it.

Care4all
09-30-2006, 07:20 AM
But the shoe is on the other foot as well .USC ... i hear the rhetoric from the Dems side ... using the Clinton vrs. Bush angle... if they are going to use 9/11 and put the onus squarely on the Bush administration they then better be prepared to explain the 8 previous years that led to 9/11.

i agree the finger pointing is pathetic.. and as i stated in a previous post I agree with Gullianni ... the finger of blame should go in one direction and one direction only... those who flew airplanes into our Towers. Nothing wrong with finding out where there were lapses.. but to sit there and blame a previous administration or the current administration who was was in office for a mere 9 mos. .... its a frickin joke and beyond all rational thinking.
Look it... for those who wish to blame Clinton.. it's all about hate ... and for those who blame Bush..its about hate and a desire to conjure up some conspiratorial crap that he was behind it.

But honestly, haven't the Republicans blamed Clinton for the First World Trade Center Attack and said that it did happen under clinton's watch, when Clinton had only been sworn in to office for a month of LESS before this attack took place?

Also, can you tell me WHY President Bush did not retaliate for the uss cole?

Honestly.... why didn't he? What did he, and our national security and defense advisors do about it when the certified CIA release on the Cole Attack named Bin Laden/alqaeda as the offenders in late January of 01?

Nothing....except, they invited the Taliban here to texas and I believe they gave the Taliban money for curbing their poppy crop...is what I had read somewhere years ago...? I am certain they knew the Taliban was Harboring Bin Laden at that time....don't ya think?

So what in the heck WERE THEY THINKING, to not retaliate for the USS Cole...they would have been in Afghanistan doing such, BEFORE 911 and once again in the speculation world, it could have set something off that would have prevented it from happening...

I was upset that Clinton did not retaliate in November and December, but I did not know that we did not have the official CIA confirmation/certification of the culprets until January 01....?

care

Care4all
09-30-2006, 08:22 PM
well? any answers or guesses on this?