He was a good liar. That is all he gets credit for. O, and getting head in the Oval.
It's pretty much a done deal...
Collapse
X
-
-
Oh, you're going to flame me for this one:
He was the best President you ever had. Diplomat to the bone, he actually almost had a peace deal between Isael and Palestina done. He was smart as hell. I think he didn't do better than any of the other presidents domestically, but internationally speaking he was, and still is a fucking grade A politician. I'd really like to see him replacing Kofi Annan, but with Bush still in that's not gonna happen I'm afraid.
He let himself be sucked off by some broad: that shows he still knows what's good for a man
Now I'm gonna get it...Blowkick visual & graphic design - No Civilization. Now With Broadband.
There are but three true sports -- bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motor-racing. The rest are merely games. -HemingwayComment
-
Your entiteled to your opinion, but your very very wrong. 9/11 happened because Clinton did nothing the first time around. He even had Osama Bin Laden turned over to him for it in 1993 and decided there wasn't enough evidence against him. It was his fault Bush is having to do so much now to curb terrorism."The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
- Thomas JeffersonComment
-
That true about Osama? Gonna look that one up...nevertheless he has done more good internationally than many other politicians I know. Carter tries, but I think overall Clinton is more down-to-earth.Blowkick visual & graphic design - No Civilization. Now With Broadband.
There are but three true sports -- bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motor-racing. The rest are merely games. -HemingwayComment
-
Yes it is true. Look up the first bombing of the world trade center in 1993. I forget which government it was, pretty sure it was one of the middle eastern governments who were then going to hand Osama over to us for his perpetration in that act, which Clinton declined. Instead Osama was deported from that country. Was it Saudi Arabia? I know he was deported and banned from Saudi but I can't remember if this was for the same actions. I'd look it up but I'm too lazy right now.
You might also want to look at his actions in Africa, namely Somalia. If he would have followed through with the things we were trying to do over there, then at least the soldiers that died for that cause would not have died in vain. We lost a lot of good men, and for nothing really. Clinton kept running and never finished anything he started. Thus, 9/11, and thus the war on Terror abroad. Keep in mind I'm not blaming it ALL on him, but definetely a lot of it was him.
I will also add that yes Clinton was a great President despite this. Namely the Internet Privacy Act of 1992 or 1993 (I forget which). Which was very important for the Internet to take off the way it did. He also did many other good things.
Originally posted by Jenks#1 Harry Truman, the last great democrat."The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus (55-117 A.D.)
"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."
- Thomas JeffersonComment
-
Heheh, good signature Civic.
I know about the Mogadishu debacle, in fact, that's the reason the US refused to act when the genocide took place in Rwanda: the US didn't want to have anything to do with Africa anymore, and it has been like that untill today: they did not respond to Liberia's cry for help last year either. It wouldn't be fair to say this makes the US a bad country: they lost their soldiers (in Somalia) while the UN sat there doing nothing. Also in the Rwandan case, the UN is to blame, prolly even more than the US. I've studied that case quite thoroughly, and it has shocked me how guilty the international community factually was in that horrible slaughter.
About Osama: if he was deported, it may have had less to do with the American efforts (or the lack of that) to get their hands on them, but maybe more with a political gesture to the other Arabian countries. Think of how the Islamic world would've reacted if an Arabian/Muslim would be handed over to the US...I think we need to search this one out before blaming it on Billy.
BTW: gonna post the link to my first mix on [ms].Blowkick visual & graphic design - No Civilization. Now With Broadband.
There are but three true sports -- bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motor-racing. The rest are merely games. -HemingwayComment
-
Originally posted by Jenksyes, it's true about Clinton. He did nothing.Comment
-
Originally posted by _evangelion_Originally posted by Jenksyes, it's true about Clinton. He did nothing.
The Bush administration reduced efforts against terrorism before 9/11. I'm not blaming them for that. There was no appetite within the American electorate for war. Before 9/11, Ashcroft, in fact, told members of the FBI he no longer wanted to hear about Al Qaeda. I'm not blaming him for that either.
To try to blame that on Clinton is ridiculous. Bush had almost a year before 9/11 and efforts were reduced, not increased. The evidence is clear on that, and I don't blame him for it at all. It was a different time, and both parties had no idea how grave the threat was. Shame on both of them.
Why does everyone on here have to take one side or the other? Every leader has had plusses and minuses. Admit to them both.Comment
-
Originally posted by JenksOriginally posted by maddlingoclinton!
Devon, you beat me too it buddy. Clinton's two terms were times of great economic growth and prosperity.
Clinton was the first president with the balls to give us a surplus and start paying down the debt since before FDR, I believe. He could have used all the cash to spread pork left and right, like most politiians do. Don't give me that crap about "it was the Republican majority in Congress." In one of the most economically successful decades this country has ever known, he kept taxes at the same rate, and eliminated many deductions, something Republicans most certainly did not want. His political might got that done. After getting rid of the deductions, he slammed all that extra money into paying off the debt. The debt reduction helped continue to fuel the surge in the economy, and it would have been a great thing for our future if it continued.
Unfortunately, under Bush, the national debt has risen 40%. In times of war, you need to spend, but I contend it was economic negligence to ram through a tax cut when we were about to go to war. All citizens would have undersood that we needed to bear the burden of the war. Instead, our grandkids will have to.
If Bush can turn Iraq into a free nation, I'll be the first to jump up and say "holy shit. dman good job, Bush." I criticize him now because it doesn't seem like it's going to happen anytime soon, and he missed by a wide mark in estimating the ease of the task. But if he gets it done, it will surely be one of the greatest accomplishments of any president in recent memory.
Either way, you don't call any President "lucky", especially a two term president. Whatever happens on his watch, you give him credit for, good or bad. Reagan gets credit for ending the Cold War, while some dumb liberals like to say the USSR was collapsing anyway.
Calling Clinton lucky for the boom of the 90s is just as ridiculous.Comment
-
Originally posted by Jenkshe was lucky. :P
It would have been somebody attractive. :wink:Broken Symmetry on mcast.mercuryserver.com
www.krelmatrix.com - archives & mixes
www.myspace.com/satansfluffer - general tomfoolery
"It's like a koala bear crapped a rainbow in my brain!"
- StimutacsComment
-
Originally posted by krelmOriginally posted by Jenkshe was lucky. :P
It would have been somebody attractive. :wink:
He really tried his best to enjoy his time in the oval office, that's for sure. :wink:Comment
[ms] Statistics
Collapse
Topics: 191,717
Posts: 1,236,857
Members: 53,129
Active Members: 74
Welcome to our newest member, newiron009.
Comment