user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Well, has Osama carried out any attackes on US soil since 9/11? Was 9/11 being planned while Clinton was in office? Was Clinton's lobbing of cruise missles at his camp effective? My answer is the same as the answer to all of those.
Sorry, lol, the answer to my second question shouold be "yes", heh. Rest=NO.
No, thats silly. Should we just go to his house and get him?
"Well, has Osama carried out any attackes on US soil since 9/11?"
No, but he's been pretty effective at attacking Americans (civilian and combatant) in other countries and then some. Do you honestly think the US changed that much that now it's harder to commit a terrorist attack? I don't think so. It's still very easy. Maybe not as easy as before 9/11 but it's still easy. And that can't be changed no matter who the president is. The world has danger in every corner and no way that can change.
"Was 9/11 being planned while Clinton was in office?"
There's no real proof that 9/11 was planned in Clinton's mandate. For all we know it could've been planned 15 years ago or 15 months earlier.
"Was Clinton's lobbing of cruise missles at his camp effective?"
Was Bush's "lobbing" of cruise missiles at Iraq any effective at finding Al-Qaeda or better yet the large masses of WMDs Saddam had.
Bush couldn't find his butt with two hands and a road map, how do you expect him to find Osama.
Cletus: You're your own worst enemy.
Could Bushy look any more impotent and retarded?
They probably would have gotten the little bastard if Bushy hadn't diverted resources to Iraq. The idiot.
No, they've been able to divert the public's attention.
Well no, the Republicans are weak and ineffective of course. That is why they win so many elections. that is why the Democrats, under Clinton had to "triangulate" their platform.
Same reason that Blair had. Of course Blair wouldn't have been elected without the help of the Clintion "war team".
Yep. Osama should be chained and dragged through the streets of NY. Roman style.
Uh, Liberal, have you seen the list of Al Qaeda high rollers we have taken into custody or killed in Iraq. So since, President Clinton never caught any and President Bush has, well...yes that would be more effective.
But Liberal it's good to see your finally admitting Saddam did have WMD's.
How weak did it make President Clinton look that he was acutally offered Bin Laden and just decided that we didn't need to bring him to trial for the 1st WTC bombing and the USS cole.
That's right: Bush's incompetence is Clinton's fault.
I'm simply saying that Clinton had the opportunity to get him into our custody and he didn't, so how can people bash GWB for not catching him when he is in deep hiding, when Clinton didn't take him when he was on a silver platter.
YOU CAN'T!
I don't think Clinton would have switched gears after 9/11 and sent troops into Iraq.
Osama Bin Laden wasn't OSAMA BIN LADEN before 9/11. And if the Republicans knew what a threat he was, they had months to act, but did absolutely nothing. Bushy had plenty of vacation days before 9/11.
And, I maintain that if virtually anyone else was president they would have gotten the little shit, because they wouldn't have become sidetracked proving their manhood to daddy with an idiotic, pointless war in Iraq.
My point is: Bush stinks.
Another thing that makes the Republicans weak is that they cover up their own failiures with Bill Clinton's mistakes.
Not so much weak and effective -- it just looks like they don't care.
bin Ladin was always the person that he was.
Clintoon had ample opportunity to attempt to capture or curtail Oscummy trash bin and was too busy getting his cock sucked.
BILL CLINTOON WAS IN OFFICE FOR *84*** MONTHS
BUSH WAS IN OFFICE FOR *8*****
YEAH IT WAS BUSH'S FAULT. CLINTOON WAS INNOCENT AND PURE.
But why let facts get in the way of your ideology.
Right, Osama Bin Laden was an innocent flower child before 9/11. Except for the 1st WTC bombing and the bombing of the USS Cole. Using your methodology, both of which must be Bill Clinton's direct fault since they happened under his watch. Or does that ideology only apply to GWB?
^Last 3 comments above prove my point.
Liberal did you read my entire comment-I said using YOUR METHODOLOGY then Clinton would be to blame for those things like democrats blame GWB for everything. It is a little thing called sarcasm. I don't really think Clinton was responsible for those bombings. Please read completely before commenting.
I didn't understand it. It sounded like you were blaming Clinton for the Cole bombing because Clinton did nothing about Osama in his term.
Voted : No
It makes Bush look like a liar.
|
|
