Bush's Lunacy?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rat Faced@26 June 2004 - 16:10

Quite frankly, I think im better than that.

I also believe the vast Majority of Americans and British are better than that...and in fact most people everywhere.

Its just a shame that shit floats to the top of politics... in every country.


All that we as voters in Democracies can do, is try and minimise the damage by voting in the lessor of the evils on offer...coz no matter WHICH Party they are in, make no mistake...If they can get away with it, they will stab you through the heart for a buck or more power.

<_<

---

I was going to reply to a couple comments here, but as I read through the post to the end, I think, on a conceptual level, we are on the same page, particularly our attitude towards poltics in general. Good post.

I will just say I have absolutely no defense for the bombing of water treatment facilities and I guarantee you, that information is not known by many here.

As for the other sanctions, the deaths were not just a function of the sanctions, but equally a result of the allocation of resources. Saddam kept his military well fed and in good health, the rest were neglected and died.

Had Saddam wished to throw himself into doing what he could to assist his country, the death totals that are quoted would be a fraction. Gold toilets and palaces don&#39;t feed people. Argriculture does.

Syringes? I hope, at least, this war will bring syringe technology to Iraq.

Antibiotics? Alexander Fleming grew these things in his sink on dirty dishes. Come on, they aren&#39;t hard to make. If they can make pesticides, they can make antibiotics.

Well argued, the two of you.

If I might make one more point, it would be that certain issues, such as who is responsible for the fall-out from the sanctions, should somehow achieve the status of having been decided, or resolved between us on this board.
Certain things don&#39;t deserve a re-hashing at every turn.

Perhaps we could start a pin or something wherein these issues could be assigned a collective determination via the occasional poll; call it the "Be It Resolved" thread.

Might be an interesting exercise; we ought not lose track of those instances when we actually have a reasonably wide swath of agreement-it certainly wouldn&#39;t ever be cumbersome enough to tax the server, eh? :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@26 June 2004 - 07:34


Clinton had the highest IQ of any Democrat, and he, too, was/is a scoundrel, but he also managed to be impeached, and stay in office.

---

Sorry for the delay...didn&#39;t notice a response to the picture..i actually posted it after there was no debate on the original issue as a bit of light heartedness.


in reply to your post about clinton...i have not debated the impeachment before because i felt it represented the bottom of the barrel in trying to get clinton out (it was the republicans that instigated it) i care not about blowjobs that others get.

I will take it as read that you dissagreed with the end result of the impeachment but could you tell me what the outcome was ?

one word answer please :D

What the outcome was?

Of the impeachment?

One word?

Okay, that word would be:

Correct&#33;

The actual result was less than satisfying, though I look forward with humor to upcoming efforts to tender an amnesty or expungement upon Clinton; I&#39;m sure he thinks he deserves it; given his concern with his legacy-"...badge of honor..." and all that. :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@26 June 2004 - 20:11
What the outcome was?

Of the impeachment?

One word?

Okay, that word would be:

Correct&#33;

The actual result was less than satisfying, though I look forward with humor to upcoming efforts to tender an amnesty or expungement upon Clinton; I&#39;m sure he thinks he deserves it; given his concern with his legacy-"...badge of honor..." and all that. :D

---

on February 12, the Senate voted on whether to remove Clinton from office. The president was acquitted on both articles of impeachment. The prosecution needed a two-thirds majority to convict but failed to achieve even a bare majority. Rejecting the first charge of perjury, 45 Democrats and 10 Republicans voted "not guilty" and on the charge of obstruction of justice the Senate was split 50-50. After the trial concluded, President Clinton said he was "profoundly sorry" for the burden his behavior imposed on Congress and the American people.


Now i am not going to get into the ins and outs as we will look at things differently...he did get a blowjob, but as i said before i don&#39;t care about private lives. I am not defending his mistake ( the impeachment wasn&#39;t because he got a blowjob but it was connected )
However this impeachment keeps being raised even though he was aquitted. There have been calls to have Bush impeached because he lied about Iraq, many take the view he did lie, i Know you don&#39;t, but should he be impeached and aquitted in the same way clinton was i doubt you would accept anyone raising the impeachment in the same way you do about clinton.
i look at the results for America that a president has during his term, not his social life. I will happily denounce ANY president for failings in policy



I didn&#39;t respond to this ..i got sidetracked.

Quote:

---

In any case, the uselessness of the whole exercise is surely indicated by Carter&#39;s having the second-highest IQ (175), isn&#39;t it?

What a resoundingly successful presidency he had&#33;

---

I could have made a case such as you did with reagan on carters term but i have a strong belief in the phrase i used for reagan..."the buck stops here".



EDIT: top line missed the year for those that don&#39;t know 1999 :unsure:

So, then-

Even attempts at humor are subject to the old to-may-to/to-mah-to adage, yes?

So many things are a matter of taste, these days; wouldn&#39;t you agree?

Question:

If we bow to the dictates of Miss Manners, will we even have anything to talk about?

Example:

"If it weren&#39;t for Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones et. al., Clinton&#39;s book would...":

A. Never have been written.

B. Be much thinner.

C. Already be selling at massive discounts.

D. Some or all of the above.

I personally would have defaulted to "A", but the fact "C" was the case, even at the book&#39;s debut, tells a story that isn&#39;t in the book. :)

I know it&#39;s still morning there this time so good morning J2.

As i said i had avoided debating the impeachment but for some reason i just felt i needed to finally make a point about it as it has been raised too many times as if he was actually found guilty and sentenced to political death.

On the book the "women" subject would make me less interested. I shall not be buying the book and probably won&#39;t get it out the library, but i may read the abridged excerts in the papers. It&#39;s a shame that the "women" subject seems to be what the media concentrate on the most.
I do feel it would have been written regardless of the "scandels".

I have no sympathy for the women involved either, they knew what they where getting into...but that&#39;s a different subject...



none of this has anything to do with Bush and Isreal :lol:

I to thought about buying Clintons book but I thought that &#036;35 bucks was a bit overpriced for toilet paper :lol: :P

vid-

I&#39;d be all for consigning Clinton and his book to the "resolved/disposed of" bin (I proposed the idea somewhere else in here, but can&#39;t remember where), but I fear he&#39;ll keep trying to remind us all of his ongoing relevance.

One of the reasons I hope Hillary goes down in flames is that she&#39;ll take at least a part of her husband with her.

Hank-

Using that book for toilet-paper would make you shit with a leftward bias.

Messy and unnecessary; I suggest Charmin.

BTW-

As much as I tried, I could not avoid hearing tidbits about his book, one in particular being his story that he and Hillary devoted "one entire day every week" to counselling, after he admitted the Lewinsky affair to Hillary.

This must have made quite an impression on Hillary; I don&#39;t recall hearing that she mentioned it in her book.

You libs are pathetic. Are any of you aware that G W Buash has a degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard, the world&#39;s top business school. Yeah but he&#39;s stupid. That reminds me of a hilarious story I read . Some lib started a web site called georgebushisanidiot.com. Then she did some research and found out that G W Bush had the same SAT score as she did. LMAO. By the way, how many of you pathetic libs have degrees from Yale AND Harvard? Show of hands please... :D