Pres. Clinton Answers Charges That He Didn't Do Enough To Capture Bin Laden...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Indeed you don't, but that's part of the sticking point for me. For one thing - the law says that everyone eligible to work must pay taxes, regardless of whether or not they have the right to vote. As the taxes of immigrants and indistinguishable from those of Citizens, how is it fair to suggest that tax paying immigrants don't have a right to be critical?

I think complaining about taxes, and the tax system, is a God given right, no mater who you are!

True, but the tax system supports the government - and the government is impotent without tax revenue.

Are you saying that the IRS is a form of Viagra for the U.S. Government?!!!

Sure - in the sense that they can't to ** all without the general public paying for it.

[Marc and Olga 0]

OK where the hell do I slag off the USA??? George Bush oh yeah I go for him. But where do I bash the US? George Bush is one tyrannical American not the whole freaking nation. I loathe George Bush, yeah OK, so does every American I have met. They can't believe he was ever voted in the first time let alone twice, they are ashamed of him on many levels.

As for the sitting in the UK pondering US politics. We get international news broadcasts over here, America has a big say in the world. You want me to go back to Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan...... I will, just thought I'd keep to recent history and on topic kinda.

... can't any immigrant have an opinion?? Without the whole flag waving fraternity of VJ jumping down my throat saying shut up or don't come here?? Do I have to kiss Fundamentalist Christian Right Wing ####### forever when I go be with my American wife?

I have no problem with you coming over to the UK and slagging off the Queen (dim heartless tax sucker), Tony Blair (corrupt power crazy warmonger), Princess Diana (publicity seeking neurotic corpse), the weather, the pollution, the accent, our rudeness, the overcrowding, whatever, take your pick, We really don't care. Us Brits really love a good moan about these things we will join in and laugh heartily. ...and'll say please come back and do it again.

Can I have a list of things to bite my tongue about when living in the US - I'd really hate to come across as being opinionated or ungrateful.

Thankyou sir for letting me be here. ...doffs cap, bows & scrapes,

I certainly can't speak for everyone, but attacking the President of the United States, or former Presidents, is essentially the same as attacking the U.S. itself. Though many Americans do the same thing, those Americans that didn't bother to go out and VOTE in the last election, aren't given any real credibility for their complaints. Unless you have voted either for, or against, the current President, you have no real say about what that President, or current administration does.

News flash... not everyone hates President Bush, or in your case, "loathes" him. Maybe if you toned down your rhetoric a wee bit, it wouldn't come across as being so abrasive. Though many Americans like to complain about our government, we don't take kindly to outsiders having a go at it as well.

So by your statement, I cannot complain about the person I voted against in 2000 because I didn't vote at all in 2004...which by the way was based on the fact that I did not like either of the major candidates.

I should point out that the majority of my complaints are based on things that happened PRIOR to 2004 also!

I shall also add that until he sent our troops into Iraq because of WMDs (which was uncalled for as our "war" was on "terror" not WMDs AND the UN inspectors were stating that they needed more time), I was accepting of Bush as our President...

I knew the day we started the "War on Iraq" that it was not about terror and I accepted the lesser accepted Operation Iraqi Liberation, since in my mind that was what it boiled down to

I have stated before and I shall state again, I liked his father so my views are NOT partisan but based on how I feel their presidency has performed. I respected Bush Sr.'s choice to NOT go after Saddam since our goal in 1991 was to liberate Kuwait, he succeeded and left it at that!

I also liked Reagan though his economic policy was garbage...trickle down my @$$! Both I MUST add were REPUBLICAN presidents.

I liked Clinton, his domestic affairs (no pun intended ) were well kept! No I do not mean his "affairs". I mean his domestic and economic policy, I believe internationally he was fairly well liked.

Neither of which is the case with Bush Jr. and as I mentioned in a previous post in this thread IMO (based on the facts) he has NOT upheld his Presidential Oath and has no intention, nor does he have any intention to uphold said oath.

Whale Biologist

If you understand that quote then

Whale Biologist: ...and the fifth reason whales kill is for the sheer fun of it!

Leela: Anything else I should know?

Whale Biologist: Yes. Your suit's lumpy and you smell awful. Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. I'm a whale biologist.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I certainly can't speak for everyone, but attacking the President of the United States, or former Presidents, is essentially the same as attacking the U.S. itself.

If you mean attacking as in physically attacking, then I agree. But if you mean attacking as in verbally criticizing, then I most certainly disagree. I chose the US as my home and I love this country and what it stands for (or rather what it used to stand for). I'll be damned if I don't harshly criticize a government that tears down the fabric and tramples on the documents that made this nation great and that blatantly lies to me every chance it gets. It's this government that's attacking the country. My attacking this government is defending the country.

[*Robert* 2]

The main point I was trying to make was if you don't like the people currently in office, then get out and vote in November, and replace them.

Though it sounds good in theory, it isn't always that easy, and often times, we as voters, are left with a choice between the better of two evils; but by exercising our right to vote as U.S. citizens, we have more of a say in what our government does.

[godsavethequeen 0]

I certainly can't speak for everyone, but attacking the President of the United States, or former Presidents, is essentially the same as attacking the U.S. itself. Though many Americans do the same thing, those Americans that didn't bother to go out and VOTE in the last election, aren't given any real credibility for their complaints. Unless you have voted either for, or against, the current President, you have no real say about what that President, or current administration does.

News flash... not everyone hates President Bush, or in your case, "loathes" him. Maybe if you toned down your rhetoric a wee bit, it wouldn't come across as being so abrasive. Though many Americans like to complain about our government, we don't take kindly to outsiders having a go at it as well.

how can attacking, sorry verbally attacking one man be attacking the whole nation?? I can't understand the blindness in that.

He is the figurehead of your nation?? Well the Queen is my figurehead for now and I loathe her and all Monarchy stands for, Brits really don't care if you attack her we had no chance to vote her in. and I did vote Blair and right now I detest him more than Bush he is figurehead too!! Again you won't get Brits screaming Don't Come Here If You Hate Criticise or Loathe Blair.

Surely America is more than just one person or the office of one government. Let me and my American friends have an opinion about Bush and Co. Ltd. Even if I can't vote there, I can still disagree with political craziness that may go on there. Is it really the middle ages in the US?? Where it is Treason or Heresy to disagree with the government on some fundamental level??

[rasmussen 0]

I like the part where he reprised that, shaking his finger in Chris Matthews' face -- just as he did in that long-gine day where he assured us he did not have sex 'With that woman, Monica Lewinsky."

It gets pretty bad when anyone has to resort to pointing his finger at you to get his point across. Its as if his argument isnt strong enough to stand on its own.

Considering we've had three years now of Democrats and the media repeating "Bush Lied" and declaring everything Bush does a failure its about time the man who was in charge for 8 years got ONE QUESTION about what he did to stop OBL. Especially since Democrats tried to kill the ABC movie "The Path to 9/11" which started to explain to those who do not know exactly how we got where we are.

It is not a "blame game". It is history. And for over three years now, the left has been trying to rewrite it (for instance, putting the person who made it nearly impossible for the FBI and CIA to share intelligence information, Jamie Gorelick, on the 9/11 commission).

If the public accepts the redacted history the left is putting out, the war on terror is lost right now.

[Fuzzness 2]

"The lesser of two evils, is still evil. And the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend"

just thought i'd throw that in for no reason

Edited September 25, 2006 by Fuzzness

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I like the part where he reprised that, shaking his finger in Chris Matthews' face -- just as he did in that long-gine day where he assured us he did not have sex 'With that woman, Monica Lewinsky."

It gets pretty bad when anyone has to resort to pointing his finger at you to get his point across. Its as if his argument isnt strong enough to stand on its own.

Considering we've had three years now of Democrats and the media repeating "Bush Lied" and declaring everything Bush does a failure its about time the man who was in charge for 8 years got ONE QUESTION about what he did to stop OBL. Especially since Democrats tried to kill the ABC movie "The Path to 9/11" which started to explain to those who do not know exactly how we got where we are.

It is not a "blame game". It is history. And for over three years now, the left has been trying to rewrite it (for instance, putting the person who made it nearly impossible for the FBI and CIA to share intelligence information, Jamie Gorelick, on the 9/11 commission).

If the public accepts the redacted history the left is putting out, the war on terror is lost right now.

Rewritten history… who is it who keeps comparing the "war on terror" to WW2 or the Cold War? Who is it who compares Bin Laden to Hitler AND Lenin?

[Marc and Olga 0]

I like the part where he reprised that, shaking his finger in Chris Matthews' face -- just as he did in that long-gine day where he assured us he did not have sex 'With that woman, Monica Lewinsky."

It gets pretty bad when anyone has to resort to pointing his finger at you to get his point across. Its as if his argument isnt strong enough to stand on its own.

Considering we've had three years now of Democrats and the media repeating "Bush Lied" and declaring everything Bush does a failure its about time the man who was in charge for 8 years got ONE QUESTION about what he did to stop OBL. Especially since Democrats tried to kill the ABC movie "The Path to 9/11" which started to explain to those who do not know exactly how we got where we are.

It is not a "blame game". It is history. And for over three years now, the left has been trying to rewrite it (for instance, putting the person who made it nearly impossible for the FBI and CIA to share intelligence information, Jamie Gorelick, on the 9/11 commission).

If the public accepts the redacted history the left is putting out, the war on terror is lost right now.

Rewritten history… who is it who keeps comparing the "war on terror" to WW2 or the Cold War? Who is it who compares Bin Laden to Hitler AND Lenin?

I think the problem with "The Path to 9/11" was that ABC claimed it was the "official true story", yet they also claimed key scenes were fictionalized. How do we, the viewing public, suppose to know which parts were fictionalized? Especially since it WAS billed at "the official true story".

EDIT: So here is one great example of why the Dems wanted it killed, you take it as truth when it was a dramatization.

Edited September 25, 2006 by Marc and Olga

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I like the part where he reprised that, shaking his finger in Chris Matthews' face -- just as he did in that long-gine day where he assured us he did not have sex 'With that woman, Monica Lewinsky."

It gets pretty bad when anyone has to resort to pointing his finger at you to get his point across. Its as if his argument isnt strong enough to stand on its own.

Considering we've had three years now of Democrats and the media repeating "Bush Lied" and declaring everything Bush does a failure its about time the man who was in charge for 8 years got ONE QUESTION about what he did to stop OBL. Especially since Democrats tried to kill the ABC movie "The Path to 9/11" which started to explain to those who do not know exactly how we got where we are.

It is not a "blame game". It is history. And for over three years now, the left has been trying to rewrite it (for instance, putting the person who made it nearly impossible for the FBI and CIA to share intelligence information, Jamie Gorelick, on the 9/11 commission).

If the public accepts the redacted history the left is putting out, the war on terror is lost right now.

Rewritten history… who is it who keeps comparing the "war on terror" to WW2 or the Cold War? Who is it who compares Bin Laden to Hitler AND Lenin?

I think the problem with "The Path to 9/11" was that ABC claimed it was the "official true story", yet they also claimed key scenes were fictionalized. How do we, the viewing public, suppose to know which parts were fictionalized? Especially since it WAS billed at "the official true story".

EDIT: So here is one great example of why the Dems wanted it killed, you take it as truth when it was a dramatization.

I'm not so sure it offered a strictly anti-Democrat agenda, but certainly - as far as fictionalised elements go, it does not help the general debate to present fabrication as fact.

Edited September 25, 2006 by erekose