@POLITICAL JEDI,
POLITICAL JEDI;32130 wrote:With all due respect, it's not the overwhelmingly Christian Mexicans that are on a jihad to destroy America. Yes, we should secure our borders much better then we are now. Yes, letting 20 million un-educated, un-assimilated Mexicans into the United States constitutes a problem.
And lets see, the muslims that flew planes into the WTC were here on expired visas, no effort mades to track tham dow and remove them. Muslim extremist have crossed the mexican/canadian borders and been found in America, yet Bush wants to make it easier, and give any that are already here amnesty. Mexicans aren't the only ones streaming across the border.
Quote:Finally, I don't know about the rest of you, but I for one would rather spend billions upon billions killing radical islamist in Iraq and Afghanistan then spend it foolishly by searching cargo trailors containing clothes from China, cars from Japan, plazma TV's from Singapore, wine and cheese from France, ect, ect. :dunno:
Yea, right up until one of those nuclear weapons gets smuggled through them, then, I guess instead of calling to secure them at that point, we should should just go and invade another country, right? What a joke.
Quote:]Clinton kept us safe??? First, lets get something straight right off the get go. . .Our embassies around the world are on U.S. sovereign soil. Whether they are in Moscow, Russia or Islamabad, Pakistan -- thats still sovereign U.S. soil as if it were in Witchatah, Kansas. Our embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya were bombed under Clintons watch. Over 200 killed and over 4,000 injured. NO RESPONSE! A U.S. Warship (USS Cole) was attacked and had a hole the size of a tractor trailor put in it's hull. 17 U.S. sailors dead, 39 injured. NO RESPONSE! Clinton let our elite, our special forces/army rangers get swisscheesed up in Mogadishu by radical islamic types -- NO RESPONSE! All he had to do was order air support for them, but because that might have interfered with his Oslo folly, or because they weren't muslims in Bosnia or Kosovo, he didn't, and our military hero's were dragged through the streets of that rathole for it!
Time and time again, we were attacked under Clintons watch and time and time again he did absolutely nothing except knowingly launch useless million dollar cruise missiles at empty ten dollar mud huts then launched a team of lawyers with supeonas in hand at Al qaida whilst him and his cabinet stood around congratulating themselves on "the message" they had sent. . .Why even our former/present nemisis ( depending on what day it is ) knew what time it was:
"I talked with the previous U.S. administration", said Vladimir Putin shortly after September 11, "and pointed out the bin Laden issue to them. They wrung their hands so helplessly and said, the Taliban are not turning him over, what can one do? I remember I was surprised: If they are not turning him over, one has to think and do something."
As far as I'm concerned Clinton didn't keep us safe. He didn't do squat! The cowboy from Texas picked up America's sword and shield and kept us safe.
The point remains that it is faulty logic. Bush hasn't kept us any safer here
in America than Clinton did, or Carter, or Reagan, or any other president. There's almost 3000 people that would say he didn't make us safe at all.
Quote:If you do nothing else, please tell me what you mean by: "hadn't run the beginning of the war under such a load of changing BS"
Do your own homework, or just continue to parrot the same talking points and lipservice the other neocon lapdogs do.
Quote:Your wrong. What Fox news decides to broadcast to it's viewers, or doesn't, has nothing at all to do with our Commander in Chief. Bush, nor anyone in his administration, has censored our media in any way, shape or form. The same cannot be said about Woodrow Wilson.
Ahhh running to defend your figurehead, yet I didn't even say Bush censors my news did I? Bush couldn't censor the news nowadays if he wanted to. The spread of information is too vast, quick, and multimedium to be censored effectively. So what's the next best thing? Launch a patriotic, propaghanda campaign, filled it with rhetoric, information, and misinformation, and watch it boil. Manufacture an enemy and set hte dogs loose. The "War on Terror"? So, we are fighting an emotion? There's is no end to that war, terror can't be defeated, as it is not a being, it is not an army, it is not a country. It is a manufactured enemy. Are there terrorist? Hell yea there are, so why not call it the "War on Terrorist"? Or the "War on Islamic Militants"? Or "War on the Middle East"? I guess they just don't have same catchy jingle eh?
Quote:The cowboy from Texas picked up America's sword and shield and kept us safe.
HAHAHAHAHAHA The half assed reservist, never went to war, ex cokehead, fratboy, complete business failure picked up Americas fear and turned it into a multi billion dollar industry for his buddies. He hasn't defended ****, just like he didn't do **** when he was in the military. He's the grandpoobah of the chickenhawks.
Quote:Direct quote from the just published REAGAN DIARIES.
The entry is dated May 17, 1986.
'A moment I've been dreading. George brought his ne're-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work.'
Did Reagan really say it? No, but it's funny as hell.
( BTW i respect the bravery of those soldiers, its unfortunate they had to go that way, but its war)