Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Old_Rooster on April 24, 2007, 11:34:43 AM
-
Are any of you naieve enough to think when clinton was president or for that matter any past president, do you believe you were always told the truth? If so, i have some nice land in florida i'd like to sell you. Don't fret if it appears a bit swampy, i swear the water will move away eventually. good grief. like bush is the first president to lie a bit.
grow the hell up.
-
Are any of you naieve enough to think when clinton was president or for that matter any past president, do you believe you were always told the truth? If so, i have some nice land in florida i'd like to sell you. Don't fret if it appears a bit swampy, i swear the water will move away eventually. good grief. like bush is the first president to lie a bit.
grow the hell up.
Was it that land valued at? ;D
I'm sure the issue isn't that Clinton or anyone else in office never lied.
The issue is the current president lying.
-
when clinton was president....
Things were good
next
-
when clinton was president....
Things were good
next
on average -today people make way more money now,, we have less unemployment,, and lower taxes. so how were things better?
-
on average -today people make way more money now,, we have less unemployment,, and lower taxes. so how were things better?
di you take into account monetary inflation? less unemployment? based on what? the methods of measuring unemployment are inaccurate , look it up if you don't believe me, they have always been skewed, considering more than 2% of pop is in jail now compared to 1.3 % during clinton, and we have a war going on I think it would stack up that away. Lower taxes. ok, guess that equals things out when 100 people die per day (UN)
-
Are any of you naieve enough to think when clinton was president or for that matter any past president, do you believe you were always told the truth? If so, i have some nice land in florida i'd like to sell you. Don't fret if it appears a bit swampy, i swear the water will move away eventually. good grief. like bush is the first president to lie a bit.
grow the hell up.
Better question: Are you attempting to use wrongdoing where it may exist in the past as a justification for committing wrongdoing in the present? If so, I've got a nice firey place in the lower levels of hell for you ;) Don't worry if it appears a bit hot, I swear the heat is only temporary. Wow, where will we be in the future when presidents justify their further wrongdoings based on marks sets by Bush oh boy, we're fucked...
-
on average -today people make way more money now,, we have less unemployment,, and lower taxes. so how were things better?
Actually Clinton rode the tech boom. It wasn't his doing of course but it was during his Presidency. You must have forgotten about that little time period when everyone with any investment in the market made a killing. Again, not Clinton's doing but during his time. Your claim of people making "way more money" isn't completely accurate.
And besides, stats can be skewed to say essentially anything you want them to say.
-
Are any of you naieve enough to think when clinton was president or for that matter any past president, do you believe you were always told the truth? If so, i have some nice land in florida i'd like to sell you. Don't fret if it appears a bit swampy, i swear the water will move away eventually. good grief. like bush is the first president to lie a bit.
grow the hell up.
Sure he lied.. About getting a bj from a fat bitch.
Bush lied to invade a country.
-
"Well, let's see, start with Somalia. It's not the first, but its one of the best known. In the winter of 1992 George Bush ordered US troops to guard food shipments in and around the ports. The deployment ended in March, a resounding success. A couple of months later Clinton got suckered into sending the Marines back in as 'nation builders'. In the course of which he deliberately violated Executive Orders of the Presidency not to engage in deliberate or willful assassination of foreign political or military leaders; you DO remember the AC130 gunships firing wildly into civilian occupied apartment buildings, in an effort to murder a Somali warlord and his followers, don't you? I didn't think so. Long term memory is not a strong suite of the Clintonestae."
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/LIES.html
-
"Well, let's see, start with Somalia. It's not the first, but its one of the best known. In the winter of 1992 George Bush ordered US troops to guard food shipments in and around the ports. The deployment ended in March, a resounding success. A couple of months later Clinton got suckered into sending the Marines back in as 'nation builders'. In the course of which he deliberately violated Executive Orders of the Presidency not to engage in deliberate or willful assassination of foreign political or military leaders; you DO remember the AC130 gunships firing wildly into civilian occupied apartment buildings, in an effort to murder a Somali warlord and his followers, don't you? I didn't think so. Long term memory is not a strong suite of the Clintonestae."
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/LIES.html
Are you also trying to justify the commission of present wrongs with past ones?
-
Are you also trying to justify the commission of present wrongs with past ones?
Nope. Just showing about another person's lies excluding a blowjob but regarding entering another nation.
-
Nope. Just showing about another person's lies excluding a blowjob but regarding entering another nation.
You can't possibly be comparing W's Iraqi quagmire to what happened in Somalia: ::)
1992
March 3
Ceasefire
Warring faction leaders sign a ceasefire agreement, which includes provisions to allow a UN monitoring mission into Somalia to oversee arrangements for providing humanitarian assistance.
April 24
UN Military Observers to Somalia
UN Security Council approves UN operation in Somalia, pursuant to the ceasefire agreement. In July, 50 unarmed UN military observers are deployed to Mogadishu to monitor the ceasefire.
August 15
Operation Provide Relief (United Nations Operation in Somalia -- UNOSOM I)
UN humanitarian relief effort begins.
December 4
US President George Bush launches Somalia intervention
Deteriorating security prevents the UN mission from delivering food and supplies to the starving Somalis. Relief flights are looted upon landing, food convoys are hijacked and aid workers assaulted. The UN appeals to its members to provide military forces to assist the humanitarian operation.
With only weeks left in his term as president, George Bush responds to the UN request, proposing that US combat troops lead an international UN force to secure the environment for relief operations. On December 5, the UN accepts his offer, and Bush orders 25,000 US troops into Somalia. On December 9th, the first US Marines land on the beach.
Bush assures the American people and troops involved that this is not an open ended commitment; the objective is to quickly provide a secure environment so that food can get through to the starving Somalis, and then the operation will be turned over to the UN peacekeeping forces. He assures the public that he plans for the troops to be home by Clinton's inauguration in January.
This US-led United Task Force (UNITAF) is dubbed "Operation Restore Hope."
1993
January
Clinton takes over
Clinton, like Bush, is anxious to scale down the American military presence in Somalia and let the United Nations take charge.
March 15 -28
Addis Ababa Accords
The UN organized Conference on National Reconciliation in Somalia, held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, results in a resolution among faction leaders, including Aidid, to end the violence.
May 4
UN takeover; "nation building" (UNOSOM II)
In March, the UN authorizes UNOSOM II, a UN operation with expanded enforcement power, whose mandate stressed "the crucial importance of disarmament" of the Somali people. This UN-led mission was to take over from the US-led UNITAF. The expanded operation's new mission goes beyond simply providing humanitarian relief, calling for the UN to facilitate "nation building," to get Somalia back on its feet by restoring law and order, shoring up the infrastructure, and helping to set up processes for establishing a representative government. By the end of March, 28 different nations send contingents to Somalia in support of the new militarized operation. The US officially hands over the command to the UN on May 4.
While Clinton supported this expansion of the UN's mandate, he simultaneously ordered the number of US troops in Somalia to be reduced and replaced by UN troops. By June, only 1,200 US combat soldiers remained in Somalia, with 3,000 support troops.
June 5
Massacre of Pakistani troops; the hunt for Aidid
During an inspection of a Somali arms weapons storage site, 24 Pakistani soldiers are ambushed and massacred. The next day, the UN Security Council issues an emergency resolution calling for the apprehension of "those responsible" for the massacre. Though Aidid is not specifically named in the resolution, it is, in effect, a call to apprehend him. Twelve days later, Admiral Howe orders Aidid's arrest, offering a $25,000 reward for information leading to his apprehension.
June 8
Special Forces requested
In the aftermath of the June 5 massacre, Admiral Howe first requests a counterterrorist hostage rescue force from Washington because they he they needed more extensive military capability to deal with the escalating violence. No such troops are forthcoming until Task Force Ranger is deployed in August.
June 12-16
Attacks on Aidid's strongholds
US and UN troops begin attacking various targets in Mogadishu associated with Aidid, including a radio station and ammunition depots. The peacekeepers are now at war with Aidid.
July 12
Abdi house attack
In a major escalation, American Cobra helicopters attack a house in south Mogadishu where a group of clan leaders are meeting, destroying the building with TOW missiles and cannon fire and killing a number of Somalis. Four western journalists who had gone to investigate are beaten to death by an angry mob.
July 29
Last sighting of Aidid
August 8
Americans killed by land mines
Four American military police are killed by a remote detonated land mine set off by Somalis. Two weeks later, six more US soldiers are wounded in a similar attack. This gets attention in America, and shortly thereafter, Task Force Ranger is deployed to Somalia.
August 26
US Special Forces arrive in Somalia
US Army Task Force Ranger flies into Mogadishu -- 440 elite troops from Delta Force and the U.S. Rangers. Led by Major General William F. Garrison, their mission is to capture Aidid. They begin pursuing Aidid and his top lieutenants, with sporadic success.
September
Carter negotiating with Aidid
In the midst of the manhunt, the Clinton administration opens a secret initiative to negotiate with Aidid. Former president Jimmy Carter, who had a previous relationship with Aidid, volunteers to act as intermediary. The US military commanders in Mogadishu are not informed about this new initiative.
September
Request for armored reinforcements denied
In a decision that is later highly criticized, US Defense Secretary Les Aspin denies requests from General Montgomery for armored reinforcements, despite support for Montgomery's request from General Colin Powell. Aspin says that he did not want to create the appearance that the US was increasing forces in Somalia at a time when they were trying to reduce military presence. He later concedes,"Had I known at the time what I knew after the events of Sunday, [October 3]. I would have made a very different decision." In December, he is forced to resign.
October 3-4
Firefight
Task Force Ranger's assault on the Olympic Hotel in Mogadishu, in search of Aidid, results in a seventeen hour bloody battle in which 18 US soldiers are killed and 84 are wounded.
October 7
Clinton's response: withdraw troops
President Clinton decides to cut his losses. He sends substantial combat troops as short term reinforcements, but declares that American troops are to be fully withdrawn from Somalia by March 31. The hunt for Aidid is abandoned, and US representatives are sent to resume negotiations with the warlord. Two weeks later, in a letter to President Clinton, General Garrison accepts full responsibility for what happened in the battle.
October 14
Durant released
CWO Mike Durant, who had been taken captive by Aidid's men during the battle, is released along with a Nigerian prisoner.
1994
March 25
Remaining US forces leave Somalia
Approximately 20,000 UN forces remain, composed primarily of Asian and African contingents.
1995
Spring
Final UN withdrawal from Somalia
August 1
Aidid dies
Aidid dies in hospital from bullet wounds received during an outbreak of fighting in Mogadishu.
-
Just providing a comparison. It doesn't have to be exact. Clinton lied about much more but I thought I'd keep it just on response to what CJ said. Don't make it bigger than that because frankly that would be lame.
-
Just providing a comparison. It doesn't have to be exact. Clinton lied about much more but I thought I'd keep it just on response to what CJ said. Don't make it bigger than that because frankly that would be lame.
Bigger than what, I'm just saying there is no relevant comparison. It would be lame of you to provide Somalia as a comparison to Bush's Iraq... eh... bigtime ;)
-
Bigger than what, I'm just saying there is no relevant comparison. It would be lame of you to provide Somalia as a comparison to Bush's Iraq... eh... bigtime ;)
The only thing that I said and was responding to CJ was that Clinton went into A COUNTRY under false pretenses. That is all. It is a comparison, plain and simple. In terms of severity, yes they are different but the basic premise is the same. Posting endless facts about Somolia will not change that. NOBODY is saying that they are on the exact same level in terms of consequences but the action is the same.
-
September
Request for armored reinforcements denied
In a decision that is later highly criticized, US Defense Secretary Les Aspin denies requests from General Montgomery for armored reinforcements, despite support for Montgomery's request from General Colin Powell. Aspin says that he did not want to create the appearance that the US was increasing forces in Somalia at a time when they were trying to reduce military presence. He later concedes,"Had I known at the time what I knew after the events of Sunday, [October 3]. I would have made a very different decision." In December, he is forced to resign.
October 3-4
Firefight
Task Force Ranger's assault on the Olympic Hotel in Mogadishu, in search of Aidid, results in a seventeen hour bloody battle in which 18 US soldiers are killed and 84 are wounded.
This was just criminal. >:( Blood on Aspen's hands. Clinton's too.
-
on average -today people make way more money now
when you include inflation? I'm not so sure about that homie. Proof?
-
when you include inflation? I'm not so sure about that homie. Proof?
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2006/10/the_average_ame.html
lets not forgit about the recession clinton put us in.. which bush got us out of.. but clinton was so great for our economy ::)
-
thanks.
can you tell us more about the clinton recession?
-
thanks.
can you tell us more about the clinton recession?
sure,, what would you like to know
-
sure,, what would you like to know
what indicators do you use to determine it? What was DOWN for clinton that BUsh did better?
-
When Clinton was president ...
Gas was between $1.00 and $1.50 per gallon
-
Better question: Are you attempting to use wrongdoing where it may exist in the past as a justification for committing wrongdoing in the present? If so, I've got a nice firey place in the lower levels of hell for you ;) Don't worry if it appears a bit hot, I swear the heat is only temporary. Wow, where will we be in the future when presidents justify their further wrongdoings based on marks sets by Bush oh boy, we're fucked...
No, what i'm saying is we don't always have to know the truth. Not all americans have enough balls to deal with the total truth.
Still, years go by, presidency's go by and shucks, we are still a free democratic nation, the greatest nation in history. so I never complain much, I truly feel like i live in disneyland, felt that way when clinton was president, when reagan was prez, heck, i loved my country and wouldn't leave it even when jimmy carter was president.
-
No, what i'm saying is we don't always have to know the truth. Not all americans have enough balls to deal with the total truth.
Still, years go by, presidency's go by and shucks, we are still a free democratic nation, the greatest nation in history. so I never complain much, I truly feel like i live in disneyland, felt that way when clinton was president, when reagan was prez, heck, i loved my country and wouldn't leave it even when jimmy carter was president.
Yes, but if you bash Hilary here, you'll end up in Hilary camps in 2009. A couple of folks here, who are super-duper happy with the Mil Commish act and election fraud are unaware that the Dems can use these tools too.
Once Hilary cheats her way into office then starts locking up every Rush listener, the place should get a little better. What's wrong, guys? You were fine with it when the repubs had the power... ;)
-
Yes, but if you bash Hilary here, you'll end up in Hilary camps in 2009. A couple of folks here, who are super-duper happy with the Mil Commish act and election fraud are unaware that the Dems can use these tools too.
Once Hilary cheats her way into office then starts locking up every Rush listener, the place should get a little better. What's wrong, guys? You were fine with it when the repubs had the power... ;)
You know you are the only one here i respect......well i love jag but may not respect her, i just wanna sex her.
-
Blood on Clintons hands vs. Blood on Bush's.... OH brother, you fools really want to stand these two side by side ::)
-
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2006/10/the_average_ame.html
lets not forgit about the recession clinton put us in.. which bush got us out of.. but clinton was so great for our economy ::)
Clinton did not put the US in a recession. The business cycle pretty much governs the expansion and contraction of our economy. The man most responsible for that is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Bush did not get us out of the recession. The real players were the ongoing benefits paid from the computer revolution, an overextended housing boom, and artificially suppressed interest rates by the Fed.
-
No, what i'm saying is we don't always have to know the truth. Not all americans have enough balls to deal with the total truth.
Still, years go by, presidency's go by and shucks, we are still a free democratic nation, the greatest nation in history. so I never complain much, I truly feel like i live in disneyland, felt that way when clinton was president, when reagan was prez, heck, i loved my country and wouldn't leave it even when jimmy carter was president.
LOL.... I couldn't have asked for a better response from you!!!! PERFECT!!!!
Dictionary entry on Sheeple :D
2. sheeple
A individual that forfits their right to choose in favor of inclusion in groupthink and what is viewed as popular or elete group. Allowing the influences of different forms of media and group members to hold great sway in the formation of attitudes, behavoir and opinion.
To accept the group mentaility and opinion as fact without examination.
Not only to be told what to do, but accepting the paradigm of thought as absolute thereby removing the weight of personal responsibility in the making of decisions.
-
LOL.... I couldn't have asked for a better response from you!!!! PERFECT!!!!
Dictionary entry on Sheeple :D
2. sheeple
A individual that forfits their right to choose in favor of inclusion in groupthink and what is viewed as popular or elete group. Allowing the influences of different forms of media and group members to hold great sway in the formation of attitudes, behavoir and opinion.
To accept the group mentaility and opinion as fact without examination.
Not only to be told what to do, but accepting the paradigm of thought as absolute thereby removing the weight of personal responsibility in the making of decisions.
That sheep nonsense is idiotic. Democrats are the sheep, they simply disagree with everything Bush says, if he said the sky was blue, democrats would in unison proclaim it to be green. baaa baaa, its greeeeeen, baaa baaaa.
-
That sheep nonsense is idiotic. Democrats are the sheep, they simply disagree with everything Bush says, if he said the sky was blue, democrats would in unison proclaim it to be green. baaa baaa, its greeeeeen, baaa baaaa.
Come on, share your true reaction when it dawned on you that you just defined and stamped yourself a true dedicated sheeple :D Tell me it was a classic Homer Simpson style, "D'oh!"
:P
-
Come on, share your true reaction when it dawned on you that you just defined and stamped yourself a true dedicated sheeple :D Tell me it was a classic Homer Simpson style, "D'oh!"
:P
and to me you are a sheep. whoopie.
-
I dont like comparing Presidents' handling of economies b/c there are so many variables that need to be taken into account, including variables that presidents really have no control over. But here it goes:
A common mistake in comparing the economies of the two presidencies is starting at the first year of each of thier terms. Clinton and Bush took over during different points in the corresponding business cycles. Clinton took over when the economy was already 2 years in expansion, Bush took over two months BEFORE the recession officially began. Therefore, to be fair, you have to start measuring Bush's performance at 2003 if you are going to start measuring Clinton's performance at 1993. After doing that, you will find that in most areas Bush actually has better statistics.
So Bush already has the disadvantage of inheriting a recession, while Clinton inherited an expansion. Bush is fighting two wars, had to deal with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he had to deal with higher oil prices, he had to deal with the fallout of two major corporate scandals. Which reminds me: Sarbanes-Oxley probably hasnt helped a whole lot either. (Unfortunately Bush had to sign that into law or it would probably have been political suicide for him.) And he had to deal with Katrina. He also had to deal with a Republican Congress that had become drunk on power and lost its fiscal virtues. When you consider all of these obstacles, I think it is safe to say that Bush wins. Although Clinton wasnt too shabby either. Actually, the economy is Bush's crowning achievement. In the 90s, things didnt start to get really good until 1997. Thats when the expansion entered its latter strage, which is when wages always start to go up. Another main cause of this prosperity was a major tax cut on capital gains that Clinton signed into law.
Clinton did not put the US in a recession. The business cycle pretty much governs the expansion and contraction of our economy. The man most responsible for that is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
I agree. There really isnt anything Clinton could have done to prevent the bursting of the tech bubble. If anything it was the fault of the Federal Reserve. During the summer of 2000, I beleive they continued raising interest rates even while many prices in the economy were declining. In the future, the Federal Reserve needs to find a way to prevent asset bubbles from developing.
Bush did not get us out of the recession. The real players were the ongoing benefits paid from the computer revolution, an overextended housing boom, and artificially suppressed interest rates by the Fed.
Actually I beleive Bush's tax cuts played as big of a role, particularly his tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. His tax cuts on income were probably not huge enough to have a big effect. He decreased the top income bracket to 35% only from 39%. That's still higher than when his dad was president. It should have been decreased to 27%, which is where it was when Reagan was president.
-
I dont like comparing Presidents' handling of economies b/c there are so many variables that need to be taken into account, including variables that presidents really have no control over. But here it goes:
A common mistake in comparing the economies of the two presidencies is starting at the first year of each of thier terms. Clinton and Bush took over during different points in the corresponding business cycles. Clinton took over when the economy was already 2 years in expansion, Bush took over two months BEFORE the recession officially began. Therefore, to be fair, you have to start measuring Bush's performance at 2003 if you are going to start measuring Clinton's performance at 1993. After doing that, you will find that in most areas Bush actually has better statistics.
So Bush already has the disadvantage of inheriting a recession, while Clinton inherited an expansion. Bush is fighting two wars, had to deal with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he had to deal with higher oil prices, he had to deal with the fallout of two major corporate scandals. Which reminds me: Sarbanes-Oxley probably hasnt helped a whole lot either. (Unfortunately Bush had to sign that into law or it would probably have been political suicide for him.) And he had to deal with Katrina. He also had to deal with a Republican Congress that had become drunk on power and lost its fiscal virtues. When you consider all of these obstacles, I think it is safe to say that Bush wins. Although Clinton wasnt too shabby either. Actually, the economy is Bush's crowning achievement. In the 90s, things didnt start to get really good until 1997. Thats when the expansion entered its latter strage, which is when wages always start to go up. Another main cause of this prosperity was a major tax cut on capital gains that Clinton signed into law.
I agree. There really isnt anything Clinton could have done to prevent the bursting of the tech bubble. If anything it was the fault of the Federal Reserve. During the summer of 2000, I beleive they continued raising interest rates even while many prices in the economy were declining. In the future, the Federal Reserve needs to find a way to prevent asset bubbles from developing.
Actually I beleive Bush's tax cuts played as big of a role, particularly his tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. His tax cuts on income were probably not huge enough to have a big effect. He only decreased the top income bracket to 35% from 39%. That's still higher than when his dad was president. It should have been decreased to 27%, which is where it was when Reagan was president.
Yeah....but Clinton got more ass than Bush. :)
-
well i love jag but may not respect her, i just wanna sex her.
That's pretty pathetic. :-\ What's wrong, not enough action over at the senior center? ;D