Blinded by Bush-Hatred

[furie]

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28080-2003May7.html" target="_blank"> Perhaps the most disheartening development of the war -- at home, anyway -- is the number of liberals who have allowed Bush-hatred to take the place of thinking. Speaking with otherwise perceptive people, I have seen the same intellectual tics come up time and time again: If Bush is for it, I'm against it. If Bush says it, it must be a lie.
</a>



<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer2.jpg" width=300 height=100>

[JerryTaker]

I agree...

replace "liberals" with "conservatives" and "Bush" with "Clintons," and I would also agree...

It balances out. As a Libra, I approve... move along... :-)


<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

[furie]

replace "liberals" with "conservatives" and "Bush" with "Clintons," and I would also agree...


I agree with that.

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer2.jpg" width=300 height=100>

[TheMojoPin]

When he's right, he's right. Actually, both furie and Jerry are right. People are too quick to just assume someone is always wrong or even "evil" just because they're on the other side.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[LiquidCourage]

replace "liberals" with "conservatives" and "Bush" with "Clintons," and I would also agree...



I'll have to disagree with you there.

When Clinton bombed Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, or an aspirin factory in the Sudan I never saw any conservative holding a sign saying "Clinton=Hitler".

I'm not out to turn this into some big liberal vs. conservative thing, but this seething hatred that many liberals have for Bush is just amazing. It's like they lose all sense of reality when someone mentions George W. Bush.

[TheMojoPin]

When Clinton bombed Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, or an aspirin factory in the Sudan I never saw any conservative holding a sign saying "Clinton=Hitler".

I'm not out to turn this into some big liberal vs. conservative thing, but this seething hatred that many liberals have for Bush is just amazing. It's like they lose all sense of reality when someone mentions George W. Bush.

You're right. But don't underestimate the Clinton hatred. It's probably almost as strong today as it was when he was in office. They just had different focal points for the hatred. With Bush it's Iraq...with Clinton it was Lewinsky. Just because they got different reactions on different issues doesn't mean that the hatred was any less strong. You listen to a lot of conservatives, and they're convinced Clinton would be going to Hell TODAY if he weren't already married to Satan.

And look at the catalysts...liberals mad over a war they have no control over...conservatives mad over a man seemingly flaunting his lack of morals and "family values" and they can't do anything about it (Let's be honest...for a LOT, not all, of the witch hunters, it was NOT about the lying). It wouldn't make sense for conservatives to get up in arms over what was a successful exercise in American millitary might and international involvement, just as much as you really on average see many liberals getting up in arms (Not now...during the election the gloves were off) over Bush's past involvement with drugs and alcohol (Compared to the shit Clinton got over the stupid "I didn't inhale" statement) or the embarassing, moronic activites of his daughters. You honestly think if Clinton had two daughters like that the hardcore conservatives wouldn't have been up his ass left and right over the "horrible example" they were setting for the rest of the country?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-8-03 @ 5:35 PM

[HBox]

When Clinton bombed Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, or an aspirin factory in the Sudan I never saw any conservative holding a sign saying "Clinton=Hitler".


They were too busy trying to impeach him for a blow job.

[CaptClown]

A lot of it still stems from the election. Those rules have been in place for a long time and they never bitched when elections went their way. They just can't believe that their poster boy was beaten by someone that is perceived to be an idiot and it just digs in their collect craw.


They were too busy trying to impeach him for a blow job

During a legal proceeding? I think that might qualify. He could have avoided all that if he had tried to reach a settlement before the trial and none of that would have ever come to light.

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RonFez/files/cptsig.gif

This message was edited by CaptClown on 5-8-03 @ 5:42 PM

[TheMojoPin]

"Poster boy?" Who, Gore?

Heh...

<img src=http://www.ime.usp.br/~freitas/images/joker.jpg>

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[curtoid]

"When Clinton bombed Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, or an aspirin factory in the Sudan I never saw any conservative holding a sign saying "Clinton=Hitler"."

I'll show you the pictures and video someday.

There was even a march against that war in June 1999 where PLENTY of the right were busy marching with their peace-nick hippy brothers; the ONLY reason some of THEM were there was because of Clinton.

[KOP]

[LiquidCourage]

I think you all need to hang around some of these San Fransisco types to see the hatred for Bush I'm talking about. You know, the kind that held the "vomit it" in SF to protest the war, or like my one teacher who said she hoped our troops have chemical weapons used on them in Iraq.

[LiquidCourage]

I have to agree with Moe.

Unless you see it, I can't explain the hatred surrounding Bush.

No matter what, these people always break down about how Bush was never elected, etc., etc.



I think these hippies just want to create their own Richard Nixon since they missed out on the 60s. They just want to feel like they're fightin the system or something like that.

[Death Metal Moe]

I have to disagree fully about this idea that the Clinton hating and Bush hating are about equal. This is NOT the case.

Until Clinton started doing illegal things and immoral things, people respectfully disagreed with him and his party.

But there is SEETHING HATRED for Bush from the Left. They can't stand him, and there is a different feeling in the air. It's not general party disagreement.

NO ONE tried to discredit everything Clinton did. No one attacked his intelligence on a daily basis and suggested his cabinet made all his descisons. No one wanted to make a sitcom up about his wacky life behind the scenes. He was the butt of jokes, and opened himself up to examination by his own actions.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
<font size=1 color=333366>
<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>
</font>

666%

[TheMojoPin]

I have to disagree fully about this idea that the Clinton hating and Bush hating are about equal. This is NOT the case.

Until Clinton started doing illegal things and immoral things, people respectfully disagreed with him and his party.

I must respectfully disagree. The hardcore Republicans were out to get him as soon as he started appearing as a legitimate threat to Bush's re-election. Just as those on the left who hate "your boy" are obvious and glaring to you, those who seemed to live for nothing but the downfall and discrediting of Clinton were woefully apparent to us "lefties" pretty much from day one. Let's face out, both of us were and are just looking really for what we WANT to see...but in the end, Bush and Clinton are probably equal in their roles as cartoon-like punching bags for their respective "sides."

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[reeshy]

It appears to me that the original premise of this thread is propogating itself automatically. Those who are pro-Bush are finding fault with Clinton and vice-versa. It's always easy to find fault in the opponent's platform in order to make your side of the argument more "logical". It's harder, though, to prove your point using the good things that your "side" does!!

<IMG SRC=http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:0UUzAMSBhqwC:www.sltrib.com/2002/jan/01112002/images/gilmour.jpg>

[LiquidCourage]

I'm not really all that pro Bush, I just see it as being two different cases together. The conservatives during the Clinton years basically thought Clinton was a scumbag, full of himself, etc. Some of the Bush haters I see however, have a completely different attitude. They're running around with signs like "Bush is the Devil incarnated", "Bush is the new Adolph Hitler", etc.

[LiquidCourage]

(remember that fake IQ report that was circulated saying he had a 91 IQ while Clinton's was above 160?)


Actually, Clinton's was said to be 182 in that report, ironically twice the level Bush's was supposed to be.

[LiquidCourage]

That's the one thing I can't stand, this double standard.
When Clinton under the guise of NATO had Serbia and Bosnia bombed, he was hailed as this hero protecting "the little guy."

When Bush did it to another oppressed people, the very same people who hailed Clinton were calling Bush a hell-bent maniac that was going to slaughter thousands of innocents.

[Death Metal Moe]

How did LiquidCourage agree with me at 6:16 when I didn't say it until 6:20.

EERIE! Are we posting in a wurn whole or something?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
<font size=1 color=333366>
<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>
</font>

666%

[Bergalad]

Republicans were out to get Clinton, let's not kid ourselves. They focused on minute things he did or didn't do and the Republican Congress called him on just about everything. Saying that, I absolutely feel that the Democrats are more vehement and petty in their attacks on Bush. I am not going to go case by case, it's all my opinion. Bush was hit from day one as a lightweight (remember that fake IQ report that was circulated saying he had a 91 IQ while Clinton's was above 160?), and I think that the Dems just refuse to accept that Bush isn't a moronic Satan. It's all politics, yes, but it's unfortunate that things continune to be taken to higher and higher levels of rancor by both sides.

[FiveB247]

When Clinton bombed Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, or an aspirin factory in the Sudan I never saw any conservative holding a sign saying "Clinton=Hitler".

I dislike Clinton for many of his actions as well. Especially the bombing of the Sudanese medical factory. That actually was a NATO bombing, in response to non-compliance with GATT patent laws. So much for helping others.

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

[TheMojoPin]

They're running around with signs like "Bush is the Devil incarnated", "Bush is the new Adolph Hitler", etc.

Which IS slightly worse than "Clinton is destroying America" or "Clinton is the most evil man in America", but not by much.

Come on people, let's cut the shit. Both Bush and Clinton are and did take hell from the guys on the other side. We're really piddling over semantics here when trying to say that one is "more hated" than the other. I think it's just safe to say that each did not and will not get a fair shake from the other side, simply because of who they are and what they are assumed to represent.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-8-03 @ 7:20 PM

[Death Metal Moe]

Not to stoke the fire or anything, but in my opinion, Bush wouldn't be under such scrutiny if Clinton hadn't disgraces the presidency.

Now the press feels they have to watch the president's every bowel movement for inpropriety.

Also, don't forget that even though you hear about this concervative network rising, liberals still control the major 3 news networks and 2 of the cable news networks, not to mention many periodicals and a whole public radio network. So you'll hear the natural enemies of the Republican party a lot more than vise versa.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
<font size=1 color=333366>
<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>
</font>

666%

[HBox]

Not to stoke the fire or anything, but in my opinion, Bush wouldn't be under such scrutiny if Clinton hadn't disgraces the presidency.

Now the press feels they have to watch the president's every bowel movement for inpropriety.


I think this started with Nixon. The press has started scrutinizing Presidents more and more ever since then. Clinton brought this scrutiny into the private life, but that aspect hasn't affected Bush yet.

[LiquidCourage]

Oh well, I'm not going to convince anyone.

But at least the enemies of Clinton accepted the fact that he was elected. I can't say the same for the enemies of Bush.

[Se7en]

They were too busy trying to impeach him for a blow job.

Which he committed perjury, A CRIME, to cover up.

I mean, who cares, that was a 1,000 years ago, but conservatives make too much about it, while liberals make too little.

Too get back to the thread, I read that article in the Post today. Pretty good, and I agree with.

As far as the presidential scrutiny.....I agree that this probably started with Nixon. BUT, the massive amount of shit that Clinton got, I feel is directly correlated to what Bush is experiencing. Too many (in the media, it would seem), turn about is fair play: Clinton got it for 8 years, so now that a Republican is in office, it's their turn to feel the venom.

<img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/captainamerica.jpg" width="300" height="100">

Cap sez: The mods are all Nazi fascist cocksuckers drunk with power. Does THAT fit inside 3 lines, asshole?

[FiveB247]

Clinton disgraced the presidency? I wouldn't go that far...I think you could honestly only say that of Nixon.

Clinton was brought into the scrutny due to media and infidelity. Yes, he lied in court...but he didn't lie about anything regarding security of the nation. He f'in lied about getting a bj. There's a bit of a difference there.

It's morally wrong yes, but it's no worse then Bush having a past in alcohol and coke, JFK banging chicks in the white house, Clinton getting a bj in the white house, etc.....it's all the same relative crap.

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

[HBox]

Clinton disgraced the presidency


I think Clinton was a better president than Bush is but even I would still admit that Clinton did, to some extent, disgrace the Presidency.

[Bergalad]

There's a bit of a difference there.

I didn't know there were varying levels of perjury, especially for the president.

[LiquidCourage]

Clinton definitely disgraced the Presidency.
I mean come on, he was getting head in the sacred oval office.

[TheMojoPin]

sacred oval office

"Sacred"? Wow, next thing you know, LC will be kneeling and facing in the direction of the White House and praying every sunset...

And come on people. Clinton made an ass of himself. I don't think he really did any lasting "damage" to the office itself, but he made a fool of himself, and did it while he was president, so the office took a lot of his shame while he was in power. But I think most, if not all of it, went with him.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

But I think most, if not all of it, went with him.


Not quite. You just know people, when passing the oval office on a tour, will say "Hey! That's where Clinton got a blow job!" That, unfortunately, isn't gonna go away for awhile.

[LiquidCourage]

I don't really care that it happened. I mean, I'm not like "Oh the children!"

But if there was one room in the White House where it SHOULDN'T have happened it would be the oval office.

From now on, when any future president is hard at work, he'll look up and say "right where I'm sitting is where ole Bastard Bill got skull."

[LiquidCourage]

...and be incredibly jealous.


Not after they remember who it was from.

[Bergalad]

From now on, when any future president is hard at work, he'll look up and say "right where I'm sitting is where ole Bastard Bill got skull."
...and be incredibly jealous.

[El Mudo]

Liberals are always best when they're completely out of power..that's when they're at their wackiest and most funny

http://www.thebattlezone.com/decals/decalpix/d47nso.jpg

[TheMojoPin]

I know new president's bring in their own furniture (ie-new desk for the Oval Office), but do they change the carpeting? If not, little Bill's might be running loose all over the place...

And I've always wondered, do you think Clinton is the only president to engage in any kind of "shenanigans" in the Office? Kennedy must have...Roosevelt had FOUR mistresses, dammit! Surely at least ONE of them made the trip...

Liberals are always best when they're completely out of power..that's when they're at their wackiest and most funny

Nice try.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

Kennedy must have...Roosevelt had FOUR mistresses, dammit! Surely at least ONE of them made the trip...


Imagine if they never replace they carpeting. There might be Clinton/Roosevelt/Kennedy Uber-Democrat DNA lying right under Bush's feet right now. The Dems better hurry and get a sample, that might be their only way back to power.

[LiquidCourage]

I know new president's bring in their own furniture (ie-new desk for the Oval Office)


Maybe other stuff, but not the desk. The current desk was JFKs.



Liberals are always best when they're completely out of power..that's when they're at their wackiest and most funny



I would have to agree with him there, but not on some kind of "Boo liberals" thing.

ANYBODY who's as out of power as the Democrats now is funny as hell, except it's never happened to the Republicans this bad before.

Right now we have a few hundred billion dollars in debt, and the Democrats are complaining about Bush coming in on a jet in a flight suit.

[TheMojoPin]

Yikes...imagine the mess THAT clone would be...

"I...am NOT...an ANIMAL!!! *Schhhhhhlllurrrrp!!!*"

<img src=http://www.meredy.com/vinbw/elephant.jpg>

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

Yikes...imagine the mess THAT clone would be...


It would have boyish good looks and raging sex drive that would be moot because he is crippled from the waist down. They could literally campaign with the slogan:

"Everything you loved about Clinton, Roosevelt and Kennedy and nothing you hated! (except the wheelchair)"

[TheMojoPin]

Wait! You gotta fit the other big Dems from the last 60 years, LBJ and Truman...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

Hmm. A clone with boyish good looks, a raging sex-drive, and a crippled lower half. He has an alcoholic embarassment of a brother, an itchy nuke trigger finger, feels like he has unfinished business in 'Nam, and still hasn't given up on the League of Nations. And he's also evil. (Nixon's DNA got mixed in too)

[TheMojoPin]

AND he holds important meetings while on the can...HOT.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

And he sees UFOs.

http://www.cohenufo.org/Carter/carter_abvtopsec.htm

[furie]

He f'in lied about getting a bj. There's a bit of a difference there.


you know what else is the difference? If you or I lied in court about getting a bj, we'd go to jail. It appears he's above the law.

I really didn't want this to turn into a right vs wron...umm i mean left fight.

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer2.jpg" width=300 height=100>

[TheMojoPin]

If you or I lied in court about getting a bj, we'd go to jail.

I seriously doubt it, unless it was a trial dealing with some kind of sexual assault. If it was "you or I" and we were involved in the kind of relationship that Clinton had been in, I doubt it would have even gone to trial, much less anyone going to jail. The guy was lying about sex, and he got caught. Unfortunately, people who had the means to actually prosecute him over this chose to do so. This isn't to say he wasn't a scumbag, I thought he was the lowest of the low...but I also thought ultimately trying to impeach the president for commiting perjury over a blow job was the epitome of absurdity. People can try and pretend like it was some "bigger issue", but it wasn't. He made a stupid, stupid mistake with a woman who wasn't his wife, got caught on it, and try to lie his way out. Sadly, that's just what 99% of guys would do. I'm not trying to be cute or funny or use this as a "bit", it's just what he did, and pretty much what any of the rest of us would have done. It's a shameful part of our history, largely for the stupid actions of the president, but also because of the ridiculous lengths people went to to try and actually, truly get him thrown out of office. Both sides should be ashamed, and seriously need to rexamine where their priorities lay. People want to point now as to how Bush's poll numbers "justify" his actions? Public opinion during the impeachment where not only VERY high for Clinton (Usually 60% or higher), but also demonstrated that the American public felt that the impeachment itself was, quite frankly, a waste of everyone's time. The American people spoke, and our leaders ignored us. Braaaaavo.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-9-03 @ 1:59 PM

[furie]

You don't think you'd go to jail for perjury? It doesn't matter what the lie is, perjury is perjury.

<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer2.jpg" width=300 height=100>

[The Nature Boy]

conservatives mad over a man seemingly flaunting his lack of morals and "family values" and they can't do anything about it


I think those who support Clinton put too much stock in those attacking him being Bible thumpers and holy rollers. I find the fire and ire in Clinton's direction to come from as much the center as the right. Naturally, Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc. will be particularly exhuberant in their vitriol, but it's more endemic of the media seeking quotes from them. No different than if a Black person sneezes these days and a white guy doesn't say "God Bless you", we have 5 satallite trucks in front of Sharpton's and Jackson's offices.

For me, and most, it was never about blow jobs. In fact, it has only recently become an issue for me, considering allegations it may have come at the expense of our security. That's been and remains the most galling thing about Clinton. In NY, it's much less part of our culture, but I"m sure our DC brothers know quite a few folks, civilian and otherwise, associated with the Pentagon, CIA, NSA and FBI, and the out and out neurtering Clinton rendered, in a new world. I was in goddamn high school, and I realized the need to not just maintain our standard of might, but to continue to stay fleet and flexible toward's this century's new war.

I wasn't special, I was parroting some folks I knew at the D of D. I also happen to know a few folks employed at some of the Alphabet clubs, and it was disheartening and frightening to see their exodus under Clinton's regime, for the expressed reason that he was taking their balls away. Now in Clinton's case, fool me once(WTC bombing #1 in 93), shame on you, fool me twice, three, four....times shame on me(U.S. Cole, embassy bombings, etc). I won't go so far as to put the blame on Clinton for 9/11, but he doesn't get a clean pass in my book. There is no doubt that his actions put us in the position to see the towers go down.

And now look at the chickanery, which was common knowledge as far back as 1996, regarding his pussyfooting with the Chinese and Koreans. "Clinton-Bashers", as they are named, were merely questioning why foreign influence was being peddaled like a 10 dollar whore for a few campaign dollars. If it's wrong to question his policy in this regard, then I"m wrong. But what the hell was going on. And today, we have the North Koreans threatening to drop a nuke on downtown Denver.

To me, this is Clinton's legacy, as of 2003. His presidency becomes more disasterous by the day. But I think what has the potential to be his true legacy is the stock scandals. I think anyone who knew anything about the market knew it was overinflated. The Market is about the value, and there was no tanigble, hard reason for Amazon to be selling at 100 dollars a share.

I don't consider myself a moralist, but I do feel like I have ethics. I was so let down by the Starr Report, when I thought there were legitmate improprities regarding Vince Foster, and the best he came up with is Lewinsky. I didn't like it, but I didn't think he should swing for it. I do think if he had any class, he would have stepped down, but I see that as not wanting to give a rub to Gore, who he apparently loathes. So I"m no moralistic, I do think we'll be drawing some interesting pararells to Clinton's lack of ethtics and lie cheat and steal attitude(regarding perjury, the foreign campaign contributions) and the obvious shell game that was corporate accounting in the U.S. between 1996 and 2000.

And regarding Clinton's blowjob, and the laisse faire attitude rendered by Clinton supporters, how, in the PC era, do you think it would have flown if Bush was getting head. What if Chelsea was blowing her boss? Can you say sexual harassment suit? H-Y-P-O-C-R-A-C-Y

Bon Jovi Fan Since Day ONE!

[JerryTaker]

But I think what has the potential to be his true legacy is the stock scandals. I think anyone who knew anything about the market knew it was overinflated. The Market is about the value, and there was no tanigble, hard reason for Amazon to be selling at 100 dollars a share.


I agree with you about the stock market. I saw it too, but how would what happened be Clinton's fault? what was he supposed to do? Stop companies from going public? Stop people from buying thier stock? or selling it? I thought this was a free market...

I blame the day traders... people who figured they could make a buck playing the market like a roulette table, but afaik, there's nothing Illegal about what they did, which is the kicker...
Again, it was just human greed and laziness. People trying to make as much money as possible while doing the least work possible wil <I>always</I> ruin it for themselves as well as everyone else.



<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

[TheMojoPin]

conservatives mad over a man seemingly flaunting his lack of morals and "family values" and they can't do anything about it




I think those who support Clinton put too much stock in those attacking him being Bible thumpers and holy rollers.

Just to clarify, I wasn't here. One of the staples of the Republican party is the idea of being strong fighters for "family values"...they hardly have to be extremists or Bible thumpers for this to be the case, it's simply something they use as a core trait of the party.

And as for Clinton's "neutering" of our intelligence community, that's out and out bunk. Our intelligence agencies (Especially the CIA) have pretty much stayed the course budget-wise or had it increased really for almost 20 years now. Most of the "top brass" in the CIA, FBI and NSA today are all pretty much holdovers from Clinton's eight years, and if they were really representatives of "neutered" American intelligence capabilities, I highly doubt Bush would have kept them in place in today's internaitonal climate. The lax nature of our intelligence communites in the 90's cannot be blamed on really any one president, or the agencies themselves. You may not like it, but we simply became TOO confident, TOO complacent and TOO lazy. Remember, the end of the Cold War took EVERYONE by suprise. We had almost all of our intelligence capabilities focused almost solely on the commies for decades, and suddenly we had to do an about face to a section of the world where things were almost completely different...the Middle East. Events like the African embassy bombings and the Cole were really no more "wake up calls" than the bombings and attacks that killed far more American civilians and soldiers in countries like Iran, Lebanon and Kuwait in the 80's and early 90's. The only time we REALLY dropped the ball was after the '93 WTC bombing, but even that was, again, less than three years after the end of the Cold War had thrown everything into disarray, and quickly after that, events like Waco, Rbuy Ridge and the Oklahome City bombing pushed our intelligence forces towards pursuing domestic, "homegrown" extremists and terrorists...unfortunately, like the Titanic, we were too distracted to notic how bad the iceberg had actually wounded us until it was too late.

Bush has really freed up nothing when it comes to the CIA, except make it it a wee bit easier if they ever wanted to bump someone off illegally, which isn't that easy to do if you need to jump start you avenues of information that FIND the people who need killing after they've been so useless for basically a decade.

In the end, history will reward Clinton as it sees fit. I don't think he'll be a "bad" or "great" president; he will be, as every other president since Nixon until now has been, someone who has merely stayed the course and done only what had to be done instead of what needed to be done. Par for the course...sorry, Clinton haters/lovers...but he's just not that special either way...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."



This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-10-03 @ 1:41 AM