| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Well Ray....
On 7/13/2014 11:45 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 7/13/14, 12:07 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 7/13/2014 11:33 AM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 7/13/14, 11:10 AM, wrote: On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 08:47:04 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote: The big difference is that while Clinton talked the talk, Bush walked the walk. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/ Precisely. Clinton talked about the problems with Iraq but was smart enough not to invade it and stick around, while Bush was dumb enough to be talked into invading Iraq and sticking around. Clinton was smart while Bush was...Bush. Clinton was extremely lucky that his term was over in 2001 instead of 2002 or he would have been placed in the position of having to back up his rhetoric or back down. Al Gore lights a candle every day thanking the SCOTUS for Bush v Gore. How do you think things would have worked out if Saddam was still in Baghdad? The apologeticas for Bush just never end.  They will end as soon as the lefties stop blaming Bush and Co. for everything they determine as being wrong with the country and realize that hindsight is 20/20. Serious mistakes have been made throughout history by representatives of both parties. It doesn't mean that at the time, with the information available, they weren't trying to do what they thought was best or right. Bush left this country in ruins in many ways. It is going to take a long, long time to fix his damage. Once the campaigner in chief steps down the process will begin. -- "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them". Thomas Jefferson |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
