Political Crossfire Forums

[Dark Party]

lovebush wrote: Refrozen Seabass wrote: It takes a true believer to point at Bush's failed policies as proof of Clinton's incompetence. Bush was handed this ball just like he was handed the bin Laden ball, and he dropped it like it was the bin Laden ball. Face it.

when you jump on this side of this argument, you really show your hand. you must be one of those people who blame Bush for the weather.

Actually you can blame Bush for ignoring the weather. See: New Orleans and Hurricane.

[Snake]

Cal-Pak wrote: Under which President did North Korea Build a nuclear bomb?:think:


Oh, that's right, This President.

What does that matter? Under what president did David Koresh have a shootout with the ATF?

See, I can play that game too.

[Kane]

And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.

[^Markus^]

Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

[lilwolf]

^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.


You should buy into it because it is not all about BUSH but also about Clinton and his screw ups....not all Bush and that's a fact you should realize.

[Snake]

Clinton is trying to push a new agenda, ad his wife is going to run for president, of course there's scrutiny and slander, the left plays that game too.

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:

[The Newb]

so if hillary gets elected then bill would be the first lady?

[Snake]

lol, I wondered this as well

[^Markus^]

el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:
The only people that have their heads buried are the ones continuing to blame Clinton for every dismal decision made in the U.S. for the last 20 years and I don't believe their heads are buried in the sand.

20 years from now Bill Clinton will be recognized as a fine President who got oral sex on the job and G.W. Bush will be vilified as a warmonger who took this country to war under false pretenses and needlessly cost thousands of our troops their lives. I'll take a President who likes his dick su cked any day over an idiot who plays at war games.

[The Newb]

^Markus^ wrote: el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:
The only people that have their heads buried are the ones continuing to blame Clinton for every dismal decision made in the U.S. for the last 20 years and I don't believe their heads are buried in the sand.

20 years from now Bill Clinton will be recognized as a fine President who got oral sex on the job and G.W. Bush will be vilified as a warmonger who took this country to war under false pretenses and needlessly cost thousands of our troops their lives. I'll take a President who likes his dick su cked any day over an idiot who plays at war games.


ok clinton not only got a header but he was married and then lied to the poeple and congress while under oath in court

bush did what he thought needed to be done

[Kane]

The Newb wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:
The only people that have their heads buried are the ones continuing to blame Clinton for every dismal decision made in the U.S. for the last 20 years and I don't believe their heads are buried in the sand.

20 years from now Bill Clinton will be recognized as a fine President who got oral sex on the job and G.W. Bush will be vilified as a warmonger who took this country to war under false pretenses and needlessly cost thousands of our troops their lives. I'll take a President who likes his dick su cked any day over an idiot who plays at war games.


ok clinton not only got a header but he was married and then lied to the poeple and congress while under oath in court

bush did what he thought needed to be done

:rotf:

Let's spin this:

[sarcasm]
Clinton got a header while being married and then lied about the header to the people and congress...

Bush faces one of the most critical moments of this country's history and...invades Iraq after Afghanistan as it's WMD's pose a significant threat to the US.

Clinton did what he thought needed to be done.[/sarcasm]

Your favoring one politician over another...it's made abundantly clear. That you would rather criticize someone else as opposed to the one you favor display's an exact mentality...

[Kane]

el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:

Oh yes, please add more substance to this thread. :roll:

[Kane]

Kamel wrote: Clinton is trying to push a new agenda, ad his wife is going to run for president, of course there's scrutiny and slander, the left plays that game too.

I sincerely doubt his wife will run for president...she might want to...but she wouldn't get past the primaries. What's his new agenda?

[Kane]

lilwolf wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.


You should buy into it because it is not all about BUSH but also about Clinton and his screw ups....not all Bush and that's a fact you should realize.

But through using this logic everything is everybody's fault.

It's just a continuous line of blame until something so inconsequential, so minuscule, and so overwrought with propaganda through an elongated period of time; is blamed on you.

[Angelicus]

^Markus^ wrote: el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: ^Markus^ wrote: Kane wrote: And yet again...attention shifts from Iraq, the current situation with the DPRK, the "War on Terrorism," Iran, etc.

It's awesome arguing about what should've been without the added conjectures of what could be.
That's because the only strategy for defending Bush they have is blaming Clinton and anyone with a grasp on reality isn't buying it.

A grasp on reality... :lol: Does the view underneath the sand still look good for Clinton where your at? From ostrichville maybe.. :lol:
The only people that have their heads buried are the ones continuing to blame Clinton for every dismal decision made in the U.S. for the last 20 years and I don't believe their heads are buried in the sand.

20 years from now Bill Clinton will be recognized as a fine President who got oral sex on the job and G.W. Bush will be vilified as a warmonger who took this country to war under false pretenses and needlessly cost thousands of our troops their lives. I'll take a President who likes his dick su cked any day over an idiot who plays at war games.

Ummm so Bush, who's been in office for 6 years now, is to blame for the past 20?

Lets see then, according to you, Bush is responsible for 14 years of "dismal decisions" when he wasn't even in office.

Ok......................... :sigh1: yeah I see how that one works. :roll: :lol:

[tmoore]

puffin wrote: If you want Kerry/Gore/Pelosi/Hillar/Reid/and don't forget sitting in the shadows"The Man With A The Perpetual Hardon", who from now on I dumb "The Happy Gang", to be dealing with Kim, Iran, the Iranian sent terrorists in Iraq and Kim then by all means vote Dem. in Nov. and in 08.
The greatest threat to the sercurity of the world would be a LIB US government with Hillary taking advice on running the country from the likes of Carter and Bill and the rest of the 'Happy Gang'. Imagine a completely chaotic administration with no qlue what to do with rouqe states.
Imagine watching Hillary/Pelosi/Reid, and the man who took over Rumsfields job namely Jimmy Carter sweating under the CNN camera lights trying to explain where New York dissappeared to to the citizens of the US.
Think that's a joke (well the part about Carter is but Hillary would stick some one just as dumb as Carter in the job to appease the Hollywood radical LIB hippies). I'm afraid there more truth to my little senario than mights meet the eye.
Every person on earth who wishes for the destruction of the US right now is waiting with both fingers crossed to see if the LIBs win the House/senate and hopefully the Whitehouse. If they do those you want to destroy the US will have all been given Platinum ''no limit' terrorism against the US credit cards.


That is a very scary thought. It is decided I am voting Republican, but I was going to do that anyway!

[Snake]

Kane wrote: I sincerely doubt his wife will run for president...she might want to...but she wouldn't get past the primaries. What's his new agenda?

Clinton Global Initiative

[Kane]

Kamel wrote: Kane wrote: I sincerely doubt his wife will run for president...she might want to...but she wouldn't get past the primaries. What's his new agenda?

Clinton Global Initiative

Which is bad why? And related to the thread how?