If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   Bill Clinton booed at Super Bowl   (newsmax.com) divider line 306
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

13150 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Feb 2002 at 1:45 PM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



306 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2002-02-04 01:47:01 PM
France Surrenders
 
2002-02-04 01:47:29 PM
If he was getting head there and not sharing, I would have booed too.
 
2002-02-04 01:47:38 PM
Clinton is better than bush..

At least Clinton had a sense of humor
 
2002-02-04 01:49:25 PM
What a load of crap. NewsMax is like a conservative edition of Weekly World News - anyone who reads this dung on a regular basis and BELIEVES IT needs to have their head surgically removed from their ass.
 
2002-02-04 01:50:11 PM
I was at Cal Ripken's last game in Baltimore last year and he came out for a speech. He was booed there also.
 
2002-02-04 01:50:40 PM
*yawns*
 
2002-02-04 01:50:52 PM
No, they were shouting "Woooo!"
 
2002-02-04 01:51:05 PM
NewsMax quoting from Curtis Sliwa....Now that's quality journalism!
 
2002-02-04 01:52:30 PM
"Hey, he could have stopped Osama bin Laden but didn't."
Says it all. 'oh, we were within 2 hours of getting him'. Whatever, his administration preferred to sit on their thumbs to avoid any potential controversy (aka strife with the Arab world). And, not only did they do nothing to stave off terrorist attacks, they gave (GAVE!!!) nuclear secrets to our largest potential enemy, who have decided to point their nuclear weapons at us. LOL- total failure as a president... deserves every 'boo' he gets. History will not vindicate this man.
 
2002-02-04 01:52:43 PM
Clinton booed,
Mariah boobed,
Pat Summerall wooed,

and Paul McCartney embarasses himself even further by
doing a duet with Terry Bradshaw.


ps... I seriously thought Summerall and Madden were going to kiss at the end of the game.
 
2002-02-04 01:52:54 PM
it took a great leader like bush to make americans aware of what a crap job clinton did.
 
2002-02-04 01:52:54 PM
They were shouting, 'Boo-URNS.' It was just hard to hear what they were saying.
 
2002-02-04 01:53:03 PM
When I first read the header there I thought it said 'boobed'...
 
2002-02-04 01:53:36 PM
Rupublicans and they're Clinton bashing... us independents believe that if every president would get some head while in office, he'd be much easier to deal with...
 
2002-02-04 01:53:51 PM
Rupublicans and their Clinton bashing... us independents believe that if every president would get some head while in office, he'd be much easier to deal with...
 
2002-02-04 01:54:25 PM
LOL
 
2002-02-04 01:54:49 PM
it took a great leader like bush to make americans aware of what a crap job clinton did.

AHAHAHAHHAHAHHA! I'm sorry, I think you forgot your sarcasm tags.
 
2002-02-04 01:57:12 PM
Keepmeinformed


You have the post of the day....
well said man.
 
2002-02-04 01:57:21 PM
Oh yeah. I'm so glad that Bush has stopped Osama and all the evil in the world! He is SOOO much better.
 
2002-02-04 01:57:36 PM
here comes a stimulating and enlightened discussion of current social/political topics!

oh, wrong thread.
 
2002-02-04 01:57:55 PM
Nice to see how well the atmosphere of partisan cooperation and mutual respect continues to hold this country together in this time of crisis...
 
2002-02-04 01:58:03 PM
Um.....I agree with Puckhead.....
 
2002-02-04 01:58:06 PM
Clinton got booed. Not to be confused by 'woo'ed, as seen below:

 
2002-02-04 01:58:12 PM
hahah no kidding .. a great leader like bush


bahahahahah

AHWAWAHAHAHAH!!!
 
2002-02-04 01:58:35 PM
Some more class acts, like the buttheads who booed Hillary at the NYC benefit.
 
2002-02-04 01:58:56 PM
Quick1

You're FIRED !
 
2002-02-04 01:59:15 PM
Who submits the crap from Newsmax? Has Drew become some little closet Nazi or such?
 
2002-02-04 02:00:32 PM
(hi my2)
 
2002-02-04 02:00:43 PM
bush a great leader... HAHAHAHA oh boy that one gets me everytime!
 
2002-02-04 02:01:18 PM
Two words..

Who cares?
 
2002-02-04 02:02:23 PM
nexusheli

You gonna volunteer for that job?
 
2002-02-04 02:03:13 PM
You can't fire me, I QUIT!

MrTuffPaws: Drew lets in whatever he thinks might elicit a chuckle from someone. It comes from both sides. I'm sure he's been accused of being too liberal/conservative/anti-semetic/etc. many, many, MANY times before.
 
2002-02-04 02:05:23 PM
thanks mytwocents...
it looks like my efforts were in vain though.
alas, politics have taken over this thread.
 
2002-02-04 02:06:07 PM
He did a great job of taking credit for what the American Economy did for itself. Bill Gates had more to do with the eight years of unprecedented economic growth than Bill Clinton did.

He raised lots of money. No president in history has spent as much time in office raising money as Bill Clinton did. Makes you wonder how he found time for blowjobs.

He embarrassed us better than most presidents. It's not everyone who can say the leader of my country used to be this moral midget who rented out the Whitehouse, tampered with witnesses to save his own skin, sold pardons, and lied to the American public right to their faces then refused to admit it even when caught red handed and instead tried to confuse us with his definition of the word "is"

What a Dickhead!
 
2002-02-04 02:06:20 PM
Hi Vegas....glad to see I'm not invisible anymore.....


OK, I better say something on the subject or else I be in big trouble.....


Um......I agree with BaconFarker....
 
2002-02-04 02:06:56 PM
"Hey, he could have stopped Osama bin Laden but didn't."

Kinda like Bush could have gotten rid of Sadaam but he didn't.
 
2002-02-04 02:06:57 PM
I have, actually. That's how I know I'm riding the middle right, I get complaints from everyone
 
2002-02-04 02:07:48 PM
u all should be thanking your god that a republican is in office during this war on terror. republican's don't back down and aren't afraid to use the strongest military in the world to do what needs to be done. if clinton wasn't so worried about getting his nob wet then maybe things wouldn't have come to this.
 
2002-02-04 02:07:53 PM
Paying for the furniture you stole when leaving the Whitehouse - $8000

Buying your wife a seat in the senate - $20,000,000

Getting booed at the Superbowl - Priceless
 
2002-02-04 02:09:01 PM
I agree Puckhead. And it looked to be a promising thread for while, there, too... I'm afraid it will just now deteriorate into Bush versus Clinton, and there's no winners there.
 
2002-02-04 02:11:09 PM
Ugh. I just can't deal with taking part in this.
 
2002-02-04 02:11:25 PM
http://www.michaelmoore.com/2002_0129.html
 
2002-02-04 02:13:02 PM
clinton sucks
 
2002-02-04 02:13:33 PM
Clinton booed...as well he should be. One of our worst presidents. We're talking Andrew Johnson bad.
 
2002-02-04 02:13:54 PM
republican's don't back down

oh man! the laughs just keep coming!

btw, Mytwocents agrees with me....
 
2002-02-04 02:14:41 PM
Ouro....By far the most entertaining though......
 
2002-02-04 02:15:28 PM
The New York radio talker said one Super Bowl fan who booed Clinton complained, "Hey, he could have stopped Osama bin Laden but didn't."

How can Clinton be responsible? He was only in office for the previous eight years, but Bush was in office at the time of the Sept 11 hijackings. Based upon the narrow and short memories and understandings of many posters here, Bush alone is responsible for the recession, terrorism, AIDS, pigs-flying, the dot-com collapse, Enron, and anything else that comes across the headlines as being bad. Yet, all good things came from the Clinton Adminstration irregardless of when the problems were incubated.

I'm no big fan of the doltish Bush and many of his stupid policies, but at least he doesn't pee down your back and tell you to your face that it's raining like Clinton was apt to do.
 
2002-02-04 02:15:36 PM
Keepmeinformed You are so correct. I'm certaintly glad we had a Republican in office for the past eight years beause our military kicked some major sand attractive and successful African-American ass didn't it?

Hey wait a minute...
 
2002-02-04 02:16:10 PM
Um......I still agree with Puckhead & BaconFarker....
 
2002-02-04 02:16:14 PM
who is clinton?
 
2002-02-04 02:16:47 PM
well that certaintly lost something in translation...

let's try again.

sand n_i_g_g_e_r
 
2002-02-04 02:16:47 PM
Is Clinton still alive?
 
2002-02-04 02:17:44 PM
Big deal, he's booed just about everywhere he goes. This isn't news.
 
2002-02-04 02:18:30 PM
Have you noticed how it drives the left-wingers crazy every time their HERO's crimes and sexual escapades are exposed and criticized? To them Clinton is viewed as equivalent to the Christian hero: Jesus Christ! SO PLEASE quit ridiculing their savior, OK?
 
2002-02-04 02:19:03 PM
Troyf1 Irregardless?

You have no regard for having no regard?
 
2002-02-04 02:21:48 PM
"..like the buttheads who booed Hillary at the NYC benefit..."

Tell that to a cop or a fireman next time you need help.
 
TV
2002-02-04 02:22:30 PM
Paying for the furniture you stole when leaving the Whitehouse - $8000
Buying your wife a seat in the senate - $20,000,000
Getting booed at the Superbowl - Priceless


would it be possible to stop repeatedly using this same stupid farking schtick that you picked up from a credit card commercial. it's not funny, amusing, clever, witty, intelligent, or entertaining. EVER.

same thing with "Got (blank)?". it just isn't funny. try using your farking head to say something, instead of some shiat off of farking television.

oh yeah, clinton, bush, the gubment - they all SARK.
 
2002-02-04 02:22:32 PM
In other news, some Fark morons actually thinks NewsMax is a legitimate news site and post stories from it...
 
2002-02-04 02:26:21 PM
um, i was saying boo-urns..
 
2002-02-04 02:27:03 PM
Here in the UK , Clinton is considered a top bloke,(probably explains why he's here all the time),
as for Bush, ermmm , what can i say that's not been said before ?!
 
2002-02-04 02:28:56 PM
at least he's still popular somewhere. the americans are on to him so i guess he's trying the brits now.
 
2002-02-04 02:29:59 PM
Who submits the crap from Newsmax? Has Drew become some little closet Nazi or such?

Considering that newsmax is a conservative site and nazis were socialists something that all conservatives hate as much as communists what does one have to do with the other?
 
2002-02-04 02:30:29 PM
But I thought the GOP controlled congress and we had a policyh against assassination and that Daddy Bush stopped Saddam cold so we don't need to worry about Iraq or our economy as Bush the kid announces that he plans to raid Social Security and Medicare to finance his huge military budget...perhaps when there is no social security left, the folks who booed Clinton might have second thoughts. His pals who don't need SS won't give a hoot.
 
2002-02-04 02:33:41 PM
Ouroborus: If Clinton was such a bad president, Republicans wouldn't STILL be spending so much time futiley trying to discredit him. End of story.
 
2002-02-04 02:33:49 PM
I booed Nancy Reagan...why didn't Newsmax cover that?
 
2002-02-04 02:34:13 PM
Keepmeinformed: FYI: Both WWI and WWII were fought with Democrats as president. Keep yourself informed...
 
2002-02-04 02:35:51 PM
Mediamademekill- The nazis were totalitarian facists.


I still don't understand why everyone hates Clinton. The guy is very smart charming and a lying pig. But aren't all of our politicans the same way? Hey the economy was good, people were happy and we all had great jobs and made money in the market. So he got a few BJ's on the job. We could only be so lucky. He lied about sex with ugly women, is that so wrong?
 
2002-02-04 02:36:58 PM
When Clinton appeared on the Jumbotron, Harmonia, Goatman, Worldcitizen, and REI were seen cheering wildly while the other 64,000 people in attendance were seen booing.
 
2002-02-04 02:37:01 PM
I was saying "Boo-urns," too...
 
2002-02-04 02:37:13 PM
Sliwa is a sell-out right wing flop who probably got his tickes from the ACLU.
 
2002-02-04 02:37:16 PM
I think it means something that NEWSMAX is an anagram of "W. = MAN SEX"
 
2002-02-04 02:37:19 PM
Where was Ronnie? Has he kicked the bucket yet?
 
2002-02-04 02:37:31 PM
MMMK: How many times do we have to give you a history lesson? Hitler put the name "socialist" in there because it sounded like something to stir the German masses in poverty in the 1920s and 30s. The Fascists are right wing, the Communists are left wing. Also, it is almost impossible to nail Hitler's party down to the contemporary US definitions of socialist/right wing/left wing as the Nazis doctrine contained elements of both extremes. Different times, different meanings behind the labels.
Don't be fooled just because someone dangles something shiny in front of you.
 
2002-02-04 02:37:50 PM
Sliwa is a sell-out right wing flop who probably got his tickes from the Klan. What ever hapened to his "guardian angels"?
 
2002-02-04 02:38:12 PM
Mytwocents,

Will you marry me?

I have a lot to offer.. =)
 
2002-02-04 02:38:45 PM
Wow, according to people on this thread, Clinton accomplished nothing in his 8 years of presidency. Besides getting head. And lying about getting head.

Man, thats a lot of people who voted twice for a horrible president that never did anything other than have sex.
 
2002-02-04 02:39:10 PM
then they should lynch reagan and Bush for giving Osama weapons, money, and training.
 
2002-02-04 02:39:14 PM
Hard to believe, but true. There remain cretins who still attempt to defend that indefensible piece of bastard scum from Arkansas.
 
2002-02-04 02:41:42 PM
Considering that newsmax is a conservative site and nazis were socialists something that all conservatives hate as much as communists what does one have to do with the other?



the nazis were teh NSDAP. National Socialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei. they ephasized the "National German Party" for the right wingers, and emphasized the "Socialist Workers Party" for the left wingers. In actual practice, the nazis were way way right-wing. rhetoric just lent them appeal to more moderates and left wing people (a la "compassionate conservative").

 
2002-02-04 02:42:23 PM
glen

i'm well aware of that thanks. and i'll take them both over clinton anyday.
 
2002-02-04 02:42:28 PM
Have you noticed how it drives the left-wingers crazy every time their HERO's crimes and sexual escapades are exposed and criticized? To them Clinton is viewed as equivalent to the Christian hero: Jesus Christ! SO PLEASE quit ridiculing their savior, OK?

I've noticed the same thing with right-wingers and Ronald Reagan. And, lately, George W. Bush. There are quite a few people who think he's the best president we've ever had.

 
2002-02-04 02:42:41 PM
I consider this pretty farking obvious. Think about it, it's a crowd of fat, middle-aged (well... mostly), balding white Americans (a generalization I admit) in the deep south... do you think they would hoot and holler for a Democratic president whom the Republicans probably hate more than anyone else?
 
2002-02-04 02:42:52 PM
Oh come on, was no one else disgusted by the deep drippings of patriotic propoganda spewed forth at the Superbowl? It's a farking football game for Christ's sakes. Football players reading the Declaration of Independence was just a little much. Of course, it was probably the only history lesson half the people watching the game have had since 8th grade.
I was just as outraged by September the 11th as the next guy, but do we really need all of this shiat spoon fed to us day after day all the while they are telling us how evil "they" are in every other sentence? I mean, ALL Americans aren't 5 year-olds, are they?
 
2002-02-04 02:45:16 PM
"Here in the UK , Clinton is considered a top bloke..." Yeah, well you folks also think that boiled beef and warm beer is high cuisine.
 
2002-02-04 02:46:47 PM
"...was no one else disgusted by the deep drippings of patriotic propoganda..." Ummmmm....no
 
2002-02-04 02:47:26 PM
"Here in the UK , Clinton is considered a top bloke..."

I think that's pretty much the sentiment world wide minus the angry white men of America (and some soccer moms).
 
2002-02-04 02:48:02 PM
The funny thing about Clinton vs. Bush II is that when clinton was pres the GOP issues a subpoena for just about every file he ever had. They even made his SS agents testify about monica. Now whitwater was worth $300,000. Enron is a $50 Billion dollar scandal and the VP will not turn over records to preserve the ability of the executive office to receive candid advice. Now that is a some serious horse shiat. If they are so concerned about the protecting the power of presidency where were they back then. Oh ya they were leading the charge against him.
 
2002-02-04 02:48:08 PM
WorldCitizen: "I mean, ALL Americans aren't 5 year-olds, are they? "

No, of course not. Just the president.
 
2002-02-04 02:48:51 PM
SnipDaddyDad: who is clinton?

This dude. Give up the funk.
 
zkm
2002-02-04 02:49:14 PM
So pretzel jokes about Bush = funny. Public mocking of former president Clinton = juvenille.

Hypocrasy anyone?
 
2002-02-04 02:49:36 PM
I was there. He wasn't booed!!! This is bullshiat.

Also, I AGREE ABOUT THAT PRE-GAME CRAP!! WHAT THE fark WAS THAT?
I thought, cool, the guy next to me has a tv and a dish on a paint can, let's see the awesome pre-game analysis. Nope, I get the farking Declaration of Independence as read by Ray Lewis.
 
2002-02-04 02:49:51 PM
"...the sentiment world wide...." World-wide does not matter. World-wide did not elect him.....but I do think that the Chinese money -- and also the money from the Lippo Group -- did help.
 
2002-02-04 02:51:38 PM
TheTick: Those in glass houses...
 
2002-02-04 02:51:40 PM
Does anyone doubt that tardboy bush isn't even smart enough to remember to chew and swallow?

Which is exactly why the republicans picked him as their mindless puppet instead of someone with a brain like McCain who wouldn't fark over the country by handing it over to whatever companies are the highest bidders.
 
2002-02-04 02:54:12 PM
"..will not turn over records to preserve the ability of the executive office to receive candid advice. Now that is a some serious horse shiat."

Actually, it is more along the lines of the "separation of powers." If Congress wants documentaion, then Congress should issue the subpoena directly. A creation of Congress -- the GAO -- should not have oversite authority vis-a-vis the Executive branch. The Founders were very clear on this matter.
 
2002-02-04 02:54:13 PM
Bad_CRC: Yes, McCain was a far superior candidate than Dubya. Maybe if he changes his name to Ronald Reagan II, that will be sufficient to get the dumbasses to nominate him next time.
 
2002-02-04 02:56:18 PM
"but I do think that the Chinese money"

Clinton Conspiracy Theory Number 28
Aluminum hats also help protect against Red Chinese mind control satellites (the technology for which, obviously, was sold to them by Clinton).
 
2002-02-04 02:56:52 PM
"Those who live in glass houses.." What has that got to do with the world's opinion of a disgraced US President?

McCain....he was cool until he adopted a policy stance that was nothing more than: "I'm John McCain, and it is all about me!"
 
TV
2002-02-04 02:56:58 PM
Bad_CRC, do you really think that McCain would have been the docile little stooge that bush is? i think your answer lies somewhere in there.
 
2002-02-04 02:57:30 PM
so MyTwoCents, what happened to you? I missed that story.
 
2002-02-04 02:59:07 PM
No McCain has a brain, and actually some principles (rare for a republican, probably why they have night mares 5X the amount of the normal population)

Bush has nothing to offer but a coke habit and a famous daddy.

Their real motivation for who they chose is obvious to even the most brain-dead republican stooge.
 
2002-02-04 02:59:10 PM
The powers that be (corporations/money) don't want McCain in power because McCain can and does think for himself. My God, he wants to their influence at least in half with campaign finance reform. Do you really think they're going to go for that? After spending 5 years in a POW camp, I don't think McCain can be very easily bought out. To bad for him, because he'll never be president for it.
 
2002-02-04 02:59:54 PM
TheTick: "What has that got to do with the world's opinion of a disgraced US President?"

Funny, I thought you just stated that the world's opinion did not matter? But since it apparently does now (thanks!!!), he's not disgraced in world opinion.
 
2002-02-04 03:00:29 PM
"wants to CUT their influence in half"
 
2002-02-04 03:01:05 PM
I love the smell of a troll thread early in the morning.


oh wait, it's 2pm.
 
2002-02-04 03:01:32 PM
The Tick -
"Boiled beef" - who in the UK eats boiled beef ?
Besides , American cuisine isn't exactly much to be proud of!
 
2002-02-04 03:02:05 PM
Of course Clinton is more beloved worldwide. He kissed everyone's ass except the people within the country he was elected in.


TV.
Got Clinton?
(had to be said)
 
2002-02-04 03:02:30 PM
Newsmax links are my favorite now. I love how the Harmonias/Reis/Goatmen and their ilk bash conservatives for "questioning the source" all the time, and then the minute a Newsmax link is posted it's all "They have no credibility! Vast right-wing conspiracy! Newsmax sucks!" yadda yadda ad nauseaum.

Clinton got booed because he was a BAD PRESIDENT. There's no conspiracy here. Get over it.
 
2002-02-04 03:02:33 PM
Osama killed around 600 Americans while Clinton was in office. Blew the hole in our ship, Clinton did nothing. The American Embassies - he tossed a bomb at an empty tent, and declared victory on an aspirin factory (killed innocent people doing this).
Osama was on the terrorist list, we knew what he was up to, but Bill was too busy playing politics, taking illegal money from the Chinese military, and getting serviced by a 23 year old.
That is why Clinton got booed, a$$heads.
 
2002-02-04 03:03:21 PM
Irregardless isn't a word! Regardless of your opinion of the word! Clinton was a better president than R.R ever was.
 
2002-02-04 03:04:05 PM
"Clinton Conspiracy Theory Number 28...." Not quite, money was funneled thru the Lippo Group (who "sweetened the pot" with some of their own cash)....not a "conspiracy theory" if you can prove it! Read up on the Congressional testimony of Johnny Huang....read the Cox report....
 
2002-02-04 03:04:12 PM
Where weere the founders clear about any of the things going on now? The GAO is not in the consistution. Either is the IRS, FDA, FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, SS, INS, CCC, TVA, DOE, HHS. It is hard to imply founders intent when the situation is completely different. I agree that the congress should subpoena the records, but they are afraid of reprisals from their own party. If the US eneergy policy was altered to help out a single company we should know. Separation of powers that is pretty funny considering Bush is the president only becuase of the supreme court.
 
2002-02-04 03:05:32 PM
sheeper bowl
 
2002-02-04 03:05:53 PM
Plus 'Black Hawk Down' was Clinton's Bay of Pigs (also Osama).
 
TV
2002-02-04 03:06:15 PM
how long until the "it was fixed so the 'patriots' would win" conspiracies start hitting the net. (am i too late).
 
2002-02-04 03:06:41 PM
"He embarrassed us better than most presidents. It's not everyone who can say the leader of my country used to be this moral midget who rented out the Whitehouse, tampered with witnesses to save his own skin, sold pardons, and lied to the American public right to their faces then refused to admit it even when caught red handed and instead tried to confuse us with his definition of the word "is" "

Why does the name Dick Nixon come to my mind? And, if we had the type of media system we have now, back in the 60's, LBJ and Kennedy would make Clinton look like a choir boy. Of course, Marilyn was better looking and probably swallowed.
 
2002-02-04 03:07:54 PM
If Clinton would have tried to go full blown after Al Qaeda the Republicans would have started screaming "Wag the Dog" as they did after every military action Clinton took. Do you think he would have gotten the same resolution passed that Bush did after 9/11? And let us not forget, Bush was in office for 8 months before the terrorist attack on the United States. In that time, what did he do to stop Al Qaeda? He had just given the Taliban millions of dollars earlier in the year. Let's face it, the American people had no will power to do what was necessary to take care of the terrorists until after we were hit and we were hit big. No president (Bush I, Clinton, or Bush II) had the support needed to do this until after it came crashing down on our heads.
 
2002-02-04 03:08:08 PM
Fishbowl Too bad we'll never know what happened, since so many left the country to avoid the investigation that puppet Reno refused to do, anyway.
 
2002-02-04 03:08:19 PM
"Clinton was a better president than R.R ever was." RR won the Cold War. Clinton got a BJ from a dumpy intern. On the scale of global events....

...never mind, it is obviously beyond your capacity for understanding.

"Separation of powers that is pretty funny considering Bush is the president only becuase of the supreme court." And by every other subsequent re-counting of the ballots.
 
2002-02-04 03:10:42 PM
You're right. Clinton was a bad president. Bush 2 is way better! I was sick of not having a budget deficit and that farking stupid Kyoto agreement.

Bush=War+Recession. Get over it. Also, Bush=one term president.

Osama killed around 600 Americans while Clinton was in office. Blew the hole in our ship, Clinton did nothing.

600?! Really. By himself?? He's strong.
 
2002-02-04 03:10:43 PM
WorldCitizen Clinton was criticized for not doing enough after the Embassy bombings - not for doing too much.
 
2002-02-04 03:10:50 PM
"Osama killed around 600 Americans while Clinton was in office. Blew the hole in our ship, Clinton did nothing."

-Umm... he killed around a dozen American's (and a few hundred Africans - but American's don't care about them) in each embassy bombing, 20 from the USS Cole. The question you have to ask yourself is that would American's have supported a war to such scale against terrorists then. I think the answer would be no, at the time I don't recall resounding preasure from the American public to do something, to strike out. You were all just happy to sit there, knowing that as long as you stay out of those "iffy" countries the CIA and FBI and NSA will keep you safe.
 
2002-02-04 03:13:14 PM
Yamprico- What? I didn't follow that.


Look, the idea that a Democrat is less corrupt then a GOP memeber is crap. They are all bought and paid for by big money interests, domestic or foriegn.
 
2002-02-04 03:13:46 PM
Speaking of presidents who should be booed.
 
2002-02-04 03:13:50 PM
The 600 figure comes from a report I read that spans from the Somalia disaster and up to the end of BJ Clinton's term. It was compiled from all of the terrorist activities Osama was thought to have done against Americans.
 
2002-02-04 03:14:18 PM
 
2002-02-04 03:15:20 PM
Tick: Explain something to me. How is the demand to turn over the notes any different than the situation with the Health Care policy meeting of 1990. To refresh your memory, Hillary Clinton, who was put in charge to head the policy planning met secretly with members of the health care industry. Republicans were outraged and demanded the notes be turned over. Which the Clinton administration did.
 
2002-02-04 03:15:49 PM
This thread has grown tiresome.

Now is the time on Fark when we dance.

 
2002-02-04 03:18:36 PM
"I was sick of not having a budget deficit and that farking stupid Kyoto agreement."

Clinton never sent the Kyoto agreement to the Congress. Why not...because it would never have been ratified! It was to easy for Clinton to just stall and leave it to "the next guy." (He did the same thing with missle defense.)

As for deficits, Clinton was lucky to have been President during an expansion -- he came into office at the time of recovery and left office at the time of decline. Again, "the next guy" has to take care of this issue...Clinton never had to face it.
 
2002-02-04 03:19:07 PM
"Clinton got a BJ from a dumpy intern. On the scale of global events...."

Clinton's foreign policy was no where near as glamorous as defeating an "Evil Empire". There were no major battles. No major obvious defeats or victories. The funny thing is, the world changed completely largely under the Clinton Administration's guidance, yet almost no one noticed. Have you ever heard of a little thing called globalization? Did you not notice the US exporting its capitalist system under Clinton trade policy during the entirety of the 1990's--making it the world standard under his term? Did that entirely slip by you there, Tick, or was that beyond your capacity for understanding? The Republicans love to bash Clinton as a left-winger, yet he was the most prominent proponent of global capitalism during the first 10 years of post-Cold War globalization. And it just seemed to slip right by all. The funny thing was, it was the Republicans who robbed him of his ability to promote the ultimate capitalism (global free trade is more raw capitalism than protectionism) by robbing him of his Fast Track negotiating abilities (against the wishes of former president's, including Bush I).
 
2002-02-04 03:20:59 PM
Both are politicians..both lie out their ass..both cater to the middle....both are close to being the same party...neither give a fark about your stupid ass..both cater to illegal immigrants cuz they vote, we in California are now going to have to pay for illegals college education and pay for heart transplants for felons in prison....
Hey america...get the lube cuz we're getting farked as usual, while dumbasses argue on line who is more corrupt and didn't vote I'm sure.
 
2002-02-04 03:21:18 PM
Tostfeld, my memory is fine, but you should remember that Hillary Clinton was not an elected official.
 
2002-02-04 03:21:42 PM
Fark bush and clinton, we need McCain. Hey wouldn't be taking no sh*t from any terrorist, the guy spent two years in tiger cage in 'nam. No terrorist in their right mind would dare attack the US with a crazy bastard like McCain in office. And why do people care if Clinton got head in the oval office, we should be praising him for that. Have you seen who he's married to? Poor guy needed head just cope to being married to Hilary.
 
2002-02-04 03:21:44 PM
Reagan bankrupted the country, you are still paying for his debts.

too bad the democrats are always such pussies and only want to run the country instead of spending all their efforts bringing the country down like the republicans.
 
2002-02-04 03:21:57 PM
Things to expect in this type of thread:

a) People agreeing with other people and letting others know. (Yet you can never find the first person the people agreed with posts)

b) conservative bashing

b) liberal bashing

c) other poplitical party bashing (like see how i didnt mention them by name?!?!?)

d) monkey bashing (pro: they are so cute, con: they throw feces)

e) corrupt economic stimulus idea expansion (since we don't know what that means, neighter do the monkeys who said they heard it from somebody else earlier in the thread)

f) people saying hi to drew (hi drew!)

g) and occasionally a post like this of someone sitting back and enjoying the ride... yee-haw

:-)
 
2002-02-04 03:22:14 PM
Hartfrog: I voted in every election since I was 18, so there.
 
2002-02-04 03:25:51 PM
(He did the same thing with missle defense.)

Thank god. It's a big farking waste of money (that, by no coincidence, would go into the pockets of defense contractors who heavily finance Bush and the GOP). Try shooting a bullet with another bullet sometime.
 
TV
2002-02-04 03:27:04 PM
Tick Brief view of terroism under Reagan. There were no reprisals for any of these events, until the 'pin-prick' strike against Qaddafi.

October 1983, another Hizbullah suicide bomber blew up an American barracks in the Beirut airport, killing 241 U.S. marines in
their sleep and wounding another 81

In September 1984, six months after the murder of Buckley, the U.S. embassy annex near Beirut was hit by yet another truck bomb

In December 1984, a Kuwaiti airliner was hijacked and two American passengers
employed by the U.S. Agency for International Development were murdered.

The following June, Hizbullah operatives hijacked still another airliner, an American one (TWA flight 847), and then forced it to fly to Beirut, where
it was held for more than two weeks.

In October 1985, the Achille Lauro, an Italian cruise ship, was hijacked by a group under the leadership of the PLO's
Abu Abbas, working with the support of Libya. One of the hijackers threw an elderly wheelchair-bound American passenger, Leon Klinghoffer,
overboard.

In December 1985, five Americans were among the twenty people killed when the Rome and Vienna airports
were bombed, and then in April 1986 another bomb exploded in a discotheque in West Berlin that was a hang-out for American servicemen.
 
2002-02-04 03:28:06 PM
WorldCitizen: You know what I mean....
We should start in independant Fark party and vote on-line.
This 2 party system sucks ass.
 
2002-02-04 03:29:58 PM
Hartfrog: I know. :)
I don't think there could be one Fark Party. Farkistan is a pretty farking partisan place.
 
2002-02-04 03:30:31 PM
Everybody says Reagan sucked, Bush 1 sucked, Clinton sucked, and Bush 2 sucks.

Wake up and smell the coffee, it is not the leaders' fault, it is very obvious:

The United States sucks.

snip ducks and runs....
 
2002-02-04 03:32:17 PM
Bad CRC

Congratulations! That is twenty-five consecutive posts without saying anything remotely resembling the truth. One would have thought that you might have inadvertently said something that had some basis in fact - but you have assiduously avoided it.

Worldcitizen

That would be in 2000, right?
 
2002-02-04 03:35:15 PM
Yeah, I am familiar with the terrorist incidents during Regan's term. He should have taken care of business then...but, I take it that you do not disagree that he did win the Cold War?

SDD....oh, what the heck -- you run to fast.
 
2002-02-04 03:35:56 PM
why do people think Clinton embarrassed us? We embarrassed ourselves. The rest of the world collectively sat back and said "what's the big f'n deal?"

I like how people speak for the world at large yet have never been out of their own backyard.
 
2002-02-04 03:36:49 PM
Hey SnipDaddyFag,
Then move out of Georgia to another country you stupid cracker. You forgot Carter sucked too. But none of them sucked as bad as living in Isreal, or France for that matter. Eat a peach and suck it.
 
2002-02-04 03:37:36 PM
This just in:

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush sent Congress a $2.13 trillion budget Monday that would provide billions of dollars in new spending for the war on terrorism and homeland security while squeezing money from scores of other programs such as highway and environmental projects.

big farking surprise!
 
2002-02-04 03:37:45 PM
Where the heck is Rei? She could put up more of a fight than all of the lefties/blame-America-first(ers) on this thread combined.

Plus, it was awfully fun to watch her throw a hissy fit!
 
2002-02-04 03:38:28 PM
HappyDaddy: No, actually that would be 1992. I even voted for Bush I in the primary, but sometime between spring and fall I gained some life experience.
Just old enough to know a little shiat without being old enough to sell out to comfort and apathy (although it will probably happen--seems to happen to the best of them).
 
2002-02-04 03:39:23 PM
hook, line, and sinker
 
2002-02-04 03:39:54 PM
"I like how people speak for the world at large yet have never been out of their own backyard."

Amen
 
2002-02-04 03:40:45 PM
Dont believe anything you see from TV
 
2002-02-04 03:43:14 PM
These ARE football fans we're talking about here...
 
2002-02-04 03:44:44 PM
How odd that Republicans acted rude and ignorant.
Oh, that's their defining characteristic? Sorry.

Clinton could have stopped bin Laden? It seems to me that we have all of our resources focused
on bin Laden and still can't get him.
 
2002-02-04 03:45:58 PM
Once again, Chemmie, you have proven you're a moron. Everyone should believe everything they see on TV.
 
2002-02-04 03:46:26 PM
i LOVE that argument... okay so lets say Clinton didnt do shiat about Osama, why arent we blaming Bush for not doing shiat for the first 8 months of his presidency?
 
2002-02-04 03:47:16 PM
NEWSMAX is a total joke.
 
2002-02-04 03:47:47 PM
Both Clinton's should be booed and often. They suck hard! Also-If Hillary runs for president-she will be assassinated
 
2002-02-04 03:48:35 PM
"why arent we blaming Bush for not doing shiat for the first 8 months of his presidency?"

His approval rating is 85%. You're not allowed to point that out as it might startle the sheep.
 
2002-02-04 03:48:56 PM
You willy SnipTroll-e-troll...
you got me...i thought I had learned by now...must be the hang over.
 
2002-02-04 03:49:55 PM
Is that a threat, Ryan?
 
2002-02-04 03:51:19 PM
Cuz if Bush had done something in the first 8 months he would have had to hear your flappin lips crying about how its not fair or not nice or not PC or something else. Its PC ideals that got us in the shiat we are in.
 
2002-02-04 03:51:33 PM
ooooo Ryanmac72 thats cutting it close. please inform us if the s.s. comes knocking soon to butt rape you.
 
2002-02-04 03:51:48 PM
"Also-If Hillary runs for president-she will be assassinated"

I think the SS knocks on your door for less than that.
 
2002-02-04 03:52:37 PM
I really don't give two shiats about petty political bickering, but NewsMax really reeks of petty schoolgirl bullshiat. Writing an article about how someone was booed? No wonder nobody takes them seriously.
 
2002-02-04 03:53:18 PM
"I like how people speak for the world at large yet have never been out of their own backyard."

Actually, I am allowed to walk down to the corner once-in-awhile...but only as long as I do not cross the street.
 
2002-02-04 03:53:50 PM
Former President Clinton got boo-ed at the SuperBowl. Big deal. People that watch football do not represent the intellectual elite of the country. They only represent the people that actually do the work. If former President Clinton went to speak to a convention of differently abled, cross-dressing. vegitarian professors from Harvard, he would get a standing ovation. In the end, isn't that what counts?
 
2002-02-04 03:54:26 PM
Yikes...Ryan, testing boundries is one thing, but...well tell em to use the KY when they come.
 
2002-02-04 03:56:57 PM
Yes Toupsie...that is what counts. Spoiled college kids and people who have locked themselves behind ivy covered walls know whats best for a communal country.
 
2002-02-04 03:57:39 PM
"Cuz if Bush had done something in the first 8 months he would have had to hear your flappin lips crying about how its not fair or not nice or not PC or something else."

Yeah, right. Keep telling yourself that. He didn't do anything because there was not the political will to do so. Republicans were turning isolationist and wanting to pull all of the troops home and stop being the world policeman. If Clinton acted he was just trying to distract you from his blowjobs. No, Clinton didn't do anything because, again, there was not the political will to do so in the nation. Most of the attacks were in far off lands that Americans are very much detatched from--even if it involved Americans. That, and besides the embassies (which were diplomatic outposts of the US), large amounts of the previous attacks were against American military. Like it or not, when your military is deployed around the world, it's going to take some hits. This was the first large scale successful foreign attack on American civilians on American soil. It was a whole new ballgame that everyone in the know knew was coming, just not when, where and exactly how. Americans have always been good at hiding their heads in the sand until it's too late when it comes to the rest of the world (see WWII).
 
2002-02-04 03:58:48 PM
Hartfrog

... a communal country. WTF is that supposed to mean?
 
2002-02-04 03:59:59 PM
How is the demand to turn over the notes any different than the situation with the Health Care policy meeting of 1990. To refresh your memory, Hillary Clinton, who was put in charge to head the policy planning met secretly with members of the health care industry. Republicans were outraged and demanded the notes be turned over. Which the Clinton administration did.

The Vice President is a Constitutional officer. The first lady is not.
 
2002-02-04 04:00:21 PM
Your right WorldCitizen. I'm just kinda hung over and am not as smart as you.
 
2002-02-04 04:00:21 PM
"WTF is that supposed to mean?"

He's trying to call all of the educated communists. It happens here a lot.
 
2002-02-04 04:01:33 PM
WorldCitizen- you were not alone in your discomfort at the patriotic propaganda displays. It was just over the top. I wondered myself if the producers had pulled the old (I know I am going to mangle the spelling here) Rebinshtall Nazi propaganda films for inspiration. The little kids in military uniforms and grown up professional outfits got me the most.

Though on the other hand, I appreciated U2s performance because they were the only one's to remind us of the actual REASON for the war going on and the compulsary plastic displays of patriotism.
 
2002-02-04 04:02:04 PM
Hartfrog: I wish I was hung over, if it means anything to ya.
 
2002-02-04 04:02:11 PM
Not surprised. Most people dislike Clinton. He had a 15-20% personal approval rating when he left office.

People respect leaders, but Clinton was never a leader, he was just a puppet of the polls.

Bush is a leader. He pushes the country into doing the right things, not becuase it is politically popular for him, but because it is best thing for the country.

This article is probably why they had Bush Sr. do the coin toss and not ex-president Clinton. They knew he was not popular and would get boooed in front of the whole world.
 
2002-02-04 04:02:24 PM
Hassen Bin Sober - So if Bush would have used a former Haliburton exec who was not a consitutional officer do yo think that they would turn over the records?
 
2002-02-04 04:02:34 PM
I'm very educated and have the student loan payments to prove it. Don't freak out. But if the shoe fits....
 
2002-02-04 04:03:15 PM
Sorry to seem like I was making a threat about Hellary. I just know that there will be some pissed off people when she runs for Pres..
 
2002-02-04 04:05:17 PM
Ryan -- Just so you know a farker in the past made a comment about GWB and the Secret Service found him and interviewed him about it. I am pretty sure you can say she is a bull dike les , but you cannot threaten her life.
 
2002-02-04 04:06:13 PM
Bush is a leader. He pushes the country into doing the right things, not becuase it is politically popular for him, but because it is best thing for the country.

hahahahaha man and here i was thinking the jokes had ended... good one!
 
2002-02-04 04:07:13 PM
Working-class Republicans - We're Conservative and we don't know why. We just should be.
 
2002-02-04 04:09:42 PM
Fishbowl - "Hassen Bin Sober - So if Bush would have used a former Haliburton exec who was not a consitutional officer do yo think that they would turn over the records?"

The honest answer is I can't say. Your honest reply should be "Neither can I"
 
2002-02-04 04:10:00 PM
Drew...
Bring on some boobies..this is going nowhere
 
2002-02-04 04:12:45 PM
Fishbowl-I didn't. Read what I wrote. Its a prediction.
 
2002-02-04 04:15:50 PM
IMPEACH BUSH!!! Throw him out before he "enronizes" our whole economy!
 
2002-02-04 04:16:03 PM
Ryan: You might have meant it as a prediction, but it could be interpreted as a threat. Not that I believe you're actually out to kill Hilary, but the SS takes that shiat pretty damn seriously. A friend of this guy on my campus got into his email and played a practical joke on him by emailing a death threat. The SS was at his door less than 3 hours later.
 
2002-02-04 04:17:43 PM
I hate Bush and Reagan, but I wouldnt boo them at a football game. Clinton haters have no class.
 
2002-02-04 04:19:08 PM
Ich bin ein Enroner!

Bush is a bee-yotch, Clinton ruled.
 
2002-02-04 04:20:17 PM
Belch
 
2002-02-04 04:20:31 PM
Neither can I.


Ryan- I read what you wrote, simply trying to help out with a little warning. It seems that keywords ring little bells at some FBI, NSA, or SS office.
 
2002-02-04 04:20:34 PM
SnitDoodyDad: not everyone missed your little insult. No mention of YOUR country of origin, numbnuts. Get bent.
 
2002-02-04 04:20:43 PM
Bill Clinton makes me as sick as the next guy but booing any President is asinine.
 
2002-02-04 04:22:31 PM
Nice profile pic Ryanmac72

I "predict" that you are going to be anally raped by a chainsaw. Your guts spewing on the white walls of your apartment. Your bowel stentch mixing with old cigar stink making your landlord vomit repeatedly while he cleans your body parts from the bookshelves.

Hey, just a prediction.
 
2002-02-04 04:24:09 PM
pigfarker

the jokes ended when clinton left office. but it was a hysterical 8 years. we had to laugh to hide our embarrassement.
 
2002-02-04 04:26:05 PM
"but booing any President is asinine."

This is very true. A touch of class is a good thing...yet again, it was at a football game. Bud Lite, hotdogs and guys smashing into each other does not necessarily reek of class.
 
2002-02-04 04:28:52 PM
Joseppi7- totaly right on. I can't stand Bush, but he is the President and should be show that respect. I can't believe the conservtives who will try to shove their 'morarlity' down your throat until the cows come home, can excuse and even encourage this sort of disrespectful behavior.
 
2002-02-04 04:29:31 PM
02-04-02 02:29:59 PM MediaMadeMeKill
Who submits the crap from Newsmax? Has Drew become some little closet Nazi or such?

Considering that newsmax is a conservative site and nazis were socialists something that all conservatives hate as much as communists what does one have to do with the other?


Sorry, but wrong.
After reading this post, I just felt I had to answe right away.

Communism is the 'left-wing' idea taken to its extreme.
Facism and Nazism are 'right-wing' ideas taken to the extreme. Try to get your facts right.

-------
Wasn't the SuperBowl taking place in HicksVille USA? I don't know, but there's someting odd in the drinking water of some of those southern states.....
 
2002-02-04 04:29:46 PM
That evil, evil man was SMOKING boo.
 
2002-02-04 04:31:16 PM
I know this is a late response but,

Freddiemiles1: Everybody says missle defence is impossible, ie. Try hitting a bullet with a bullet.

Has everyone forgotten the Patriot missles of the Gulf war? They had a huge success rate in knocking down those scuds! Granted, 1 scud hit a barracks (Marine mail, I believe), but that sucker was fired on too late and hit, by 2 different Patriot batteries that thought the other one was gonna fire.
 
2002-02-04 04:33:01 PM
er actually most of the patriot data turned out to be a bunch of crap. Patriot isnt that good. When they fired tham at OBL in Afghanistan some of them didn't even hit the right country. If they work they are super accurate, but a lot of the time they just go wildly amock.
 
2002-02-04 04:33:12 PM
Cocheese- The patriot hit rate was something like 30%. Plus all it did was knock it off course where it would explode on some poor sap's house. It really didn't destroy the missile.
 
2002-02-04 04:34:02 PM
FuzzyMonkey - "WorldCitizen- you were not alone in your discomfort at the patriotic propaganda displays."

Consider this Fuzzy. Perhaps you have been conditioned to think patriotism is vulgar, just not cool, facist.. what ever. Perhaps the people taking part in the "patriotic propaganda displays" sincerely are patriotic and believed in the message they were putting out. Perhaps, just perhaps, what they were doing was real and your reaction to it is the product of your constant exposure to another kind of propaganda. The kind that say's America is always in the wrong and patriotism is the blinder it's citizens ware to ignore that fact. Much like the blinders you ware so that you can believe that Hillary Clinton is not a selfserving carpet-bagger and she really cares about the citizens of New York as much as her own political career.
 
2002-02-04 04:34:28 PM
Tigger- You mean tomahawk, not patriot.
 
2002-02-04 04:35:15 PM
FuzzyMonkey - "WorldCitizen- you were not alone in your discomfort at the patriotic propaganda displays."

Consider this Fuzzy. Perhaps you have been conditioned to think patriotism is vulgar, just not cool, fascist.. whatever. Perhaps the people taking part in the "patriotic propaganda displays" sincerely are patriotic and believed in the message they were putting out. Perhaps, just perhaps, what they were doing was real and your reaction to it is the product of your constant exposure to another kind of propaganda. The kind that say's America is always in the wrong and patriotism is the blinder its citizens ware to ignore that fact. Much like the blinders you ware so that you can believe that Hillary Clinton is not a self-serving carpet-bagger and she really cares about the citizens of New York as much as her own political career.
 
2002-02-04 04:35:24 PM
fark - gotta my nutcases confused - I meant hussein's and kuwait, darnit
 
2002-02-04 04:35:49 PM
Drew Curtis a NAZI!?!?

NO WAY.

A socialist, maybe. =)
 
2002-02-04 04:36:04 PM
The New York radio talker said one Super Bowl fan who booed Clinton complained, "Hey, he could have stopped Osama bin Laden but didn't."


Just like Bush could have, but now he is shifting focus away from him to persue other countries (possibly because he can't find him, himself? Democrat, Republican, or other: it is a biatch to find one person who was trained NOT to be found. By one of the world leaders, no less).

I'm disgusted at this (the booing): Clinton could have had Laden, but he would've violated INTERNATIONAL LAWS. This was during his impeachment trial, which made any attempt at catching bin Laden or fighting off enemies seem like something to divert attention from the trial.

In 2004 these people better remember that it wasn't only Clinton who let bin Laden get away. Carbet bombing a country and throwing out a government was not what Americans wanted in the form of revenge -- they wanted bin Laden brought to justice. Now it seems he has escaped (again, he was trained by us to survive -- he isn't the typical fundamentalist: he can develop tactics and long term plans.).

It is for these reasons that I cannot critize Bush for not catching him. It should be for these reasons that you people not critize Clinton for it (contrary to popular belief, he almost did catch him -- and whenever he moved to attack a location, it was not a vast leftwing conspiracy to draw attention away from personal matters)
 
2002-02-04 04:36:25 PM
Sorry, double post. Damb this friggin things warped.
 
2002-02-04 04:38:51 PM
So the hit rate was 30% by your numbers. Fire 4 of them then. Rate now jumps to 100%. But noone can argue that hitting a bullet with a bullet does not work. It's been proven it does.

You are right about the Patriots not destroying the payload though. But in the Middle East, it was all desert, so there was <1% chance it was going to hit anything of value if caught in mid-flight.
 
2002-02-04 04:40:54 PM
cocheeze rate does not jump to 100%. if you toss a coin you get a fifty % hit rate on a head. If you toss it twice you don't get a one hundred percent hit rate.
 
2002-02-04 04:43:01 PM
Tigger: OK, whatever. I'm just saying it's been proven that missle defense works. Technology can fine-tune the success rate. But the simple fact is-it works.
 
2002-02-04 04:46:02 PM
WorldCitizen:
How many people watched the SuperBowl? I guess they are all a bunch of classless people to you. Did you watch it? Seeing as how it costs big $$ to go to that game, I don't think this was the beer swilling, beer belly, work for a union game that some people here seemed to have sterotyped in there stupid prejudicial minds. This seems to be the mark of a true democrat. If somebody does something you don't like just bash them and put them down. I guess people who watch soccer games are all hoodlums. Isn't that the same type of stupid fan sterotype?
 
2002-02-04 04:46:09 PM
Cocheeze, brilliant logic! (sarcasm) No wonder you are confused, you never had Math 101 did you?
;)
Oh, and how has it "been proven" that SDI works? IT hasn't, and you are full of it...
 
2002-02-04 04:46:41 PM
Capigula- I'm a patriot and don't think there is anything wrong with displays of patriotism at such events. I am happy to stand up with all American's and hold my hand over my heart while the national anthem plays. I don't think patriotism is vulgar (being liberal does not equal being unpatriotic, despite what some might say) but I do think dressing little kids up in military garb and having women dressed as the statue of liberty goosestep around a stadium is vulgar IMO.
 
2002-02-04 04:47:39 PM
"Consider this Fuzzy. Perhaps you have been conditioned to think patriotism is vulgar, just not cool, fascist.. whatever. Perhaps the people taking part in the 'patriotic propaganda displays' sincerely are patriotic and believed in the message they were putting out. Perhaps, just perhaps, what they were doing was real and your reaction to it is the product of your constant exposure to another kind of propaganda."

Why is it that the only other countries I know of that have such public displays of patriotism are dictatorships...the PRC for a great example. They constantly feel the need to spew forth how great China is. North Korea feels the need to constantly remind its people how great of a nation it is and how great its leader is. The former Soviet Union encouraged extraordinary patriotism.
None of our developed civilized peers--Canada, Australia, Britain, Japan, Germany act this way. The only ones that seem to act as patriotic as we are are the ones that don't seem to want to look at themselves critically and introspectively. They all say they are number one because to do otherwise would be to admit that they are not always right. One can love one's country without being blindly patriotic toward it. In fact, personally, I believe if you really love your country you are constantly there to fight to correct its flaws, not cover them up under a red, white and blue banner while distracting your eyes from it with fireworks.
 
2002-02-04 04:48:17 PM
We'll see how much people like missile defence when the unemployment figures for 2004 come out.

Besides not working, it'll help tank Bush's "voodoo economy".

Or should I say Enronomy.

Job training is always the first program to go.
 
2002-02-04 04:48:45 PM
the simple fact is that neither you or I know very much about it; however the overwhelming weight of scientific opinion is that it will take a very very long time to even get close. It could of course be the case that scientists tend to be left-wing anti-bush nuts, but I doubt it. The problem is not that it cannot be done. ALL defence spending comes down to not whether it can or can't be done, but whether it is worth spending on it given the benefit, the likelihood of the neutralised threat actually occurring, and the opportunity cost of other defence applications that can now no longer be developed. It just seems I think to a lot of people that, while it might be nice to have a MDS, it will be exorbitantly expensive, take forever to develop and not be appropriate defence spending, because OBL types are not likely to use long range ICBM's and they are more of a threat than governments.
 
2002-02-04 04:49:06 PM
“goosestep” FuzzyMonkey? Exaggerations merely serve to diminish your point not support it.
 
2002-02-04 04:49:27 PM
Oh, I forgot to add, Bush is goose-stepping Nazi.
 
2002-02-04 04:50:03 PM
Gr00vey: I know stooping to personal attacks makes one feel superior and tries to belittle the argument the othe person is making.

Am I wrong? Did we not hit missles with missles?
 
2002-02-04 04:50:07 PM
During the present Bush administration, American intelligence services had knowledge of a planned highjacking, they did and could not do anything about it. Should we blame Bush? Maybe we should blame Clinton for bombing a pharmacutical factory in Sudan which produced 50% of its medicine.
 
2002-02-04 04:50:58 PM
"Isn't that the same type of stupid fan sterotype?"

Hey, I'm not the one that booed a former President of the United States.
 
2002-02-04 04:51:55 PM
WorldCitizen "Why is it that the only other countries I know of that have such public displays of patriotism are dictatorships...the PRC for a great example. They constantly feel the need to spew forth how great China is. North Korea feels the need to constantly remind its people how great of a nation it is and how great its leader is. The former Soviet Union encouraged extraordinary patriotism."

This wasn't the US government this was the NFL, the Networks, all private citizens and private enterprize.
 
2002-02-04 04:52:06 PM
And how can you prove anything if you don't try. That's futile logic.
 
2002-02-04 04:52:32 PM
"Did you watch it?"

And no, I didn't. I watched some of the pre-game show, but was sufficiently turned off by it to go out for a walk and then to dinner.
 
2002-02-04 04:53:04 PM
..."if you really love your country you are constantly there to fight to correct its flaws, not cover them up under a red, white and blue banner while distracting your eyes from it with fireworks."
Exactly, WorldCitizen. Dissent can be the highest form of patriotism. One has to care enough to try, and believe enough in the system to actualy feel like they have any power in it.
 
2002-02-04 04:53:29 PM
Cocheeze: "Hitting a missle with a missle" does NOT mean SDI works... And I put a smiley after the "personal attack"! You are wrong. ;)
 
2002-02-04 04:54:48 PM
Hey man Bubba is cool. Better than stupid Jean Chretien in Canada, Bill Clinton actually did something for his country...politlcally that is
 
2002-02-04 04:57:45 PM
Gr00vey: I think it shows great potential that SDI can work.

JFK said he wanted to put a man on the moon before the decade of the 60's was over. People thought the man was nuts at the time.
 
2002-02-04 04:58:51 PM
Capigula- if you think it's appropriate to be so condescening then certainly you can't discredit my statment because of an 'exageration.'

Pot. Kettle. Black.
 
2002-02-04 04:59:58 PM
Maybe we should blame Clinton for bombing a pharmacutical factory in Sudan which produced 50% of its medicine.


Maybe we should blame Bush for allowing the Red Cross to be bombed a couple times.

Food for thought, and I'm not trying to provoke a fight between views, here (God knows there are enough of them in every other damn thread).
 
2002-02-04 05:01:36 PM
"This wasn't the US government this was the NFL, the Networks, all private citizens and private enterprize."

It's not much different. Especially becuase 95% of Americans get their news and therefore world paradigm only from American news sources. They watch 95% American movies, 99% American televsions shows. Very few travel outside the US and many think that the entire world outside the US is a dirty Mexico or otherwise some unknown menacing pit of socialism. We're geared toward it. We listen to Rumsfeld speak every night and blow the American horn. We only listen to our own president speak. How many people in the rest of the developed world have sat down and listened to a foreign leader give an address? How many Americans have sat down and listened to a foreign leader give an address (especially ones that weren't addressing American specifically)?
Americans tend to be so American-centric that they can't conceive of a world out there that is not far below the US in almost every way. It breeds a patriotism that is based out of ignorant (not as in stupid but just as in unknowing) comparisons of the US with the rest of the world.
I have no problem with loving your country. Just do it for the right reasons.
 
2002-02-04 05:03:23 PM
SDI can work. It is all about the X-band radar. However, it will cost 100 billion dollars and create a new arms race. China and Russia will do their best to defeat the system. They will use a $50 mylar balloon to do it. So that begs the question is it worth it?
 
2002-02-04 05:03:54 PM
They should have put an "obvious" tag on that one. Leave it to the jack-ass ultra-conservatives to create division in a video created to inspire unity.

I'm a conservative from Idaho, but I hate the republican party and the morons that make up conservative America. I'm switching Libertarian. Conservatives can rot in the own shiat that they constantly spew for all I care.
 
2002-02-04 05:05:00 PM
Tigger: I failed to read your argument. Sorry.

That's probably the best point about whether or not to try and deploy Missle Defense.

Granted, the technology is not there right now for the threat. I seem to remember North Korea firing a test missle over or near Japan a few years back.

But will the threat be there in the future? Who knows? Does it justify allocating resourses to try and build Missle Defense?

I for one would like to see it built, but I can see the other side's argument.
 
2002-02-04 05:06:51 PM
Here's a prime example:

This Moron



Says:


"If Hillary runs for president-she will be assassinated."


What a farking jack-off!
 
2002-02-04 05:07:23 PM
I didn't think I was being condescending. I was just taking issue with your choice of words and telling you what that issue was. I've no doubt you are an intelligent person. You and I have debated before under one of my other names. Well, no offence intended.

Anyhow, like I was saying people feel uncomfortable about certain things and sometimes have no idea why. Some people are uncomfortable about homosexuality and it comes down to their parents feeling the same way and instilling that sentiment in them. Some of us no doubt feel this kind of over the top patriotism is embarrassing. Maybe its because we have been conditioned to feel that way. OK, conditioned isn't really the right word but you get me.
 
2002-02-04 05:09:26 PM
Well, for one, SDI will not in the forseeable future be able to defeat the Russian arsenal. Bush's SDI plan is to be able to take out a handful of missiles at best. The Russians have thousands. The Chinese have the ability to build up well out of the reach of Bush's SDI.
Bush is selling SDI as a way to protect against "rogue states" (or as we're calling them now, The Axis of Evil". Yet even our dear, conservative Tom Clancy was on TV last night talking about how ridiculous it is to think that one of these states is going to attack us with an ICBM. ICBM's are 100% traceable. Any country that launched one at us would have their leadership destroyed within the day. The number one goal of a dictator is to live and stay in power. Lauching an ICBM would be suicide. If they were going to take out a US city with a nuke they'd sneak it on shore as quitely as possible--which would not involve a blazing rocket with a large launch plume originating on their home soil.
 
2002-02-04 05:10:27 PM
FifthColumn:
Clinton did let Bin-laden get away. This is well documented. There is an article in the very liberal LA Times about it.

"Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize; Sudan offered up the terrorist and data on his network. The then-president and his advisors didn't respond."
The Los Angeles Times; Los Angeles, Calif.; Dec 5, 2001; MANSOOR IJAZ;

However, since you have to pay for the article to view it, I can't paste the article in here. If anyone has it, please post it.

I found an article on NewsMax that talks about the LA Times article. (I know it's NewsMax, but the article was from LA Times) Here is a quote below from the LA Times article. The whole link to the NewsMax article is http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/12/5/153637.shtml

"Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, hoping to have terrorism sanctions lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of bin Laden and "detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas," Ijaz writes in today's edition of the liberal Los Angeles Times."
 
2002-02-04 05:10:31 PM
Eight years of peace and prosperity...........
BOO! Get the bum out of here!
I like my "war" and the defecits, lost jobs, and loss of rights, that it created.
 
2002-02-04 05:17:20 PM
World- I agree, but I think that the point is that if the US goes after say Iran or N. Korea in 5 years they could threaten a launch at the US. This would alter our actions and I think that is what we are trying to avoid. We want to be able to attack whoever whenever, well except for Russia and China. If our forces were about to take out the leadership of N. Korea they might launch and we would have no choice but to nuke them first or stop the attack.
 
2002-02-04 05:17:32 PM
World Citizen,

"If Clinton would have tried to go full blown after Al Qaeda the Republicans would have started screaming "Wag the Dog" as they did after every military action Clinton took. Do you think he would have gotten the same resolution passed that Bush did after 9/11?" --- world citizen

You just proved why Clinton sucked. He had no credibility on these issues. Repubs didn't chase him down for fun, they chased him down because he wasn't worthy of the trust we need in a president.
 
2002-02-04 05:17:44 PM
WorldCitizen: good point. But aren't some of these people suicidal? What if a bunch of terrorists smuggled an ICBM under their jacket (lol), and launched it from a friendly or Neutral country?
 
2002-02-04 05:20:16 PM
Capigula- thanks and no harm no foul dude.
Anyhow, I understand what you mean but maintain that the source of my discomfort is not some hippy shiat instilled by my family or some such, as you imply. Rather it is my understanding of history and was well explained as WorldCitizen described(to paraphase)-- real liberal democracy should not and does not seem to require such lavish pagentry. It seems, dictators, facist regimes and the like have needed to go to such lengths to remind their citizens of just how good their government is. That's why this is scary to me.
 
2002-02-04 05:21:05 PM
WorldCitizen: Forget my argument, FishBulb has a better one.
 
2002-02-04 05:21:30 PM
Fottball sucks . Booooooooooooooooooooo .
 
2002-02-04 05:21:44 PM
WorldCitizen:
"Yet even our dear, conservative Tom Clancy was on TV last night talking about how ridiculous it is to think that one of these states is going to attack us with an ICBM. ICBM's are 100% traceable."

So, the planes that hit the WTC weren't traceable back to bin laden and the Taliban? Both attacks would be traceable back to whatever country it came from. However, it is much easier to launch a missle than try to sneak a radioactive bomb into the us, along with the people who are technological enough to be able to set it up and use it. This isn't a ready made device that you would just have to hit a button. This thing would probably have to come in several peices and then be put together here and driven to where ever it was going to be used. You would have to transport all your nuclear scientist over here to build the damn thing and then let them get out of town before it went off. Much easier to launch it from home. As I said in previous threats. Russia and China care about what happens to them, that's why MAD theory works for them, but Iraq and Iran and terrorist groups don't care what happens to them. THEY DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE.
 
2002-02-04 05:21:51 PM
oops, bowl
 
2002-02-04 05:23:11 PM

For Sudan being so apparently helpful, they sure didn't come off as it... Link

Clinton targeted bin Laden even before he moved to Afghanistan. In 1996, his administration brokered an agreement with the government of Sudan to arrest the terrorist leader and turn him over to Saudi Arabia. For 10 weeks, Clinton tried to persuade the Saudis to accept the offer. They refused. With no cooperation from the Saudis, the deal fell apart.



Then there as this one:

The report also said that the Clinton administration had began training commandos for a possible ground assault aimed at capturing or killing bin Laden, but abandoned it after failing to get adequate intelligence and support from key countries.


I cannot comment directly on what you posted, MacV: I had no knowledge of it until now. I'm going to try and find that article (has to be a cache/transscript of it somewhere) when I get home from work.
 
2002-02-04 05:24:33 PM
"I agree, but I think that the point is that if the US goes after say Iran or N. Korea in 5 years they could threaten a launch at the US. This would alter our actions and I think that is what we are trying to avoid."

This is a good point. One would hope that the US would have enough resources to go in and take out a handfull of ICBM sites before it lauched any full scale attack on said country, therefore eliminating their ability to fire them off (with N. Korea or Iraq where they would be very primitive and limited--forget China or Russia). However, being that they Indian and Pakistani underground tests caught us off guard, it does make one a little less confident in our abilities to know what is going on in the world.
Cocheeze: I don't think too many leaders are suicidal. They get the suicidal lunatic fringe to do that kind of work for them (take bin Laden, not exactly offering himself up freely as a martyr now, is he?). Problem is, I don't know if there is a suicidal lunatic fringe capable of secretly moving around an ICBM from country to country. It's not like they're something you can put into a suitcase and launch from a pickup.
 
2002-02-04 05:26:25 PM
The article was biased- perhaps a lie, and these people who think that Bush is a great leader are delusional. No president is a leader. He has too many people leading him.
 
2002-02-04 05:26:29 PM
For Sudan being so apparently helpful, they sure didn't come off as it

strike that, was thining of Suadi Arabia at the time, didn't mean for "sudan" to sneak in there (nor the "for being so appearntly helpful, it was part of a sentence i decided not to include due to length reason)
 
2002-02-04 05:29:05 PM
"but Iraq and Iran and terrorist groups don't care what happens to them. THEY DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE."

With Iraq and Iran you are mistaken. Dictatorial leadership never dies for their cause. Their cause is to stay in power, not Islam, or socialism or any other -ism. They have no problems with getting some freaks to go blow themselves up in the name of a cause, but the leadership is never ready to die.
Terrorists might be able to develop a nuclear bomb (or better yet, steal one for the former Soviet Union). An ICBM is a completely different story. Put a nuke on a boat and park it off the coast of Manhattan and NYC and all the evidence are gone in a nice big mushroom cloud. Traceable to terrorists? Maybe. So the trade center planes were tracable to the terrorist leadership. Have we gotten them yet?
 
2002-02-04 05:29:37 PM
Newsmax sucks. Read their story on Lay's wife. They spent half the article gutting out the Clintons!
 
2002-02-04 05:31:53 PM
Let me join the chorus:

PLEASE stop accepting NewsMax submissions!
 
2002-02-04 05:32:42 PM
Sorry, for the delay. I went out to get burnt. OK,

Fuzzymonkey,

real liberal democracy should not and does not seem to require such lavish pagentry. It seems, dictators, facist regimes and the like have needed to go to such lengths to remind their citizens of just how good their government is.
 
2002-02-04 05:34:43 PM
FifthColumn:
It's archived on the LA Times site, search on the Author MANSOOR IJAZ and look for the Dec 5th article. However, for some reason you have to pay for the article. If you can find it somewhere else please post the whole thing. I saw the author talk about this on Fox and CNN when he was making the rounds. I haven't check their sites yet for info.

The Saudi deal was not to arrest Bin Laden it was to kick him out from Sudan to Saudi Arabia. Saudi's didn't want him in their country because he wants to overthrow their government. Bin laden was then sent to Afghanistan. Of course, we have now learned that it would have been better for the US to leave him in Sudan since we had more connections and more informants that knew what was going on in Sudan than in Afghanistan. That was another big failure of the Clinton administration. He wasn't trying to arrest him, he was just telling Sudan to kick him out of their country.
 
2002-02-04 05:35:16 PM
Yep, I said that.
You really did get burned, didn't you dude?
:)
 
2002-02-04 05:40:24 PM
Sorry, for the delay. I went out to get burnt. OK,

Fuzzymonkey - "real liberal democracy should not and does not seem to require such lavish pagentry. It seems, dictators, facist regimes and the like have needed to go to such lengths to remind their citizens of just how good their government is."

But the existence of lavish pageantry is not in itself evidence that it is manufactured by a fascist regime. Somewhere in the world a people take place in a display is obnoxious as this and are sincere. When the demonstrators in Pakistan burned our flag and shouted death to America, death to Bush that was over the top and I believe they meant it.
 
2002-02-04 05:41:42 PM
Damb, I posted accidentally, wrote somemore and then double posted. Now I'm telling everyone. Damb this pot!!!!!
 
2002-02-04 05:43:52 PM
Clinton is such a waste of time and blather. And there's no finer proof than the fact that the City of Berkeley, California gave him a medal last week. Anything that they do is intrinsically FUBAR. And when you throw Barbara Boxer in for the ride, you know it must be a steamin' shiat heap. Has anyone in the world ever seen a picture of her when she didn't look like a three day old dead carp...eyes rolled back, mouth wide open...oh, wait, that's probably why Slick Willie let's her follow him around.

Bah!
 
2002-02-04 05:45:20 PM
Desynch & Bad C I got in trouble for causing 'off topic' threads and upsetting certain farkers.....However, I have been to go to the forum....


So seeing as how I'm not allowed to say anything 'off-topic' I am going to patrol the threads and point out everytime someone does it....Oh wait........that would be EVERY thread......


Yes, I'm annoyed....but hey, I got some actual work done during the 'break'.....
 
2002-02-04 05:47:09 PM
Tick:

Tostfeld, my memory is fine, but you should remember that Hillary Clinton was not an elected official.

All the more disturbing that Cheney will not voluntarily offer the notes.
 
2002-02-04 05:47:13 PM
WorldCitizen:
Do you think if we nuked Baghdad we would get Sadam? He would survive in one of his many bunkers, but now he would be the hero of the arab world for killing milliions of americans. Their leadership will not die as you pointed out with the terrorist. Which also destroys your whole point in the first place which was that they won't attack us with ICBMs because they will also die. Thanks for proving yourself wrong.

I've listed serveral reasons in other posts why MAD theory doesn't work for these countries. I don't want to go into it all again, but here is the summary.

If we were attacked by a nuclear missle we would not respond in kind. If Iraq nuked New York, we would not nuke Baghdad. We would not kill the civilians and people that we need to overthow him. Sadam doesn't care about his people anyway, he used chemical weapons on them already. Sadam would still survive a nuclear strike on Baghdad anyway and the problem would not go away until we put in troops to go find him. MAD does not work for these people that's why you must stop them before they have the weapons.

BTW, North Korea already has enough plutonium for at least two bombs and missles that can almost reach Hawaii.
 
2002-02-04 05:52:33 PM
Mytwocents - okaaaaay ... now say something on-topic.

;)


Oh, here's mine: Jeezus-Pleasus - FUBAR ... effed up beyond all repair ... like BSD and stuff, dude?
 
2002-02-04 05:57:35 PM
Labberdasher: traditionally: Recognition, but the judges will allow "repair."

Circle gets the square.

Clinton still boo'd.
 
2002-02-04 05:57:36 PM
Mytwocents- are you being obstinant or just stupid?
It has nothing to do with being off topic. Threads always go off in tangents and nobody really minds that. Its taking over the thread to talk constantly about yourself and hanging around for the sole purpose of getting all the little boys to drool all over you.
Which is fine but has its place.
Wanna be a webwhore? Get a webcam and some one to host you. Unless you're actually interested in what others have to say (that is when they are not necessarily talking to or about you.)

You got booted, I think because in that thread some days ago you admitted to 'thread jacking.'
Not for being off topic.
All you're little friends whined on too. D
o you guys just not get it? Or is that 'why did they ban me' part of your trolling?
Capigula,
The people cheering and shouting in the streets in Pakistan (and I'm pretty sure it was established that that was file footage and did not occur on the 11th but anyway) were just that. Demonstrators that took to the streets. Not a huge corporate extravganza. And not to get to into it, but I realize that the government itself did not produce the superbowl of course but the corporate interests are so hard to untangle from our politicians thatit might as well be.
 
2002-02-04 06:07:29 PM
FuzzyMonkey,

Sorry, I got lost on another page. To be perfectly honest I'm too high to argue now. I thought the game itself was terrific. What an ending.
 
2002-02-04 06:12:40 PM
We all know damn well that if Al Gore was president, he would have acted the same. Nothing would be different. Bush is only popular because of the dumb ass terrorits from September 11th. That's it. There is NO OTHER reason. Sept 11th was the best thing to happen for Dubya. After 2 years, his popularity will slide and he'll be just like daddy.
 
2002-02-04 06:13:13 PM
Capigula- Totally cool. I was having fun, but gotta get home anyhow. And I don't wanna kill yer buzz :)
I thought the game rocked. What an ending,indeed.
 
2002-02-04 06:16:17 PM
Jeezus-Pleasus - my favourite is NAF. Allegedly "No Apparent Function", marking all the stuff coming in during WWI that was either
a) from the enemy, and no-one knew what it was supposed to do,
b) FUBAR (of course), or
b) a piece of complete crap form the first day, and no-one wanted to admit to being able to repair it.

I just like imagining the situation ...

- Sir, we just got a ZingBat-100 in. Should we fix it?
- Nah, soldier, that's NAF.
- But Sir, I'm sure it's a ZingBat! Arkely could fix it, and you know all the specs. See? It even says it down the side he...
- Soldier? NAF, I say.
- Uh, yessir.


Um. Anyway. Clinton? Feh.
 
2002-02-04 06:23:37 PM
Ramblinwreck - heh. That should bring the trolls out of the woodwork. And hey, I agree that this war thing is an often underestimated facet of the relationship between Dubya and the American public. Bit like an abusive relationship in a post-apocaliptic world. Sucks to be in it, but good to have a total dick protecting you, too. (come ouuuut, come ouuuuut, wherever you are ...)

;)
 
2002-02-04 06:23:53 PM
MacV:
"Their leadership will not die as you pointed out with the terrorist. Which also destroys your whole point in the first place which was that they won't attack us with ICBMs because they will also die. Thanks for proving yourself wrong."

You know, I almost posted an added comment to what I wrote because I knew there would be someone out there that would not be able to understand the difference in what I said.
Then I thought, "no, surely they will see the very plain difference." But, MacV, you proved me wrong.
The leadership of a nation-state has a hugely different vested interest than that of an international terrorist, such as Al Qaeda and bin Laden. The leader of a nation-state only has power in the state that they lead. Saddam only controls the territory of Iraq. All of his power lies in Iraq. If a nuclear missile was launched at the US from Iraq, Iraq would be destroyed. The entire might of the US would fall on Saddam, much more strongly than it has on bin Laden. Even if Saddam did not die, he would be out of power and/or his power base would be destroyed. His entire life would then be over as it depends on him being in power. Same goes for Kim Jung Il. They are their nation-state. The leader does not exist independently. To lose power equals death. They are not suicidal; they are power hungry.
Now, on the the difference with an international terrorist. An international terrorist can move between nation-states and not lose any power. They have no set power base. There is no one waiting to overthrow them. They don't care if a city gets nuked as long as they've found their way out of the city first. They can hide and be out of communication. A national leader/dictator can do no such thing--they would risk being overthrown and hence, killed.
I am not as confident as you are that if we tracked an ICBM lauch from Baghdad that we would not launch in kind. We were not afraid to do it to the Soviets, the Chinese, or the Japanese in our military planning. I don't know what would make Iraq any different. Americans are already calling for Iraq on a platter and they haven't even been linked with 9/11.
And you're right, MAD would not work. Because there would be no "mutual" about it. The US would suffer a blow, the other nation would no longer exist. MAD requires both sides to be able to destroy one another. Only two nations on earth currently have MAD capability--Russia and the United States. China could do a lot of damage to the US, but not completely destroy it. We could wipe China off of the map. Again, that is not MAD.
 
2002-02-04 06:51:17 PM
WorldCitizen: MAD doesn't protect us from crazy people who might get access to ICBM's and launch them without a care in the world of their own destruction (a very modern version of the suicide bomber). As nukes become more prolific, are ability to count on other countries to control them becomes less and less wise.
 
2002-02-04 06:54:17 PM
..."our"...

I simply cannot write today.
 
2002-02-04 06:57:16 PM
Yet another right-wing link on Fark...
 
2002-02-04 06:58:14 PM
Ramblinwreck: Oh yeah Al Gore is SO much smarter than Clinton. He knows when to keep his pseudo-intellectual trap shut...except about being the father of the Internet and shiat. Oh, and when he's hustling campaign contributions from the Communist Chinese. Oh and then there's that big trap-open kiss of Tipper (why d'ya suppose they call her that?) at the convention. Yeah, he's fine presidential material.

*end rising to troll bait*
 
2002-02-04 07:30:20 PM
hehehe... clinton's political career is as over as gore's. now for hillary to serve out her term...
 
2002-02-04 07:36:08 PM
WorldCitizen:
Nice back-pedaling. They would get killed, they won't get killed. MAD works, MAD doesn't work. I've never seen somebody argue both sides of an issue like you before. I don't think you really know what side you are on.

"We were not afraid to do it to the Soviets, the Chinese, or the Japanese in our military planning. I don't know what would make Iraq any different."

And there in a nutshell is your problem.

Because there would be no "mutual" about it. The US would suffer a blow, the other nation would no longer exist. MAD requires both sides to be able to destroy one another.

HAHAHAHA, MAD does not mean you have to completely blow the other country to hell. HAHAHAHAHA. People like yourself complain when we kill a couple civilians in Afghanistan, after they killed thousands in the US. Do you really think the world would be OK with us nuking the Iraqi's because their leader, that the Iraqi people hate also, attacked the US? So, if you were the leader you would nuke the whole country of Iraq and then when Sadam didn't die, since there are no more people left to overthrow him because you just nuked them all, we would then have to send in troops to a radioactive environment to find him. HAHAHAHAHA Great Plan!

I love these conversations with you WorldCitizen. You are so out of touch with reality that it makes them great!
 
2002-02-04 07:59:25 PM
Osama killed around 600 Americans while Clinton was in office. Blew the hole in our ship, Clinton did nothing.

And just how many of you Clinton-haters had even heard of Osama bin Laden before 9/11? Were there rabid op-ed pieces during the Clinton administration on his failure to go to war? No. You're revising the past to make Bush look good and it's pathetic. BTW, Newsmax is not at all trustworthy...one guy says that people booed....who the hell knows?
 
2002-02-04 07:59:57 PM
Good. Clinton sucks.
 
2002-02-04 08:06:18 PM
TheTick: I'm surprised that this made it past...

"Clinton was a better president than R.R ever was." RR won the Cold War. Clinton got a BJ from a dumpy intern. On the scale of global events....

Ronald Reagan DID NOT win the Cold War. He merely spent money on the military and watched the USSR defeat itself. The USSR just did not have the economic system to keep up with the US in an arms race. That is what caused the end of the war. Any decent military leader will recognize America's economic advantage and use it. Reagan did not have to do anything but be ready to fight.
 
2002-02-04 08:11:25 PM
MacV: That situation makes MAD work MORE. Besides, if Iraq launched a nuclear strike EVERYONE would move out of the way of the US. They would be routing for us. Even 9/11 shows this. And that was not even a nuke. Plus an attack by Iraq would force all of NATO into the fight. Saddam is not that stupid. He won't attack the US directly. Israel? Probably. But not the US. At least not directly.
 
2002-02-04 08:14:47 PM
Zardoz:And just how many of you Clinton-haters had even heard of Osama bin Laden before 9/11

Usama bin Laden was so well known that before 9/11 he even was photoshopped with a picture of Bert (wearing a muslim garb) from Seasame Street as a joke. He was fingered as the mastermind behind the first bombing of the WTC.

Newsmax is as trustworthy as "Mother Jones"...
 
2002-02-04 08:19:01 PM
How bout that Budwieser commercial? Unbelievable. Corporate America has no shame.
 
2002-02-04 08:20:14 PM
I think I can sum up this arguement:

Bill "Slick Willy" Clinton: Politically correct wangtastic jerkweed. He never should have been elected.

George "Duh-bya" Bush: The guy's an idiot. It's that simple. All of the other things that can be said about him stem from him being on the low side of the intelligence graph. He never should have been elected president.

Clinton: Didn't do a damn thing as warning afetr warning of both economic meltdown (not much of one though...) and terrorist attack came past his administration.

Bush: This guy has done NOTHING of long term effect during his term so far. The "War On Terror" has been coming ever since terrorism started pointing in our direction (early eighties, probably even earlier) and it would be as foolhardy to give him the credit for rooting out evil as it would be to give Clinton the credit for several prosperous years of bliss. A MONKEY could have steered the ship of state towards attacking terrorism.

To summarize:

Clinton wasn't responsible for the economy, one way or the other. The president has very, very little to do with keeping the economy on track (try blaming Greenspan). Plus, the economy does tend to go in cycles. In fact, Clinton's terms were more famous for the amount of personal problems he had than any serious policy decisions he made. Good things he did: Not much. Bad things he did: Eight years sure goes by you fast...

Bush isn't responsible for attacking Afghanistan, seeing as how he would have been thrown out on his ASS if he didn't. He's not responsible for the economic bubble burst either... except perhaps in the "confidence" area. Good things he's done: Hmm..... nothing much. Bad things he's done: Well, he's got quite some time left before I start making judgements about broken campaign promises, but it's looking like he isn't going to be very nice to the environment. Oh well.
 
2002-02-04 08:39:30 PM
More post-modern relativist ig-nuh'ent venom here than any place else on the web.

The irony of Clinton reciting the Gettysburg address was the producers' best joke of the night. On October 17, 1996, in front of an audience in Santa Ana, Clinton said: "Our friends on the other side, they complain about government all the time. They set it up as the enemy, it's government versus the people.
The last time I checked, the Constitution said, 'of the people, by the people and for the people.' That's what the Declaration of Independence says."


Well the Constitution does not say that. Clinton swore to uphold the principles of the Constitution but, evidently never actually read (or "checked") it. And the Declaration of Independence doesn't say it either.
The Gettysburg Address contains the mythic invocation of "government of the people, by the people, [and] for the people" with a commitment that it not "perish from the Earth."
IMHO it was profane that the President did not know this, has obviously neither read the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, nor taken their principles to heart, and invoked this language with the intent to slander people with whom he had political disagreement.
I was crying with laughter last night when he read those words.
'night all.
 
2002-02-04 08:54:23 PM
As I haven't read ANY of the previous posts (I'm sure the comments, by now, are way off topic) I'm giving my 2¢ about the article.

Slick Willie? Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
 
2002-02-04 09:08:34 PM
The point of my post was not to endorse Al Gore for president. The purpose was to simply point out that any dumb ass in office right now would be riding high on public opinion polls. As soon as it wears off, he'll be in trouble because good things do not happen when the government increases spending and lowers taxes. Look back at Reagan when the unemployment was 10%+. As for booing the president, I don't see any other morons stepping up to the job. When so many people disrepect someone that was in that high of a position, it really pissed me off. Each president has had his ups and downs. Most of the time we remember the downs. Lets not forget the good. Rights always see the bad in lefts and vice versa. I lived a pretty good life during the Clinton admin, so why should I complain? I don't give a damn if he got head or not. Now, I can't get a decent paying job. Friggin 'eh, when Publix isn't hiring, you know something is wrong!
 
2002-02-04 09:35:00 PM
In response to an earlier post, Clinton did not embarass the United States more than any other president. You have biatches like Linda Tripp and Ken Starr to thank for that. Believe me, if he had his choice, I don't think Bill would have chosen to have the entire world know about his private sex life.

If those men would have never flown planes into the World Trade Centre, everyone would still think Bush is a friggin' moron.
 
2002-02-04 09:49:19 PM
Rakshasa:

Well said. I agree with you 100%. Now that that's been said, I think we need to get a president in office that is controlled by the PEOPLE of this nation. Not some corporate puppet. No scandals. I want to know exactly where my "tax" money is going. Furthermore, I want to control where my money goes. I want to control my social security account; Meaning, I don't want my money to go towards fruitless efforts like studies why monkeys throw feces. Every day our social security money gets dropped into a bottomless bucket, because EVERY president has funneled money out of social security. The government -- Democrat and Republican, Green or Independant, or whatever. The whole system is broken, and we the american people need to fix the system, or else our lives, as well as the lives of our parents and offspring are just going to get worse. You have the fabulous republi-muppets in the white house taking away our civil rights. Why? "For the good of the country." And the sheep out there are baaa-ing away like mad. Imagine that. The american people want their civil rights unconstitutionally violated. And this is someone that was "confirmed" by our elected officials!

Anyway, I think:
1. I've rambled on enough
2. I lost my train of thought.
 
2002-02-04 11:37:31 PM
For everyone moaning about how Clinton didn't act against Osama the way W did are missing a vital point. Look at who was doing the fighting in Afganistan. It was overwhelmingly Afgan rebel troops fighting Taliban troops. Air support logistic support and all kinds of support was provided by the international troops, but it wasn't US servicemen taking the majority of the casulties. Every US serviceman who was killed was headline news. Did anyone remember seeing the casulty numbers of the Afgan troops on our side? Look at the US in Somalia (Black hawk down). US troops where killed on a mission. Public opinion was overwhelmingly "Get out, why are we fighting there anyway?"
Now these same people are the first to blame the Clinton administration for the September 11th attacks. "If we would have been harder on Osama in the past..."
Every president is terrorfied of getting into a Vietnam part II. Trapped in a war no one wants to fight, but if the president backs down he (and the USA) look weak. Even with the emotional climate after September 11th, if week in week out troops where coming home in body bags the support for the war on terror would evapourate. The reason it's lasting so long is that so far someone else has been willing to do the dying.
 
2002-02-05 12:40:59 AM
MacV: Come back and make tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when you learn to get a clue. You honestly can't comprehend what I write, can you? You've become so set in whatever mind set it is that you can't understand it....You read it and then throw back arguments I didn't even make out of it...read it all. There is no black and white like you seem to think. Moving situation A slightly to the left or right completely alters situation B.
There was no contradiction there. There were different situations and different scenerios for different types of leaders/actors on the world stage. The same rule does not apply for an international organization (Al Qaeda) and its leadership as it does for a nation-state and its leadership. They have completely different stakes. We might not nuke Iraq if Iraq nuked us, but I can 100% guarentee that he and his regime would be finished. We would have every right to march in and destroy him under international law. (we did not in 1991). As Freddie^2 mentioned, a direct attack on the US by Iraq would invoke the NATO defense treaty, along with a host of others. NATO, along with Australia and others would be automatically in the war to destroy Iraq. I don't think some of you can see thru the propaganda to understand that dictators and terrorists have different motiviations. Dictators have to stay in power to live. They are not suicidal. Look how long Castro and Saddam have been around already. They plan on living long lives well into old age. Attacking the US directly would guarentee that they did not live to see next week. Saddam and Kim Jung Il cannot up and move their country as a terrorist organization can.

MacV: "Nice back-pedaling. They would get killed, they won't get killed. MAD works, MAD doesn't work. I've never seen somebody argue both sides of an issue like you before. I don't think you really know what side you are on."

You totally miss the point. I was not backpedaling. I was trying to explain the irrelevance of your point. If Saddam attacked the US directly, it would not matter at all to him if we nuked him or not. He would lose power and his life either in a puff of smoke in an atomic explosion, or in a bunker by special forces and smart bombs. In the end, its all the same to him--death and the end of his power; the very two things he cherishes most.
As far as MAD goes, you again miss the point. Do you know what MAD stands for? It stands for Mutually Assured Destruction. That means that both sides are destroyed as powers after a mutal exchange of nuclear weapons. No nation has the power to do that to the United States other than Russia. China could knock us back into a depression-like state, but not destroy the entity that is the United States (maybe in a few years with their buildup in response to SDI). One or a handful of poorly aimed missiles launched by a third rate power is going to cause a few million deaths in the US. We have almost 300,000,000 people. We would survive and so would our government (or type of government, anyway). The attacking nation would not. Therefore, there is no MAD when it comes to rogue states. Their launch would be Self Destruction, not mutually assured destruction. MAD is therefore a moot point unless you are talking about Russia and possibly China.
And addressing Glenlivid, no, it would not surprise me in the least if the US lost a city to a nuke tomorrow. But that loss is not going to be from an ICBM. There are much easier, more efficient and less suicidal ways to deliver a nuke to an American city.
 
2002-02-05 12:50:49 AM
MacV: Oh, and MAD does mean that you blow the other country to hell. What exactly do you think destruction means? MAD does not mean killing everyone in a country, but it does mean disabling it as a functioning state and power. MAD means effectively taking out a country's ability to produce industrial goods and services and its ability to govern itself. You, therefore, reduce the country back to a disfunctioning non-entity. The destruction of the United States would involve taking out the major trade and manufacturing centers (cities), military bases, agricultural production and government. This cannot be done with a handful of nukes.
 
2002-02-05 01:25:20 AM
Lemmings.

This is why I want to move to Canada.

The influence of the dollar will bestow upon us only mediocrity in the white house.
 
2002-02-05 08:28:28 AM
Clinton got booed because people are finally realizing what scum he and his wife really are.
 
2002-02-05 11:45:20 AM
Clinton is filth. However, it is unseemly for people to have booed him. And it sets a precedent for liberals to act like animals (um, more like animals) when a Republican appears somewhere. We should remain civilized and respectful.

On the other hand, the NYPD and FDNY were dead-on for booing Hillary, given what she has done to them as a group, not to mention her overall villiany. It's an absolute tragedy the boos were edited out on the broadcast.
 
2002-02-05 11:52:14 AM
freddiemiles1

I was there. He wasn't booed!!! This is bullshiat.

And Lord knows we can all trust your view of events.

I get the farking Declaration of Independence

"The farking Declaration of Independence". Wow, you really are a piece of shiat. That was probably your only exposure to it.

Careful kid, you might accidentally learn something.
 
2002-02-05 12:29:36 PM
Odietamo- I would trust freddiemiles more than Newsmax.
 
2002-02-05 12:32:57 PM
he not a president, he's an embarrassment
 
2002-02-05 12:36:40 PM
RileyGirl85- That doesn't justify booing him. You conservatives are such hipocrites. What if liberals booed Reagan at a public event? Is that ok?
 
2002-02-05 01:57:20 PM
FuzzyMonkey, then you either haven't read his posts or it says a whole lot about you. But, hey, go you.

But you are right in that he shouldn't have been booed.

Freddie^2, Reagan did not have to do anything but be ready to fight.

Something liberals can't even manage, with the military or the intelligence community. Which is why several thousand of our own people were murdered on our own soil. (I can't wait for the liberal excuses and blame game for this one.)

And, aside from the fact that you proved in a previous post you are willing to lie to win an argument, I'll address your Reagan-bashing nonsense. The Russian leaders could have, at the least, held on longer. Reagan's complete lack of tolerance for Communism and the balls to proclaim it to them publicly and often at the very least hastened the end. If your ideology didn't taint your perceptions and you weren't willing to lie to win an argument you would give credit where it is due for at least that much.
 
2002-02-05 02:29:31 PM
Clinton is way better at raping than Bush ever wiil be.
 
2002-02-05 04:35:45 PM
"blame game for this one"

Why would anyone else want to play the blame game when you seem to be so good at it yourself.
 
2002-02-07 12:57:42 PM
Dumbya the lying sneaking drunk, who has never learned or heard a single lesson in his whole useless easy life, can't be trusted with that red button that can wipe out every bit of life on Earth.

MAD - Major Alcoholic Disaster
 
Displayed 306 of 306 comments



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report