Dems are at it again,,,,Boxer :Quote: I'll Call Condi a Liar Again

Status
Not open for further replies.
ravensteve1961

ravensteve1961

New Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
3,916
Reaction score
0
Well it seems democrats tell republicans when clinton was the president at the time"" You cant call the president a liar show some respect"" Well isnt true you should show respect to condi rice huh??
The Link
 
This looks like another bullshit republican website. :roll:
 
Some of the Democrats are showing their true colors in their attitudes towards Dr. Rice.
 
I am, if anything, a liberal. I called Clinton a liar when he was in office. I've called Bush a liar since September 11.

The difference is, Bush is actively targeting those who are calling him a liar, and calling them traitors. That's not how this country is supposed to work.

"You are remembered for the rules you break." Douglas MacArthur


Look, spout all you like about republican this, democrat that. Nobody died because Bill Clinton got a bj in the oval office.

I realize this post is rather random.
 
FFT said:
I am, if anything, a liberal. I called Clinton a liar when he was in office. I've called Bush a liar since September 11.

The difference is, Bush is actively targeting those who are calling him a liar, and calling them traitors. That's not how this country is supposed to work.

"You are remembered for the rules you break." Douglas MacArthur


Look, spout all you like about republican this, democrat that. Nobody died because Bill Clinton got a bj in the oval office.

I realize this post is rather random.
Click to expand...
:gpost:
 
Reba said:
Some of the Democrats are showing their true colors in their attitudes towards Dr. Rice.
Click to expand...
Um. If you were trying to imply that they are 'showing' their true colors in their attitude towards Rice because of her race then *buzz* you are wrong!

They are showing their true colors in their attitudes because of her blatantly LIES. We surely don't need any more liars like her. Bush is more than enough... Keep that in your mind.

She is well-known for being incompassionate politican. That's danger to have a person as Rice.

Edit: btw, Barbara Boxer is a true patriot.
 
Last edited:
Yup, and the Republicans are showing their true colors by even considering her.
 
If Bush is a liar then it makes the whole Bush administration officials pathalogical liars also. :)

If Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, which is becoming increasingly obvious, and had no connections to Sept. 11, Why the heck they are still down there for? Oh that is right to free the people there, give them freedom to vote, Oh.. So Sept. 11 is just sweep under the rug?

So, If you say that Democrats are showing their true colors? It has nothing to do with racist, It has something to do with her lies along with Bush,

Now, If I say that Republicans are showing their true colors, That will meant that they voted for a President Bush that doesn't or haven't done anything for Sept. 11th justice for those who died. That shows the true colors of those republicans who doesn't care about Sept. 11th. ::shaking my head::::
 
Magatsu said:
btw, Barbara Boxer is a true patriot.
Click to expand...
Sure, and Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia (America's favorite Klansman) doesn't have a racist bone in his body.
 
FFT said:
... Nobody died because Bill Clinton got a bj in the oval office.
Click to expand...
The Somalia War, 1993

The intervention into Somalia in 1992 was an attempt to do good and may have been justified, but the decision by President Clinton to continue the mission in the Spring of 1993 was without a doubt a mistake. He abdicated his responsibility as Commander in Chief of the US military to Butros Gali and allowed the UN Secretary General to run a war against Aideed in an attempt to build a nation from a fragmented society.

...Controlling the distribution of food was the key to winning the war, so whoever controled the port kept control of the food for their clan. They could then dole it out the sub-clans to gain more power and soldiers. President Bush made the decision in late 1992 that the US would secure the distribution of food and so prevent the famine from growing worse. In this we were effective, but the clans had not yet come to accept a leader, so the problem simmered underneath the surface of our food distribution program.

The critical juncture was when Clinton declared the mission accomplished in May of 1993, but continued to keep US troops there as part of a vague UN mission to build a nation. This 'assertive multilateralism' was justified in the "State Dept Dispatch" by Albright as necessary for "rebuilding Somali society and promoting democracy in a strife-torn nation". . . this required choosing sides in a conflict if we were to impose a government on the clans. Once we set this in motion, conflict was inevitable. Butros-Butros Gali, the Secretary General of the UN, had decided that Aideed's clan was an impediment to the above goals. The war began 5 June when Pakistani soldiers were attacked by militia of Aideed's United Somali Congress, killing 25 Pakistanis, and continued as a 'low-intensity conflict' until the end of the year. Tactics included morter attacks on UN compounds almost nightly, random sniper attacks, assaults on UN compounds, mines and command detonated explosives, children unwittingly blowing themselves up at the gates of compounds with grenades given them by adults, and RPGs used to shoot down helocopters. In an effort to keep the Somali conflict out of the headlines, Clinton failed to build up the forces to the level required for the mission. We depended on less than forthright allies for armor support. In one incident, an Engineer Company was brought under attack in Sept 1993 while on a road clearing mission on 21st Oct Road. The Pakistani Armor support immediately fled, leaving the lightly armed company to fight its own way out. During the Oct 3rd battle in central Mogadishu the US was forced to depend on other nations to support the rescue convoy.

The US had no national security issues at stake in Somalia, and yet 29 US Soldiers died. The decision by President Clinton to send in the Rangers, Delta Force, and 160th Special Ops Aviation Rgt. to hunt for Aideed was a misallocation of resources. These are Strategic assets of the military, best used for high-value targets. They were bogged down in a civil war which meant 1) they were unavailable in the event of another crisis, 2) lost some 80 injured and killed. Failure to give them adequate resources left them hanging out to dry during the battle of October 3rd. The soldiers performed excellently, but were acting under a vague, mishandled policy, much like the situation in the Vietnam war that Mr. Clinton avoided.
 
Sighhh...here we go...
How about Republicans Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Haley Barbour, Rush Limbaugh...need more?
http://www.clubs.psu.edu/clubs/sayer/repub/rrp.htm

Blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic. About 85 percent.
And of course it is a fact that the illegal disenfranchisement of black voters in Florida in 2000 led to Herr Bush being in power today.
Want more?
 
I can understand why Clinton failed and
avoided these military strategies & responsibilities
only because he's too busy getting blowjobs
under his desk.
 
Yeah, what a guy, huh?
Bush most likely is utterly impotent.
 
Beowulf said:
Sighhh...here we go...
How about Republicans Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Haley Barbour, Rush Limbaugh...need more?
Click to expand...

How bout senator harry reid with his racist remarks? ...Need more?
 
Y said:
I can understand why Clinton failed and
avoided these military strategies & responsibilities
only because he's too busy getting blowjobs
under his desk.
Click to expand...
He had a blow job and he didn't kill any innocent civilians but only his sperms.

While Bush have a impotent issue and he massacres over 100,000 innocent iraqi civilians with glee, sink America's economy into deficit in no time, arrested for DUI few times, list is limitless.

Which is the best? Millions of sperms or 100,000 innocents iraqis. Hmm, that is not difficult to make a choice.

Clinton.

And... you forget one thing, Bush failed the Iraq war too. Where's WMD? Where's Bin Laden? More and more republicans worried about failure in Iraq and practically begged Bush to pull the troops or face the disaster results in future.

Har har har ;)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top