Whoops. Revoke my licence (or license, as the Americans say)!
I’m particularly dissappointed to have messed that up, because i make a point of trying to disseminate greater understanding of the subjunctive mood.
{slinks away for a bout of self-flagellation}
No, Thank you!
Because they’re twerps who see everything in harsh terms of good vs. evil. Of course, Bush sees things the same way-- and it’s when he said that “you’re either with us or against us,” that the world took a mighty big step back.
I mean, there are plenty of reasons to oust Saddam. But watching last night’s speech, I kept waiting to hear them without Bush resorting to lies about al-Qaida.
If Bush and Powell et al had tried to build a solid case, they could have won world support, instead of depending on the B-team of Denmark and Eritrea. Instead, they pissed it all away.
Originally posted by mhendo
What i want to know is, why do people like the OP consistently and pig-headedly assume that those who oppose Bush’s policies were huge Clinton fans?
So you did oppose Clinton’s use of the military to try to avoid impeachment for lying under oath (not blowjobs)?
Regards,
Shodan
I opposed Clinton’s use of the military for many reasons, including but not limited to the domestic issues of lying and possible impeachment.
I have never, i don’t think, defended Bill Clinton for anything on this Board. I was far less impressed with him than many liberals and progressives. I think that much of his foreign policy was seriously flawed, and that on the domestic front he wimped out on many issues and also set a pretty poor example of how a President (or anyone in a position of power, for that matter) should act towards members of staff. To top it all off, he then lied about his actions.
Nor has my opinion of Clinton changed just because the United States is now being run by an air-headed frat boy fuckstick who, if not for family money and connections, would probably be wearing a bowtie and selling used cars.
There. Happy now?
I will add one thing. I don’t, as i said above, condone Clinton’s abuse of his position in having a sexual relationship with a White House intern, nor his lying under oath. But, once the deed was done and he was being questioned, i think that instead of lying, he should have told Starr and all the other prudish-yet-prurient, politically-motivated self-righteous dirtbag conservatives who were hounding him for purely selfish reasons to go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
Does that clear things up for you?
Well, I opposed it at the time. Considering the fact that those attacks came close to taking out bin Laden (along with that dangerous aspirin factory), it seems less stupid now. I also opposed that trumped-up impeachment charge, now that you bring it up.