Bush's Obscene Tirades Rattle White House Aides

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

actually my dear, I WAS. I know firsthand the effects of that seminal piece of work. But as Clinton said, and I know this for a FACT, (since I happen to now WORK in social services) Clinton DID try to ease the blow of that reform

I'm glad you work in social services, more people should in order to gain a better understanding of just how hard it is for people. I used to work in a welfare office and I, personally, was appalled at the things I saw go on. Staff cutting corners, staff being instructed not to divulge all of the funds and programs available to people, people being treated as worthless because they needed government assistance, people without any faith in life, etc. It's heartbreaking to see people like that.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Here's the link

You cant blame Clinton entirely for the effects of welfare reform. surely you remember that the balance of power shifted prior to the passage of that particular bill?

You can't dismiss him entirely, either. I don't cut Clinton any slack. He was all talk and charm, nothing else. As I've said for a long time, I have no bloody clue as to why liberals hold him up to God-like status. The man was barely even a Democrat.

[macfanken]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

That first photo of Bush is of his thumb. Make a fist with your thumb up and turn your wrist outward so your lower arm is in profile, you will see how that can be his thumb.

His house of cards is finally beginning to fall and I can hardly believe it. I did have faith it would happen some day but it was getting dimmer! The fact that he is on an extended vacation in wartime speaks volumes about his "character" and I think most Americans see that.

Hi SuzeQ!

I agree with you... I've always hated the man but taking a FIVE-WEEK (!) vacation while our soldiers are being killed on a daily basis is a new low for this idiot of a President. I think more and more people are starting to agree... I hope the protests follow shrub when he leaves Crawford... he deserves massive protests everywhere he goes.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

I'm glad you work in social services, more people should in order to gain a better understanding of just how hard it is for people. I used to work in a welfare office and I, personally, was appalled at the things I saw go on. Staff cutting corners, staff being instructed not to divulge all of the funds and programs available to people, people being treated as worthless because they needed government assistance, people without any faith in life, etc. It's heartbreaking to see people like that.
You can't dismiss him entirely, either. I don't cut Clinton any slack. He was all talk and charm, nothing else. As I've said for a long time, I have no bloody clue as to why liberals hold him up to God-like status. The man was barely even a Democrat.

Diss: I work in Social Services NOW, but I used to be a welfare mom, I was abandoned by two husbands when I became pregnant. I know what it is like to live on next to nothing, using every possible program available. you have to or you dont survive. I know firsthand the effects of the reform but I still know that Clinton's hands were basically tied. as for what you saw in your welfare office, I am surprised to say the least. I guess things are different in CA because none of that goes on in MY office. We have Resource Guides free for the taking, and we also network with the employment side and the resource side to assist clients with jobs/resources available to them. I myself have done outside research specifically aimed at helping ex felons get employed within my county. Ive even approached my supervisor with ideas about resources geared just for them! I now deal with General Assistance Clients (those who need cash assistance but dont have kids at home) and we have a higher than normal ratio of homeless clients which have their own needs...I do my best to help them as well.

About Clinton: I truly believe he had high hopes of making real change going into his first term but the changeover of the makeup of congress put a HUGE monkey wrench into his aspirations, and he spent the next 6 years playing "lets make a deal". Sad but true. His strength was that he truly was savvy.
and smart. much smarter than his opposition. Annnnnnnd: he had charisma.
fact. same as Kennedy.

Having said all of that, honesty compels me to say that your assessment of the Dem party at this point as "republican light" is pretty accurate. Do I like it? no. But do I think things will change? YES. Timing is everything.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by Lux

Definately! Enough charisma to charm while he launched indiscriminate bombing raids.

oh? based on what? your definition of indiscriminate? I think NOT.
such a tired old refrain......
if you want indiscriminate, look to Monkey Boy. HE truly doesnt discriminate. He hates everyone equally.
and THAT boys and girls is true Democracy. Huzzah!

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by macfanken

Hi SuzeQ!

I agree with you... I've always hated the man but taking a FIVE-WEEK (!) vacation while our soldiers are being killed on a daily basis is a new low for this idiot of a President. I think more and more people are starting to agree... I hope the protests follow shrub when he leaves Crawford... he deserves massive protests everywhere he goes.

They are planning to go back to Washington when he goes.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by Lux

I'll let you in on a little secret, most of us know you're a loony. One would be excused for mistaking you for one of the 13 year olds. The trouble is that last year's 13 year olds are now 14 and they're gaining ground.

really? this from the person who revels in her insanity and talks about incessant mental noise and various emotional/familial issues? isnt that the pot calling the kettle black?

This has nothing to do with the topic (just as your post didn't), I realise. I won't bother arguing this particular one over and over, I'll leave that to Jason.

Good, he does a better job.

edit: I see you edited so I shall aswell. This is not a matter of comparison, Bush's hideous crimes do not rid Clinton of guilt.

Lux, in Clinton's entire time in office I can only recall ONE time when he bombed anyone, and that was shortly before he LEFT office. Therefore, in 8 years, one incidence of bombing does not make him an "indiscriminate" bomber. Besides. as Jason so readily points out, Clinton was acting on intelligence that indicated Saddam was a looming threat. That doesnt count as "indiscriminate" in MY book..... get a grip.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

r
Lux, in Clinton's entire time in office I can only recall ONE time when he bombed anyone, and that was shortly before he LEFT office. Therefore, in 8 years, one incidence of bombing does not make him an "indiscriminate" bomber. Besides. as Jason so readily points out, Clinton was acting on intelligence that indicated Saddam was a looming threat. That doesnt count as "indiscriminate" in MY book..... get a grip.

Well, as Jason would also say, why fault Bush for using the same intel? I'm sorry, but they both knew the intel was **** and used it for their own means, anyway. They both bombed innocent people. Clinton needed something to divert attention away from having his dick in his intern's mouth and Bush already drew up plans to invade Iraq before he was even appointed president by the USSC.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

Well, as Jason would also say, why fault Bush for using the same intel? I'm sorry, but they both knew the intel was **** and used it for their own means, anyway. They both bombed innocent people. Clinton needed something to divert attention away from having his dick in his intern's mouth and Bush already drew up plans to invade Iraq before he was even appointed president by the USSC.

and, as I have pointed out to Jason NUMEROUS times: Clinton didnt know it was faulty, Bush did. Bush was warned not to use that as a justification. Bush was told that the info was tainted. Colin Powell knew. Blair knew. Cheney knew. bit they had an agenda so away they went.

Still: that doesnt explain how Clinton's ONE TIME use of force constitutes "indiscriminate bombing" unless you are Lux and you view life thru a kaleidoscope....where everything is fractured and multiplied.........

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by ReFleetwoodMac

Well if he only did it once, bombing thousands of innocent people is just a formality. We all must do it once in our lives.

please understand: once does NOT equal "indiscriminate".

and Clinton believed at that time he was correct to do so. He's admitted since then that he was wrong, and that he regretted the loss of innocent lives. Ive yet to see Bushwhacker do the same......
Im not saying Clinton was right or wrong, Im merely pointing out the fact that he wasnt guilty of "indiscriminate bombing" as Lux accused him of. Apparently she succumbed to an urge to exaggerate...go figure

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by ReFleetwoodMac

Oh no! You've quoted my pre-edit version. Now my early draft is on display for all your judgmental eyes to see. I am so ashamed.

As you should be. Assume the position.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

and, as I have pointed out to Jason NUMEROUS times: Clinton didnt know it was faulty

How are you sure of that? He was the bloody President of the United States. If he didn't know the intel was faulty, he looks like an incompetent, bumbling ****tard. If he did know the intel was faulty, he looks like a coldhearted bastard.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Bush did. Bush was warned not to use that as a justification. Bush was told that the info was tainted. Colin Powell knew. Blair knew. Cheney knew. bit they had an agenda so away they went.

I'd be willing to bet that Clinton was told not to use that intel as justification for bombing Iraq, too. Both Clinton and Shrub had agendas, they were simply different agendas.

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Still: that doesnt explain how Clinton's ONE TIME use of force constitutes "indiscriminate bombing" unless you are Lux and you view life thru a kaleidoscope....where everything is fractured and multiplied.........

I agree with her.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

please understand: once does NOT equal "indiscriminate".

What???

Iraq was bombed for 12 years straight by the United States during sanctions. During the Lewinsky scandal, Clinton not only bombed Iraq, but Sudan and Afghanistan, too. He shot cruise missiles without batting an eyelash.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

How are you sure of that? He was the bloody President of the United States. If he didn't know the intel was faulty, he looks like an incompetent, bumbling ****tard. If he did know the intel was faulty, he looks like a coldhearted bastard.
I'd be willing to bet that Clinton was told not to use that intel as justification for bombing Iraq, too. Both Clinton and Shrub had agendas, they were simply different agendas.
I agree with her.

AGAIN: the info was only shown to be faulty during BUSH'S term. NOT CLINTON'S. IE: Clinton didnt know. I dont buy into that stupid theory that Clinton bombed Iraq as a diversion from his domestic troubles. Thats stupid and he's NOT stupid. If you think he's going to bomb Iraq and hope that it would divert America's attention away from the Starr Report (the most lurid thing to come out of the annals of American Politics) then you're even more credulous than I imagined.......Clinton was too smart for that sort of pie in the sky thinking.....

btw: if you agree with Lux, then you are mathematically challenged as well.
ONE time does not equal indiscriminate.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by dissention

What???

Iraq was bombed for 12 years straight by the United States during sanctions. During the Lewinsky scandal, Clinton not only bombed Iraq, but Sudan and Afghanistan, too. He shot cruise missiles without batting an eyelash.

Well, are we talking before Clinton here? from what I recall of the headlines, Clinton Bombed Iraq during the Lewinsky mess. that doesnt equal 12 years.

as for Sudan, as I recall, we had UN peacekeeping troops over there, therefore we were directly involved, and any such bombing would have been a military decision, right or wrong. As for Afghanistan, THEY were fighting Russia up until recently and I dont recall any real headlines dealing with US military action there until Bush Jr. ordered troops in. If you have other info, please post it and I will gladly say I stand corrected.

[amber]

Not to jump into this semi boring yet almost informative debate, but I'm pretty sure Clinton bombed more than one place. Pretty darn sure. The super liberal and extremely knowledgeable guy at my work hates Clinton, and I asked why, and he named a few different places that Clinton bombed, and why he bombed them, and it was pretty ugly...