Synon

Not at all. The American people are still asking "Where are the weapons?" and they aren't getting any answers, it's a shame too, Bush seemed so sure(snicker). If Saddam had any kind of functional artillary he would have used it against already, don't you think? If I was going to have my country taken from me I'd put up a hell of a fight and use everything I've got, it's only logical. We went into Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction, not topple a corrupt regime. Saying we never found any weapons but we did something good in in the end is no excuse for the loss of our brothers, we went to war for one main reason, weapons, not the regime. Sure, I think it's great to help the world, I have no problem with that, but to hell with that if I have to put my fellow American's lives on the line. It's not worth it, if it is, then why don't you risk YOUR life and come back saying it was worth it. Nuclear, that's fine if you want to tell your side, but you have no right to say what the liberals would do. For all you know we could be eating cake in a hot air balloon, but that's besides the point, putting words in other peoples mouths isn't going to make your argument any more valid.

Wow, that response didn't surprise me at all... Once again you managed to completely aviod a response to this post and instead of stating a counter point all you can do is insult nova like a little kid? How sad. I can't even get a yes or no out of you and your crying about other people not refuting what you said? It's SO simple Craig, here is some logic for you. Life isn't made out of dominos which you seem to be setting up in the order that pleases you. You are picking and choosing events that you think(notice how that word is NOT objective) could have sparked 911. I still have not seen one fact from you that Clinton 'caused' the attack, all your facts lead to a subjective biased opinion that Clinton was to blame. But you honestly can't say you KNEW 911 was going to happen given what had happened in the past. If you KNEW, you would have been able to say it BEFORE IT HAPPENED. If it already happened, then you DIDN'T KNOW. See how that works? You can't just line things up and say 'this event led to this,' it's not as simple as you would like it to be. 2+2 does not equal 5 no matter what angle you look at it from. I am happy to have a calm civilized debate, but unless you decide to grow up sometime soon I don't believe that will happen. The only type of response I can see getting from you is insults and absolutly nothing to prove me wrong, if Im right then I reserve the right to laugh at you. If Im wrong... well, more power to you my friend, if you can prove me wrong then Ill accept it.

... Who is this guy? Craig, you need me to cite a source that 2+2 doesnt equal 5? If it's illogical(which it's NOT) then stop avioding what I'm saying like a bad politician. Instead, I DARE you to attempt to actually stay on the topic of what I said and prove me wrong. I don't care how many biased 'sources' you have, you can't predict what would have happen, you can only guess... and not a very educated guess at that. Maybe this will work, say either "yes I was just guessing" or "no I have supernatural powers to predict the future". Can you handle that? if not, don't reply like a hyprocrit about not responding to you book.

Craig, are you saying you aren't biased? Unless you lived in president Clinton's pocket as well as Bush's, you really have no right to judge how well a job they did. You get your information from the media, just like everyone else. The difference is that you aren't open minded whatsoever and you state your arguement like you were THERE. By the way, oral sex isn't sex. If I still my **** in your ear is that sex too? They taught this stuff in elementry school buddy, did you miss that day? When you say Clinton is to blame for 911 I think "well lets see, 2+2=5... no it doesn't" There is no logic in your argument, if you have some psychic ability to know what would have happened, then great, you might know. But otherwise you are just rambling about the way things COULD have been. Since you seem to have a hard time understanding this concept Ill give you an example. My best friend was paralyzed when he rolled his truck after falling asleep at the wheel 2 years ago. To this day, he asks a lot of what-if questions, what if he didnt go to work, what if he didn't overcorrect, what if he had his seatbelt on, etc. To no surpise the outcome to every one of these questions leads to things being BETTER than they are now. So I asked him, what if you had been killed, what if your entire body had been paralyzed, what if you suffered brain damage. It's complete ignorance for you to assume what the outcome would have been Craig, if you can't see that then Nova is completely right. There are an infinite amount of factors, I doubt you have accounted for them all.

Another Tuesday... or a nuclear wednesday, unless you have some kind of magical ability to predict what the future would be if you changed the past, shut your mouth, because you nor anyone else knows. I couldn't agree more, he doesn't think about it whatsoever, he doens't consider the alternatives, thank you for describing him for what he is. Read, if you think Clinton was bad for the economy you obviously know absolutly nothing, we never had it so good as when Clinton was in office. And yes, when Bush took office and the economy started to drop, he lied to the American people and said we were not heading towards a recession(7 out of 8 is pretty damn close if you ask me). So investors ignorantly believed them and held on, losing just about everything, yeah... thanks alot for the warning. Every economist in the country knew what was going on, maybe like Nuclear was saying he wasn't 'contemplating' what was going on.

Mind pulling anything else out of your ass? Find where I said it was "okay," don't put words in my mouth pal or your just as bad as the people you hate so much. Corruption... right. Like when Bush told the American people that we were not going into an economic resession, flat out LYING to the people who got him in office? Oh thats right, a majority of the American people didn't want him in office, silly me. Or 'knowing' Iraq had weapons of mass destruction which... wow, we can't find anywhere. I figured you wouldn't be able to respond to anything I said, that's very convincing, hypocrit. Stay out of my country.

oh my god, you people cant be serious, he got a bj, big freakin deal. Oh no he cheated on his wife! If you cheated on your wife and lied to the people under you about it you think you would be fired? NO! Man that is so childish to use his personal life as to how well he ran the country, it's got nothing to do with anything. If it's not relevant, don't bring it up. Read, I think it's great that you have your opinion which you are more than entitled to. But name calling(Dumbocrud) just makes you seem really immature, surely you can make your point without stereotyping and insulting people in the process. Only I get to do that. Saddam just released a new tape threatening "catastrophic” losses unless we unconditionally withdraw from Iraq. If a nuke goes off in the states, are you going to blame Clinton for that too? Had George Washington done something, none of this would have happened! If Clinton had took action it might of been worse, but you guys convienently think things would have been better. Unless you have some kind of supernatural power to know what the world would be today had Clinton made a different decision, then your opinion might have some relivance, but as it stands, you have absolutly nothing to base your facts on, no matter how many you have. He couldn't predict the future, neither can you, so why are you holding it against him? It wasn't anybodies fault, but that doesn't seem to satisfy you, you need someone to blame, yet the fact still remains you have NO CLUE what would have happened had he done something different. This isn't dominos, it's not that easy to predict what would have happened, reality is a more complex than you give it credit for.

Thanks for the welcome. I completely agree that the next president will always be the fall guy(exception to the rule... the guys who are blaming the president BEFORE it happened). I do realize the economy is not completely in the hands of the president, but he has an extremely large impact. We must remember as a capitalist society a free market does not exist, but then it's not completely controlled by the government either. Im not sure about the figure on how many are paying taxes, but most college students have a job and pay income tax... which doesn't make sense(why dont we just keep the money and not have to take out a loan). The specific tax relief I was talking about was given to those with a large amount of money invested in the stock market, although they may be tax payers, they arent the ones who need it the most. It did not include most middle class family, only the rich seem to get the breaks, and they are the last ones who even need it. Oh, you can find penty of sick, hungry, and yes homeless people who are still alive. I do remember there are people trying to kill us, but I am weighing the differences. 10,000(alot more than this in reality) die every year because they cant afford gas and freeze to death, cant afford food, cant afford medical bills. OR you can have 3,000 die in a terrorist attack once in a while. Yes, the act is outraging that someone hated us that much, but if it took the same amount of funds to save the 10,000 as the 3,000... I dont know about you, but it would be worth it to me to save the many rather than save the few. So many seem to forget that they were people too, just like the victims of 911, but they push it aside and that outrages me more than anything. For a little more safey, I don't believe that is money well spent. You have to realize, you cant kill them all, and when one falls another will stand up, even more angry than before. Sure, we might save another 3,000 but I would rather save 10,000 instead. Cant get caught up in the cause rather than the result.

Mr. Read, just who do you think you are to be judging? It's really easy to blame Clinton for your own biased opinion isn't it, don't assume that every event ends up in a domino effect, and when it does you don't have the right to point your ugly finger. All I hear you guys saying is "If Clinton had done something this never would have happened," wake up losers, you can't predict what would have been. It could have been worse, ever thought of that? He could have really pissed them off and a nuclear weapon might have detonated on your front porch. At least it would have shut you up, if Clinton went after every wanna-be terrorist who called in a bomb threat at school then we would be overwhelmed, dont ASSUME Bin Laden was the only one. I can't believe you are still crying and trying to pull the blame away from Bush. Guess what, it happened when BUSH was president, guess what else, it WASNT HIS FAULT EITHER, even if he is the most incompetent president ever. He can be blamed for Iraq, still looking for those non-existant nukes buddy? A crumbling economy, a JUMP in unemployment. Clinton was getting out of our national debt, one of the biggest economics jumps in decades. Now it's all gone thanks to bush, I lost $20,000 that was to be used for my education because of the failing economy. He gave all the people with hundereds of thousands in stock tax breaks, not the people who need it like STUDENTS or just a little money in stock. I can't figure out what is wrong with you people, Bush has done nothing productive in his administration. He is asking for another 87 billion for Iraq, what about OUR country? All the hungry that could be fed, all the sick that could be cured, if that money went to making cars safer then we would be saving tens and tens of thousands of lives instead of trying to get revenge of a couple thousand(RIP). The problem with you conservatives is you live in the past, instead of making things better you well on the past, stop crying and make a difference.