CLINTON'S MISDEEDS

[zonyl]

I think Clinton was decent president and that GW is a toolbag. That being said, what good is one long winded post on the topic after another?

Im just having fun with an internet forum. What is the purpose you have here?

[stimpy]

So let me get this straight, Clinton's major flaw in leadership is that he wasn't good at being evasive? Then by that benchmark GWB is the presidency ever!

I really can't say I disagree with you too much, I really feel that Clinton should have been able to invoke executive priveledge and tell Starr to fuck off with his questions about his sex life. I think in retrospect, Clinton probably wishes he had as well.

[zonyl]

So let me get this straight, Clinton's major flaw in leadership is that he wasn't good at being evasive? Then by that benchmark GWB is the presidency ever!

Hehe. One skill of many. I never claimed GW is the god of all leaders either. I just chose to pick on clinton because no one else here was. Makes things for me more interesting.

[Lex]

Then stop reading them Lex

Normally I don't really bother too, but I am serious. What's the point in getting all worked up over the Repugs or Libtards? Doesn't seem to resolve anything. I could write a 10 page post on how having a job will allow me to buy a car, but I should just forget out buying a car unless I actually go out and get a job. Shitty analogy, but the point is if you guys feel so strongly about this shit, what are you doing about?

[Lex]

What is the purpose you have here?

Ant hill kicker.

[Blue Shift]

There's one or more books out on all the fuckups Klinton made, somebody ought to read them and post up the facts here, as I don't have the time or effort on hand to do it.

I remember one anecdote, something some top general told later on about how BJ Bill actually left the nuclear football behind and got into a car. The general guy had to grab it and run for a couple blocks or something to catch up to him - this thing has the ability to launch every nuclear weapon in our arsenal - and gave it back to him. Supposedly, Clinton was pretty annoyed at being bothered and brushed it off as a trivial matter, citing that he was late for some thing. No big deal, just the fucking FOOTBALL, right?

Another great thing, was allowing scientists/officers from Communist China tour a couple research facilities, including Lawrence Livermore National Lab. My dad worked there at the time and witnessed these guys, uniforms and all being led around as they took notes. Not exactly a bright decision.

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

[stimpy]

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

I suppose the "rash" of bombings that you're talking about is the WTC bombing, as that was the ONE bombing on US soil carried out by foreign terrorists during Clinton's presidency. I know you can't be talking about the ones that happen in other countries, like the suicide bombers in Iraq, Bali, London, Spain...

Yep, that War on Terror worked just as good as the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty, dinnit? One thing to be sure, no one will bomb the World Trade Center again on Dubya's watch!

And as far as the football thing, if that were true I'm sure you could provide some source, and even then how does one quantify annoyance? Where there words exchanged? Let's see the source and put it to the Snopes test. Otherwise you're just shovelling the bullshit. Doesn't make me mad at ya, but come on.

[zonyl]

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

I suppose the "rash" of bombings that you're talking about is the WTC bombing, as that was the ONE bombing on US soil carried out by foreign terrorists during Clinton's presidency. I know you can't be talking about the ones that happen in other countries, like the suicide bombers in Iraq, Bali, London, Spain...

Yep, that War on Terror worked just as good as the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty, dinnit? One thing to be sure, no one will bomb the World Trade Center again on Dubya's watch!

And as far as the football thing, if that were true I'm sure you could provide some source, and even then how does one quantify annoyance? Where there words exchanged? Let's see the source and put it to the Snopes test. Otherwise you're just shovelling the bullshit. Doesn't make me mad at ya, but come on.

Here is the book "Clinton's Dereliction of Duty" that makes these assertions:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... 2?v=glance

Supposedly, Lt Col Patterson, recounts details of:
- Losing the launch codes
- Passing on an opportunity to bomb a location where Bin Laden was at, because he was busy watching a golf game
- Groping other various female co-workers
- etc.

[stimpy]

From Amazon.com
"Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson was a military aide to President Clinton from May 1996 to May 1998 and one of five individuals entrusted with carrying the "nuclear football"—the bag containing the codes for launching nuclear weapons."

Looks like if the football got left behind somewhere, it was Buzz that wasn't doing his job. If Buzz did take the football, then he was doing his job and has nothing to bitch about. But I'm sure he got paid for his dirt.

[Kohburn]

From Amazon.com
"Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson was a military aide to President Clinton from May 1996 to May 1998 and one of five individuals entrusted with carrying the "nuclear football"—the bag containing the codes for launching nuclear weapons."

Looks like if the football got left behind somewhere, it was Buzz that wasn't doing his job. If Buzz did take the football, then he was doing his job and has nothing to bitch about. But I'm sure he got paid for his dirt.

so if one of clintons people messes up its their own neck - but if one of bushes people messes up its bush who fucked up?

[EBSB52]

There's one or more books out on all the fuckups Klinton made, somebody ought to read them and post up the facts here, as I don't have the time or effort on hand to do it.

I remember one anecdote, something some top general told later on about how BJ Bill actually left the nuclear football behind and got into a car. The general guy had to grab it and run for a couple blocks or something to catch up to him - this thing has the ability to launch every nuclear weapon in our arsenal - and gave it back to him. Supposedly, Clinton was pretty annoyed at being bothered and brushed it off as a trivial matter, citing that he was late for some thing. No big deal, just the fucking FOOTBALL, right?

Another great thing, was allowing scientists/officers from Communist China tour a couple research facilities, including Lawrence Livermore National Lab. My dad worked there at the time and witnessed these guys, uniforms and all being led around as they took notes. Not exactly a bright decision.

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

There's one or more books out on all the fuckups Klinton made...

Oh, it's written so it must be true. Who's the author, Ann Coulter?

...somebody ought to read them and post up the facts here, ...

Here it is baby, you're time to shine. Find the book, read it, and post your arguments supported by the book and other evidence. Why talk about it; do it.

...as I don't have the time or effort on hand to do it.

No shit. This is a lame duck-out. Why even bring it up? I just did an internet search based upon a lot of evidence that I already knew about. See, this is how the Repubs vote; they just hear rumors and rhetoric, and go to the polls with em. I was the same way, as I am still a register Repub... then I went to college/Univ and unfucked the BS. I don't expect you to do it, but it is a great thing to do to better understand why things work as they do. However, ignorance is bliss in that this understanding propagates uneasiness with this fucked up country.

Anyway, if you have as much as a dictionary or know a dictionary website, look up the word, "acquiesce." You'll find that that's what you're doing by writing, 'I just don't have the time.'

I remember one anecdote,...

How special, deciding politics and the leaders of countries based upon fairytale, fable and anecdote; color me surprised, a Repub deferring to fantasy to decide and rationalize US and world politics.

So, a book out there, a joke you can’t remember…. This is how our politics get the way they are; jackasses using zero intelligence and logic to decide our leaders.

Another great thing, was allowing scientists/officers from Communist China tour a couple research facilities, including Lawrence Livermore National Lab. My dad worked there at the time and witnessed these guys, uniforms and all being led around as they took notes. Not exactly a bright decision.

What does that mean? What was lost? Any substance here? I was working at the Boeing Apache Longbow factory when they had an Asian, I think Japanese but I don’t know, group of people come through and they were supposed to give us info on how to improve production. So scientists supposedly from China toured research facilities, and your point? BTW, our elitist gov sends a lot of manufacturing to China, so is there any evidence/substance to your contention?

One of the designers to the A-bomb was a German guy, so what if these guys were ‘good Chinese’ (sarcasm) if they were even Chinese at all? You post ambiguous folklore that evidences zero. If you were in court zero of your rhetoric would be admitted. In fact, in disclosure, before trial, the opposition would have you removed from the witness list based upon you having zero evidence to offer.

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

I addressed that in a previous post to this thread. I can repost it if you wish. In order to further make your point, you need to establish how going to war, other than for the sake of just going to war, will actually remedy the terrorist attacks. Outline, through historical events or other relevant supporting data how going after a country, when it was a rouge group that entirely committed the acts, will remedy the matter so we no longer have to be subjected to terrorist attacks….. That is unless you think simple payback is justified; fuck remedies.

We’ve traded shots with the Middle Eastern Arabs for decades, things have only escalated; what do you think we are going to accomplish by turning things up? Ya think they’re going to scare off? If so, take another toke, blow the smoke and log onto your favorite cannabis website. I know, let’s have another Viet Nam where 58k kids die and the country is tied in turmoil for 15 years and the richest get richer…. Brilliant. Why don’t we ask what the fuck they want. I think they would say for us to get the fuck out of their country and out of their business.

Another point, look at the gas prices, the price for crude has almost tripled since the start of this war. During the Gulf War they doubled. This is how they conduct their war since they have no real military as compared to ours.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

Feel free to support your claims with something half-ass reliable.

[stimpy]

From Amazon.com
"Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson was a military aide to President Clinton from May 1996 to May 1998 and one of five individuals entrusted with carrying the "nuclear football"—the bag containing the codes for launching nuclear weapons."

Looks like if the football got left behind somewhere, it was Buzz that wasn't doing his job. If Buzz did take the football, then he was doing his job and has nothing to bitch about. But I'm sure he got paid for his dirt.

so if one of clintons people messes up its their own neck - but if one of bushes people messes up its bush who fucked up?

Well, if one of Bushes people fucked up I wouldn't expect they'd be blaming the prez for their own fuckup. Other then that, I really don't understand what you're saying. One of us needs coffee, maybe both of us.

[Kohburn]

Another point, look at the gas prices, the price for crude has almost tripled since the start of this war. During the Gulf War they doubled. This is how they conduct their war since they have no real military as compared to ours.

umm.. try again - look at the crude oil $ per barrel - its dropped a lot

so has the cost of gasoline.. yet the gas stations don't reflect this

[EBSB52]

Of course, there's also the rash of bombings and terror incidents that happened during Klintons administration, or shortly thereafter. We haven't had any such incidents to date. IMHO, Bush said no terror, and we got it.

Feel free to dispute or agree as you see fit.

I suppose the "rash" of bombings that you're talking about is the WTC bombing, as that was the ONE bombing on US soil carried out by foreign terrorists during Clinton's presidency. I know you can't be talking about the ones that happen in other countries, like the suicide bombers in Iraq, Bali, London, Spain...

Yep, that War on Terror worked just as good as the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty, dinnit? One thing to be sure, no one will bomb the World Trade Center again on Dubya's watch!

And as far as the football thing, if that were true I'm sure you could provide some source, and even then how does one quantify annoyance? Where there words exchanged? Let's see the source and put it to the Snopes test. Otherwise you're just shovelling the bullshit. Doesn't make me mad at ya, but come on.

Here is the book "Clinton's Dereliction of Duty" that makes these assertions:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... 2?v=glance

Supposedly, Lt Col Patterson, recounts details of:
- Losing the launch codes
- Passing on an opportunity to bomb a location where Bin Laden was at, because he was busy watching a golf game
- Groping other various female co-workers
- etc.

Let’s examine the bias that Patterson would have here.

1) He is the author, how much did he make off this book?

2) He is very conservative based upon reviews by Publishers Weekly where he is quoted as saying, “…trying to remove the ban on homosexuals and put women in combat roles…â€

[stimpy]

Another point, look at the gas prices, the price for crude has almost tripled since the start of this war. During the Gulf War they doubled. This is how they conduct their war since they have no real military as compared to ours.

umm.. try again - look at the crude oil $ per barrel - its dropped a lot

so has the cost of gasoline.. yet the gas stations don't reflect this

The price of oil has dropped since the beginning of the war? Dude, who is your dealer, and does he take PayPal? I want some of the shit you're smokin'!

[stimpy]

Patterson was a ultra-conservative general working for a liberal president and he was disgusted and waiting to pounce. According to conservative logic, isn’t that a form of mutiny to lash out at the people above you? Hypocrite.

Eh, Lt Colonel. Couple steps below General. I guess that's why he needed to prostitute himself for the cash.

[EBSB52]

Patterson was a ultra-conservative general working for a liberal president and he was disgusted and waiting to pounce. According to conservative logic, isn’t that a form of mutiny to lash out at the people above you? Hypocrite.

Eh, Lt Colonel. Couple steps below General. I guess that's why he needed to prostitute himself for the cash.

Ok, you're right. Rank means very little to me now, did when I was in the USAF too..... maybe that's why I never made it.

Guess the reason for that is because I don't care about age, gender, money, etc... if someone is correct, they're correct. I hate the saying in the USAF. They would say, "A superior can never be wrong, just mistaken." WHat a bunch of back-slapping assfucks. I would tell them,m no, you are wrong.... went over well

[EBSB52]

Here is an empirical study of the history of pay increases from a DOD website. I tried to get as close as I could with the start and ending dates, but the chart shows only October 81, not Jan, so I had to go with that. I was in the USAF at the time and I think they went with a fiscal October date. I used an E-4 with over 2 years service as a standard, but the rest should follow by percentage. The first set illustrates when Reagan, the military lover took office and the 2nd set illustrates Clinton, the military hater and their respective military pay amounts entering office and leaving office. It is only logical to establish percentages, not gross dollars, so I will do so.

http://www.princetonreview.com/out.asp? ... .mil/money

______________________________________________________________________

Oct 81 military pay
http://www.dod.mil/dfas/money/milpay/priorpay/1981.pdf
E-4 over 2 years is $720.30

Jan 88 military pay
http://www.dod.mil/dfas/money/milpay/priorpay/1988.pdf
E-4 over 2 years is $876.60

17.83% increase, or 2.229% per year

________________________________________________________________________


Jan 1993 military pay
http://www.princetonreview.com/out.asp? ... .mil/money
E-4 over 2 years is $1063.80

Jan 2001 military pay
http://www.dod.mil/dfas/money/milpay/pr ... 1-2001.pdf
E-4 over 2 years is $1423.80

25.28% increase, or 3.16% per year

________________________________________________________________________

The methodology used was to establish the difference of the pay at the start of the president’s term from that of the pay at the end of the term. I then divided that by the pay at the end of the term. I don’t know if it would have been more appropriate to divide that difference into the starting pay o not, but either way the difference would be negligibly proportionate. Where is this great honor he refers to so often; liars have no honor. If readers choose to believe Patterson then they are as foolish, only now it’s selective ignorance/foolishness.

[EBSB52]

Did me establishing that Patterson is a lying piece of shit silence the opposition? Come on, you guys were all about rallying behind the lying loser - Let's get some more talk going here........ I would hate to think you acquiesced already.... after all, it was YOUR cite.

[stimpy]

Maybe they're busy reading his book for more dirt. It is a whole 148 pages long you know.