Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Anyway.. what does the invasion of Iraq have to do with the murder of Bin Laden?
Deflect much?
It has NOTHING to do with it, because Bush took his off of the ball (Bin Laden), by starting an invasion of Iraq. Get it?
No.. this is colossally goofy, even for you. So, your argument is that we needed all the resources used in Iraq to get Bin Laden? REALLY????
Come on man....
Cantor's right. If y'all wanna blame Bush for the bad stuff, you have to face the unpleasant truth that this current success started under Bush's watch.
Sharing credit does not make it any less significant. Man up, lefties.
That only works if you accept that Bush WAS to blame for the 'bad stuff'.
When did the Right show any inclination to do that?
Starting with the unmitigated disaster of the Iraq war and the needless deaths and injuries to thousands of Americans, and the waste of trillions of dollars.
Is the Right's consensus now to willingly blame Bush, unequivocally, for that?
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
This lame attempt at spin by the Right is comparable to the morons who claim that the economic boom during the Clinton years was caused by Ronald Reagan.
So...
...the Right's spins are as follows:
Obama inherited Bush's great work in pursuing Bin Laden, but did he inherit an economic disaster from Bush?
No no no no, can't say that!! Economic disaster bad!!! Can't blame Bush for that!!
lol, maybe the economy fell apart on Bush because he was too focused on the trail of Bin Laden!!!!!!!!
jeezus you people are stupid!
Cantor's right. If y'all wanna blame Bush for the bad stuff, you have to face the unpleasant truth that this current success started under Bush's watch.
Sharing credit does not make it any less significant. Man up, lefties.
LoL @ "What do you want him to say?"
WAAAAAAAHHHHH...you are besmirtching my Pwezidunt!
DumbA$$...I expected the buffoon to LEAD.
I expected him to say...
"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.
THAT'S what $hrub SHOULD have said.
This lame attempt at spin by the Right is comparable to the morons who claim that the economic boom during the Clinton years was caused by Ronald Reagan.
So...
...the Right's spins are as follows:
Obama inherited Bush's great work in pursuing Bin Laden, but did he inherit an economic disaster from Bush?
No no no no, can't say that!! Economic disaster bad!!! Can't blame Bush for that!!
lol, maybe the economy fell apart on Bush because he was too focused on the trail of Bin Laden!!!!!!!!
jeezus you people are stupid!
Not stupid (well some are - a shout out to NOLA), they're desperate. The Republican leadership has one goal and one only. The more success Obama has the greater the difficulty the R's face in achieving that goal.
Given 'getting' OBL is likely to boost Obama's poll numbers what's a Cantor to do? Rewrite history of course. And what's a partisan troll to do? Repeat the orders from the Ministry of Truth of course.
That only works if you accept that Bush WAS to blame for the 'bad stuff'.
When did the Right show any inclination to do that?
Starting with the unmitigated disaster of the Iraq war and the needless deaths and injuries to thousands of Americans, and the waste of trillions of dollars.
Is the Right's consensus now to willingly blame Bush, unequivocally, for that?
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
LoL @ "What do you want him to say?"
WAAAAAAAHHHHH...you are besmirtching my Pwezidunt!
DumbA$$...I expected the buffoon to LEAD.
I expected him to say...
"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.
THAT'S what $hrub SHOULD have said.
That is YOUR opinion... whatever Bush said, you'd have taken out of context and bitched about. Cuz you dumb.
Killing bin Laden was not our biggest priority. Crushing terrorism.... in any form.... is a national security priority.
You are so hung up on individuals and labels that you are unable to think logically. Hence, you result to using really big, bold text.... because you're so fucking moronic that you think you're making a point instead of a fool of yourself.
Carry on.
That is YOUR opinion... whatever Bush said, you'd have taken out of context and bitched about. Cuz you dumb.
Killing bin Laden was not our biggest priority. Crushing terrorism.... in any form.... is a national security priority.
You are so hung up on individuals and labels that you are unable to think logically. Hence, you result to using really big, bold text.... because you're so fucking moronic that you think you're making a point instead of a fool of yourself.
Carry on.
That only works if you accept that Bush WAS to blame for the 'bad stuff'.
When did the Right show any inclination to do that?
Starting with the unmitigated disaster of the Iraq war and the needless deaths and injuries to thousands of Americans, and the waste of trillions of dollars.
Is the Right's consensus now to willingly blame Bush, unequivocally, for that?
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
It has NOTHING to do with it, because Bush took his off of the ball (Bin Laden), by starting an invasion of Iraq. Get it?
No.. this is colossally goofy, even for you. So, your argument is that we needed all the resources used in Iraq to get Bin Laden? REALLY????
Come on man....
Obama didn't. Since as you know, he actually got the bulk of our troops OUT of Iraq. However, Bush obviously didn't need the added distraction of the Iraq invasion on his plate, since it took his priorities away from finding Bin Laden. Get it?
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
81 Democrats voted yes. Please you need to stop already... you're not looking very good here. This was NOT entirely Bush's war... that's just plain dishonest.
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
81 Democrats voted yes. Please you need to stop already... you're not looking very good here. This was NOT entirely Bush's war... that's just plain dishonest.
No.. this is colossally goofy, even for you. So, your argument is that we needed all the resources used in Iraq to get Bin Laden? REALLY????
Come on man....
Obama didn't. Since as you know, he actually got the bulk of our troops OUT of Iraq. However, Bush obviously didn't need the added distraction of the Iraq invasion on his plate, since it took his priorities away from finding Bin Laden. Get it?
So, in your opinion, we should have focused the entire might of the US on chasing one man... and completely ignored the rest of AQ's infrastructure, training facilities, etc?
Seriously? That's your contention?
If you cannot see the utter stupidity of that, then God is the only one who can help you.
Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.
They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
81 Democrats voted yes. Please you need to stop already... you're not looking very good here. This was NOT entirely Bush's war... that's just plain dishonest.
LoL @ "What do you want him to say?"
WAAAAAAAHHHHH...you are besmirtching my Pwezidunt!
DumbA$$...I expected the buffoon to LEAD.
I expected him to say...
"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.
THAT'S what $hrub SHOULD have said.
That is YOUR opinion... whatever Bush said, you'd have taken out of context and bitched about. Cuz you dumb.
Killing bin Laden was not our biggest priority. Crushing terrorism.... in any form.... is a national security priority.
You are so hung up on individuals and labels that you are unable to think logically. Hence, you result to using really big, bold text.... because you're so fucking moronic that you think you're making a point instead of a fool of yourself.
Carry on.
PLEASE tell me how you take these commenst IN context then:
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
LoL @ "What do you want him to say?"
WAAAAAAAHHHHH...you are besmirtching my Pwezidunt!
DumbA$$...I expected the buffoon to LEAD.
I expected him to say...
"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.
THAT'S what $hrub SHOULD have said.
That is YOUR opinion... whatever Bush said, you'd have taken out of context and bitched about. Cuz you dumb.
Killing bin Laden was not our biggest priority. Crushing terrorism.... in any form.... is a national security priority.
You are so hung up on individuals and labels that you are unable to think logically. Hence, you result to using really big, bold text.... because you're so fucking moronic that you think you're making a point instead of a fool of yourself.
Carry on.
PLEASE tell me how you take these commenst IN context then:
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
That is YOUR opinion... whatever Bush said, you'd have taken out of context and bitched about. Cuz you dumb.
Killing bin Laden was not our biggest priority. Crushing terrorism.... in any form.... is a national security priority.
You are so hung up on individuals and labels that you are unable to think logically. Hence, you result to using really big, bold text.... because you're so fucking moronic that you think you're making a point instead of a fool of yourself.
Carry on.
Riiiiiiight........
Speculation, convection, shoulda-woulda-coulda, OPINION, pseudo-nuance....in the end that's all you have to fall back on.
Carry on hack.
Another lie. He had the backing of the REPUBLICANS in Congress. Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war.
81 Democrats voted yes. Please you need to stop already... you're not looking very good here. This was NOT entirely Bush's war... that's just plain dishonest.
Just for the record, this is correct, Bush did get support from Democrats for the invasion of Iraq. Not a majority of them but the support was there. Of course, their support was gotten partially based on the lies of WMD, but that will get this thread way off track....
