Why Does the Right Hate Obama?

[Iriemon]

it is more about power and the loss of control. There is this sense in the right that they know better, it is part of the hierarchical ideological frame they operate in. Clinton faced the same 'hate' - call it what you will - and was hounded till a private incident gave the conservatives their high moral (?) ground. Ask which party wants to control your actions and you get a sense of why conservatism is so lost after a democratic majority told them go away.

well, the simple fact is that we actually do 'know better.' it's a function of our means to reason and your stark lack of that simple means.

And it's not ideologically heirarchial... It's the natural order... And yes, americans tended towards a visceral, intense dislike for bubba; often in ways that evoked feelings of anger, hostility, or animosity... But there was innumerable intellectually sound, logically valid, well reasoned... Reasons. This in contrast to the irrational unsound, ethereal, logically invalid poorly reasoned visceral, intense dislike the left has to dislike gw bush... Who was more like them than he was like us.

lol!

 

[Iriemon]

Well using that species of reasoning then, we can conclude that the Financial meltdown is happening on the Lord of the Idiots watch...

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

 

[Iriemon]

Well using that species of reasoning then, we can conclude that the Financial meltdown is happening on the Lord of the Idiots watch...

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Did it? Are ya sure?

Sorta like how the Islamic terrorism went to war with the US in 1993 and the Clinton regime treated it as a function of criminality, establishing walls of separation between law enforcement and intelligence, prohibiting profiling of Islamic males and eviscerating Intelligence and Military budgets...


ROFLMNAO...

Now I’ve posted this 501 times, so once more is no big deal...

The current financial crisis is a direct result of the abuse of power by the Leftists in the legislature; it began nearly a century ago and slowly crept deeper into the US Markets, but was accelerated exponentially in the 1990s when the "Progressives" in the legislature, threatened the US mortgage industry with Civil Rights lawsuits if they did not underwrite mortgages in red-line districts... thus manipulating and undermining the reasonable and time tested actuarial thresholds of mortgage lending...

Of course, the Financial industry SHOULD have told the leftist to shove it, and in so doing forced those civil right lawsuits and exposed the leftists as the rancid fools that they always have been; but instead they assented to the coercive abuse of power and public trust all of which lead to pseudo-guarantees through Fanny wherein it was determined that if the Lenders wrote the deals, Fanny would take their shady paper; leaving the lenders held presumably harmless.

The problem is of course, that even the US Federal government and it's Leftist, er... "Progressive" means to print money, can't guarantee THAT volume of liability... just as the Federal government can't actually guarantee Deposits by the whole of it's citizenry, which they've now doubled-down on... all they can do is to SAY that they can guarantee those deposits... which puts the fear of those depositors, that 'their money is at risk of evaporating' at ease...

And THAT is the BIG LIE; and THAT is why the 'Progressives' have had to spend two TRILLION DOLLARS... to avoid runs from panicky depositors which would once again PROVE that the Progressive house of cards is unsustainable; which would force the Federal government to fold after it is forced to print MANY, MANY MORE TRILLIONS in cash to pay those depositors...

It's Progressive "Fractional Banking" sis and it's a SCAM.

Bernie Madoff is an ANGEL; a veritable economic SAINT compared to the scam that leftism has pulled and continues to pull on the international economy and the hard working people of the entire world...

Credits and debits... based upon nothing, except the means of the US Taxpayer to PAY TAXES... which are paid using the same credits and debits which are based upon the same nothing.

The scam was never sustainable, but the superior production of a free market and the prudent and virtuous nature of the American people, acted as a regulating, moderating influence which prolonged what would have otherwise collapsed decades ago.

Where the Left hijacked the actuarial thresholds to advance it's warped and wholly erroneous sense of fairness, it precluded the means of market to regulate itself... due to lowering the means by which these highly coveted instruments were obtained, it induced a frenzy of mortgage buying which lead to exponential increases in the cost of the real estate which secures those mortgages...

Sadly, once the actuarial thresholds were lowered, the runaway Mortgage Genie was out of the bottle... the same 'irrational exuberance' which drove the tech bubble/burst, drove the price of secured real estate beyond the means of the market to sustain it and PRESTO... the market failed to sustain sales; values plummeted... and the fraction of liquidity which the industry is required to have on hand against it's liabilities was once again exposed as being grossly insufficient and TRILLIONS WERE NEEDED TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM REALIZING THAT THE ENTIRE "PROGRESSIVE" ECONOMY IS A SCAM.

So, with all that said, one may be tempted to run and decry “GREED CAUSED IT ALL”… but that human beings are, by their nature, GREEDY is not news… humanity is saddled with numerous frailties… so PERHAPS it’s a BAD IDEA to advance POLICY WHICH SETS ASIDE SOUND PRINCIPLE… PERHAPS… it’s a BAD IDEA to advance ideas which PREY ON THOSE FRAILTIES… just perhaps it’s a BAD idea to lend credence to those who suggests that actuarial thresholds should be lowered to accommodate ideological goals which rest upon invalid reasoning and exists wholly outside of sound principle.

Need anything else Sis?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG etc were the left?

 

[Annie]

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

Bin Laden is still a 'hot potato', thanks to Obama resurrecting him. Even if dead, now Obama must prove it. If alive, he damn well better capture him.

 

[manu1959]

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

CLINTON ADMITS: I NIXED BIN LADEN EXTRADITION OFFER

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

Clinton made a speech to the Long Island Association's annual luncheon on February 15, 2002

: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [Al Qaeda]. We got -- well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.

Yes... So Bubba couldn't hold Bin Laden on anything... NOT EVEN THE 1993 WTC Bombing... He couldn't take him... hold him in a quiet place and 'debrief' him... NOooooooo

And THAT's How we ended up with 9-11.

 

[Iriemon]

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

CLINTON ADMITS: I NIXED BIN LADEN EXTRADITION OFFER

I figured, it was the Saudis who said he was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him, not Clinton.

But putting aside that little factual error and the fact that Ijaz's story has been discredited, In 1996 Bin Laden hadn't been indicted of anything against the US. Sure in hindsight it would be great to get him, but of course in 1996 9-11 hadn't happened yet, and didn't happen till Bush was president.

 

[Iriemon]

Er, 9-11 was being hatched under Clinton's watch, Clinton did have opportunities to nail Bin Laden, and chose not to. Clinton said that Bin Laden was a "hot potato" and didn't want to touch it. Bin Laden was behind the first WTC bombing. Clinton had fragmented the FBI, and the CIA intelligence to the point that they couldn't connect the dots.

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

Clinton made a speech to the Long Island Association's annual luncheon on February 15, 2002

: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [Al Qaeda]. We got -- well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.

Yes... So Bubba couldn't hold Bin Laden on anything... NOT EVEN THE 1993 WTC Bombing... He couldn't take him... hold him in a quiet place and 'debrief' him... NOooooooo

And THAT's How we ended up with 9-11.

When was Bin Laden indicted for the 1993 bombing? Oh yeah, 1998, two years later.

Nice try though.

Then Bush was elected, and ignored specific warnings of imminent hijackings by Al Queda and went on vacation.

And THAT's How we ended up with 9-11

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Er, no. The meltdown started in 2007, your boy's watch...;O)

Did it? Are ya sure?

Sorta like how the Islamic terrorism went to war with the US in 1993 and the Clinton regime treated it as a function of criminality, establishing walls of separation between law enforcement and intelligence, prohibiting profiling of Islamic males and eviscerating Intelligence and Military budgets...


ROFLMNAO...

Now I’ve posted this 501 times, so once more is no big deal...

The current financial crisis is a direct result of the abuse of power by the Leftists in the legislature; it began nearly a century ago and slowly crept deeper into the US Markets, but was accelerated exponentially in the 1990s when the "Progressives" in the legislature, threatened the US mortgage industry with Civil Rights lawsuits if they did not underwrite mortgages in red-line districts... thus manipulating and undermining the reasonable and time tested actuarial thresholds of mortgage lending...

Of course, the Financial industry SHOULD have told the leftist to shove it, and in so doing forced those civil right lawsuits and exposed the leftists as the rancid fools that they always have been; but instead they assented to the coercive abuse of power and public trust all of which lead to pseudo-guarantees through Fanny wherein it was determined that if the Lenders wrote the deals, Fanny would take their shady paper; leaving the lenders held presumably harmless.

The problem is of course, that even the US Federal government and it's Leftist, er... "Progressive" means to print money, can't guarantee THAT volume of liability... just as the Federal government can't actually guarantee Deposits by the whole of it's citizenry, which they've now doubled-down on... all they can do is to SAY that they can guarantee those deposits... which puts the fear of those depositors, that 'their money is at risk of evaporating' at ease...

And THAT is the BIG LIE; and THAT is why the 'Progressives' have had to spend two TRILLION DOLLARS... to avoid runs from panicky depositors which would once again PROVE that the Progressive house of cards is unsustainable; which would force the Federal government to fold after it is forced to print MANY, MANY MORE TRILLIONS in cash to pay those depositors...

It's Progressive "Fractional Banking" sis and it's a SCAM.

Bernie Madoff is an ANGEL; a veritable economic SAINT compared to the scam that leftism has pulled and continues to pull on the international economy and the hard working people of the entire world...

Credits and debits... based upon nothing, except the means of the US Taxpayer to PAY TAXES... which are paid using the same credits and debits which are based upon the same nothing.

The scam was never sustainable, but the superior production of a free market and the prudent and virtuous nature of the American people, acted as a regulating, moderating influence which prolonged what would have otherwise collapsed decades ago.

Where the Left hijacked the actuarial thresholds to advance it's warped and wholly erroneous sense of fairness, it precluded the means of market to regulate itself... due to lowering the means by which these highly coveted instruments were obtained, it induced a frenzy of mortgage buying which lead to exponential increases in the cost of the real estate which secures those mortgages...

Sadly, once the actuarial thresholds were lowered, the runaway Mortgage Genie was out of the bottle... the same 'irrational exuberance' which drove the tech bubble/burst, drove the price of secured real estate beyond the means of the market to sustain it and PRESTO... the market failed to sustain sales; values plummeted... and the fraction of liquidity which the industry is required to have on hand against it's liabilities was once again exposed as being grossly insufficient and TRILLIONS WERE NEEDED TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM REALIZING THAT THE ENTIRE "PROGRESSIVE" ECONOMY IS A SCAM.

So, with all that said, one may be tempted to run and decry “GREED CAUSED IT ALL”… but that human beings are, by their nature, GREEDY is not news… humanity is saddled with numerous frailties… so PERHAPS it’s a BAD IDEA to advance POLICY WHICH SETS ASIDE SOUND PRINCIPLE… PERHAPS… it’s a BAD IDEA to advance ideas which PREY ON THOSE FRAILTIES… just perhaps it’s a BAD idea to lend credence to those who suggests that actuarial thresholds should be lowered to accommodate ideological goals which rest upon invalid reasoning and exists wholly outside of sound principle.

Need anything else Sis?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG etc were the left?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG were subject to the CALAMITOUS effects OF THE LEFT and their unsound, imprudent and nonvirtuous policy failures?

Psst.... I knew...

Of course the left wants to focus on the results on the failure inherent in human frailties... BUT NEVER ON THE POLICY WHICH AMPLIFIES THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER ON THE ABUSE OF POWER WHICH FEEDS ON THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER on the secular progressives who demand that science is the answer and rejects the moderating effect of sound, virtuous, prudent bed-rock principle.

 

[manu1959]

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

CLINTON ADMITS: I NIXED BIN LADEN EXTRADITION OFFER

I figured, it was the Saudis who said he was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him, not Clinton.

But putting aside that little factual error and the fact that Ijaz's story has been discredited, In 1996 Bin Laden hadn't been indicted of anything against the US. Sure in hindsight it would be great to get him, but of course in 1996 9-11 hadn't happened yet, and didn't happen till Bush was president.

clinton used the term.....in reference to the saudis not wanting him.....in 96 i belive bin laden had declared war on the us....his forces eventually attack several civilian targets several military targets and a couple of embassies....clarke and tennant both claim they knew what he was up to and that he was a danger.....clinton has said the same.....suddenly it is all bush's fault......

 

[Iriemon]

Did it? Are ya sure?

Sorta like how the Islamic terrorism went to war with the US in 1993 and the Clinton regime treated it as a function of criminality, establishing walls of separation between law enforcement and intelligence, prohibiting profiling of Islamic males and eviscerating Intelligence and Military budgets...


ROFLMNAO...

Now I’ve posted this 501 times, so once more is no big deal...

The current financial crisis is a direct result of the abuse of power by the Leftists in the legislature; it began nearly a century ago and slowly crept deeper into the US Markets, but was accelerated exponentially in the 1990s when the "Progressives" in the legislature, threatened the US mortgage industry with Civil Rights lawsuits if they did not underwrite mortgages in red-line districts... thus manipulating and undermining the reasonable and time tested actuarial thresholds of mortgage lending...

Of course, the Financial industry SHOULD have told the leftist to shove it, and in so doing forced those civil right lawsuits and exposed the leftists as the rancid fools that they always have been; but instead they assented to the coercive abuse of power and public trust all of which lead to pseudo-guarantees through Fanny wherein it was determined that if the Lenders wrote the deals, Fanny would take their shady paper; leaving the lenders held presumably harmless.

The problem is of course, that even the US Federal government and it's Leftist, er... "Progressive" means to print money, can't guarantee THAT volume of liability... just as the Federal government can't actually guarantee Deposits by the whole of it's citizenry, which they've now doubled-down on... all they can do is to SAY that they can guarantee those deposits... which puts the fear of those depositors, that 'their money is at risk of evaporating' at ease...

And THAT is the BIG LIE; and THAT is why the 'Progressives' have had to spend two TRILLION DOLLARS... to avoid runs from panicky depositors which would once again PROVE that the Progressive house of cards is unsustainable; which would force the Federal government to fold after it is forced to print MANY, MANY MORE TRILLIONS in cash to pay those depositors...

It's Progressive "Fractional Banking" sis and it's a SCAM.

Bernie Madoff is an ANGEL; a veritable economic SAINT compared to the scam that leftism has pulled and continues to pull on the international economy and the hard working people of the entire world...

Credits and debits... based upon nothing, except the means of the US Taxpayer to PAY TAXES... which are paid using the same credits and debits which are based upon the same nothing.

The scam was never sustainable, but the superior production of a free market and the prudent and virtuous nature of the American people, acted as a regulating, moderating influence which prolonged what would have otherwise collapsed decades ago.

Where the Left hijacked the actuarial thresholds to advance it's warped and wholly erroneous sense of fairness, it precluded the means of market to regulate itself... due to lowering the means by which these highly coveted instruments were obtained, it induced a frenzy of mortgage buying which lead to exponential increases in the cost of the real estate which secures those mortgages...

Sadly, once the actuarial thresholds were lowered, the runaway Mortgage Genie was out of the bottle... the same 'irrational exuberance' which drove the tech bubble/burst, drove the price of secured real estate beyond the means of the market to sustain it and PRESTO... the market failed to sustain sales; values plummeted... and the fraction of liquidity which the industry is required to have on hand against it's liabilities was once again exposed as being grossly insufficient and TRILLIONS WERE NEEDED TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM REALIZING THAT THE ENTIRE "PROGRESSIVE" ECONOMY IS A SCAM.

So, with all that said, one may be tempted to run and decry “GREED CAUSED IT ALL”… but that human beings are, by their nature, GREEDY is not news… humanity is saddled with numerous frailties… so PERHAPS it’s a BAD IDEA to advance POLICY WHICH SETS ASIDE SOUND PRINCIPLE… PERHAPS… it’s a BAD IDEA to advance ideas which PREY ON THOSE FRAILTIES… just perhaps it’s a BAD idea to lend credence to those who suggests that actuarial thresholds should be lowered to accommodate ideological goals which rest upon invalid reasoning and exists wholly outside of sound principle.

Need anything else Sis?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG etc were the left?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG were subject to the CALAMITOUS effects OF THE LEFT and their unsound, imprudent and nonvirtuous policy failures?

Uh, they weren't.

Psst.... I knew...

Well, you should have told the Republicans who ran the government including the agencies responsible for overseeing Freddie and Fannie. They ignored the problem.

Of course the left wants to focus on the results on the failure inherent in human frailties... BUT NEVER ON THE POLICY WHICH AMPLIFIES THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER ON THE ABUSE OF POWER WHICH FEEDS ON THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER on the secular progressives who demand that science is the answer and rejects the moderating effect of sound, virtuous, prudent bed-rock principle.

We didn't elect Republicans to power. You got the wrong group.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Source that Clinton said Bin Laden was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him?

CLINTON ADMITS: I NIXED BIN LADEN EXTRADITION OFFER

I figured, it was the Saudis who said he was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him, not Clinton.

But putting aside that little factual error and the fact that Ijaz's story has been discredited, In 1996 Bin Laden hadn't been indicted of anything against the US. Sure in hindsight it would be great to get him, but of course in 1996 9-11 hadn't happened yet, and didn't happen till Bush was president.

Ya 'figured' that did ya?

And since Clinton STATED: At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. that could NEVER BE CLINTON TELLING YOU THAT BIN LADEN WAS A HOT POTATO... and he had no where to put it...

ROFLMNAO...

Clinton COULD HAVE TAKEN BIN LADEN IN THAT SAME SCENARIO... HE REFUSED ON DUBIOUS GROUNDS... and he rationalized that error by trying to lay it on the Saudis...

And THAT is how we got to 9-11.

 

[manu1959]

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG etc were the left?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG were subject to the CALAMITOUS effects OF THE LEFT and their unsound, imprudent and nonvirtuous policy failures?

Uh, they weren't.

Psst.... I knew...

Well, you should have told the Republicans who ran the government including the agencies responsible for overseeing Freddie and Fannie. They ignored the problem.

Of course the left wants to focus on the results on the failure inherent in human frailties... BUT NEVER ON THE POLICY WHICH AMPLIFIES THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER ON THE ABUSE OF POWER WHICH FEEDS ON THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER on the secular progressives who demand that science is the answer and rejects the moderating effect of sound, virtuous, prudent bed-rock principle.

We didn't elect Republicans to power. You got the wrong group.

name the presidents that signed deregulation into law......

 

[Iriemon]

CLINTON ADMITS: I NIXED BIN LADEN EXTRADITION OFFER

I figured, it was the Saudis who said he was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him, not Clinton.

But putting aside that little factual error and the fact that Ijaz's story has been discredited, In 1996 Bin Laden hadn't been indicted of anything against the US. Sure in hindsight it would be great to get him, but of course in 1996 9-11 hadn't happened yet, and didn't happen till Bush was president.

clinton used the term.....in reference to the saudis not wanting him.....in 96 i belive bin laden had declared war on the us....his forces eventually attack several civilian targets several military targets and a couple of embassies....clarke and tennant both claim they knew what he was up to and that he was a danger.....clinton has said the same.....suddenly it is all bush's fault......

Bin Laden did not issue Fatwas declaring war against the US until after this event, when he was in Afghanistan.

It's easy to point the finger an assert fault, isn't it.

 

[manu1959]

I figured, it was the Saudis who said he was a hot potato and didn't want to touch him, not Clinton.

But putting aside that little factual error and the fact that Ijaz's story has been discredited, In 1996 Bin Laden hadn't been indicted of anything against the US. Sure in hindsight it would be great to get him, but of course in 1996 9-11 hadn't happened yet, and didn't happen till Bush was president.

clinton used the term.....in reference to the saudis not wanting him.....in 96 i belive bin laden had declared war on the us....his forces eventually attack several civilian targets several military targets and a couple of embassies....clarke and tennant both claim they knew what he was up to and that he was a danger.....clinton has said the same.....suddenly it is all bush's fault......

Bin Laden did not issue Fatwas declaring war against the US until after this event, when he was in Afghanistan.

It's easy to point the finger an assert fault, isn't it.

august of 96....look it up.....as for blame....just pointing there were 6 attacks on us intersts prior to 2001....with no response......none.....it wouldn't be much of a strech to claim clinton tenant and clarke set bush up....

 

[Iriemon]

clinton used the term.....in reference to the saudis not wanting him.....in 96 i belive bin laden had declared war on the us....his forces eventually attack several civilian targets several military targets and a couple of embassies....clarke and tennant both claim they knew what he was up to and that he was a danger.....clinton has said the same.....suddenly it is all bush's fault......

Bin Laden did not issue Fatwas declaring war against the US until after this event, when he was in Afghanistan.

It's easy to point the finger an assert fault, isn't it.

august of 96....look it up.....as for blame....just pointing there were 6 attacks on us intersts prior to 2001....with no response......none.....it wouldn't be much of a strech to claim clinton tenant and clarke set bush up....

Yes and that was after Bin Laden left the Suden and was in Afghanistan. Look it up.

There were responses. Clinton sent cruise missiles after Bin Laden, missed him by a couple hours. Which is a lot closer than Bush ever got.

 

[manu1959]

Bin Laden did not issue Fatwas declaring war against the US until after this event, when he was in Afghanistan.

It's easy to point the finger an assert fault, isn't it.

august of 96....look it up.....as for blame....just pointing there were 6 attacks on us intersts prior to 2001....with no response......none.....it wouldn't be much of a strech to claim clinton tenant and clarke set bush up....

Yes and that was after Bin Laden left the Suden and was in Afghanistan. Look it up.

but not after "this event" which in context you were refering to 911....

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG etc were the left?

Who knew that Goldman, Citi, Merryll, AIG were subject to the CALAMITOUS effects OF THE LEFT and their unsound, imprudent and nonvirtuous policy failures?

Uh, they weren't.

Psst.... I knew...

Well, you should have told the Republicans who ran the government including the agencies responsible for overseeing Freddie and Fannie. They ignored the problem.

Of course the left wants to focus on the results on the failure inherent in human frailties... BUT NEVER ON THE POLICY WHICH AMPLIFIES THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER ON THE ABUSE OF POWER WHICH FEEDS ON THOSE FRAILTIES... NEVER on the secular progressives who demand that science is the answer and rejects the moderating effect of sound, virtuous, prudent bed-rock principle.

We didn't elect Republicans to power. You got the wrong group.

Well even a BLIND nut, finds a squirrel now and then... its true that 'you' did not elect Republicans t power and it's also true that there are no American policies being advanced... as it is true that there is no American policy which require actuarial thresholds be lowered to accomodate LOW INCOME BUYERS... because of some principle-less, twisted notions of fairness.

Republicans made MANY attempts to revise the absurd theft which the left was perpetrating through their quasi-federal mortgage banks... Bush noted that BOTH were in deep trouble in his 2000 Campaign... and soon after taking office in 2001.

Sadly, the Minimal majorities that the GOP enjoyed, particularly given the "Moderates" precluded the GOP from overcoming the VOCIFEROUS DEFENSE OF THE POLICY BY THE RADICAL LEFT...

Now again... it's a failure of character... it's a function of human frailty... it's a function of human NATURE; and it's LEFTIST POLICY WHICH PROMOTED THE FAILURE BY ESTABLISHING POLICY WHICH LENT ITSELF TO THE FEEDING ON THOSE FRAILTIES... rewarding bad behavior and lowering standards which are designed to DISCOURAGE bad behavior.

Now the same thing will happen within the relavant circumstances for the normalization of sexual perversion and the attempts to redefine marriage... legalize pot, prostitution, etc, etc...

 

[Iriemon]

august of 96....look it up.....as for blame....just pointing there were 6 attacks on us intersts prior to 2001....with no response......none.....it wouldn't be much of a strech to claim clinton tenant and clarke set bush up....

Yes and that was after Bin Laden left the Suden and was in Afghanistan. Look it up.

but not after "this event" which in context you were refering to 911....

I was referring to the supposed offer. It was April in 1996 where the supposed "offer" occurred. And the Pakistani's claim that there was such an offer from Sudan is discredited.

FactCheck.org: Did Bill Clinton pass up a chance to kill Osama bin Laden?

In any event, Obama had not been indicted for anything at that point and the later bombings in Africa had not occurred.

Like I said, hindsight is a wonderful thing. With hindsight we could have killed Hitler in 1930 and avoided WWII.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Bin Laden did not issue Fatwas declaring war against the US until after this event, when he was in Afghanistan.

It's easy to point the finger an assert fault, isn't it.

august of 96....look it up.....as for blame....just pointing there were 6 attacks on us intersts prior to 2001....with no response......none.....it wouldn't be much of a strech to claim clinton tenant and clarke set bush up....

Yes and that was after Bin Laden left the Suden and was in Afghanistan. Look it up.

There were responses. Clinton sent cruise missiles after Bin Laden, missed him by a couple hours. Which is a lot closer than Bush ever got.

WOW... Cruise missiles which ONLY MISSED HIM BY A COUPLE OF HOURS! No doubt that was because the Cruise missiles got caught up in traffic...

What brand of fool calls a missile shot that MISSES BY TWO HOURS A "RESPONSE"?

ROFLMNAO... You can't make this crap up.