Along Come The “Downer Debbie” Democrats
What would a victory celebration be without the Downer Debbie Democrats..you guessed it, the Dems were out in full force today:
Some Democrats, breaking ranks from their leadership, today said the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi in Iraq was a stunt to divert attention from an unpopular and hopeless war.
“This is just to cover Bush’s [rear] so he doesn’t have to answer” for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. “Iraq is still a mess — get out.”
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, said Zarqawi was a small part of “a growing anti-American insurgency” and that it’s time to get out.
“We’re there for all the wrong reasons,” Mr. Kucinich said.
June 8, 2006 - 05:23 PM on June 8th, 2006
“This is a good day for the Iraqi people, the U.S. military and our intelligence community,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
June 8, 2006 - 05:28 PM on June 8th, 2006
yeah, I’m sure there was a “but….” after that… those asshat democrats can’t afford to give up on the conspiracy they have working with the MSM to perpetuate those bogus approval poles in the desperate attempt of stealing congress.
June 8, 2006 - 05:33 PM on June 8th, 2006
al-Zarqawi’s death is good news, but the jury is still out on the long term impact on al Qaeda and the insurgency. Some of what I read today, other than the facts of the air raid, suggested that al-Zarqawi had fallen from favor, had diminished influence in al Qaeda, and had already been partially if not completely replaced. In fact, he may have been given up by insiders who wanted him out of the way. Time will tell.
Don’t take any of what I posted above to diminish the import of terminating him. Kudos for that. I’m merely reserving judgement on the big picture impact. That’s not being a “Debbie Downer”, it’s being practical.
June 8, 2006 - 05:41 PM on June 8th, 2006
Yes he did SF…and what say you about what I posted?
June 8, 2006 - 05:42 PM on June 8th, 2006
The BHDS Democrites just can’t help it, can they?
For just the sake of Justice alone, or the sake of restoring the karma continuum the removal of the diseased, degenerate, despicable maggot Zarqawi is huge.
June 8, 2006 - 05:43 PM on June 8th, 2006
Rest assured, this war on terror is every bit as psychological a campaign as it is military. The “insurgents” (terrorists) are betting that continues american casualties will not be tolerated by their allies in the AMerican media, democratic party and american left… ANY good news throws a wrench into this plan, that’s why this little piece of sunshine, Al-Zarqawi roasting in hell, should be applauded, celebrated, and used as motivation…
they cannot defeat us militarily, and If we ever got our asses together, psychologically, this thing would end with a quickness.
June 8, 2006 - 05:49 PM on June 8th, 2006
Paul- I did hear that they believe they know who is replacing him, and they are tracking him as we speak..I didn’t take your reply to be a DD reaction. It is reasoned..I would disagree that he had been replaced..I do think he fell from grace, which led his people to give him up, but I believe that it was because he was nuts..he was killing to kill. These people that are his followers have families..the only people dying(for the most part, I am not forgetting our soldiers or the press) are their families..I was happy to hear that the military got their hands on a treasure trove of info! That to me was the real get in all of this! Yes, ridding the insurgency of him was huge, but getting into his mind was better!
June 8, 2006 - 05:53 PM on June 8th, 2006
Paul, no offense intended, but where did you read that crap? Zarqawi was da man for Al Qaeda in Iraq. His maggot-infested group was behind numerous gruesome beheading of captives, which were put on the Internet. His team was behind many of the IED attacks and suicide bombs.
How is it possible to diminish the magnitude of getting Zarqawi? The only bigger fish is OBL himself.
June 8, 2006 - 05:58 PM on June 8th, 2006
“This is just to cover Bush’s [rear] so he doesn’t have to answer”for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat.”
Huh? WTF does this mean? They killed Zarqawi just for PR cover? Maybe they had Zarqawi in the sights for some time, but waited to pull the trigger for a time when Bush really needed the coverage?
What an incredibly stupid thing to say! Stark has been a f’ing idiot for many years. And all this from the party that supported “Wag the Dog” Willy, the Maestro of Manipulation of the MSM lap dogs.
June 8, 2006 - 06:03 PM on June 8th, 2006
Robert- I have heard a different version of what Paul said..
Let me ask you this though:
Strategically, which was they bigger fish to catch, OBL or AMZ?
Symbolically, which was the bigger?
I think that AMZ was the greater of the 2 stategic evils at this point in time, but symbolically, we put OBL’s face on it….OBL must be stopped, don’t get me wrong, but I do think he was the real evil of the 2…
June 8, 2006 - 06:05 PM on June 8th, 2006
Robert, don’t be so quick to condescend or impugn. The “crap” I posted is all over the news (other than perhaps Fox where the focus is more like a pep rally). Here’s just one reference from two months ago.
June 8, 2006 - 06:07 PM on June 8th, 2006
Here is Nick Berg’s dad reacting to the news:
“I don’t think that Zarqawi is himself responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq,” Berg said in a combative television interview with the U.S. Fox News network. “I think George Bush is.
“George Bush is the one that invaded this country, George Bush is the one that destabilized it so that Zarqawi could get in, so that Zarqawi had a need to get in, to defend his region of the country from American invaders.”
I am sorry for Mr. Berg’s loss, but AMZ is not an Iraqi and nothing to defend in Iraq.
June 8, 2006 - 06:14 PM on June 8th, 2006
Nick Berg’s dad is an asshat and should spend his time plowing the barren expanse that is Cindy Sheehan’s hey nanny-nanny
June 8, 2006 - 06:19 PM on June 8th, 2006
Paul I wouldn’t put much stock in that…those are not the reports I was referring to and I do believe that a meglomaniac like AMZ would not just step down…
June 8, 2006 - 06:21 PM on June 8th, 2006
Paul: Did OBL fire him? He was still the Al Qaeda leader, no?
Mr, Berg is, sadly, mentally ill imo. Apparently the loss of his son, a very tragic case, was damaging to his psyche to the point that he is no longer making sense.
I just figured out that there are two main reasons why the DDDs, BHDS crowd, MSM Lefties, etc. are trying to spin downward the Zarqawi kill:
1. They cannot stand the thought that this will be chalked up as a score for the U.S., and that Americans will feel even a tiny bit better about the scales being balanced, or that Bush might get any scintilla of lift from it.
2. Although they may not be consciously aware of it, they are extremely disappointed that Zarqawi wasn’t arrested so that they could generate stories about how we was being abused and tortured while in captivity: no Zarqawi-Graib stories for Chapatraitor Ted to exploit. They couldn’t revel in a Zarqawi circus trial, causing us to waste a million dollars while Zarqawi mugged and performed for the delighted MSM cameras and virtual Al Jizzeerists. They won’t be able to use it to generate any propaganda that our enemies can use against us.
Yes, this is the worst outcome for the Left. And the worst of the Left is coming out.
Huuu-aaaah!!! Good shootin’ with them bombs!
June 8, 2006 - 06:55 PM on June 8th, 2006
Robert,
I’ve heard it commented that this could be a good thing for the left. It puts Iraq on the front page, and the favorable press from al Zarqawi’s death will be over-shadowed soon by ongoing realities on the ground. Bush may get a short term bounce, but would have to face the realities of a failed overall policy once the al Zarqawi news fades.
I have no idea which way things will go, and once again merely comment that I’m reserving judgement on the long term impact of this.
June 8, 2006 - 06:59 PM on June 8th, 2006
I am dissapointed that the left wing of this Great Country would accuse us of playing politics with the war….. Isn’t that what they are doing,,,, have been dooing for quite some time? traitors! Thats what these people are.
June 8, 2006 - 07:36 PM on June 8th, 2006
Hasn’t Iraq been on the front page for months? The lead on radio news? What’s new about that?
June 8, 2006 - 09:04 PM on June 8th, 2006
Anyone who claims that the US policy for fighting the war in Iraq is failing lacks either knowledge of the facts, knowledge of military operations, or both.
While the MSM is soundly deriding everything that they claim is happening in Iraq, they are leaving out most of the story and everything that is favorable to the US. They are strictly sticking to the “If it bleeds it leads” axiom. Unfortunately building new schools don’t bleed, neither do new cell phone towers, nor do tens of thousands of new soldiers (unless Al Quada is blowing them up then they make the news) and policeman, etc etc etc. The good news out of Iraq is simply not being reported by the MSM. Perception is reality for far too many people in this country. Because the MSM promotes the perception that we are losing the war in Iraq, people are believing it even though it’s not true. Is it going to be a long drawn out process? Yep. Noone ever said it was going to be a walk in the park.
On the topic of military operations, there is one thing that no commander in the world can ever truly know and that is exactly what the enemy is going to do. You simply have to react to the changing conditions on the battlefield. Enemy starts bombing your hummvees, you put armor on them. Enemy starts doing something else, you react to it. The one thing you absolutely can’t do when you’re the substantially superior force is to retreat. You simply can’t. If you do, you not only adversely effect the morale of your troops but you strengthen the morale and conviction of the enemy as well. One thing you shouldn’t do is try to fight the war in a politically correct manner. While I’m not advocating barbarism, there must not be any qualms about utilyzing every weapon at your disposal to end the fight as quickly as possible. This prevents the war from dragging on and causing unnecessary casualties. Had we simply treated Fallujah to the same treatment we used on Dresden in WWII, we wouldn’t have had to conduct two offensives against it to rout the terrorists. They also would’ve found themselves as unwelcome in any other town as Zarquawi found himself in Baquba. For those who don’t know history, Dresden was a thriving German manufacturing city. During WWII, the allies bombed Dresden for a number of days including using incendiary bombs. A firestorm ensued that caused temperatures in the streets to top an estimated 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The city was reduced to mostly ash within the week. That was with B25s and B17s using WWII technology munitions. A couple of squadrons of B52s and B1 bombers with 2000 technology could level Fallujah to the ground in very short order. Oh that Islamic fervor is fine for the single guys, but one city eliminated and the family guys are going to think twice about their families being left homeless or dead. No woman is going to allow terrorists to hide in her house and risk having her children killed under those circumstances.
June 8, 2006 - 09:12 PM on June 8th, 2006
FAO,,, if the libs were running the circus, all we would be hearing is about the “success” of the invasion and how justified it was.
So sad!:???:
June 8, 2006 - 11:55 PM on June 8th, 2006
“One thing you shouldn’t do is try to fight the war in a politically correct manner.”
Damned right! And that is my main criticism of how this war has been handled. War should be fought with one single goal: to win. As we’ve already stated and agreed, Liberalism cannot win wars. I thought we learned our lesson in Vietnam, that political correctness is a recipe for failure.
June 9, 2006 - 06:01 AM on June 9th, 2006
If the MSM was fair and balanced, we would be getting reports of how many insurgents and terrorists were being killed and captured. It isn’t zero, folks.
It is about time we fought back in the press. The moonbats need to be confronted for siding with the Islamofascists, and that includes SF. It is time the full story be told, and the ldft made to acknowledge the truth.
IF the left, and especially the ldft on this board, want to side with the Islamofascists, let them do so openly.
June 9, 2006 - 07:41 AM on June 9th, 2006
Very true, PCD. On the one hand, the military didn’t want to do the body count thing, like Vietnam, as a way of measuring success. But by almost never reporting or estimating enemy casualties, they make it easy for the MSM to skew the situation.
The Left, the BHDS crowd, etc. couldn’t handle having the truth be broadcast openly in the MSM. It would put the lie to their agenda.
June 9, 2006 - 07:58 AM on June 9th, 2006
Robert,
Their agenda is to lie and lie, just like Josef Goebbels. The truth of who they are and want they want has been soundly rejected by a great majority of Americans. They crave power and want to operate like Robert Mugabe, take what they have coveted but were unwilling to work for using government, not earning their booty.
June 9, 2006 - 08:00 AM on June 9th, 2006
Bill Clintons biggist stunt was having him stand over ARAFAT and RABIN while they shook hands that was a stunt and staged for the cameras:smile:
June 9, 2006 - 08:37 AM on June 9th, 2006
yeah, how did that work out, senor blowjob?? Lot’s of wasted nobel peace prizes got handed out during the Blowjob era……….I still have yet to see “Hug-A-Jew Day” going on in Gaza….
June 9, 2006 - 08:40 AM on June 9th, 2006
Snowy, you’re being unfair to Klinton! We’ve been told by the Left that Klinton’s precision missile strikes completely, thoroughly destroyed Saddam’s WMD! You know, the WMD he also didn’t have?
June 9, 2006 - 08:55 AM on June 9th, 2006
That Klinton single-handedly brought peace to the middle east… wait, I guess not….
That Klinton crushed Islamofacist terrorists!…oh, wait……maybe not…
well, at least he solved the problems of Inner city povery and inadequate health care…oops, sorry..
Damn, well, surely he must have done something right, to be treated by the MSM like the second coming of Christ.. oh, I know, he put a woman on the supreme court who believes the age of consent for a woman to have her unborn child vaccumed and dismembered should be 12.. and THAT makes you a hero.
mind-boggling.
June 9, 2006 - 09:36 AM on June 9th, 2006
“IF the left, and especially the ldft on this board, want to side with the Islamofascists, let them do so openly.”
ad hominem – Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason.
—————————————————
“surely he must have done something right, to be treated by the MSM like the second coming of Christ…”
Bill Clinton was not only a better national leader than the waste of space we have now, but he was immensely more popular with the American people than Bush could ever dream of being. Clinton was also probably the most intelligent president we’ve had in recent memory…no embarrassing, toe-curling mis-speaks like the moron we’re stuck with dishes out almost daily…
And most Americans understand that America was at its peak when we were under his leadership; economic booms, declining crime rates, environmental protections, etc…
Our nation and the international image we project has gone down the tubes since Clinton left…
Ahhh…the 90’s. Those were the good old days!
George Bush lowered us all. And some of you have a part in that.
June 9, 2006 - 09:41 AM on June 9th, 2006
Am I being a “downer democrat” to suggest that the killing of Zarqawi won’t really change the situation all that much on the ground?
For example; does anybody remember when Saddam was captured two years ago? I certainly remember a few Neocons or two thought the end was near after that particular American victory.
I wonder what some on this board were saying back then…
June 9, 2006 - 09:42 AM on June 9th, 2006
kool aid alert, kool aid alert!!!!!!
fudged surpluses that never existed
enron and company running buck fucking wild
jews being slaughtered daily in Tel Aviv
a dozen attacks on US embassies, Ships, interests by muslim animals..unanswered
American Citizens in Waco…murdered
Lincoln bedroom….sold
8 year old cuban boy…well, he did win that military campaign.
lies, lies, lies, and more lies.
you believe in a farce… billy blowjob was one of the 3 worst presidents in US history, the other 2 being FDR and James assclown Carter.
June 9, 2006 - 09:49 AM on June 9th, 2006
it’s fucking hilarious.. virtually EVERYTHING that liberals point to as a success during Blowjob’s reign of terror….DIDN’T EXIST!!!
Suprlus – Lie
Environmental protections – Lie
Peace in the Middle East – Lie
Fighting Terror – Lie
now, SF, you wanna tell me again, the great legacy of the Blowjob nightmare? Oh, the French liked us better…..wonderful.
June 9, 2006 - 09:53 AM on June 9th, 2006
he was immensely more popular with the American people than Bush could ever dream of being.
the problem with that is that you are equating popularity with good leadership..Yes Clinton was so popular that he allowed us to be attacked..again, and again, and agian, and again…and never stood up for us. He was so popular, that he did not safeguard the ecomony that he had and it started sliding into recession in 99′. He was so popular that woman alledged rape.
Bush didn’t lower anyone…the left has dragged this country down from the decision of 00′. The past 5 years have been aboput paybacks from the left and you have a part in that!
June 9, 2006 - 10:01 AM on June 9th, 2006
30- did any of us give you any indication that we felt this was going to be the end of the war? I believe we rejoiced in the fact that AMZ and his top people were taken out, and we got intel to boot…that is a good thing but the war carries on. A Downer Democrat is cited in the post …the idiots that are cited are the Downers!
June 9, 2006 - 10:01 AM on June 9th, 2006
33. Peejz, W never groped anyone who came to him looking for help like Clinton did Willey.
Oh, SF, with your answer, I’ll take that as you have sided with the Islamofascists. To you good news is Americans dead in Iraq/Afganisatan. All Al Queda set ups of civilian deaths are American Service men killing them.
June 9, 2006 - 10:13 AM on June 9th, 2006
“Yes Clinton was so popular that he allowed us to be attacked..again, and again, and agian,”
What are you talking about?!? Being attacked makes one popular?
If that were true, Bush would be as popular as Jesus; with all the Americans being killed from terror attacks under his reign…
June 9, 2006 - 10:22 AM on June 9th, 2006
“Bush didn’t lower anyone:the left has dragged this country down from the decision of 00″
Yeah, Peejz…that’s makes a lot of sense. The party that did NOT control Congress and the Presidency is at fault for the mistakes of the past 6 years.
Where do you come up with this stuff?!?
———————————————————-
“now, SF, you wanna tell me again, the great legacy of the Blowjob nightmare?”
His domestic priorities as president included efforts to create a universal healthcare system, improve education, increase local police forces, restrict handgun sales, balance the federal budget, strengthen environmental regulations, improve race relations, and protect the jobs of workers during pregnancy or medical emergency. He raised income taxes in 1993. His most dramatic domestic move was the radical reform of the welfare system in 1996 in cooperation with Republicans who had taken control of Congress.
Internationally, his priorities included reducing trade barriers, support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, preventing nuclear proliferation, and mediating the Northern Ireland peace process and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts, and military intervention to end the Bosnian War and the Kosovo War. He engaged in air attacks on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, most notably in Operation Desert Fox, and funded efforts to overthrow Saddam. Clinton also directed his focus towards eliminating Al-Qaeda covertly through the CIA during the late 1990’s.
Clinton remained popular with the public throughout his two terms as president, ending his Presidential career with a 65% approval rating, the highest end-of-term approval rating of any President in the post-Eisenhower era.
————————————
Just admit it guys, you are jealous of Clintons popularity. It doesn’t make sense to you and you fear the unknown, so you hate on Clinton even though he was immensely popular and successful domesticly and internationaly. Unlike that failed monkey of a president, George W. Bush.
June 9, 2006 - 10:29 AM on June 9th, 2006
37-Yes it does make sense. I would bet if you put a bit of thought into it, you would actually see it…but that me be asking too much!
Why would Clinton being popular make any of us jealous? He was popular with all those countries that took bribes from Saddam. He is yours, you own him..
June 9, 2006 - 10:36 AM on June 9th, 2006
“Why would Clinton being popular make any of us jealous? He was popular with all those countries that took bribes from Saddam. He is yours, you own him…”
Popular with all those other countries AND WITH HIS OWN AMERICAN PEOPLE!!
Look at the numbers, Peejz, they don’t lie. Clinton consistently had higher public approval ratings, more so than Bush could ever dream of.
I finally understand what all this Clinton-Hate is all about!!! Your team is freakin’ jealous that Bush isn’t as popular on a daily basis with the American people like Clinton was.
It probably really galls you, but you won’t dare admit it…
I mean, even during the impeachment deal his approval was up in the 60% range, while Bush is just barely hovering above 30%.
———————————————–
“I would bet if you put a bit of thought into it, you would actually see it:but that me be asking too much!”
June 9, 2006 - 10:40 AM on June 9th, 2006
“Oh, SF, with your answer, I’ll take that as you have sided with the Islamofascists. To you good news is Americans dead in Iraq/Afganisatan.”
June 9, 2006 - 10:45 AM on June 9th, 2006
SF, again, you claim..
“is domestic priorities as president included efforts to create a universal healthcare system, improve education, increase local….”
yeah, his PRIORITIES..again, the liberal way..symbolism over substance…
NAME ONE FUCKING ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!
here is my favourite belly laugh statement in that ridiculous post….
“Clinton also directed his focus towards eliminating Al-Qaeda covertly through the CIA during the late 1990’s.”
I nearly snarfed out my tuna hoagie through my nose when I read that f-ing gem.
June 9, 2006 - 10:53 AM on June 9th, 2006
“NAME ONE FUCKING ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!”
northern ireland peace accord.
June 9, 2006 - 10:56 AM on June 9th, 2006
oh, ANOTHER FUCKING LIE!!!!
Subsequent talks on the agreement, which would have ended three decades of direct rule from London, seemed to go nowhere. Finally, at the end of November, David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionists, abandoned the seemingly sacrosanct “no guns, no government”position and took a difficult leap of faith in agreeing to form a government prior to Sinn Fein’s disarmament. If the IRA did not begin the destruction of their weapons by Jan. 31, 2000, however, the Ulster Unionists threatened they would withdraw from the Northern Irish Parliament, shutting down the new government. With this compromise in place, this government was quickly formed, and on Dec. 2, 1999, the British government formally transferred governing power to the Northern Irish Parliament. David Trimble became first minister. Two leaders of Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, received seats in the 4-party 12-member Parliament. But by the deadline, Sinn Fein had made little progress toward disarmament and claimed it had not made any such commitment. As a result, the British government suspended Parliament on Feb. 12, 2000, and once again imposed direct rule. In July 2001, after issuing one last ultimatum to the IRA to begin destroying its weapons stores, Ulster Unionist leader Trimble resigned his post as first minister.
Following Trimble’s departure, the IRA offered another vague and open-ended disarmament plan, only to withdraw it.
June 9, 2006 - 10:56 AM on June 9th, 2006
oh, ANOTHER FUCKING LIE!!!!
Subsequent talks on the agreement, which would have ended three decades of direct rule from London, seemed to go nowhere. Finally, at the end of November, David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionists, abandoned the seemingly sacrosanct “no guns, no government”position and took a difficult leap of faith in agreeing to form a government prior to Sinn Fein’s disarmament. If the IRA did not begin the destruction of their weapons by Jan. 31, 2000, however, the Ulster Unionists threatened they would withdraw from the Northern Irish Parliament, shutting down the new government. With this compromise in place, this government was quickly formed, and on Dec. 2, 1999, the British government formally transferred governing power to the Northern Irish Parliament. David Trimble became first minister. Two leaders of Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, received seats in the 4-party 12-member Parliament. But by the deadline, Sinn Fein had made little progress toward disarmament and claimed it had not made any such commitment. As a result, the British government suspended Parliament on Feb. 12, 2000, and once again imposed direct rule. In July 2001, after issuing one last ultimatum to the IRA to begin destroying its weapons stores, Ulster Unionist leader Trimble resigned his post as first minister.
Following Trimble’s departure, the IRA offered another vague and open-ended disarmament plan, only to withdraw it.
June 9, 2006 - 10:58 AM on June 9th, 2006
SF, I’m trying to help you here, keeping you from continuing to stick your foot in your mouth.
Northern Ireland peacel….farce
Surplus….fantansy
middle east peace…..laughable
fighting terror…..disgraceful
Ah, the Clinton record….
June 9, 2006 - 11:01 AM on June 9th, 2006
Clinton got Northern Ireland’s divided community to sit down together with the common goal of consigning violence and inequality to the past.
Clinton was a man who sought peace. Bush is a pathetic warmonger.
Everyone knows this…that’s why Clinton is immensly popular around the world and here in the states and why Bush is spit on and burned in efigy accross the globe.
June 9, 2006 - 11:04 AM on June 9th, 2006
SF, you are reaching.. I just blew your f-ing accomplishment WIDE OPEN and this is all you can come back with? A BHDS tirade?
Clinton was a man who sought head…….. and the worst legacy of that fucking nightmare of a bogus president was that he shat that carpet-bagging, bitch-on-wheels wife of his on the unsuspecting public.
Thanks, dickhead.
June 9, 2006 - 11:07 AM on June 9th, 2006
Mike Kilo, come on man…you’re just grabbing propaganda crap from some right-wing website. weak.
Try looking at some Unbiased sources for a change…:roll:
Again, I know you are just jealous of the immense success of the Clinton presidency and his immense popularity.
I mean, I would be pissed off like you are if I backed and put everything I have emotionally into a loser like Bush. What a disappointment HE turned out to be for your team.
You guys thought you had it easy after Bill, but no…it just went downhill for you guys.
Your president has a 30% job approval rating.
Mine, had 60%+ in his WORST DAYS…
Clinton = good president
Bush = Loser
June 9, 2006 - 11:07 AM on June 9th, 2006
I swear that you guys have concocted this utter fantasy of a Clinton legacy….NONE OF IT EXISTS!!!!
June 9, 2006 - 11:08 AM on June 9th, 2006
“improve race relations,” (SFL)
Now there’s one Klinton cliamed “accomplishment” that just jumps right out of the page.
Are you joking? Are you studying to be an amateur comedian, SFL? Writing your own material now, are you?
Klinton pandered to the Black Plantation “leadership” while participating in public acticities that only served to alienate and divide this country by race even more.
Remember his “black churches” burning crap? Then later it turned out it was a another big lie, that not only had some white chuirches burned too, but that some of the black churches were burned by their own pastors to in insurance fraud schemes. The whole thing was a pandering, posturing, f’ing lie by Klinton who was grandstanding to curry favor while inflaming anti-white sentiment among blacks.
It was the kind of cheap lying demagoguery that does great damage to Society. Yet KKKlinton did it.
It is just one more reason why it is a fact that he was a tawdry, lying, degenerate scumbag pos.
Your turn.
June 9, 2006 - 11:10 AM on June 9th, 2006
approval ratings don’t mean JACK SHIT..they are driven by media manipulation, why would I put any kind of stock in those numbers?
How does that saying go? The only poll that matters is taken the first Tuesday in November… and um….we’ve been doing quite well, thank you very much, in that poll.
June 9, 2006 - 11:12 AM on June 9th, 2006
It makes people like you angry that Americans would think Clinton was a better president than Bush.
I can understand your anger.
Clinton = Success
Bush = Failure
June 9, 2006 - 11:14 AM on June 9th, 2006
Robert, you are apparently jealous of Clintons success too. He IS known as the first “balck” president.
He was very popular with the minority community.
Doesn’t every black person know that Bush “doesn’t care about black people”????
Clinton = Success
Bush = Failure
June 9, 2006 - 11:15 AM on June 9th, 2006
SFL: “Mine, had 60%+ in his WORST DAYS:”
There he goes again, just making it up as he goes along. See below; SFL’s President!
Gallup poll: Clinton popularity at all-time low
March 9, 2001
Web posted at: 1:36 PM EST (1836 GMT)
PRINCETON, N.J. (CNN) — The popularity of former President Clinton has plunged in the wake of the pardons controversy to the lowest level ever, results of the latest Gallup Poll showed Friday, while his successor’s approval ratings have soared just as dramatically.
In a poll conducted Monday through Wednesday of this week, only 39 percent of respondents said they have a favorable opinion of the former president, while 59 percent said they have an unfavorable opinion of him. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
June 9, 2006 - 11:16 AM on June 9th, 2006
This is awesome, SF just keeps throwing out these fairy tale “accomplishments” and Kilo and Robert blast them out of the air like a ruffed grouse!
June 9, 2006 - 11:17 AM on June 9th, 2006
SF, it wouldn’t matter who the democrat was, that’s who the slaves are TOLD to love by their massas…
June 9, 2006 - 11:18 AM on June 9th, 2006
Mike,
SF is the Lord Haw-Haw of this board.
June 9, 2006 - 11:19 AM on June 9th, 2006
Robert, you are apparently jealous of Clintons success too. He IS known as the first “balck”president.
Yes, he was called that by the bootlicking plantation managers. The “Bledsoes” of the black so-called “leadership”.
He was very popular with the minority community.
Yes, they offered fealty in exchange for freebies paid for by confiscated tax dollars, just as they do for every Democrite.
Doesn’t every black person know that Bush “doesn’t care about black peopleâ€????
The stuck-on-stoopid sheeple plantation dwellers know that for sure.
June 9, 2006 - 11:20 AM on June 9th, 2006
55, Mike:
This is like skeet shooting! 
June 9, 2006 - 11:21 AM on June 9th, 2006
SFL maybe you better go take a potty break, get a drink of water, something. You’re getting hammered…
June 9, 2006 - 11:24 AM on June 9th, 2006
yeah, I actually now find myself waiting, with bated breath, to hear about some more of these phantom accomplishments of William Jefferson Blyth BJ Klintscum
June 9, 2006 - 11:24 AM on June 9th, 2006
Here is a chart for his approval ratings…
read it and weep.
Above 50% from 1995 on…even during the impeachment charade.
CLEARLY, you guys are SO jealous of the famous Clinton popularity.
June 9, 2006 - 11:29 AM on June 9th, 2006
Again, I ask you….how can such a “wonderously popular” god-like figure such as your bukkake butt buddy, billy, LOSE FUCKING CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 40 YEARS!!!!!
Come on SF…even you have to admit that throws a little monkey into your wrench.
What you are telling me is that, this ass clown was SOOOOO beloved by the American people that they turned around, as fast as they could, and handed both the Senate and the House to the GOP?
Is that what you would have us believe?
June 9, 2006 - 11:30 AM on June 9th, 2006
LOL…you guys aren’t touching me.
Here it is again for the slow learners.
Bill Clinton was an immensely popular and successful president.
Your Clinton-hate is clearly a demonstration of your jealousy and anger at his popularity and indestructibility.
You guys expose yourselves as green with envy with every anti-Clinton rant.
You can attact the messenger all you want, but you can’t change the fact that Clinton was a more popular and more loved by Americans than George Bush ever could dream of being.
June 9, 2006 - 11:31 AM on June 9th, 2006
this is toooo easy.
next thing you know you are going to produce some 60’s era documents produced with microsoft word at Kinko’s.
June 9, 2006 - 11:32 AM on June 9th, 2006
Yes, he was so beloved that the entire fucking country left skidmarks on their way to the polls to put Republicans in control……..
June 9, 2006 - 11:32 AM on June 9th, 2006
yes mike, that was unfortuante, but the republicans had a good stategy.
Plus, congressional dems DID need a bit of a wake up and shake up call. 40 years in power can make anyone a little…you know.
Staying on that, now…you should note that Congressional Republicans have a lower approval rating than Bush right now. I didn’t know polls went that low.
June 9, 2006 - 11:32 AM on June 9th, 2006
I’m going to interject some reality into this discussion with the moonbat, SF.
This is a post on Blogmeister’s blog of a letter from a soldier in Iraq. The letter is the truth SF refuses to see of himself and the other BDS sufferers out there.
June 9, 2006 - 11:34 AM on June 9th, 2006
The end of the debate: The winning shot: I’m done for a bit after this one…you just can’t come back after this. Clearly, America likes Clinton better than Bush.
sorry.
In a May 2006 a CNN poll comparing President Clinton job performance with that of successor, President George W. Bush, a strong majority of respondents said President Clinton outperformed Bush on a host of issues.
The poll of 1,021 adult Americans was conducted May 5-7 by Opinion Research Corp. for CNN. Margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
When asked which man was more honest as president, 46 percent favored Clinton to 41 percent for Bush. Respondents favored Clinton by greater than 2-to-1 margins when asked who did a better job at handling the economy (63 percent Clinton, 26 percent Bush) and solving the problems of ordinary Americans (62 percent Clinton, 25 percent Bush).
On foreign affairs, the margin was 56 percent to 32 percent in Clinton’s favor; on taxes, it was 51 percent to 35 percent for Clinton; and on handling natural disasters, it was 51 percent to 30 percent, also favoring Clinton.
June 9, 2006 - 11:34 AM on June 9th, 2006
why are you so obsessed with Polls? Is that part of the liberal DNA makeup? I mean, I know that’s how BJ governed, and how queen bitch operates…
If I were you, I’d start paying more attention to ELECTIONS than POLLS.
any poll numbers can be manipulated when 92% of washington based correspondents vote democrat…….
you can throw poll number after poll number out and it dosen’t mean diddly shit.
June 9, 2006 - 11:36 AM on June 9th, 2006
it’s all fantasy with you, isn’t it? It’s all how something is “perceived” and not how it actually is.
Bill Clinton is perceived as caring about minorities
Reality: He did JACK SHIT for them
ahh, but what does reality matter in the mind of the liberal, it only matters what you say you feel!!!!
June 9, 2006 - 11:51 AM on June 9th, 2006
CNN push poll = 0 value
June 9, 2006 - 11:53 AM on June 9th, 2006
SF, a CNN poll of mainly liberal Democrats proves NOTHING!
All you are doing is admitting that you were hit with the winning shot, SF.
Oh, SF, you don’t support the troops and they know it. They are starting to speak out about it. You are going to lose from their backlash.
June 9, 2006 - 12:33 PM on June 9th, 2006
SF got tired of getting pummelled from all sides.
Can anyone tell me how they come up with this bullshit concocted Clinton presidency???? I lived through it..you know what I remember? Columbine, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian, Monica, WTC, US embassies bombed, Black Hawk Down, USS Cole bombed.
not quite the rosy fucking picture that SF paints.
June 9, 2006 - 12:35 PM on June 9th, 2006
Mike, they are all issued and wear Clinton Rose (Law Firm) colored glasses.
June 9, 2006 - 01:35 PM on June 9th, 2006
69.SanFran…..now I’ve heard it all. Wow, a whole 1,021 adults. Wow.:lol:
Mike, I blame 9/11 on Clinton as well. After all, if he had paid attention to the problem we wouldn’t have had 9/11.
June 9, 2006 - 02:10 PM on June 9th, 2006
Just read, again, what SF chose to post
“Clinton also directed his focus towards eliminating Al-Qaeda covertly through the CIA during the late 1990’s.”
so, in other words, captain head job was fighting terrorism SECRETELY
I get it….so secretely that it never effing happened.
June 9, 2006 - 02:13 PM on June 9th, 2006
Yeah, I know things like “science” and “statistics” are difficult subjects for some wacky-far-righties to grapple with, but I can assure you that when done properly, polls can be quite accurate representations of public opinion.
It’s a lot to swallow, for conservatives, that Bill Clinton was an immensely popular president despite the highly coordinated right-wing assault that continues 6 years after the man left office.
Failure is hard for some to accept. And clearly the Right has failed in it’s 14 year smear job. Even impeachment couldn’t put Clinton lower than 50% approval…where is Bush right now? Hovering around 35%?
Wow. That sucks!
Your group jealousy of Clinton’s presidential success, even though you can’t even admit it to yourselves, is crystal clear to those looking in…
Methinks the Far-wacko-Right doth protest too much.
June 9, 2006 - 02:21 PM on June 9th, 2006
SF Liberal: “Even impeachment couldn’t put Clinton lower than 50% approval:”
ONCE AGAIN:
Gallup poll: Clinton popularity at all-time low
March 9, 2001
Web posted at: 1:36 PM EST (1836 GMT)
PRINCETON, N.J. (CNN) ” The popularity of former President Clinton has plunged in the wake of the pardons controversy to the lowest level ever, results of the latest Gallup Poll showed Friday, while his successor’s approval ratings have soared just as dramatically.
In a poll conducted Monday through Wednesday of this week, only 39 percent of respondents said they have a favorable opinion of the former president, while 59 percent said they have an unfavorable opinion of him. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
I know we are supposed to be nice here now, but it may be time to bring up the mental illness thing again, you know about how Liberalism has been shown to be a form of mental illness…
June 9, 2006 - 02:39 PM on June 9th, 2006
again I ask you, if the object of your homo-erotic desires, billy bj was sooooooo effing popular explain the following
1. in 2 elections he failed to get more that 43% of 43% of registered voters
2. 2 years into his stellar presidency, they country collectively ran like there was a fire to the polls to sweep republicans into power.
some popularity….
June 9, 2006 - 02:41 PM on June 9th, 2006
we actually have this ass clown to thank for the 12 year lock on congress that the GOP has enjoyed
Thanks Bill!
June 9, 2006 - 03:07 PM on June 9th, 2006
Robert, you post a poll on Clintons approval rating when he’s OUT OF OFFICE??
How does that counter the fact that Clinton didn’t dip below 50% during the last 5 years of his presidency and more specifically, during the impeachment witch trial????
It doesn’t.
You can’t fight it, guys. If you can’t admit it to yourselves then that’s your problem, but the undeniable fact is President Clinton was a vastly more popular president with the American people than Bush could ever hope to be.
You’re all green with envy, I know.
June 9, 2006 - 03:11 PM on June 9th, 2006
answer my post, SF…
Again, my point involved ACTUAL ELECTION RESULTS..not Friggin polls.
Even that self-hating jew, phoney war hero, gold digging, trophy husband John Kohn got more votes than billy BJ.
June 9, 2006 - 03:23 PM on June 9th, 2006
“the object of your homo-erotic desires”
Hey now…YOU guys are the one with the serious case of Clinton envy; constantly talking about him and bringing him up ad ad nauseam.
“1. in 2 elections he failed to get more that 43% of 43% of registered voters”
Umm, gee Mike, I don’t know. Maybe because they were three way races and not the traditional two?
“2 years into his stellar presidency, they country collectively ran like there was a fire to the polls to sweep republicans into power.”
OK, this on isn’t as black and white as the first, but I don’t think Clinton can take all of the blame on this one. The Contract with America had some appealing ideas (that’s back when I was a conservative) and was fresh and new compared to the Democrats same old-same old after 40 years in power. There’s a lot more to it than that, obviously, but the Contract campaign was very successful at putting a fresh message out there.
June 9, 2006 - 03:24 PM on June 9th, 2006
“Even that self-hating jew, phoney war hero, gold digging, trophy husband John Kohn got more votes than billy BJ.”
That’s because Kerry wasn’t in a three way race. (!)
June 9, 2006 - 03:29 PM on June 9th, 2006
“Even that self-hating jew”
Why do you keep posting this crap when it’s been disproved a thousand times already?
Kerry’s grandfather changed the family name in the 19th century…and yet you and your ilk STILL call John a “self-hating Jew”.
It’s EXTREMELY ineffective to use proven false material like that. It reduces the effect of the “hit” to nearly nothing, and ends up making the poster of it look like the fool.
…FYI.
June 9, 2006 - 03:30 PM on June 9th, 2006
The only reason it was a 3 way race was because Clinton and Bush Sr. and Dole were all such SHITTY OPTIONS…and lucky us, we got the shittiest.
If you know me, you know I have one issue that supercedes all others…. the government has NO BUSINESS ASS RAPING ME FOR MY WEEKLY PAYCHECK.
and when Bush Sr. renegged on his “no new taxes” he was DEAD to me.
SF, I know.. deep down you are not as much the commie as you come off as, we have a lot of the same liberitarial ideals, and the only way to reach that is to stop feeding the beast that is government…ANY tax cut is a GOOD thing…PERIOD.
June 9, 2006 - 03:35 PM on June 9th, 2006
I will not rest until the IRS has been smashed in a million pieces.
The IRS runs a close second to soccer as the most dangerous enemy america faces.
June 9, 2006 - 03:40 PM on June 9th, 2006
SF, changing one’s name does not change one’s identity, heritage, ancestry…
I can call myself Mike Chen and convert to Buddhism, but that dosen’t change the fact that my family for CENTURIES are french protestants….
Why hide? Is he ashamed? Well, If I were a Jew, I’d be ashamed to support a party that advocates allowing a bunch of dirty sandpigs to forcably remove the only modern functioning democracy in that ass crack of the planet known as the middle east.
June 9, 2006 - 03:51 PM on June 9th, 2006
I was uner the impression that he was surprised to learn of his Jewish heritage…
June 9, 2006 - 03:56 PM on June 9th, 2006
oh, sure… you mean as surprised as he was to learn that he did, in fact, own SUVs?
Everything that man ever did was for self-aggrandizement and self-promotion, from filming war re-enactment footage (during the actual war) to tossing someone elses medals over the white house fence
the man is a walking disgrace.
June 9, 2006 - 03:57 PM on June 9th, 2006
I would never say this normally, by I’m ashamed to have served in the same branch of the military with this boob, he is NO shipmate of mine.
June 9, 2006 - 04:40 PM on June 9th, 2006
“oh, sure: you mean as surprised as he was to learn that he did, in fact, own SUVs?”
Mike, he explained that one!: Those SUVs are owned by the family, not by him.
Lying hypocritic disgrace…
June 9, 2006 - 04:48 PM on June 9th, 2006
and don’t forget his horrifying fantasy incursion into cambodia…..
the man makes me physically ill….and he was ALMOST (thanks to clueless nuts like SF) commander in chief
if that dosen’t give you the heebie-jeebies, nothing will
June 9, 2006 - 08:13 PM on June 9th, 2006
Polls are supposed to be a way to determine the general opinion of the populace on a topic. They have however become a way to manipulate the news to produce the outcome the producers desire. Their results are statistics and they are invariably skewed by the wording of the questions and the geographic location of the pollster.
Mark Twain wrote that there are “three types of lies: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
A friend had a text book in college called “How to Lie With Statistics.”
If you want a very favorable polling for Bill Clinton, softball the questions and hold the poll in DC or NYC. Want to really ramp up the results? Run news programs telling how he did such a wonderful job in the White House for a week and then conduct the poll. It doesn’t really matter whether the content of the program was factual or not, as long as it was repeated enough times. It’s literally propaganda 101. Repeat something often enough and people will believe it whether it is true or not.
The facts are that despite the massive loss of jobs related to 9/11. We currently have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the last 3 decades. That’s not conjecture or polling data, that’s fact. Does it get reported as “Unemployment rate hits new low.” or does it get reported as “Unemployment rate expected to rise in the future”? Honestly, both are true. If unemployment rates are as low as they’ve been in a decade, isn’t it reasonable to expect them to eventually rise? But which one gives a positive outlook on the current economy? Which a negative one?
We’re effectively dismantling the Islamofascists in Iraq. A document found recently (I heard about it a couple of weeks ago)in one of Al Zarqawi’s safe houses indicated that the foreign terrorists had dropped to less than 50 ideologically solid mujahideen. They were therefore going to have to stop Suicide bombings until further notice. They were instead going to have to concentrate on using IEDs to attack the US and Iraqi forces. This was extremely under reported in the MSM.
The Iraqi Terrorism situation is more complex than many liberals care to admit. There are at least 3 separate types of organizations fighting in Iraq. The first is the Islamofascists such as Al Quaeda in Iraq who are opposed to any sort of western style of freedom in a predominantly Muslim country. These are probably the most dangerous because they can NOT be negotiated with. They are going to be on a jihad to restore the Caliphate if it kills them, and it will.
There are the Baath Party loyalists who are trying to regain their power in the same manner in which they gained it initially. Through the use of terror and violence.
The third group is the Iraqi nationalists who simply want the Americans to leave. This group is slowly coming around to the idea that the Americans are NOT there to steal their oil or rape their women. They are pretty much winding down their attacks.
Now there are two other groups of criminals who are being lumped in with the terrorists because of the way they act, but they are truly just criminals. These are the criminals that Saddam released from prison who are making their livings by committing crimes like kidnappings. The other group is the sectarian militias. They get lumped in with the terrorists because of the nature of their attacks against members of the other sects, but they are simply violent racists not terrorists in the classical sense. These criminals will have to be arrested and jailed, the sectarian militias will have to be disarmed or negotiated with/forced to stop their violent attacks.
The MSM refuses to report any of the good information that comes out of Iraq, continues to report it as a failure, and then asks people if the Iraq war is failing. Exactly how are they supposed to get an answer other than yes? I wonder what the answer to that question might be if they left the beltway or Manhatten island and posed it to the men and women who have actually been there versus those who are just reading their slanted antiwar reports? Why are so many soldiers who have served in Iraq anxious to go back, including those who have been grievously wounded? Could it be that they know we’re doing something good there?
June 10, 2006 - 12:11 PM on June 10th, 2006
SF Liberal, you seem like a pleasant enough chap. Clearly you are intelligent.
So why would you align yourself with a philosophy, a fundamental orientation, that is consistently wrong? I am talking about Leftism, Liberalism. A discredited, humiliated, nearly always wrong fundamental orientation that is at odds with traditional Americanism, with the things that made America great.
Why would anyone in their right mind ally with such a failed, discredited philosophy?
June 10, 2006 - 01:51 PM on June 10th, 2006
FAO “…the foreign terrorists had dropped to less than 50 ideologically solid mujahideen. They were therefore going to have to stop Suicide bombings until further notice.”
Yes, that’s the one fundamental problem with suicide bombing. It’s a self-depleting tactic…they haven’t figured out a way to solve that problem.