I am glad we had a strong Republican leader like GWB in office during this perilous time.
Clinton or Carter NEVER would have stood up to terror. They are sissy girly-men who do not/did not have the guts to stand up to threats to our country.
Reagan could have handled it too.
2006-09-11 03:41:21 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Hey guys - good first 3 answers!
2006-09-11 03:49:20 · update #1
HIC - LOVE Saturday Night Live and the girly-man skit. THAT is why I say that.
I think it is a funny term and I am secure enough that calling girly-men what they are doesn't bother me. (There are girly-girls too.)
2006-09-11 03:58:29 · update #2
Are YOU so insecure as to take offense of a WORD? "girly"
I am BLOND, part Polish, and was a cheerleader - NONE of those jokes bother me in THE LEAST. I laugh. I am just great I guess.
2006-09-11 04:01:56 · update #3
Michelle - I'm not great because I am a blond and was a cheerleader - it's because I am not foolish enough to take jokes about it seriously. I am a confident person - a great person...! ; )
2006-09-11 06:33:34 · update #4
Garednerd, you're an idiot. Get off the boards with your ignorance. Years of planning went into these attacks.
The fact is, if Clinton would have taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance, none of this would have happened.
Two strong Republicans took the forefront after 9/11 - George W Bush and Rudy Guiliani. Both whipped into action. They comforted a nation and made sure we haven't been attacked since. You get that don't you? We haven't been attacked on our soil since. All kinds of attacks have been planned - probably for as long as 9/11, and they were all stopped.
Thank God Bush is in office.
2006-09-11 04:15:51 · answer #1 · answered by RAR24 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I don't want to get into a full political debate here but, Clinton did stand up to the mid-east during his term of office and it worked out fine without war he was able do work it out with diplomacy and not war and the loss of innocent lives. Bush the first had the same problem with Desert Storm, if you remember, he didn't win that either, in fact Swartzkoph's troops had Saddam in his sights and he had to order his troops to stand down. Saddam tired to assassinate Bush the first, and that is the only reason the Bush the second is in Iraq because he said in a news conference early on in is office that he vowed revenge against the guy who tired to kill my Daddy. There were no weapons of mass destruction and the can't tie Saddam to the 9/11 bombings so what was his point of invading Iraq? We still don't have Bin Laden, so where is he and if Bin Laden is behind all this should we be focusing on him and not Iraq? Think about it.
2006-09-11 03:49:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Stupid and Republican is no different from stupid and democrat!
A logical rational leader is what we need and needed then! You are so gullible - the enemy hits and the government chases the wrong culprit - that makes you feel safe? You sound kind of stupid to me. That means anybody can sell you snake oil and you will be the highest proponent of the seller. *Which is precisely what you're doing). GWB and that bunch from "Emerald city" has sold us nothing but snake oil - a plot that is leading us to the poorhouse and their cronies in corporate America are raking in the green and on borrowed money I might add.
They try to keep us in check by announcing a new terrorist of the month (probably from Boogey man Cheney).
Get over this Republican and Democrat bull sh it -use your brain!
2006-09-11 05:01:30 · answer #3 · answered by worriedaboutyou 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO. It is not your hair color that makes you dim witted it is your ignorance and hate.
Being blond and a cheerleader does not make you great (I am a natural blond (unlike Ann Coulter) and was a college cheerleader (a lot recently than you were), but that doen't make me GREAT). What makes a person great is what is inside their heart and head.
You can't be that great, if you feel the need to call yourself as such on here. Just insecure!
2006-09-11 05:00:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If Reagan launched a few cruise missles into Libya as a way of letting Qaddafi to know it was time to back down on sponsoring state terrorism, you know this would have been handled decisively. Hell, France was our ally and he dropped a bomb into their compound in Libya because they wouldn't let us fly over France for the raid so the planes had to refuel in flight at night.
My guess is that 9/11 was planned and set up before Bush was in office and they didn't know that they were going to face a Republican president. It certainly didn't matter to the hijackers, they would be long dead and unable to face retribution, but the rest of Al-Qaeda was seriously hamstrung by having to split their resources of men and money fighting the US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, denying them the ability to launch additional attacks on US soil.
2006-09-11 03:50:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
It happened BECAUSE Bush was in office.
I'm not at all thrilled with the current state of the Democratic party. But they would never have used the tragedy to lie their way into a war, diminish our freedoms and liberties, or increase Presidential powers in a way that the Constitution was written to prevent. 9-11 was an EXCUSE for Republicans to rip apart MUCH of what America has always historically stood for.
As Patrick Henry said, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! "
There is NOTHING brave or remotely American about Bush's response to 9-11. The laws he passed affect only US, while our borders are wide open, and Islamic Fundamentalists continue to use our flight schools. His response appeals ONLY to drama-addicted chicken sh/ts only too happy to sell us all out for imagined safety. Bush said terrorists threaten our freedom, but only our own government can do that...and Bush DID. As if that wasn't enough, after you sell us ALL out (Patriot Act), you support sending our TROOPS off to die, too, over a LIE. AS long as YOU'RE safe, you don't care who or what you sacrifice. FOOLISH EVIL MISGUIDED DRAMA-ADDICTED UN-AMERICAN PEOPLE. You are all traitors to our forefathers, our flag, our Constitution, and our nation.
2006-09-11 04:39:37 · answer #6 · answered by tat2me1960 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
i'm for removing the tax exempt prestige class altogether. there is not any stable reason at inquisitive approximately non secular, political, resourceful, and so on communities to be one after the different tax exempt previous the regulations that be conscious to the different voluntary employer.
2016-11-07 02:31:07 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am so glad. can you imagine If Al Gore was the president? He would probably be whining about the pollution from the crumbling buildings. Our greatest enemy would be the internal combustion engine, Let me stop laughing. We would be given grave speech's on the dangers of global warming, and other chicken little BS. Nothing of any significance would have been done about the Islamic nuts, just like under Clinton.
2006-09-11 03:53:53 · answer #8 · answered by zzz 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
sissy girly men? What are you, one of those self loathing insecure women who parrots everything a man says? Incredible! What, by the way, is wrong with girls, that you have to use the term 'girly' ? Pretty inappropriate and self depricating...
And, no, I'm not happy with the president that let 9/11 happen, nimby
2006-09-11 03:53:39 · answer #9 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Why are all of your questions based around your hatred for one group of people?? I mean seriously, do you really think life is so black and white that there are not good and bad people on all sides of the equation??? Your blind hatred of anything that's not "Republican or conservative" is really sad.
2006-09-11 04:30:26 · answer #10 · answered by carpediem 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋