Often used as "look how many turn up dead around Bill" is a pure crock of horsesh*t -
http://members.tripod.com/~rcjustice/pres.html
ok then look how many turn up dead around DoubleYou -
Iraq 100,000 Iraqies largely innocent bystanders
almost 3000 American Troops - is that workin for ya? heck-uva-job
(Soldiers Rock! - "leaders" need input from real on the ground generals)
9/11 under W's watch another 3000
Katrina due to an actuall response another 3000
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3125
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060912/cm_huffpost/029234
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/13/wirq113.xml
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/September/27%20o/Iraq%20is%20Bush's%20Reflection%20Pond%20By%20Mike%20Whitney.htm
If it were a contesst on "how many" dead guys W would definetly win it
2006-09-28 04:37:40 · 8 answers · asked by omnimog 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush sucks.
WHEN CLINTON LIED
NOBODY DIED!!
FU...N YEAH, WOOOH! =p
2006-10-02 04:20:40 · answer #1 · answered by its just me!! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My problem with the loser is that he's not a guy and has no values. the guy had no backbone to address the problematic subject matters that were latest throughout the time of his administration. The WTC changed into bombed, the united statesCole changed into attacked, the U. S. Embassies were bombed, and he did no longer something about it. We were attacked in Mogadishu, our troops retaliated and were on the offensive and then Slick Willy pulled out it somewhat is what OBL cites as u . s . a . of america being a paper tiger. Clinton also cut back military funding for intel, operations, and troops in 0.5 to stability the funds. That flow fee u . s . a . of america 3,000 + lives on 911 - what a impressive selection that changed into. He recommended Jamie Groelick to dam intel organizations variety speaking with one yet another which allowed the 911 terrorist to flow & practice freely right here. very last yet no longer least he raised taxes which strated the reccession that Bush inherited. Obvisouly he wouldn't have any faith, morals, charater - or perhaps he would have commemorated his wedding ceremony vows he took with Hillary like almost all of yank married adult adult males. He turned right into a shaggy dog tale of a president and could by no skill be able to get his legacy previous Monica. those are only some issues I had with him and that i'm particular that numerous products would nicely be further - consisting of "Socks" Sandy Burgalar.
2016-11-25 00:34:50 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm, been bottom feeding have you?
I note that you shop for your opinions at all the right lib-tard outlets...LOL!
Your comment: "Often used as "look how many turn up dead around Bill" is a pure crock of horsesh*t - "
So how do you explain the '93 WTC bombing?
How do you explain Khobar Towers bombing in '96?
How do you explain the 1998 embassy bombings in west Africa?
Well sir, its all about Bill...
Let the lovely Ms. Ann Coulter answer the question about your boy Bill: "I did not have s.e.x. with that nomad, Osama bin Laden"
It's just like old times. Bill Clinton delivers an impassioned speech, and within 24 hours the Web is bristling with documentation, establishing that nearly every sentence was a lie.
The glassy-eyed Clinton cultists are insisting their idol's on-air breakdown during a "Fox News Sunday" interview with Chris Wallace was a calculated performance, which is a bit like describing Hurricane Katrina as a "planned demolition." Like an Osama tape, they claim he was sending a signal to Democrats to show them how to treat Republicans. Listen up, Democrats: Let's energize the undecideds by throwing a hissy fit on national television!
Regarding Katrina consider the following: "But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.
The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.
The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not happen over four days last week. It happened over the past four decades. Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.
The man-made disaster is the welfare state."
"What Did The Democrats Say About Iraq's WMD"
2006-09-28 05:03:13 · answer #3 · answered by juandos 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I really don't see how you can blame Bush for Katrina when it was really Nagin (a big Dem) who was at fault for most of the dead and issues with getting people out of the city.
And if you believe that the dead Iraqis are innocent bystanders, you are living in a dream world.
And, since Clinton was asleep at the wheel while the 9/11 attacks were planned, you can attribute those dead to him too.
2006-09-28 04:42:49 · answer #4 · answered by Leah 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Oh Glory Be! Finally a libtard is blaming President Bush for killing Katrina victims. Oh my. The limit has finally been reached. I never thought the conspiracy tards would stoop to THAT level. I was wrong.
2006-09-28 04:42:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Interesting. The links you submit as support for your outrageous claim are mostly from the other Fox's in the hen house. Why don't you get some PROOF of your BS?
2006-09-28 05:34:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
well there is a differnece, clintons men diedbecause he was stabbing his country in the back, bushes men died because they were fighting for the protection of the US, and they knew they had the risk when they signed the line.
innocent people have the freedom to leave failure to do so, is not a valid excuse.
2006-09-28 04:45:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
AW FuC$n Men!!!!
2006-09-28 04:41:16 · answer #8 · answered by Karrien Sim Peters 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋