One Thing You Can Say About Clinton's Presidency Is...

VoodooAce

Emperor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
1,894
Location
California
...He kept us safe after the initial attacks at the WTC.

Maybe its just the lack of other positives to point to, but I've heard a lot about this in regards to W and its become a qualifier in every conversation about the 'Bush Presidency'.

Surely Bubba deserves the same credit. Right?

If you think not; that Bubba somehow deserves part of the blame for 9/11 then you have to think that the book isn't closed on W in this regard.

I'm sure, however, there will be plenty of myopics that will blame '93 on Clinton (under his watch), '01 on Bubba (W was in office less than a year) and any possible attack in the next year on Obama (his watch). The Mannity's and Limbaughs of the world will find a way to make it all sound logical.
 
Do we need this thread?
 
I don't think "Number of major terrorist attacks: 1" is a good metric to judge any president by.
 
That might be true. There were incidents, even ones known to wikipedia, where potential plots have been foiled prior to the Iraq War mainly thanks to heightened security. One of those plots was to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge by some NY immigrant. We'd essentially be ignoring the pros behind his decisions if we denied that his decisions made any good.

And while there have certainly been many incidents that have been prevented after the Iraq War invasion due to heightened security; it's hard to tell how many of the incidents were caused by the invasion itself and how many prevented incidents would have occurred even had the invasion never happened. His decision could have caused most of it, is what I'm saying. But there definitely was enough reason for many terrorists before the Iraq War.

All this certainly doesn't make anyone a good president, or a great one. But it's a definitely a credit to him at least. All this talk is essentially giving him at least some good name for himself to deflect the otherwise terrible performance.
 
...He kept us safe after the initial attacks at the WTC.

Maybe its just the lack of other positives to point to, but I've heard a lot about this in regards to W and its become a qualifier in every conversation about the 'Bush Presidency'.

Surely Bubba deserves the same credit. Right?

If you think not; that Bubba somehow deserves part of the blame for 9/11 then you have to think that the book isn't closed on W in this regard.

I'm sure, however, there will be plenty of myopics that will blame '93 on Clinton (under his watch), '01 on Bubba (W was in office less than a year) and any possible attack in the next year on Obama (his watch). The Mannity's and Limbaughs of the world will find a way to make it all sound logical.

I believe the policy of staying in Saudi Arabia led to 9/11, so I hold 2 Bush's and a Clinton (8 years!) responsible. I'd like to know when the conscious decision to stay in the Middle East in spite of escalating attacks and casualties was made.
 
I believe the policy of staying in Saudi Arabia led to 9/11, so I hold 2 Bush's and a Clinton (8 years!) responsible. I'd like to know when the conscious decision to stay in the Middle East in spite of escalating attacks and casualties was made.

Well, when oil was discovered.
 
Um this thread is trolling, and Al qaeda's plan to get into the WTC was a decade long affair. Try reading the 9/11 report.
 
text only lolcat:

can I has inauguratshen dei plz?

<insert pic of cat/dog>

alternate version:

[earl hickey (from My Name is Earl) looks at his list]

[we see item number 179: "never blogged about politics"]

camera pans back to reveal EARL, a look of fierce determination begins to show on his face.

EARL (whispering): I will show them!

shot (int.) of EARL typing on a Mac, only using one finger.

fade to black.
 
Well, when oil was discovered.

oil was discovered long before the Bush - Clinton - Bush policy of keeping troops there

edit: oh, well, thats true :lol: We've been committed to protecting the oil for much longer, but we weren't actually paying the price we're paying now.
 
True; the other major terrorist attack on the US was, although on US soil, at least not in North America.
 
'93 WTC bombing, USS Cole bombing, Embassy bombings, Oklahoma City bombing, Waco (may as well have been a bombing)...
 
I considered mentioning the Cole and Khobar Towers, but they were against military rather than civilians...

But Oklahoma City is a fair one to throw in, considering domestic terrorist attacks are no better to have than foreign ones...
 
Top Bottom