To: Kitten Festival
she'll also have to explain her husband's muted no, nonexistent response to repeated terrorist attacks on U.S. targets here and abroad, starting with the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.As much as I think Hillary Presidency is about the worst thing that can happen to this country, laying at her feet, the feeble inaction of her POTUS husband is a bit disingenuous.
Bottom line, it is the POTUS job, the country elected Bubba, not Hillary to defend the country.
It's a fair question to ask her what she would have done differently, if she had the oval office officially.
Rooty is grasping at straws
5 posted on
06/28/2007 5:07:52 PM PDT by
Popman
(I removed my Bushbot brain chip after he didn't veto the McCain Feingold election anti freedom bill)
To: Popman
I thought they were co-potus? ;-)
6 posted on
06/28/2007 5:11:00 PM PDT by
doc1019
(Fred Thompson '08)
To: Popman
You are correct, but what makes this even more troubling is that as magnificently as Rudy performed immediately following the attacks, HE did not prepare NYC emergency services for a terrorist attack, having full knowledge of the earlier 1993 attack. Rudy is attempting to shed himself now of the responsibility HE had before 9-11 to prepare NYC for another attack.
I hope Rudy would bring this into the presidential discussions so he and Hillary can slime one another out of contention.
9 posted on
06/28/2007 5:23:01 PM PDT by
backtothestreets
(My bologna has a first name, it's J-O-R-G-E)
To: Popman
I realize that you don’t like Rudy but try to look beyind that for a moment. Hillary is selling the American public a return to the Clinton years. Fine. But she should have to answer for its failings then.
27 posted on
06/28/2007 7:16:49 PM PDT by
misterrob
("I've never heard of anyone going on the disabled list with pulled fat." RIP Rod Beck)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson