Posted on 11/24/2001 10:05:49 AM PST by ChaseR
He looks even smaller compared to the grace of the man who took his place. From ANWR, to removing the ABA referrals, the NOW office, the insistance on jackets, reestablishing Beck so workers can choose how Union dues are paid, treating his wife with respect, saying NO to the UN on Kyoto, the International Court, (both Clinton supported), reaffirming his stance on ABM and missile defense to the UN, the EU and the world, no J Jackson, revoked the expensive ergonomics regs., invited the Boy Scouts to the White House, actually understands and respects our military, doesn't carry a Bible as a prop, but sincerely believes....world leaders have stated the difference, the most important difference. Bush is trustworthy. He means what he says and isn't simply a poser. When he threatens Saddam, he means it and Saddam knows it. When he salutes the troops, he means it, and the troops know it.
Americans have every right to be angry at the Clintons, but taking it out on the current administration during wartime (that "inconvenience" that has cost us over 4000 innocent American lives - and more on the line overseas) is wrong, IMHO.
Let someone else in this great land get off their butts and do something about them.... quietly kidnap Slick and put him away in the country with a patriotic hooker and allow him to write cookbooks and eat Big Macs, but no other contact with the world (just kiding SS).
JW VICTORY: FEDERAL COURT RULES COMMERCE DEPT. MUST TURN OVER ATTORNEY DOCUMENTS IN CHINAGATE CASE
Picture a Clinton trial. Clinton would love the spotlight, press time any time he chose. We'd have that little weasel in our faces every day for months and his presstitutes presenting the "facts." Internationally, we'd have AP sharing the "facts" with the nations who would not mind seeing our nation divided and weakened, while the terrorists would be cheering across the world as the spotlight and the efforts of the leaders of nations now free once again to question President Bush take the offered moment to back out of any coalition.
Terry McAuliffe and most American-bashers couldn't come up with a better scenario to weaken the Republicans, strengthen the left and tyrants, terrorists and despots everywhere.
You believe that the battle will be won in a courtroom. I believe that the battle needs to be fought on ideological grounds, and the internet is the best weapon we have. The American people are choosing Barbara Olson's book over every leftist Clinton defenders' books. Clinton's bizarre anti-American words and self-serving actions post 9-11 continue to define his legacy.
Please don't "yell." I am not deaf, dumb or blind. I know that the game of politics is traditionally rotten, but the founding fathers proved it could be honorable and spirited, something today's dishonorable Dems. and their cohorts in the press, schools and Hollywood don't get. I WANT our national leaders to appeal to "our better angels," not feed on our very human weaknesses, and exploit our fears for their own power. It's old, tired and beneath us as a people.
You know ... I'd be willing to accept that answer if you could point to ANY indication that Ashcroft was investigating ANY of the alleged crimes (pardonGate does NOT count) in the EIGHT MONTHS prior to the WTC attack. But I don't think you can. So what was the EXCUSE in those 8 months for not even BEGINNING an investigation of such serious matters as TREASON, MURDER and ELECTION TAMPERING?
Our President and his staff have more on their plates than any of us should ever be forced to bear. He has never ignored domestic issues during this time while simultaneously staying in command of a complex military operation with our troops lives at stake.
Again, your whole argument falls apart because while all this counterterrorism activity has been going on, the DOJ and other agencies have STILL found time to pursue minor drug dealers (even the LEGAL marijuana clubs in California) and go after such heinous criminals as assisted suicide doctors (again LEGAL in the state where they decided to go after them). IF Bush/Ashcroft were AT ALL interested in pursuing these investigations they would AT LEAST have a core group of perhaps 50-100 investigators (a tiny fraction of the total) working on them. Why ... with half a dozen, "I" could blow open the whole Chinagate/Campaign Finance Scandal. I'd just exhume and autopsy Ron Brown body ... thereby proving that the Clinton Administration and the media AT THE VERY LEAST covered up a MASS MURDER.
I'm mystified that folks can't understand both the seriousness of the militant Muslim threat and the courage of our President.
But I do understand the seriousness and he has been courageous in that regard. But let's face it ... these foreign terrorists are not really a threat to the SURVIVAL of our Republic. But allowing our judicial system to be destroyed by IGNORING such serious crimes as those committed by the democRATS the last 8 years could be. Our Republic could die just like Rome's did.
President Bush never once during his campaign said that he'd go after Clinton legally. Clinton's a small man. He will always be a small man.
That's hardly an EXCUSE for ignoring these crimes. He took an OATH to defend the Constitution AND THE LAWS of this nation. Are you suggesting he BREAK that oath? Furthermore, this is NOT just about Clinton. This is about a whole party gone bad with perhaps HUNDREDS of individuals involved in major crimes the last 8 years. This is about a party trying to SUBVERT the ELECTION PROCESS ITSELF using ILLEGAL foreign cash (from our ENEMIES) and voter tampering.
Bush is trustworthy. He means what he says and isn't simply a poser. When he threatens Saddam, he means it and Saddam knows it. When he salutes the troops, he means it, and the troops know it.
Then didn't he also mean it when he took that oath to defend the constitution and our laws? Sooner or later he needs to prove it. Simply Moving-On is NOT the right to do.
Americans have every right to be angry at the Clintons, but taking it out on the current administration during wartime (that "inconvenience" that has cost us over 4000 innocent American lives - and more on the line overseas) is wrong, IMHO.
The Constitution doesn't say that a war is an excuse for not investigating and prosecuting mass murder or treason. In fact, isn't it dangerous to have such people in positions of power (and they STILL are) in wartime? Now more than ever, it seems to me, Ashcroft should be making sure that the people in power are non-blackmailable and trustworthy.
Why do you insist on suggesting this is just about Clinton. It's not. It is about possibly HUNDREDS of people in the Clinton administration and DNC who SOLD OUT THIS COUNTRY and willfully violated DOZENS of important laws. Before we ever got to putting Clinton on trial we'd have seen dozens of others go before the judge and jury AND BE CONVICTED. By the time they get around to Clinton, NOBODY will be in his corner. They (including the media) will all be scurrying for the shadows to avoid prosecution themselves.
We'd have that little weasel in our faces every day for months and his presstitutes presenting the "facts." Internationally, we'd have AP sharing the "facts" with the nations who would not mind seeing our nation divided and weakened, while the terrorists would be cheering across the world as the spotlight and the efforts of the leaders of nations now free once again to question President Bush take the offered moment to back out of any coalition.
I completely disagree. Don't think for one moment that the other nations don't know what went on during the Clinton era. They've lost respect for us precisely because of it. And they are loosing more respect daily because we don't appear to be going to do anything about it either. How can they respect our laws and our system if we won't even make the ATTEMPT to uphold them and defend it ourselves? And if Bush is half the man you suggest, I'm sure he could actually USE the fact that we are cleaning house to strengthen the coalition ... especially if the individuals under investigation appear to have been dealing with terrorists and terrorist supporters for campaign cash.
You believe that the battle will be won in a courtroom. I believe that the battle needs to be fought on ideological grounds, and the internet is the best weapon we have.
If you are putting your hope in the internet, you are going to be sadly disappointed. Look at the news pages of ALL the major providers. They ALL parrot the leftist mainstream media. So even if American's turn off the TV and go to the web for their news, MOST of them are still going to be fed the same lies and disinformation they got on TV. As to "ideology", if you are not willing to defend our Constitution and laws, your "ideology" is worthless.
I know that the game of politics is traditionally rotten, but the founding fathers proved it could be honorable and spirited, something today's dishonorable Dems. and their cohorts in the press, schools and Hollywood don't get.
But you don't seem to understand that if you've given up and allow the press, schools, Hollywood AND the justice system to be controlled by the democRATS, you have NO HOPE of winning your "ideological war". Where do you think the battleground for the hearts and minds of Americans is? In those very institutions.
I WANT our national leaders to appeal to "our better angels," not feed on our very human weaknesses, and exploit our fears for their own power. It's old, tired and beneath us as a people.
Investigating crimes and enforcing our laws is NOT exploiting fear for power nor is it "beneath us" as a people. Just the opposite, as I'm sure any of our nation's founders, were they alive today, would agree.
Yep...but if yer gonna fly someone you want dead into a mountaintop, why do you waste the bullet? Was it to send a message that potential ClintonBetrayors can be--and SHALL BE--murdered?!
FReegards...MUD
I still believe this assertion that Dubyuh is unwilling to hold Clinton accountable due to the alleged dirt the Left's got on Bush, Sr. is unfounded in the Truth. Dubyuh's daddy may not have been a Saint, but he was no Rapist, no Mass-Murderer, no Traitor, and no Tyrant...all things that Bill Clinton most certainly WAS and IS!! And even if Bush, Sr. could be linked to Mena or BCCI or whatever in some mysterious way, he's a big boy and can take care of himself and is far too honorable a man, IMHO, to force his son to compromise his own Presidency to defend the failures of his father's.
We'll see, I reckon...MUD
We'll see, I reckon...MUD
254 posted on 11/27/01 9:03 AM Pacific by Mudboy Slim
Very well put, MUD, and I agree wholeheartedly. A real pity that there are those unable to recognize honorable, decent men who care about this country.
It is so tiresome to hear these moaners and groaners rehashing their favorite tales. If it is so easy to solve these deaths, etc, why haven't they done it? By this time, all BeAChooser's posts about Ron Brown should have come to someone's attention.
It really is time for people to start supporting Pres Bush, and stop the whining about what he hasn't done *yet*, and give the man a chance to continue what he's accomplished, to date.
Thanks for your successful effort, and I hope a few will take note of what you've clearly and correctly pointed out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.