Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Grisu
You brought up the fact that it was only the first 200 days. He has not done crap afterwards either!
|
Yes, I did. It was exactly 235 days from Bush's inauguration till 9.11. I didn't say anything about after this time because it isn't important to the debate. Can you explain to me how it is important to the debate?
Quote:
|
Also, last I checked the first 100 days were crucial to a new presidency. When did it become 200?
|
When did I say anything about whether this is a crucial time for Bush? Nice try at evasion though.
Quote:
|
You are refering to the 300000 jobs supposedly created in the last quarter? Is that supposed to be an achievment? How many got lost in the same time frame because the unemployment rate still climbed by .1 %!
|
No, I'm referring to the cummulative reports of strong economic growth that has occured over the past four quarters.
Quote:
|
Clinton did what he did and surely carries part of the blame. However, he was able to do so (for some time) without restricting everyones civic liberties. It was being mentioned that Clinton put out a kill order for Bin Laden, however stipulated that no "colletoral damage" can be accepted and hence it wasn't done. Right now the US has violated a slue of human rights, killed a crapload of civillians (statistics on those are not being kept by this administration) in 2 countries and hasn't captured or killed Bin-Laden yet!
|
I never said anything about civil liberties abridged by Clinton, it wasn't part of the debate. I apologize for not predicting what you were going to argue about.
My argument rests on the fact that:
1) Clinton had significantly more time to combat terrorism in general, and al Qaida specifically, than Bush. Why would we expect Bush's results to be any better?
2) Clinton was not as concerned about civilian casualties as Ranger would like us to believe (as my linked articles show).
Would you like to address either of these, or will we be continuing entirely different debates?
Quote:
|
So enlighten me where Clinton failed compared to what Bush accomplished?
|
I never said Bush accomplished anything, though I'm not surprised at your inability to read what I wrote. If we're all going to come down on Bush for not accomplishing in 235 days what Clinton could not accomplish in 8 years, even though Clinton had numerous opportunities to do so, I'd just like to know what the reasoning is.
So, perhaps after this, you could stick to the subject and answer my original question: How does all of your ranting address events prior to 9.11 and Clinton's "dedication" to protecting civilian lives?