APPEASEMENT?

[Lindaloo]

I agree with you on that note John. I believe all should pitch in to rebuild Iraq. EVERYBODY, not just the United States.

On a side note** I do wish we would capture Saddam and Osama. Then maybe I would not care so much about our rebuilding Iraq efforts.

[Rainband]

I agree with you on that note John. I believe all should pitch in to rebuild Iraq. EVERYBODY, not just the United States.

On a side note** I do wish we would capture Saddam and Osama. Then maybe I would not care so much about our rebuilding Iraq efforts.

I agree all the nations of the world should help out..just like we do everytime they ask us too. I wish we would catch them sobs too. I just wish I knew what our PLAN was. I don't want this becoming another Vietnam

[stormchazer]

Okay I must have missed that last turn into communists...

Someone care to elaborate? That felt like a sling at the democrats, but it was so far left field (forgive the pun) that I'm quite certain I must have just missed something.

It certainly was - name calling and put downs are always the last resort.

Which brings me to a question I had. If the Clinton presidency didn't do anything about terrorism, why didn't the Republican controlled Congress make waves about the potential. There are various committees out there that focus on security issues. Surely, someone would've seen something and brought it to the Capital for discussion? Or were they more worried about the President's sex life?

Those same commitees were in the hands of Democrats the 10 months leading up to 9/11. Remember Jeffords? Democrat Bob Graham (Head of Intelligence Committee before 9/11) didn't make any waves either then after was ripping Bush for not knowing.

I call Democrats communist, and your right, it is a strong word, because there agenda is about redistribution of money. Communist philosophy dictates suppose worker equality where everyone makes the same and lives at an equal standard of living. They controlled the money and were suppose to redistribute the wealth equally.

Sounds a lot like Welfare and taxes.

Yep and The Republicans seem to wanna SPEND IT ALL on WAR!!!!! So I guess they both have their downfalls Taking care of your citizens with affordable healthcare and heres a thought still having SS when we are old enough to get it!!! Nah buy a few more nuclear bombs..Give me a break. Both of your parties have good ideas.If they would GROW UP and work together. Thats why I am glad I am independent..

That would be on page 16 line 42 of the Democrat Trash Book. Tell me one time in history where Social Security checks were not mailed? Bet you can't! Thats because it has never not happened. How much is enough? We spend about 30% of budget on defense. Where does the rest go?

Remember...Bush increased education spending. His budget increased all Fed programs by an average of 4.5%. Not one government program recieved less then they recieved in the prior budget year. Where do we stop. How much is our security worth?

63% of Americans have private insurance and with Medicaid, Medicare and government supplemental programs, most needy Americans can get insurance. You want social medicine? 3 month wait for hernia operation? If there health system is so great, then why do we have one of the highest life expectancy rates in the world?

[ameriwx2003]

Yes you are correct and I agree that Bill Clinton could have done more to combat terror and I wish he would have but the fact is fighting terrorism has never been very high on our list until 9/11 and it wasn't any higher on the Bush administrations list either until 9/11. Before 9/11 bushs big plan was for missle defense, remember??.

[stormchazer]

Yes you are correct and I agree that Bill Clinton could have done more to combat terror and I wish he would have but the fact is fighting terrorism has never been very high on our list until 9/11 and it wasn't any higher on the Bush administrations list either until 9/11. Before 9/11 bushs big plan was for missle defense, remember??.

Still is thank goodness.

[Lindaloo]

Yes you are correct and I agree that Bill Clinton could have done more to combat terror and I wish he would have but the fact is fighting terrorism has never been very high on our list until 9/11 and it wasn't any higher on the Bush administrations list either until 9/11. Before 9/11 bushs big plan was for missle defense, remember??.

Heck, the first attacks should have been enough for Clinton.

[rainstorm]

An interesting little memo prepared by the Democratic staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee has surfaced in Washington. The memo shows that the Democrats intended to use the Intelligence Committee as a political tool in next year's presidential elections.

The memo suggests that Democrats should "prepare to launch an investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time -- but we can only do so once ... the best time would probably be next year."

Democrats, of course, are trying to downplay the importance of this memo. They are claiming that it was never adopted, it was prepared by a low-level staffer and is, therefore, of no importance. Yeah, right.

This memo clearly shows that the Democrats intended to go along with the committee hearings on intelligence until the time was right for them to step forth with their demands for an independent investigation. There was never any intention to work with the majority Republicans to find out the true story behind intelligence failures in the Middle East. Just wait until the time is right, then pull that trigger on an independent investigation. And why would next year probably be the best time? Because it's a presidential election year, of course.

Lesson: The Democrats intended to use the Senate Intelligence Committee as a 2004 campaign tool. Hopefully you aren't surprised.

[ameriwx2003]

well.. rainstorm the info the memo talks about hasn't been used yet and until that happens its alot of huff and puff from people. Its not like the Republicans hadn't thought of doing such a thing. Here is an example for you. To Deweys credit he didn't pursue the issue :) but just like this memo the thought of doing the same type of thing has happened in the past.

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mpearlharbor.html

Mike

[GalvestonDuck]

So the American government knew an attack on Pearl Harbor was coming.

No. The Japanese government was not in the habit of informing its diplomats of planned military strikes in detail. So while the Americans knew that Japanese diplomats had been instructed to deliver a certain message to the U.S. government at 1 p.m. on December 7 and then destroy their cipher machine and secret documents, and from this deduced that something big was about to happen, they did not know where to expect the initial attack. The Pacific Ocean's a big place, and there were lots of targets available to the Japanese--the Philippines, Dutch East Indies, Singapore, etc. Admiral Stark recognized that the Japanese were planning to attack somewhere, but told his subordinates it would be "against either the Philippines, Thai, or Kra Peninsula or possibly Borneo." As is well known, the American military failed to take advantage of what little warning it did have through bad luck and incompetence.

Why does "Tora! Tora! Tora!" portray that differently?

[rainstorm]

So the American government knew an attack on Pearl Harbor was coming.

No. The Japanese government was not in the habit of informing its diplomats of planned military strikes in detail. So while the Americans knew that Japanese diplomats had been instructed to deliver a certain message to the U.S. government at 1 p.m. on December 7 and then destroy their cipher machine and secret documents, and from this deduced that something big was about to happen, they did not know where to expect the initial attack. The Pacific Ocean's a big place, and there were lots of targets available to the Japanese--the Philippines, Dutch East Indies, Singapore, etc. Admiral Stark recognized that the Japanese were planning to attack somewhere, but told his subordinates it would be "against either the Philippines, Thai, or Kra Peninsula or possibly Borneo." As is well known, the American military failed to take advantage of what little warning it did have through bad luck and incompetence.

Why does "Tora! Tora! Tora!" portray that differently?

the sad thing is if the dems were around back then they would be undermining our war against japan. the dems are contemptable.

[ameriwx2003]

the sad thing is if the dems were around back then they would be undermining our war against japan. the dems are contemptable.

Ummmmmmm, Rainstorm the Dems were around back then. :). A Democrat was president, Frankiln Delano Roosevelt:):):)

Mike

[Stephanie]

That is what I was talking about John. The information that was not shared by the CIA to the FBI and vice versa. Clinton handcuffed both agencies. Not a cop out IMO either. At least Bush DID go after them.

What do ya mean investigate Bush's also Steph? That makes no sense. Bush went after those bunch of idiots while Clinton was playing with a cigar.

My point being is that what was the reasoning for the investigation of the affair to begin with? Was it really anyone's business? If it is, then we should investigate Bush's as well just for the heck of it! We spent $40 million dollars to investigate Clinton and all we got were cigars and blue dress stains. I think that investigation dug alittle too deep and the whole reason why I brought it up was to show that BOTH SIDES are equally guilty in digging up the dirt on the other side to use it to their advantage. Helen was just bringin up one story to further her cause that the Democrats are the only ones that do this and it's probably because they are traitors or power-hungry. It works both ways.

Unfortunately, as long as we have Republicans versus Democrats, NOTHING will ever get accomplished simply because one side will always try to undermine the other. This whole topic is a perfect example of what we could probably witness on Capital Hill on any given day. He said/she said; they didn't do this/they did that, blah, blah, BLAH. High School BS. Someone I know has already jumped on my case about saying "what have you done for me lately?" - supposedly a liberal reaction and response, but I think that's why we go and vote. The only thing that I see ANY of them do is bicker, name call, dig up dirt. What about the REAL issues? Are they being dealt with? The answer is probably no.

[stormchazer]

That is what I was talking about John. The information that was not shared by the CIA to the FBI and vice versa. Clinton handcuffed both agencies. Not a cop out IMO either. At least Bush DID go after them.

What do ya mean investigate Bush's also Steph? That makes no sense. Bush went after those bunch of idiots while Clinton was playing with a cigar.

My point being is that what was the reasoning for the investigation of the affair to begin with? Was it really anyone's business? If it is, then we should investigate Bush's as well just for the heck of it! We spent $40 million dollars to investigate Clinton and all we got were cigars and blue dress stains. I think that investigation dug alittle too deep and the whole reason why I brought it up was to show that BOTH SIDES are equally guilty in digging up the dirt on the other side to use it to their advantage. Helen was just bringin up one story to further her cause that the Democrats are the only ones that do this and it's probably because they are traitors or power-hungry. It works both ways.

Unfortunately, as long as we have Republicans versus Democrats, NOTHING will ever get accomplished simply because one side will always try to undermine the other. This whole topic is a perfect example of what we could probably witness on Capital Hill on any given day. He said/she said; they didn't do this/they did that, blah, blah, BLAH. High School BS. Someone I know has already jumped on my case about saying "what have you done for me lately?" - supposedly a liberal reaction and response, but I think that's why we go and vote. The only thing that I see ANY of them do is bicker, name call, dig up dirt. What about the REAL issues? Are they being dealt with? The answer is probably no.

The sex thing twisted the issue. The reason he was impeached was he was being sued in a court and he lied thus commiting perjury. He thus denied Paula Jones, right or wrong, the right to a fair hearing in court. Forcing one to tell the truth under oath is fundamental to our court system.

The point of Paula Jones having a right to sue was decided by a court. Pres Clinton had a duty to tell the truth. Then a jury was to decide the truths of the case. Thats why after he left the Presidency, the judge placed him on probation and reccomended his disbarment because she believed he committed perjury. Your arguement appears on page 62 line 25 of the Democrats Trash Book.

[Lindaloo]

The investigation would not have cost so much had he told the truth to a Grand Jury.

Under normal circumstances you are right, it is none of our business. In this case, he was the President of the United States. Anything he does is our business.

That stained dress is not all we got. We found out who Bill Clinton really was. He certainly was not in the White House to "hunt down and punish those responsible" for the above mentioned. All he cared about was reaping the benefits from a booming economy(for which he had nothing to do with) and chasing women. When he left office excuse me impeached, the United States was already suffering from a declining economy. Known facts.

Face it Steph... the man was a loser and he was not a very good President nor was he a good man for the Democrats or a good husband. IMO, they should be ashamed to this day to try and back him on anything.

[Stephanie]

Well Linda, I'll have to respectfully disagree.

[Lindaloo]

Well Linda, I'll have to respectfully disagree.

**hand shake**

[ColdFront77]

Tell me one time in history where Social Security checks were not mailed? Bet you can't!

My checks are sent right to the my bank.