View Full Version : So how long can stuff be blamed on Clinton for?
StoneGold
10-11-2006, 12:56 AM
It helps to read the story first.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_go_co/us_nkorea_mccain;_ylt=AjcAhtNYgMkvHtWCLNyAqt.s0NUE ;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-
I'm seriously thrown off by this. OK, so Clinton was president six years ago, right? And apparently, according to McCain, because of things he did or didn't do back then, North Korea has nuclear capability.
Now, for all I know, he may have done something that didn't help the situation. Me not being a geopolitics expert, it's hard to say. But how the hell can you shift the blame of something time consuming like a nuclear weapon to two presidential terms ago? Why not just blame Truman for not winning the Korean War in two weeks?
Tages
10-11-2006, 12:59 AM
The answer is "Until a Democrat is elected in 2008." At that point the Bush-boosters switch to blaming everything on him/her, and the Bush-bashers do exactly what the Bush-boosters are doing now.
moebius
10-11-2006, 01:15 AM
But...he just looks so blameable.
Wesley Dodds
10-11-2006, 01:21 AM
The paranoid style in American politics.
From the Illuminati to the Masons to the Communists to Bill Clinton.
Clinton's mistake was becoming President after the cold war had ended in victory.
All of these crazy people suddenly left with nothing to be crazy about.
Roy Edoso today:
"The die-hards' portrayal of the former President has become over-complicated, though: it's hard to envision even the Clenis killing real Americans at Ruby Ridge and Waco, running drugs through the Mena Airport, selling us out in Darfur, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, and getting his dick sucked all at the same time."
And don't forget haircutgate!
Samurai
10-11-2006, 01:26 AM
It helps to read the story first.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_go_co/us_nkorea_mccain;_ylt=AjcAhtNYgMkvHtWCLNyAqt.s0NUE ;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-
I'm seriously thrown off by this. OK, so Clinton was president six years ago, right? And apparently, according to McCain, because of things he did or didn't do back then, North Korea has nuclear capability.
Now, for all I know, he may have done something that didn't help the situation. Me not being a geopolitics expert, it's hard to say. But how the hell can you shift the blame of something time consuming like a nuclear weapon to two presidential terms ago? Why not just blame Truman for not winning the Korean War in two weeks?
Do some research on the subject before you decide the blame is invalid.
Clinton negotiated several deals with North Korea in 1994-95. In exchange for a ton of aid (food, money, help building 2 light water reactors, etc), North Korea promised to not work toward developing nuclear arms, and to allow UN inspectors. Well, practically from the the time the ink on the deal was still wet, NK was breaking its end of the deal, and was secretly working on nuclear weapons. Clinton had an extremely lax (some would say negligently uncaring) attitude toward verifying NK's compliance, and that gave NK years to work on the bomb unmolested. Also, it was unprecedented that a country violating the Non-Proliferation treaty would be given help building "peaceful" (yeah, right) nuclear reactors, and that helped set up Iran to get one as well later on. The fact that they were bi-lateral talks rather than 6-party made the US far weaker at the bargaining table. We could not immediately turn to NK's neighbors for support, additional pressure on NK, proposals to aid in verification of the agreement and aid packages, etc.
All in all, Clinton made a poor deal and then did practically nothing to follow up on it. Besides the food and monetary aid, nothing was ever really done to fulfill the US side (NK kept refusing the SK-created plans for the reactors, so not much was ever built), and nothing much was done to verify that NK kept its end of the bargain. We know now that they never did. By the time Bush took office, NK had been working on the bombs for many years, and received a lot of help from Pakistan in 1997.
moebius
10-11-2006, 01:30 AM
And don't forget haircutgate!
Or having Bill Foster killed after his lesbian wife had an affair with him and/or he could incriminate him!
Iangould
10-11-2006, 01:53 AM
Clinton negotiated several deals with North Korea in 1994-95. In exchange for a ton of aid (food, money, help building 2 light water reactors, etc), North Korea promised to not work toward developing nuclear arms, and to allow UN inspectors. Well, practically from the the time the ink on the deal was still wet, NK was breaking its end of the deal, and was secretly working on nuclear weapons.
And the US and South Korea suspended the aid deliveries almost as soon as the ink was dry, claiming various North Korean violations.
The problem here is that there was no arbitration mechanism in the agreements, so both sides simply accused the other of violating it and effectively tore it up within months of signing it.
TheTen-EyedMan
10-11-2006, 01:58 AM
That was the really funny thing (not haha but ridiculous) about that attack dressed up as interview that Murdoch's lickspittle asslicker did with President Clinton a few weeks ago.
The only thing they kept going on about in the circle jerk afterwards was the fact that he used a cigar like a dildo on that tubby psychology student from Sacremento.
The current president has presided over the deaths of 3000+ servicemen in pursuit of three things, oil money, fame and cleaning up his father's mistakes.
President Clinton's only mistake was trying to cover up getting a blow job. Kenneth "attack dog" Starr, the religious zealot spent years uncovering it.
He should have said "Yes, I got a blow job off her. Bitch has a mouth like a hoover".
President Nixon got impeached because he was paranoid. President Clinton nearly got impeached because he was horny.
howyadoin
10-11-2006, 02:01 AM
President Clinton's only mistake was trying to cover up getting a blow job.C'mon, Republicans don't like blowjobs. They only like missionary-position sex with people* they're married to, and then only so they can make more Republicans.
*People of the opposite sex, obviously.
TheTen-EyedMan
10-11-2006, 02:05 AM
C'mon, Republicans don't like blowjobs. They only like missionary-position sex with people* they're married to, and then only so they can make more Republicans.
*People of the opposite sex, obviously.
I still think Bill O'Reilly is a self-fucker.
I mean he's never found someone more morally bankrupt than himself so it's sex with someone worthy of his pus filled love muscle.
Spike-X
10-11-2006, 02:08 AM
C'mon, Republicans don't like blowjobs. They only like missionary-position sex with people* they're married to, and then only so they can make more Republicans.
*People of the opposite sex, obviously.
I don't think they're allowed to actually like sex at all.
Especially the women.
Dan Apodaca
10-11-2006, 02:16 AM
Do some research on the subject before you decide the blame is invalid.
He admitted up front that he could be totally wrong and he wasn't fully-versed on the subject.
So, don't be so fucking snide.
Iangould
10-11-2006, 02:49 AM
I still think Bill O'Reilly is a self-fucker.
Not according to the sexual harassment suit from a couple of years back.
o1pickleboy
10-11-2006, 02:56 AM
As someone said earlier they will stop blaming Clinton when they find someone else to blame. How long where they blaming Carter before they stopped? Answer when Clinton won and they had someone else to blame.
On a different note, we can stop blaming Clinton when all of his policy and actions stop affecting the amercian people. For me personally NAFTA is still affecting and hurting my day to day life.
Iangould
10-11-2006, 03:09 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework
Terms of the pact and consequent agreements included the shutdown of the pilot Yongbyon nuclear reactor, abandoning the construction of two larger nuclear power plants, and placing of spent fuel which could have been reprocessed to create plutonium for a nuclear weapon under IAEA controls. In exchange two light water reactors would be constructed in North Korea by 2003 at a cost of $4 billion, primarily supplied by Japan and South Korea. In the interim, North Korea would be supplied with 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil annually, at no cost, to make up for lost energy production. When the LWR plants were completed, North Korea would dismantle its other nuclear reactors and associated facilities.
The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) is a consortium of the United States, South Korea, Japan, and various other states that is responsible for implementating the energy-related parts of the agreement.
It is reported that US President Bill Clinton's officials agreed to the plan only because they thought that the North Korean government would collapse before the nuclear power project was completed [4]. North Korean officials at the time also suspected the U.S. anticipated an early collapse of the DPRK [5]. North Korea's leader Kim Il-sung had recently died.
Soon after the agreement was signed, U.S. Congress control changed to the Republican Party, who did not support the agreement. Some Republican Senators were strongly against the agreement, regarding it as appeasement [6] [7]. Initially U.S. Department of Defense emergency funds not under Congress control were used to fund the transitional oil supplies under the agreement [8], together with international funding. From 1996 Congress provided funding, though not always sufficient amounts [9]. Consequently some of the agreed transitional oil supplies were delivered late.
Some analysts believe North Korea agreed to the freeze primarily because of the U.S. agreement to phase out economic sanctions that had been in place since the Korean War. But because of congressional opposition, the U.S. failed to deliver on this part of the agreement. [10]
International funding for the LWR replacement power plants had to be sought. Significant spending on the LWR project did not commence until 2000. [11]
There was increasing disagreement between North Korea and U.S. on the scope and implementation of the treaty. When by 1999 economic sanctions had not been lifted and full diplomatic relations between U.S. and North Korea had not been established, North Korea warned that they would resume nuclear research unless the U.S. kept up its end of the bargain. U.S. has repeatedly stated that further implementation would be stalled as long as suspicions remained that the North Korean nuclear weapons research program continued covertly.
Iangould
10-11-2006, 03:21 AM
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB87/nk15.pdf
This is a 1989 US government report on the North Korean nuclear program which warned that Koreans could have a nuke by "mid-decade".
If we're going to blame Clinton, let's also ask what the Bush senior administration was doing between 1989 and 1992.
BlairH
10-11-2006, 03:26 AM
If we're going to blame Clinton, let's also ask what the Bush senior administration was doing between 1989 and 1992.
Gulf War I
Iangould
10-11-2006, 03:30 AM
Clinton-era negotiators claim that the North Koreans have had nukes since at least 1993 and this was why Clinton didn't adopt a military option and opted instead for a program designed to slow down their acquisition of more nukes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A10405-2002Nov5¬Found=true
In 1993, as since, it was the judgment of our intelligence agencies that North Korea likely had one or possibly two nuclear weapons, manufactured from plutonium produced some years earlier. President Clinton therefore decided that it was vital not to allow the North to produce more plutonium. This we did. The Agreed Framework we negotiated secured the spent fuel they held in storage (enough plutonium for five nuclear weapons), and all other plutonium-producing facilities were frozen under inspection. Had these facilities been allowed to become operational, North Korea would by now be producing enough plutonium for 30 nuclear weapons each year, a capacity far greater than, by most estimates, those of India, Pakistan and Israel combined. This has been greatly in our interest.
In return, the Clinton and Bush administrations and other governments have been supplying North Korea with heavy fuel oil. We also promised, but have not yet been bound to deliver, light-water nuclear reactors.
Now Pyongyang has revealed that it more recently initiated a dangerous, secret uranium enrichment program. It is true that the Agreed Framework did not create a new, comprehensive inspection regime that could have prevented this. We would have to rely on our own intelligence in this regard. But this would have been the case without the agreement. And the deal did at least give us new leverage. In 1999 we used the agreement to gain access to a suspicious site identified by intelligence.
...
The choices in 1994 were the same four we have today: We could launch a military strike against the identified nuclear facilities; we could refuse negotiations and go to the United Nations for sanctions to isolate and contain the North's nuclear program; we could essentially accept the new nuclear weapons status of North Korea and try to contain the damage to international nonproliferation efforts, as well as to our alliances with South Korea and Japan; or we could negotiate with the North to stop the nuclear weapons program that creates the crisis.
The consequences for South Korea of the first option, a preemptive strike, make it, for almost all commentators, and apparently for the Bush administration, at best an option of last resort. The second, sanctions alone and no talks, the one favored by former secretary Baker, would be tantamount, in practice, to the third: acceptance of the North Korean program. Nobody in 1994, and probably few today, expect international sanctions alone to stop a North Korean nuclear weapons program. The Chinese, and perhaps others, would provide enough aid to prevent sanctions from starving the North into submission.
Iangould
10-11-2006, 03:34 AM
Double post
Iangould
10-11-2006, 03:35 AM
Gulf War I
Which let's them out for 1991/2 if we assume the US is incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time.
Now how much slack do we cut Clinton for the post-war Iraq sanctions and the bombing missions in support of them; the Kosovo War; the African embassy bombings; the east Asian economic meltdown, the Sudan bombing raid and the impeachment?
Michael P
10-11-2006, 03:53 AM
Gulf War I
Okay, that's three months down. What about the other 45?
Valmore
10-11-2006, 04:35 AM
Forever, of course!
Everything gets pinned back to Bill.
Including W trading Sammy Sosa.
TheTen-EyedMan
10-11-2006, 06:48 AM
Forever, of course!
Everything gets pinned back to Bill.
Including W trading Sammy Sosa.
Well, that was pretty reprehensible.
Dreadstar
10-11-2006, 07:03 AM
The answer is "Until a Democrat is elected in 2008." At that point the Bush-boosters switch to blaming everything on him/her, and the Bush-bashers do exactly what the Bush-boosters are doing now.
The truth will never fly around here Tages. Have you learned nothing?
Shellhead
10-11-2006, 07:10 AM
Gulf War I
Bush Senior was like the janitor who had to clean up after Reagan's wild party. Reagan's allies included Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, and the rebels in Afghanistan, including one Osama bin-Ladan. Bush ended up capturing Noriega and waging war on Hussein.
How about we blame Kim Jong-il and Kim Il-sung?
From what we've seen over the past 2 decades, NK was absolutely determined to get nuclear weapons and nothing short of the US invading was going to stop them. What we are basically seeing here is what we saw with
Arafat - if you have the leader of a movement or country that does not deal in good faith and has their mind set on one specific goal, then even the best diplomats in the world can't do much about it. You can make a temporary truce but eventually the Arafat/Kim figure is going to reneg.
We are seeing the very real limits of our role as the world's policeman. I think some of the euphoria from the end of the cold war has fooled folks from both sides of the political isle into believing that there is no situation that American involvement, be it diplomatic or military, can't solve.
From a foreign policy perspective, I am very much looking for a Presidential candidate that has a very common sense, very realistic view of foreign policy. Someone who isn't afraid to send 500,000 troops to occupy a country that attacked us for as long as it takes but isn't going to freak-out because folks start using tags like "isolationist" when they don't decide to police every crisis and bomb every perceived enemy.
Calybos
10-11-2006, 11:49 AM
Clinton visited southeast Asia once... no doubt to create the avian flu! Clinton is responsible for everything bad, EVER people! Remember that!
He's kind of a reverse Chuck Norris.
Clinton once shot a Vince Foster just to watch him die.
Clinton cheats on his wife... but only with underage boys.
Scientists have confirmed that exposure to Clinton causes cancer... and he can't stop exposing himself!
Clinton emerged from his mother's womb, checked out her rack, and then turned around to go right back in.
Clinton doesn't need to sleep. He keeps up his energy by eating stillborn babies.
Clinton calls his little black book the Special Victims Unit.
Clinton doesn't believe in Santa Claus... but he gets coal in his stocking anyway.
Clinton had all his teeth removed to make oral sex easier... but it's okay, because he doesn't need to chew. He just unhinges his jaw.
Clinton watched the original Star Wars trilogy to pick up tips on leadership from Darth Vader. Then he made the second trilogy himself under the pen name "George Lucas."
howyadoin
10-11-2006, 11:51 AM
I don't think they're allowed to actually like sex at all.
Especially the women.Huh? Women like sex?
But iwarrior told me they don't masturbate.
Ray R.
10-11-2006, 12:02 PM
Okay, that's three months down. What about the other 45?
North Korea was caught in a space-time continuum wormhole during that time, and technically didn't exist. How could it be on the radar? Plus, Kim Il Jung's dad, L'il Kim, was only 2/3 as bat-shit insane as his son. Give the Bushies a break....
Jerry Falwell has stated over and over, but been ignored, that the wormhole was designed and manufactured by, surprise-surprise, Arkansas governor BILL CLINTON!
MatthewC
10-11-2006, 01:39 PM
Clinton's policies towards North Korea were a failure.
That doesn't necessarily mean that Clinton was wrong, though. Sometimes you can take actions that seem reasonable at the time, and still end up failing. I'm not at all convinced that any plausible set of actions by the United States could have induced North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons program.
Sure Clinton could have tried harder, made it more of a priority, put more effort in. You can say that about pretty much any issue for any president.
I'm not at all convinced that any plausible set of actions by the United States could have induced North Korea to give up their nucelar weapons
Ding ding ding. There was nothing to be done about the situation. That doesn't mean you don't try but it definitely changes how we should look at and define failure. I do love how McCain is coming out and slamming Clinton about this and aiming his comments at Hillary. Those two are already running their 2008 campaigns.
TheTen-EyedMan
10-11-2006, 04:31 PM
Clinton calls his little black book the Special Victims Unit.
The greatest line in the history of forums.
I love you Cal. I FREAKING LOVE YOU!!!!!!
howyadoin
10-11-2006, 05:20 PM
North Korea was caught in a space-time continuum wormhole during that time, and technically didn't exist. How could it be on the radar? Plus, Kim Il Jung's dad, L'il Kim, was only 2/3 as bat-shit insane as his son.Shit, Il must be seriously nuts, then.
http://images.askmen.com/imagesmusician/oct00/lil_kim/lil_kim_150.jpg
Wesley Dodds
10-11-2006, 06:04 PM
Shit, Il must be seriously nuts, then.
Well, kind of.
Basically, we don't know if he's insane or if he's just using Nixon's "madman theory". You know, acting as if he's unstable on the global stage so other countries become reluctant to provoke him.
Suzanne
10-11-2006, 08:44 PM
I still think Bill O'Reilly is a self-fucker.
I mean he's never found someone more morally bankrupt than himself so it's sex with someone worthy of his pus filled love muscle.Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter...wait, is he into ladyboys?
Samurai
10-11-2006, 11:22 PM
Since people seem to have forgotten this:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/10/17/us.nkorea/index.html
North Korea said its program began several years after it signed the so-called Agreed Framework in 1994, promising the United States, Japan, and South Korea that it would freeze its nuclear program, in exchange, the other signatories agreed to provide light-water nuclear technology for power generation.
At the White House, two U.S. officials said they believe the weapons program existed before the 1994 agreement. North Korea has facilities now capable of enriching uranium and is constructing additional facilities to expand its capacity, they said.
North Korea acknowledged to U.S. officials earlier this month that it has a secret and active nuclear weapons program that began after the 1994 agreement, the White House said Wednesday.
StoneGold
10-12-2006, 12:21 AM
Since people seem to have forgotten this:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/10/17/us.nkorea/index.html
And so the fact that the Clinton administration might not have done anything about it completely absolves the Bush administration of any guilt? If Clinton was so off the ball, shouldn't Bush have done something in the last half-decade? That's what I'm getting at. To have been in power this long and still feel the need to blame the last guy seems silly.
howyadoin
10-12-2006, 12:23 AM
And so the fact that the Clinton administration might not have done anything about it completely absolves the Bush administration of any guilt? If Clinton was so off the ball, shouldn't Bush have done something in the last half-decade? That's what I'm getting at. To have been in power this long and still feel the need to blame the last guy seems silly.I can't believe that Clinton fucker was too busy getting a blowjob to do anything about Hurricane Katrina.
Valmore
10-12-2006, 04:19 AM
And so the fact that the Clinton administration might not have done anything about it completely absolves the Bush administration of any guilt? If Clinton was so off the ball, shouldn't Bush have done something in the last half-decade? That's what I'm getting at. To have been in power this long and still feel the need to blame the last guy seems silly.
Hey, they still blame Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for stuff, so why should Bill Clinton get a pass just because everyone loves him and stuff?
Dreadstar
10-12-2006, 05:14 AM
Hey, they still blame Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for stuff, so why should Bill Clinton get a pass just because everyone loves him and stuff?
Hell, some folk still blame Nixon for stuff. And I know there are folk who blame the current state of welfare on people before my time.
No one gets a pass. No one deserves a pass.
EDIT: Well, maybe Carter. But then again, it's hard to be blamed for something you didn't do.
TheTen-EyedMan
10-12-2006, 07:50 AM
No one gets a pass. No one deserves a pass.
EDIT: Well, maybe Carter. But then again, it's hard to be blamed for something you didn't do.
I want to talk to you right now about a fundamental threat to American democracy.... I do not refer to the outward strength of America, a nation that is at peace tonight everywhere in the world, with unmatched economic power and military might.
The threat is nearly invisible in ordinary ways. It is a crisis of confidence. It is a crisis that strikes at the very heart and soul and spirit of our national will. We can see this crisis in the growing doubt about the meaning of our own lives and in the loss of a unity of purpose for our nation.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Jimmy_Carter.jpg/200px-Jimmy_Carter.jpg
Jimmy "I can't even be bothered to say malaise" Carter.
moebius
10-12-2006, 08:01 AM
Hey, they still blame Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush for stuff, so why should Bill Clinton get a pass just because everyone loves him and stuff?
What do we still blame 41 for? Basically, the only time he gets blamed for stuff is when people note: "Hey, you know all that shit you're laying at Clinton's door? Your boy's dad did the exact same thing!"
Besdies, you could blame him for way more stuff he did as head of the CIA and VP than when he was President, were you so inclined.
And Ford seems to be the only recent President to escape any blame for anything. But really, how can you stay mad at Ford?
Dreadstar
10-12-2006, 08:03 AM
And Ford seems to be the only recent President to escape any blame for anything. But really, how can you stay mad at Ford?
He was handpicked by Nixon, and gave Dickie a full presidential pardon?
moebius
10-12-2006, 08:06 AM
He was handpicked by Nixon, and gave Dickie a full presidential pardon?
But it's Gerry!
SUPERECWFAN1
10-12-2006, 08:11 AM
And Ford seems to be the only recent President to escape any blame for anything. But really, how can you stay mad at Ford?
Well according to the SNL book I read he loved Chevy Chase playing him. So thats a prop for Ford. He loved watching Chase fall around as the President.
SUPERECWFAN1
10-12-2006, 08:13 AM
It really says something when the current Adminstration , 6 years in , will try and aviod taking blame. So they decide to blame the previous Adminstration for their mistakes and goof ups.
From Bin Laden to the economy , its like Bill Clinton is all they can blame. Grow a set of balls Bush Adminstration for gods sake. Thats all we want. Accept a mistake , don't try and dodge it.
Dreadstar
10-12-2006, 08:14 AM
Well according to the SNL book I read he loved Chevy Chase playing him. So thats a prop for Ford. He loved watching Chase fall around as the President.
Then you'd have to give props to George H. W. Bush because he was a HUGE fan of Dana Carvey's impression.
moebius
10-12-2006, 08:18 AM
Well according to the SNL book I read he loved Chevy Chase playing him. So thats a prop for Ford. He loved watching Chase fall around as the President.
I met Ford once when I was little-ish. He was a nice guy, but then again I knew nothing about him except he'd been President.
SUPERECWFAN1
10-12-2006, 08:20 AM
Then you'd have to give props to George H. W. Bush because he was a HUGE fan of Dana Carvey's impression.
I know and its wild , Carvey got to go to the White House and address the news people as Bush. Then he did it for the Troops because Bush asked him to. I loved all the hand motions he did... " Were gonna go over there. And do this...and do that. A little of this, a little of that. "
Clinton liked Darrell Hammonds impersination as well.
This isn't Presidential but Paul McCartney got such a huge laugh and enjoyed John Belushi's " Joe Cocker " he paid him $ 6 grand to come play his birthday party.
I figure the day the neocons stop trying to name every federal building and airport after Ronald Reagan will be the day they stop blaming Clinton for every ill in the world going back to the Big Bang.
moebius
10-12-2006, 08:31 AM
I figure the day the neocons stop trying to name every federal building and airport after Ronald Reagan will be the day they stop blaming Clinton for every ill in the world going back to the Big Bang.
Put Ron on the Dime! Get that Communist FDR off there!
howyadoin
10-12-2006, 01:06 PM
Shit, Il must be seriously nuts, then.
Well, kind of.
Basically, we don't know if he's insane or if he's just using Nixon's "madman theory". You know, acting as if he's unstable on the global stage so other countries become reluctant to provoke him.The Lil Kim joke didn't work for you, huh?
Ontir
10-12-2006, 01:33 PM
So long as there's a breath in a Republican lung, something will always be the fault of Bill and/or Hillary Clinton!
Suzanne
10-12-2006, 03:55 PM
It really says something when the current Adminstration , 6 years in , will try and aviod taking blame. So they decide to blame the previous Adminstration for their mistakes and goof ups.
From Bin Laden to the economy , its like Bill Clinton is all they can blame. Grow a set of balls Bush Adminstration for gods sake. Thats all we want. Accept a mistake , don't try and dodge it.That's one of the things that pisses me off about Bush & Co. They're incapable of taking responsiblity for ANYTHING and admitting their mistakes. What's worse, this is spreading to the rest of Washington.
Wesley Dodds
10-12-2006, 04:31 PM
The Lil Kim joke didn't work for you, huh?
Who's Lil Kim?
Royal
10-12-2006, 04:34 PM
Bill Clinton ruined made my milk curdle and my chicken lay no eggs.
HE'S A WITCH!!!
TheTen-EyedMan
10-12-2006, 05:40 PM
Who's Lil Kim?
http://www.7passions.com/kim/lil-kim-nue-sexy-top1.JPG
R&B singer. Not much into the clothes thing.
Not that I have a complaint about that. She is a dusky wench.
Magneto_X
10-12-2006, 06:15 PM
What do we still blame 41 for? Basically, the only time he gets blamed for stuff is when people note: "Hey, you know all that shit you're laying at Clinton's door? Your boy's dad did the exact same thing!"
Iran-Contra and how Bush screwed the Iraqis with the first Gulf War.
That's also that kid he had. What was his name again? Dubya or something.
StoneGold
10-12-2006, 06:25 PM
I figure the day the neocons stop trying to name every federal building and airport after Ronald Reagan will be the day they stop blaming Clinton for every ill in the world going back to the Big Bang.
Except the Big Bang never happened. God did.
howyadoin
10-12-2006, 07:22 PM
Who's Lil Kim?The chick whose photo was in that post of mine. She's a crazy hip hop chick, so when Ray mentioned "Lil Kim" and "bat-shit insane"...
I think you can see where I'm goin' with this. But why did you think I posted the picture in the first place?
StoneGold
10-12-2006, 07:23 PM
The chick whose photo was in that post of mine. She's a crazy hip hop chick, so when Ray mentioned "Lil Kim" and "bat-shit insane"...
I think you can see where I'm goin' with this. But why did you think I posted the picture in the first place?
Jungle fever?
TheTen-EyedMan
10-12-2006, 10:34 PM
Jungle fever?
http://blog.kievukraine.info/uploaded_images/3069-746989.jpg
I’ve got jungle fever, she’s got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
She’s gone white-boy crazy, I’ve gone black-girl hazy
Aint no thinking maybe, we’re in love
She’s got jungle fever, I’ve got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
I’ve gone black-girl crazy, she’s gone white-boy hazy
We’re each others baby, we’re in love
I’ve got jungle fever, she’s got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
She’s gone white-boy crazy, I’ve gone black-girl hazy
Aint no thinking maybe, we’re in love
She cant love me, I cant love her
Cause they say we’re the wrong color
Staring, gloating, laughing, looking
Like we’ve done something wrong
Because we show love strong, get real, come on
Calling us names too bad to mention
But we pay them no attention
For color blind are inner feelings
If we feel happiness
And know our loves the best, forget their mess
I’ve got jungle fever, she’s got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
She’s gone white-boy crazy, I’ve gone black-girl hazy
Aint no thinking maybe, we’re in love
She’s got jungle fever, I’ve got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
I’ve gone black-girl crazy, she’s gone white-boy hazy
We’re each others baby, we’re in love
Everyones created equal
Hell with all you ignorant people
Trying to stereo type us
You really ought to quit
Cause you dont know jack, you make us sick
Get off my jock, youre trying to ride me
Because I got my girl beside me
Youll only make yourself look stupid
I love youre trying to dis
Cause we’ve got happiness, I bet youre pissed
I’ve got jungle fever, she’s got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
She’s gone white-boy crazy, I’ve gone black-girl hazy
Aint no thinking maybe, we’re in love
She’s got jungle fever, I’ve got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
I’ve gone black-girl crazy, she’s gone white-boy hazy
We’re each others baby, we’re in love
I’ve got jungle fever, she’s got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
She’s gone white-boy crazy, I’ve gone black-girl hazy
Aint no thinking maybe, we’re in love
She’s got jungle fever, I’ve got jungle fever
We’ve got jungle fever, we’re in love
I’ve gone black-girl crazy, she’s gone white-boy hazy
We’re each others baby, we’re in love
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.