Still can't stop laughing at Hillary and her feminazi buddies
U.S. Presidential Race: Official Thread
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
which 'great men' are you referring too.
How exactly has the 'war on evil' been won?
The post invasion scrutiny Bush has faced is an accurate reflexion of the public's lack of interest in his Iraq policy. In that respect, the media have done their jobs.
The honus isn't on him to prove it. You prove it.
What are you saying, Raoul...
That the media is supposed to merely reflect public opinion? You couldn't possibly think that anyone with half a brain is going to find that as an acceptable perspective.
You should know more than anyone should know that the media is used as to tool to manipulate the populace. Furthermore, 8-10 represent the corporate world driving opinion in one direction or another, if not to prevent people from concentrating on something like the fallen sodiers or a butchered middle-eastern population.
*Damnit!!! I told myself I wouldn't be so confrontational, today.
Except that Bush was inaugurated in late January of 2001 and the attack came in mid-September, around 7 1/2 months later. Bush's appointees would barely be up to speed on much of the international intrigue. It might be interesting to know what, if anything, Clinton's minions had briefed the new administration on regarding such threats.
I was never a big fan of either Al Gore or John Kerry, but I don't know if I'd call them "evil."
When I heard Colin Powell's speech to the UN, I kept asking myself, "where's the beef?" I didn't hear any convincing evidence (prosecutor--my level is "beyond a reasonable doubt") that Iraq had WMD or was involved with Osama's boy's club. However, when the Senate voted overwhelmingly (Demos and GOP) to support the attack, I hoped they were given some intelligence that we hadn't been privy to. My mistake, putting Senate and intelligence in the same sentence. I tried to convince myself that the government had information they weren't sharing with us because it was obvious that if Bush was wrong, he would have destroyed any legacy he could establish and would, undoubtedly, go down in history as one of our worst presidents. Guess what?
Good grief, you're WUMMING right? You can't actually have this stance on Bush, surely?
I've always appreciated Bush
This doesn't help. I've just discovered this CE forum, so I really have no idea on where you stand really - so you may be taking the piss. I really don't know, but I hope for your sake you are...
American historians, intellects, and the majority of the world believe Bush to be the very worst president in American history - Tells you a lot about Dipper.
I don't hate somebody because the media says he is the worst president ever. I've always liked him, even before the Iraq war and the war didn't change a thing.
Oh I see!
Surely you don't know him personally, so you've based your liking of Bush on what, if not the media or his achievements?
you're quite right, although that would make it arounf 8 1/2 months, but thats neither here nor there, a little digging discovered this
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0DEEDB1131F933A15750C0A9629C8B63
I am old enough to understand what is going on without listening to the media.
Why don't some people understand that every idiot in the world has his own admirers
Are you for real? First off someone else said "the media allowed Bush to sell the war" so go quote them and say prove it. My proof is any of the major news networks except Fox News. Just go watch any of MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN or listen to NPR. Want some proof fine, how about one of the most well respected news shows, 60 Minutes, using purley fabricated documents to sell a story about Bush and the war. That's just one of any examples that occurs on nearly a daily basis here. And the war in Iraq is debateable for many reasons. You're probably one of the first ones to line up about injustices occuring around the world and Saddam Huseins family commiting horrific crimes on a daily basis was one. How about Uday torturing the Iraq football team for lack of success? You're right they should have stayed in power.
Now your brilliant retort.....
Why don't some people understand that every idiot in the world has his own admirers
So you're now calling him an idiot?
Just get out of the CE forum, it's not the place for WUMs.
People said much of the same about Nixon. Now he's considered a great president so that line means nothing. Only time will tell what kind of president Bush is/was.
Why don't some people understand that every idiot in the world has his own admirers
I honestly can't tell if you're taking the piss or not.
Given that you can use a computer and seem to be able to spell I can only assume that you are.
Not saying that story is right or wrong but the NY Times is rapidly becoming the laughing stock of journalism. I'd be careful using them as a source of full or truthfull information.
considered a great president by who?
You are acting strangely today Sults, very unlike yourself. I'm not wumming here and I did not call him an idiot. I'm just saying that somebody who is an idiot according to you may not be the same for me.
again, by who's standards are the ny times being judged? Who is saying they're a laughing stock? Where are you getting this stuff from?
Good God my man, do you pay attention to anything related to history or politics? Or do you just see a thread about Bush and bash away? Nixon is one of the people primarily responsible for opening relations with a little county you may have heard of called China.
Example 1: Jayson Blair.
Examplpe 2: The Associated Press quotes the New York Times management as admitting that the Jayson Blair four years of lying as a Times reporter is "a low point in the 152 year history of the newspaper."
That is an understatement.
It is the lowest point in the history of American journalism.
It is even worse than the New York Times continuing to brag about the 1932 Pulitzer Prize won by their Moscow correspondent, Walter Duranty. This creature repeatedly lied in claiming that Joseph Stalin's Red Army never starved to death so many millions of Ukrainians.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32750
That one one quote is from the AP, heard of them?
Again, I said time will judge. If you had done that poll after 9/11 it would be the opposite.
That is a tongue in cheek comment. What I meant is even somebody who is considered an idiot by most will have his admirers.
wasn't he also responsible for destroying the american people's faith in the president, something that your country hasn't recovered from even today in that they expect to be screwed aren't suprised when they are
I don't have to. I've always appreciated him and I might have posted it in other threads too.
EDIT: It sounds like you are the one trying to wind me up.
His times nearly over.
We mostly know his record as President, save a few months remaining before the elections.
I wouldn't say he's soley responsible. One thing is the media is more agressive now. There is no room for anything outside the lines. There were things going on during the Kennedy administration that were starting to creep out. I mean would the Attorney General and the President be allowed to sneak a celebrity in and out of the White House to share? Of meet ups with suspected mafia people at a winter cabin in Lake Tahoe? No.
Nixon wasn't perfect but he's also not looked at as the same president as when he resigned.
And obviously you'll be happy but that still doesn't have anything to do with how he'll be looked at in 10, 20 or more years.