|
Saturday, February 22, 2003
Clinton's War
I did a little rant on Clinton not too long ago. I'm a conservative, what do you expect? :)
I finally found a great piece on what Bush says today on Iraq and what Clinton said during his wag the dog days. It's for all you libs out there that hate to say you're wrong.
Larry Elder put this together for worldnetdaily.com at http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31143
Here is just one part of that article:
Clinton, Dec. 19, 1998: "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. ... Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. ... Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."
George W. Bush, Jan. 28, 2003: "Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks, to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons is to dominate, intimidate or attack. With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region."
Don'tcha hate it libs? Sooooo, which is it? Was Clinton attacking Iraq to divert attention from his romances or was and is Iraq a serious threat?
posted by Peter Shinn at 12:22 AM
Reporter or human being?
All of us have seen the footage of the fire in Rhode Island from the Great White concert. I can understand the newsman filming the fire as it was starting. I can understand him filming it as he was making his way out of the club. What I can’t understand is how he could film people dying. There he was, panning, walking around to get better angles of the death and mayhem while people were dying and screaming right in front of him.
At what point are you not a human being and become just a spectator? Does having a camera allow you to ignore the pains and anguish from others as you catalog it for mankind?
In my opinion he should have done one of two things:
1) Toss the camera down & help pull people out right away
2) Set the camera down where it would still be filming while he jumped into rescue efforts.
Not up to me to judge. This guy has to live with the screams and deaths the rest of his life. There is no doubt that he could have saved many.
posted by Peter Shinn at 12:14 AM
Friday – 02/21/03
CNN – I love how the libs don’t want to admit that the majority of the media is liberal. A great example of how liberal they are was this headline on CNN:
“CNN/Times poll shows that 50% of American people think that Al Qaeda is a greater threat than Iraq.”
Why doesn't it read that 50% of Americans think that Iraq is a greater threat than Al Qaeda? Of course it is because libs don't want to do or support anything that Bush does, unless they have to for fear of being labeled obstructionists, or maybe even dangerous to society.
In my opinion, a conservative would say that Americans believe that both are equally threatening and both have to be dealt with.
I also believe that libs are playing politics with our lives. They look at the war on terror as an opportunity to get votes, and Bush and the Reps are getting too many of those, as was evidenced by the last election.
posted by Peter Shinn at 12:08 AM
Monday, February 17, 2003
Monday 02/17/03
Listen To Chirac, or in other words, be quiet & sit down!
Naughty naughty you eastern nations in Europe. You didn't listen to Mr. Chirac! Here is the big man's quote:
"It is not really responsible behavior; it is not well brought-up behavior. They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet,"
That quote came from a Fox News article at: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78810,00.html
And More from http://europe.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/02/18/sprj.irq.chirac/index.html
Chirac said: "These countries have been not very well behaved and rather reckless of the danger of aligning themselves too rapidly with the American position."
"I felt they acted frivolously because entry into the European Union implies a minimum of understanding for the others," Chirac said.
Chirac called the letters "infantile" and "dangerous," adding: "They missed a great opportunity to shut up."
I think he means that you children should be seen and not heard, if you want to be accepted into the European Union that is.
You should have a good understanding what the ¡§Union¡¨ will be like now. Germany and France want to run the show & everyone else is expected to act appropriately.
Good luck :)
posted by Peter Shinn at 10:00 PM
|
