It's become a pasttime to blame US policy failures on Bill Clinton. Yesterday, Bush declared that our problems with N. Korea are all due to the failed policies of his predecessor, Bill Clinton.

Fine, one can certainly argue that Clinton took too passive an approach to N. Korea, although as any Asian foreign policy expert will note, given the conflicting interests in that region of the world (e.g. China, S. Korea, Japan, Taiwan) it's proven nearly impossible to develop a strategy, let alone tactics, to reign in the militarism of N. Korea. It's clear, given the role of China and the precarious position of S. Korea, that the U.S cannot act unilaterally here.

But what really galls me is the implication by Bush that his Administration has no culpability with respect to what's happened. Now, I may be wrong here, but hasn't the Bush Administration held the reins of power for nearly six years? And six years after Clinton left office, the best the Bush Administration can do is blame Clinton?

I was once hired by an organization that was in very bad shape, having been nearly run into the ground by an inattentive leader. When I was hired I told the people I worked for and the people who worked for me that I understood it was my job to fix things, not to ascribe blame for things that had gone wrong in the past, and that I expected to be held accountable for where the organization went over the next two years. This is how I was taught leaders are supposed to think: fix problems; don't waste time afixing blame.

I was also taught that a leader has clearly failed when he spends his time playing the blame game.

Branquinho,

Can we safely assume that your position, and those of your co-workers, was not dependent on the fickle whims of a largely ignorant populace?

Can we also safely assume that you didn't start and continue this period of employment with approximatly fifty percent of your co-workers hell-bent on your removal, and willing to play constant and continuous blame games with said populace to achieve that removal?

I think it's a false comparison.

Yes, it's a blame game. I wish he wouldn't do it. I wish the democrates wouldn't do it. But as long as we have a largely ignorant populace, my wishes will not be granted.

Huh? You lost me. Sidestepping responsibility and blaming others is OK because the folks that elected Bush are not a bunch of rocket scientists? And I seem to remember Bush having some pretty impressive approval ratings, yet he managed to squander the good will of the public and our allies, and now refuses to own up to any responsibility for anything he's done (or failed to do).

Other presidents have governed effectively after being elected by narrow majorities. Bush failed because he's not a consensus-builder. He and Team Bush knew exactly what they wanted to do, knew they were right (God told them so), and proceeded to alienate others at every opportunity.

I'm not defending Bush...I don't like Bush.
I'm not justifying anything at all...I'm making two separate observations.

One...that corporate leadership conditions or styles are not legitimately comparable to elected office.

Two....that fucking polititians are fucking polititians....and that they are that way largely because it works. Try to take the high road as a polititian and you might as well just keep hiking. Particularly with the level of venom coming from the democrats fangs right now.

This particular attack was pre-emptive, and you know it.

There was essentially nothing that Clinton could have done about Kim Jong-il short of assasination, the guy's a head case. Not much has changed since Bush took over...we could assasinate him... do you want to??

Crying foul in this case is little more than sour grapes because your guys didn't get in the first punch...partisan, partisan, partisan. Nothing more.

> It's become a pasttime to blame US policy failures on Bill Clinton.

That's the official fair and balanced view of Fox News and that portion of the populace that swallows every turd that gets delivered to them. Then when a few weeks ago they actually had Clinton on and he bit back, their stance was "whoa, why so defensive?" You may recall it began on Jan 20th 2001 when the new regime spoke about the previous inhabitants of the WH as if they had just evicted a load of trailer trash.
Rarely do I hear mention of the man behind the curtain: his name is Roger Ailes. His heart is still in the Republican Oval Office.

Thailand is presently having some severe flooding problems. If there was a Fox Thailand it would be Taksin's fault.

Yesterday, Bush declared that our problems with N. Korea are all due to the failed policies of his predecessor, Bill Clinton.

Bush did no such thing. John McCain did.

For all his faults, Bush doesn't finger point, something your idol could learn a thing or two about.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/12/15/nkorea.us/

Yeah...it looks like Clinton had the solution to every problem and didn't leace the problems for who ever his succesor would be.

Lets see....he tried to kill Bin Laden ....but " I failed."

He had plans to attack North Korea but instead he negociated and sent the great pacifer Jimmy Carter to give North Korea aid and nuclear reactors.

No Liberal response to Facts that the Clinton and the Democratic leaders talked tough when they were in power and how they had a plan to invade North Korea and Clinton tried to kill Bin Laden but "I failed." Clinton plays all tough now that he had planned to invade Korea but instead he sent the great pacifer Jimmy Carter over to instead let North Korea blackmail us to give them nuclear reactors and food and oil. And oh yeah, the Democrats are upset now that Bush only wants to have negotiations with 6 countries instead of one on one with North Korea. Looked at the previous posting link and the one below.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=uVbu1zBid-o


Wasn't Carter the one who monitored the elections in Venezuela when Chavez was elected?

You have seen the videos where Clinton and all the Democratic leaders talked tough when Clinton was President and it was politically correct for them to do so that Iraq not only was trying to aquire and develope WMDs....but that they already had them and had used them.. Tough talk on how Iraq had to be stopped and Iraq was the biggest threat to our security involvint hte matterof WNDS. Hillary even said Iraq was harboring Al Qaida.

You see Clinton left these problems for his successors to deal with because Clinton was not a true leader....he was obsessed with his popularity and was always polling to see what Americans would and wouldn't respond to favorably.

Of course Americans do not want the US to be engaged in conflicts anywhere in the World..... but a real leader knows that sacrifices need to done...... and act in the best immediate and long term interest for our country's security.

What about Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam.....as bad as it was it.....it probaly stalemated what would have been a much bigger conflict in SouthEast Asia if the US had not intervened!
Clinton was much more concerned about being popular than being a real leader. Of course he showed how much of a great leader he was with Waco....or has that been forgotten.

Laguy, dArtagnan, Branquinho-

You guys are so intelligent.....how do you explain, defend Clinton's action or lack of action concerning North Korea during his 8 YEARS. No one disputes the huge cuts he made to during his terms to US intelligence agencys that are a huge reason Terror groups establish the footholds they did.
Of course....we know how Clinton would have handled a crisis......look at Waco......the Federal government killing women and children......American women and children... Where were the Liberals defending their constitutional rights.

Another Wacko post from Beachman. Que chato...

Another unfocused incoherent post by Beachman.

Clinton cut a deal with NK for them not to build a bomb in exchange for $$ from the US. Bush cut off the $$, so NK built a bomb.

So, its obviously Clinton's fault.

Another turd from Beachman.

I'm in Orlando right now and every time I see or hear an idiot, I wonder if I've just bumped into Beachman.

Lynne Stewart.....your Liberal hero!

This case is just a small example of the mentality of the pacifying of the Terrorists and those who support and aid them!

The jury convicted her of aiding Terrorists and yet another Liberal judge has merely just slapped her hands and she appeared to the media to again make a mockery of our justice system.

The same mentality that North Korea has engaged of after the UN overwhemly vote to sanction North Korea and North Korea responds that it is a declaration of war and the UN will back down and do basically nothing like they did with all of the Resoultions against Iraq!

The worst thing Clinton did was get elected to the White House. Just think, if it weren't for the Clinton presidency Rush Limbaugh would today probably be spinning muzak on the graveyard shift at some 100 watt radio station in an Indiana shit-hole town, and Bill O'Reilly would be an insurance claims adjuster.
These guys should be kissing Bubba's feet.

Beachman said:

"The same mentality that North Korea has engaged of after the UN overwhemly vote to sanction North Korea and North Korea responds that it is a declaration of war and the UN will back down and do basically nothing like they did with all of the Resoultions against Iraq!"

Goodness! Can someone translate this sentence for me? It's not English. Maybe Korean?

Can't seem to get the picture thing to work as the instructions are somewhat ambiguous. Anyone want to help so I can post some jerking off material for Beachman?

(Message edited by LAguy on October 17, 2006)

There we go. That's better. Beachman, jerk-off to your heart's delight.

(Message edited by LAguy on October 17, 2006)

How embarrassing. So that those of you on the board don't suffer the same embarrassment, when you post a picture at the beginning of a post, the name of the picture (which normally doesn't show) is posted at the beginning of the post as you view it from the opening Discus screen.

BOY, is my face red!

And while I'm here, Beachman, you may want to use some high quality lubricant while "doing the deed" with the material I just posted. Otherwise, after an hour or so you may rub yourself raw.

Laguy, the point being, different time, different enemies, different allies.

Beachman,

I'm shocked that these guys are posting photos of politicians for you to jerk-off to.

I've combed my photo files and come up with a suitable substitute. Hope you like her:

Photo: Sept 04 Trip

Jag

Guys,

Beachman is by his own admission a very hard right wing Republican. He is certainly not alone in his views and opinions. I actually think that his opinions are shared by some people in the highest levels of our government today.

I participate in another political discussion, and there are hard right wingers in there too. They all share certain behaviors. Their posts are 90% taunting, arrogant, and demeaning. Their command of the English language is moderate to poor. I have observed that these people do not choose their positions rationally. They do it emotionally, and more importantly, no amount of logic and rationality will change their views. Period.

However, we live in a democracy. It is critical to remember that their votes count just as much as anyone else's. Just like Al Qaeda does not represent the voice of all Muslims, hard right wingers do not represent the voice of all Republicans. Actually, Al Qaeda and hard right wing republicans share one thing in common - extremism.

Al Qaeda's success hinges on its ability to spread fear and hate throughout the Muslim community. Ironically, the hard right wing agenda is chillingly similar. The good news is that boths are extremist and neither represent the opinions of the majority. To solve this epidemic of violence, we must fight EXTREMISM, not terrorism.

Jag,
I am completely shocked by the picture you posted and one question immediately came to mind. Where did they find that luxurious blue wood on the doors and on the cabinets with pink handles ? One other thing was troubling me , when will the swelling go down on that womans nose?

Blues,
The only solution that I can think of is to get laid as much as possible and really piss off those hard right wingers.

LaGuy,
You're trying to reason with a retarded version of Sean Hannity, doesn't Hannity's face look like he has a mild case of down syndrome? Anyway, I love Clinton, he gets blow jobs from 18 year olds, sticks cigars up their snatch and tells the world he didn't do it with a straight face. He's black in my eyes, an honorary "brother" and the only white man who could walk through Harlem and say "my Nigga" and live.
TRW

As a Brazilian friend of mine said about 6 years ago, "We love Clinton. He loves women, and you should never trust a leader who doesn't chase women. He could be president in Brazil if only he were as corrupt as our politicians."

>>LaGuy,
You're trying to reason with a retarded version of Sean Hannity<<

TRW: Just curious, which part of my post represented trying to "reason" with a retard? My suggestion that Beachman beat off to a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Hussein's hand, or my suggestion that he use a good lubricant while doing so?

I suppose I also should have given Beachman the opportunity to beat off to a picture capturing the relationship between Ronald Reagan and Bin Laden, namely Reagan sucking Bin Laden's dick while his CIA provided arms to Bin Laden and his terrorists in training (thereby establishing them as a force), but, unfortunately no photographers were allowed and I doubt Beachman has the mental capacity to form the appropriate mental image. Moreover, if I were to give Beachman that opportunity I would be risking another "different time, different enemies, different allies" post from Arellius.

Oh my fucking god, that is a DISGUSTING PIC Jag posted. I'm going to print it out and hang it outside my door to scare away the evil spirits.

Where's those little black censorship squares when we need them?

She kind've has that Ann Coulter come hither look about her. I'm sure Beachman is beating away as we speak.

(Message edited by LAguy on October 18, 2006)

"Laguy, the point being, different time, different enemies, different allies"

and

"Laguy, I actually think that his opinions are shared by some people in the highest levels of our government today"


Comment: My latest read is titled, "the One Percent Doctrine" and it is a facinating book. I am continually amazed at the dirt our gov. aligns itself with (to this day) in order to secure some short term objectives. It contains/details sept 11th and post 11th govt inner workings that are epic in nature. Highly recommended book.

http://www.ronsuskind.com/theonepercentdoctrine/


"TRW: Just curious, which part of my post represented trying to "reason" with a retard? My suggestion that Beachman beat off to a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Hussein's hand, or my suggestion that he use a good lubricant while doing so?"


LOL!

Laguy,
I can't answer any questions regarding people with down syndrome masterbating because it is against my family values.

Branquinho,
Our greatest leaders were womanizers, Kennedy, Eisenhower & Clinton.

Don Marco,
In your view what makes Ron Suskinds analysis of the war on terror more legitimate then others?

TRW--- his is but one educated view ... that is with documented information sources. The conclusions are no more valid than any one else analyzing the same reams of data/information. However, I don't see the book as ideological diatribe-- it's more matter of fact and doesn't delve into interpretion much imho.

Sure, one can "select" facts to support one's case, and dismiss others, but nevertheless, it is a fascinating and detailed account. It is amazing that so many of Bush's cabinet and advisors past and present went on the public historical record. Also, the retelling of the facts is not so much different than many others such as O'Neill and Clarke.

Besides Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfield-- there is no one else in this country who knows more about what really happened behind closed doors than Clarke, O'Neill, and Powell. These three all seem to in concert when it comes to telling events and how things unfolded for the most part. This book doesn't contradict anything I've heard yet-- just delve a hell of a lot deeper into detail.


By my last few posts, please don't confuse me as a leftist wacko. I think those that think Bush is the antichrist, evil, and blame him for everything are just as moronic as the right wing wacko's. In fact, I voted for him in his first term. Not because I ever liked him, but due to the dems offering up total dogshit the last two elections. Yes, the better of the two pathetic choices at the time.

For all those who say bush is a bumbling moron (bumbling yes, moron no), why hasn't one of the dem canidates been able run circles around him debate time? the dems are woefully inadequate and I for one am looking forward to better choices in two years (from both sides).

With that said, I think that Bush and his staff (i.e. cheney/rummy) have blundered and have lost the battle they wanted to wage. They will be on the defensive and tread water for two years, which does in fact undermine the national security that they tout as being almighty important.

Damn ... that is one ugly whore.

It looks like you have to resort to personal attacks now because you are losing the discussion to facts....facts you and your liberal leaders want to ignore ...but the videos don't lie!

Typical ,liberal leftist wacko responses who when presented with videos of Clinton and Democratic leaders insisting when it was politically correct for them to....that Sadam had, was developing and trying to aquire weapons of mass destruction. Also, from CNN that Clinton had plans to invaded North Korea because of their policy to develope Nukes....but instead sent Carter to neogiate giving North Korea food, oil and nuclear reactors.

With both North Korea and Iran and Iraq before the World, the UN in particular have dealt with these counties much as the League of Nations (The United States was not a member) did with Hitler and Nazi Germany prior to World War 2 with the Munich Agreement ( Sounds alot like the Agreed Framework Carter and Clinton struck with North Korea). Oh yea Hitler also signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact prior to World War Two and what happened the there!

And all the useless, unenforced Resolutions the UN passed to deal with Iraq and the useless negotiations that Iran is having with the UN where Iran knows that the UN has neither the will or the stomach....to enforce any Resolutions the UN may pass to deter Iran to continue is goal to have nuclear weapons. North Korea also know that that the UN's bark (which is small) is much smaller than its bite.

Just look back at recent World history and if you can't see that these countries and their leaders cannot be trusted to negociate with..... and even if they sign an agreement...history shows they won't abide by them because the UN appeases them and does not have the will to enforce any resolution the UN passes! Tell me one UN major mission that they have had success with in the last 20 years without having to eventually use the will and force of the US military! What is happening in many countries on the continent of Africa right now with all the slavery and and millins of innocent people being slaughtered each year and the UN has the balls to condem the United States for enforcing the very Resoultion the UN voted on and passed! Look and learn from World History that we have a choice to confront agression by terrorist groups and rogue countries that want to aquire weapons of mass destruction to force the World by blackmail and threats their way of thinking on the rest of us! Check the link below for a little history of the enviroment and chain of events that led to World War Two in Europe....it doesn't even touch on Japan.

http://web.utk.edu/~dasdell/tparker1629.htm

Don Marco,
Thank you for the referral. I never thought you were a "leftist wacko" because you represent yourself as someone who would rather debate the issues at hand rather than attack the powers that be. I dislike Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld for their policies and the arrogant way in which they have implemented them. Hopefully McCain will have the good sense to nominate Lieberman as his Vice President and Colin Powell for Secretary of Defense so they can right this ship that has sailed so wrong for the last 8 years.
TRW

Hmmmm. I smell another Beachman turd. Time to abandon this thread. It's getting toxic thanks to all the piles of shit he's left behind.

Fact: Beachman now has 69 posts in the past year, 69 in the Off-Topic section. He always was and still is completely lost and worthless to this prostitution site.
Fact: Beachman wrote "Lynne Stewart.....your Liberal hero!". Post searches will show that no one else has posted about her. In typical fashion, Beachman makes retarded straw man statements.
Fact: Beachman's writing ability is high school level at best. His blabbering is riddled with spelling errors, grammatical errors, run-on sentences, and retarded logic.
Fact: Beachman's understandable hatred of his pathetic state of being manifests itself as contempt for "wacko liberals". Due to his limited mental state, he erroneously and excessively assigns this label to people with views across the political spectrum.

TRW, wow I don't care for many politicians, but you named 2/3 that I do think fairly highly off. I'm with u on Lieberman and Powell, but McCain I have mixed feelings about. I'm not sure how much of his rhetoric he takes to heart vs. how much is for show. At face value, it seems to be heart, but the last few years have given me pause.

Unfort for us, Lieberman fails miserably in primaries and Powell would never get elected prez due to race (unfort). Personally, I think Bush and Co, took the political fight out of him with their diplomatic idiocy. I would vote for him in a heartbeat tho.

DM,
They did a real hit job on Colin, the man served his country admirably and they made him out to be a "traitor" to the Bush administration. I'm not too confident in McCain either but he's electable and what are our choices? Lieberman is a likeable Dick Cheney, no personality but I have confidence in his ability to make the right decisions and I would feel comfortable with him being a "heartbeat" away from the Presidency. The ultimate debacle would be if Newt Gingrich, the adulterer/dead beat dad/thief was able to win his parties nomination.

Has Beachman ever paid for sex? Has Beachman ever had sex?

Inquiring minds don't want to know. They just wish he'd get the purpose of this board.

Years ago Beachman used to frequent the girls hanging out in the alleys of the Zona Roja in TJ. His political tastes mirror his tastes in putas. My guess is one of those streetgirl diseases took off his dick, so now he has nothing to report on.

LOL,
I will now refer to Branquinho as "The Cleaner".

DM,

What specifically did you not like about Gore and Kerry that made them less appealing choices than Bush? Also, knowing what you know now about Bush and those he surrounds himself with compared to Gore's past record and more recent work, would you make the same choice?

I also like McCain a little less than I did before. Given the current makeup of the GOP base and past experience, I don't think he has much choice regarding shifting to the right, but I still don't like it.