Clinton......again

[alphieb]

could you jar my memory as to when/where Dubya blamed his woes on Clinton.
Dubya seems to have been very respectful of Clinton, so far as i can recall

Dubya was incredibly gracious at the Hanging of Slick Willies Portrait

Let me clarify, Maybe Bush has not personally blamed Clinton, but the republican party sure has.

 

[Paladin]

what the hell happened to previous presidents NOT attacking their successors
guess Clinton will do whatever he has to, to get another 8 years in the White House, although he will be the first First Husband

Bad Form Slick Willy

and then

interesting
but does two wrongs make a right?

ROFLMFAO
can you say :spin: ?
ted

 

[DeeJayH]

and then




ROFLMFAO
can you say :spin: ?
ted

I must be dizzy from all the spinning, because i don't see what you are talking about ted

 

[cnredd]

I must be dizzy from all the spinning, because i don't see what you are talking about ted

Here's what he's talking about...

Right(accusation) - Clinton attacked Bush43...I think that's wrong

Left(changing subject as a defense of original accusation) - Bush 41 attacked Clinton

Right(admitting secondary accusation) - I think that's wrong, too...(bringing the subject back to the original accusation)...Now will you admit that what Clinton is doing is just as wrong?

Left - (silence)

He could have easily said "Yes...Just like Bush41, Clinton went against standing tradition and Presidential etiquette by attacking the current President."

Instead he decided to attack YOU...

See how that works?...:roll:

 

[Paladin]

I must be dizzy from all the spinning, because i don't see what you are talking about ted

Easy to explain and easy to understand why you don't "get it".

You claim it is bad form if former pres Clinton attacks Bush Jr. but you will excuse Bush Sr.'s. bad form when he mounts attacks on Clinton.
Not only excuse, but attempt to throw your complaint back on Clinton.

Bad form Dan.
ted

 

[DeeJayH]

I am now EDITING THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD to
bad form Clinton and Bush 41

happy now:2wave:

 

[DeeJayH]

Here's what he's talking about...

Right(accusation) - Clinton attacked Bush43...I think that's wrong

Left(changing subject as a defense of original accusation) - Bush 41 attacked Clinton

Right(admitting secondary accusation) - I think that's wrong, too...(bringing the subject back to the original accusation)...Now will you admit that what Clinton is doing is just as wrong?

Left - (silence)

He could have easily said "Yes...Just like Bush41, Clinton went against standing tradition and Presidential etiquette by attacking the current President."

Instead he decided to attack YOU...

See how that works?...:roll:

we have a lengthy history of attacking each other, from another board
don't we ted? :2wave:

 

[cnredd]

we have a lengthy history of attacking each other, from another board
don't we ted? :2wave:

Hopefully he was better on the other board, because he thinks that when you say "two wrongs", you're really saying that one of them wasn't wrong and you're excusing it...:roll:

The overall gist of what I wrote is not just reflective of your current opponent...It's a common tactic used...

 

[Paladin]

Here's what he's talking about...

Right(accusation) - Clinton attacked Bush43...I think that's wrong

Left(changing subject as a defense of original accusation) - Bush 41 attacked Clinton

Right(admitting secondary accusation) - I think that's wrong, too...(bringing the subject back to the original accusation)...Now will you admit that what Clinton is doing is just as wrong?

Left - (silence)

He could have easily said "Yes...Just like Bush41, Clinton went against standing tradition and Presidential etiquette by attacking the current President."

Instead he decided to attack YOU...

See how that works?...

If dan had apologized for making the mistake, I would have accepted it and been quiet. But he didn't, until his previous post.
I attacked him about as much as you attacked me.

And as for the topic in particular; So what if a former president bad mouths the sitting pres? As someone else implied, their mouths haven't been sewn shut.

I am now EDITING THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD to
bad form Clinton and Bush 41

happy now:2wave:

Oh, all right!
ted

 

[Paladin]

Hopefully he was better on the other board, because he thinks that when you say "two wrongs", you're really saying that one of them wasn't wrong and you're excusing it...:roll:

Actually, I know that from our history, that is what he is saying.
ted

 

[shuamort]

could you jar my memory as to when/where Dubya blamed his woes on Clinton.
Dubya seems to have been very respectful of Clinton, so far as i can recall

Dubya was incredibly gracious at the Hanging of Slick Willies Portrait

September 2005:

Listen, there are differences of opinion about the way forward; I understand that. Some Americans want us to withdraw our troops so that we can escape the violence. I recognize their good intentions, but their position is wrong. Withdrawing our troops would make the world more dangerous, and make America less safe. To leave Iraq now would be to repeat the costly mistakes of the past that led to the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. The terrorists saw our response to the hostage crisis in Iran, the bombings in the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole. The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves, and so they attacked us.

 

[Diogenes]

Don't forget what happens when you half-heartedly support the military, then leave them left to hang...

What kind of hawk was that "down" again?

Point taken. Thinking about it later, I realized I should have included Somalia also. The mission under Bush41 - providing relief to starving people - was extremely successful. In fact it was so successful that Clinton succumbed to mission creep and tried to rebuild the society, and that was doomed to failure because Democrats don't have the attention span to undertake large projects.

 

[DeeJayH]

September 2005:

whats your point

 

[shuamort]

whats your point

That Bush has indeed attacked (aka blamed his woes on) Clinton.

 

[alphieb]

That Bush has indeed attacked (aka blamed his woes on) Clinton.

How indeed can he blame Clinton for anything.........other than finances and "wow" Clinton has been out of office for almost SIX years......

 

[DeeJayH]

That Bush has indeed attacked (aka blamed his woes on) Clinton.

the precedent is that past presidents do not attack current

the fact that the current state of affairs is very relevant and part of the job
please stay on point please
We are in the trouble we are in currently
because Clinton was too busy getting under a youngin's skirt than taking car of national security
***** Clinton and his failed presidency and his legacy
as well as his role as First Male Bitch in the White House

 

[Iriemon]

the precedent is that past presidents do not attack current

the fact that the current state of affairs is very relevant and part of the job
please stay on point please
We are in the trouble we are in currently
because Clinton was too busy getting under a youngin's skirt than taking car of national security
***** Clinton and his failed presidency and his legacy
as well as his role as First Male Bitch in the White House

Oh, to have a "failed presidency" again ...

 

[Mr. D]

I guess this means no more commercials about relief with HW Bush.

I'm not sure Sr. agrees with everything Jr. stands for. He listened to the predictions of what would happen if we occupied Iraq after the Gulf war! Jr. said he didn't discuss it with his father.

By the way, Clinton is soft on the president compared to President Carter. He just calls them as he sees them. Why should ex presidents stand silently like the three monkeys (hear no, see no, speak no evil). When an ex president says he knows the Florida election was stolen, it holds a little more weight than Al Franken saying it.

 

[cnredd]

could you jar my memory as to when/where Dubya blamed his woes on Clinton.
Dubya seems to have been very respectful of Clinton, so far as i can recall

Dubya was incredibly gracious at the Hanging of Slick Willies Portrait

September 2005:

Listen, there are differences of opinion about the way forward; I understand that. Some Americans want us to withdraw our troops so that we can escape the violence. I recognize their good intentions, but their position is wrong. Withdrawing our troops would make the world more dangerous, and make America less safe. To leave Iraq now would be to repeat the costly mistakes of the past that led to the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. The terrorists saw our response to the hostage crisis in Iran, the bombings in the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole. The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves, and so they attacked us.

Ummm...you're highlighting the wrong thing here...Let me try...

Listen, there are differences of opinion about the way forward; I understand that. Some Americans want us to withdraw our troops so that we can escape the violence. I recognize their good intentions, but their position is wrong. Withdrawing our troops would make the world more dangerous, and make America less safe. To leave Iraq now would be to repeat the costly mistakes of the past that led to the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. The terrorists saw our response to the hostage crisis in Iran, the bombings in the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole. The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves, and so they attacked us.

Seems to me like Bush wasn't referring to Clinton..If you REALLY wanna reach, I could see your argument that he is taking a shot at the last 4 Presidents....But I think that's a stretch...

How you got a direct attack on Clinton, I have no idea...wishful thinking?...:shrug:

 

[shuamort]

Ummm...you're highlighting the wrong thing here...Let me try...

Seems to me like Bush wasn't referring to Clinton..If you REALLY wanna reach, I could see your argument that he is taking a shot at the last 4 Presidents....But I think that's a stretch...

How you got a direct attack on Clinton, I have no idea...wishful thinking?...:shrug:

Actually, if you follow the link I gave, it leads to a right wing blogger who was rejoicing the fact that Bush was attacking Clinton there. So, it wasn't my wishful thinking.

Here's what he said about the quote:

In the wake of Bill Clinton's churlish performance last Sunday on George Stephanopoulos' This Week, in which Clinton blamed Bush for everything from the hurricane Katrina response to global warming to Iraq, it was only fitting that Bush FINALLY took Clinton head-on and spoke out. However, Bush never quite mentioned Clinton by name:

..............................

Nonetheless, the main target of Bush's comments was pretty clear. Well I say: It's about time you said something, Mr. President! Bush concluded his speech thus:

.............................

Now, Mr. President, would you please endeavor to drop your kind overtures and stop trying to resuscitate the career of our former Molester-in-Chief, once and for all? You're learning that, the more you hold your hand out to this opportunistic beast to promote comity, the more he will bite that hand and politely ask for more. (Besides, all this good press seems to be making Clinton a wee frisky, and it might harm his weak heart.)