Posted by Karol at 02:06 PM
Yeah, and Bill deserves an even bigger thank you from Osama bin Laden for allowing al-Qaeda to grow as dangerous as it did under Clinton’s watch.
But not as big a thank you as George H. W. Bush deserves for training and arming Osama. Oh and arming Saddam. Gift baskets from both should be on the way.
Let’s stop the histrionics people.
Try again – it was your effite French heroes who armed Saddam. That was the biggest reason they wanted him still around killing – he owed them money.
I’d say you’re batting about, say, .000 in ever being right. Are you trying to become the Washington Generals of the blogosphere?
Why didn’t he also thank George H Bush? George H Bush was president when the Cold War was endeds and he gutted military spending to reflect that, and so did his predecesor Clinton.
The Fact that we were still able to kick ass in Iraq and Afghanistan shows that the military reductions were sensible and practical to reflect our changing needs of national defense.
Our military was ready and we cut spending, I think thats the balance a good president should strive for.
Don’t be the typical liberal sentence twister….Peter said “for allowing al-Qaeda to grow as dangerous as it did under Clinton’s watch”, and you say Bush armed Osama ??? Come’on..
Laughing my Ass off at Bush arming Sadam, that’s pretty funny, lots of burned out Iraqi M1 Abrams tanks in the desert…..lol.
I just read the speech; it was so outrageously partisan and poorly-reasoned. How does she get away with putting out stuff like this? Besides the plug for Saddam Hussein, there’s a silly swipe about Kyoto, an *outrageous* (coming from the wife of Bill Clinton) swipe about Bush’s handling of North Korea, and a strange alternate history of the 20th century that involves the U.N. being used heavily for warfare (only happened once as far as I know, and it wasn’t by her husband).