Sorry if I incorrectly labelled you. I must say, though, you seem to have a difficult time labelling yourself. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] And, you did state some facts, but all facts can be re-cast in a different light, depending on one's agenda. ;)

Anywho, people talk about him because there are only a few recent presidents to talk about. I think Bush41 got more press during this war.

<font color=orange> A Life style liberal? What are you gay or something? :D

Joke all! I really don't care what others are! I just have never heard of a Life Style Liberal. I'll leave now!</font>

Go here pay attention to the part about the slashing of the defence budget. Now you know why most military personnel complain about Clinton.

<font color=orange> A Life style liberal? What are you gay or something? :D

Joke all! I really don't care what others are! I just have never heard of a Life Style Liberal. I'll leave now!</font></font>[/QUOTE]<font color="#ffccff">I don't think so...I should ask Colleen ;)
You deserve to be [img]graemlins/troutslap.gif[/img] for that question though :D

But I think those who are should not be persecuted because they are...and I think certain drugs should be legalized (even if I dont use them) for use in your own personal home...basicly...Life style Liberal [img]smile.gif[/img]

TL you are half right, it does look like I have trouble defining myself..but the truth is...I know EXACTLY where I stand on each issue [img]smile.gif[/img] </font>

<font color=orange>Agreed on both counts! I find it repugnent the amount of money this country spends on the drug war. A war that isn't winable IMO. I'd rather spend that money on rehab as opposed to jailing people. I too must be a Life Style Liberal!</font>

Well, I guess that makes me a life style liberal, too.

Rimjaw, that article you posted is useless twattle. First off, the author is asking me to believe he is an idiot if he is asking me to believe he takes all that Democrat banter seriously. He rants about something common sense tells us is useless hot air.

That said, you conservatives can't have your cause-and-effect cake and eat it too. If Clinton is responsible for Bushie-boy's failure as an economist, then it's fair for him to take credit for the army too. Plus, the overwhelming success in Iraq points to the fact that Clinton did us all a favor by cutting the military by 40%, as we obviously have military might aplenty.

And, none of this has anything to do with what Clinton has said about and during this war - which has been absolute and unwaivering support for the administration. He even deftly danced around the UN issues (Clinton is a long-time pro-UN advocate). [img]graemlins/dancing.gif[/img] Of course, he wasn't getting pressed with really hard questions, like what the word "is" means, but that's another topic. :rolleyes:

<font color="#ffccff">Err TL...all the things I have seen or heard from Clinton is how big a failure GWB has been...haven't seen him say anything good about the current administration....could you perhaps point me in the proper direction? I will do the search but at least give me a idea where to look.

Clinton slashed the Military budgets by too great an extreme, we have seen many accidents and failures that may be chalked up to lack of training...lives have been lost due to those cuts. Our military kicked ass in Iraq not because we didn't need a stronger military, but because, by and large the opposition didn't show up for a fight. </font>

[ 04-16-2003, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Saw it in an interview, MagiK. He certainly talks about Bush's failures, but he has not gone against the war at all. He readily admits these problems werre ones which hassled him -- see my "Pop Quiz" thread on this page (erm... I think you did). He does say the UN should play a major role in rebuilding, but that's a different (though certainly related) issue. Sorry I can't give you more, but I'll keep an eye out.

The author is deriding the democrats for trying to hijack this victory as their own. Anyway, like Magik said, this war was won not because of the military being such a lean, mean machine but primarily due to the low morale and tactical ineptitude of the Iraqi Armed Forces. But hey, you know best.

I'd like to retract this statement. While I think a slight defense budget cut was certainly in order after all the money Reagan and Bush41 diverted to the military, I think the evidence shows that we lost veteran troops during that time. And, the people paying the price for that are generally Iraqi and British. :(