Quote:
Would that be because he put the 'ass' back in 'assistant', or because he lied about it?
If it is the latter, how about some proof about them WMD's we've been hearing so much about?
|
1. Quite nice, you noted the usage of "elected" and didn't start off with menial name calling and bitching about other presidents being impeached. I don't care about Monica Luinski it is just that he lied so thouroughly under oath and all the other shit he did, the worst of it has already been mentioned, giving weapons tech to China. I think he might have also given tech to North Korea to appease them but I'm not sure.
2. Bush is horrid, he hasn't done much but work on foreign policy in damnedest way and "take the wind out from the behind the sails" of the democrats by taking their issues and eventually being in 75% complience. Unfortunatly he is probably going to run again and most likely win, leaving '08 open for someone new, and my geuss is Hillary Clinton is going be the democratic candidate and she'll most likely win. I'm also geussing this book is for one purpose only, so when a tough question gets asked she can just say "I covered that in my book" and then act as if she is going to ignore to question to not waste americas time, because being a democrat...she cares!
3. As for the WMD, no one denies Saddam had it in large quantities, its just that we have yet to find it so maybe he actually was telling the truth when he said he didn't have it. So that leaves a few options, he flushed it all down the toilet and can't report it so he can avoid enviromentalists wrath, he hid it really well (UN confirmed two mobile weapon labs, we've also found nuclear weapon parts), or he sold it. In any case taking down Saddam and the Baath party was a very good thing, Saddam since we free his people, Baath Party since we remove any future threat that could have arrisen provided of course we fic Iraq correctly.