Post by Gavin on Oct 3, 2003 6:51:08 GMT -5
The Libs are way off base with every single one of their supposed campaign "platforms".
The economy is growing 3 times as fast as when Clinton left office, with jobs soon to follow. Every econ student knows that jobs are always the last thing to come out of a recovery. And every economist is in agreement that the slump we experienced in the economy began during the end of Clinton's term in office, NOT after Bush's tax cuts were passed, as the Democrats have been telling us.
The Iraq war was by any standard the fastest, most sweeping victory the US has ever acheived in combat, thanks to Bush's beefed up military, and Iraq's democracy/republic/whatever is coming together much more quickly than I ever expected it would. Even the Democratic Senators who recently visited Baghdad came back and admitted that the media coverage here is ridiculously negative compared to what the reality is on the ground there, regarding the progress in government and services development as well as the security. 2/3rds of Iraqis polled in Baghdad are glad we're in Baghdad even now, months after the initial attack. That number would have been higher if they were asked right after they were liberated. And that number is of course far higher in Kurdish and other areas who have really felt the brunt of Saddam's cruelty.
And the war on terror has gone splendidly as well, if you know the facts. Of course the media doesn't mention that we have stopped over a hundred terror plots so far on Bush's watch, have disrupted a large chunk of the worldwide terror networks, dozens and dozens of terror cells dismantled, etc. The Libs would have us believe that the war on Iraq somehow took away our attention from the war on terror. How so??? The majority of the war on terror is being fought by intelligence agencies, making arrests, not by actual warfare with large groups of enemies. The exceptions being the Taliban that often attempt to regroup, never successfully thanks to the fact that we are NOT distracted, and the terrorists that are now coming into Iraq who don't stand a chance against us there.
So to sum up.... Clinton left us with a sagging economy, which has steadily been regaining steam under Bush's watch for some time now. That is a fact. Clinton allowed Saddam to kick our inspectors out, in defiance of over a dozen UN resolutions as well as the Gulf War ceasefire, while Bush was willing to enforce the UN resolutions even though it would piss off France and Germany and others to whom Saddam owed large amounts of money. That is a fact. And the war on terror is the best one. How many terror attacks happened on Clinton's watch? Five or six? Clinton did nothing. After the first WTC bombing in 93, or any of the others, he could have brought together a coalition against terror, just as easily as Bush did after 9/11 - perhaps easier. 9/11 happened because Clinton never went on the offensive against terror, as our country and our interests were attacked time and time again. Instead of taking action, the Clinton administration simply passed on the file to the next administration, for Bush to deal with the problem. Just like Clinton passed a recession economy on to Bush. Just like Clinton passed Saddam on to Bush. Just like Clinton passed the North Korea problem on to Bush by actually submitting to the N Koreans' blackmail in 94 and agreeing to pay them to stop their nuke program, and then not even making N Korea live up to the terms of the agreement. Now we are stuck, because of Clinton's idiotic agreement, with a NUCLEAR North Korea run by a dictator who thinks he can blackmail the US because he has done it before.
The newest one really is great. Every Democrat in the country is convinced that someone in the White House committed a felony by leaking the name of Wilson's
wife, a CIA employee to a journalist. Why is this the case? Because the Liberal media has told us all it is so. And many partisans on the left want so badly to believe it is true. But we are all being lied to. Robert Novak, the journalist who caused the whole buzz by printing the leak about Wilson's wife, has already come out and admitted days ago that the leak came not from the White House, but from the CIA. Hmmm. Do you think that the media is aware of this fact? Of course they are. And yet they are lying to us, focusing all of their coverage on the white house and creating a big question mark around where the leak came from, implying Rove most of the time. They never once mention what Novak himself, the source of all of the controversy, is actually saying. RIDICULOUS. On an even more ridiculous note, the Dems are once again lying flat out about very black and white legal
matters. You see, a leak of this nature is NOT a felony. The law the Dems are referring to applies only to agents who are currently active in the field and are known to be undercover. Wilson't wife not only was not undercover, she was not even a field agent at all. Again you will never hear this from the Liberal media, who are convinced they can brainwash us all if they tell the same lies enough times.
The economy is growing 3 times as fast as when Clinton left office, with jobs soon to follow. Every econ student knows that jobs are always the last thing to come out of a recovery. And every economist is in agreement that the slump we experienced in the economy began during the end of Clinton's term in office, NOT after Bush's tax cuts were passed, as the Democrats have been telling us.
The Iraq war was by any standard the fastest, most sweeping victory the US has ever acheived in combat, thanks to Bush's beefed up military, and Iraq's democracy/republic/whatever is coming together much more quickly than I ever expected it would. Even the Democratic Senators who recently visited Baghdad came back and admitted that the media coverage here is ridiculously negative compared to what the reality is on the ground there, regarding the progress in government and services development as well as the security. 2/3rds of Iraqis polled in Baghdad are glad we're in Baghdad even now, months after the initial attack. That number would have been higher if they were asked right after they were liberated. And that number is of course far higher in Kurdish and other areas who have really felt the brunt of Saddam's cruelty.
And the war on terror has gone splendidly as well, if you know the facts. Of course the media doesn't mention that we have stopped over a hundred terror plots so far on Bush's watch, have disrupted a large chunk of the worldwide terror networks, dozens and dozens of terror cells dismantled, etc. The Libs would have us believe that the war on Iraq somehow took away our attention from the war on terror. How so??? The majority of the war on terror is being fought by intelligence agencies, making arrests, not by actual warfare with large groups of enemies. The exceptions being the Taliban that often attempt to regroup, never successfully thanks to the fact that we are NOT distracted, and the terrorists that are now coming into Iraq who don't stand a chance against us there.
So to sum up.... Clinton left us with a sagging economy, which has steadily been regaining steam under Bush's watch for some time now. That is a fact. Clinton allowed Saddam to kick our inspectors out, in defiance of over a dozen UN resolutions as well as the Gulf War ceasefire, while Bush was willing to enforce the UN resolutions even though it would piss off France and Germany and others to whom Saddam owed large amounts of money. That is a fact. And the war on terror is the best one. How many terror attacks happened on Clinton's watch? Five or six? Clinton did nothing. After the first WTC bombing in 93, or any of the others, he could have brought together a coalition against terror, just as easily as Bush did after 9/11 - perhaps easier. 9/11 happened because Clinton never went on the offensive against terror, as our country and our interests were attacked time and time again. Instead of taking action, the Clinton administration simply passed on the file to the next administration, for Bush to deal with the problem. Just like Clinton passed a recession economy on to Bush. Just like Clinton passed Saddam on to Bush. Just like Clinton passed the North Korea problem on to Bush by actually submitting to the N Koreans' blackmail in 94 and agreeing to pay them to stop their nuke program, and then not even making N Korea live up to the terms of the agreement. Now we are stuck, because of Clinton's idiotic agreement, with a NUCLEAR North Korea run by a dictator who thinks he can blackmail the US because he has done it before.
The newest one really is great. Every Democrat in the country is convinced that someone in the White House committed a felony by leaking the name of Wilson's
wife, a CIA employee to a journalist. Why is this the case? Because the Liberal media has told us all it is so. And many partisans on the left want so badly to believe it is true. But we are all being lied to. Robert Novak, the journalist who caused the whole buzz by printing the leak about Wilson's wife, has already come out and admitted days ago that the leak came not from the White House, but from the CIA. Hmmm. Do you think that the media is aware of this fact? Of course they are. And yet they are lying to us, focusing all of their coverage on the white house and creating a big question mark around where the leak came from, implying Rove most of the time. They never once mention what Novak himself, the source of all of the controversy, is actually saying. RIDICULOUS. On an even more ridiculous note, the Dems are once again lying flat out about very black and white legal
matters. You see, a leak of this nature is NOT a felony. The law the Dems are referring to applies only to agents who are currently active in the field and are known to be undercover. Wilson't wife not only was not undercover, she was not even a field agent at all. Again you will never hear this from the Liberal media, who are convinced they can brainwash us all if they tell the same lies enough times.
