Why The Left Is Targeting Bill O�Reilly & US military under Clinton ??

27jd,

ever heard of small federal government? Any of the social policies you think pass the American ideals test�.i�ll give you a hint only if you limit consideration to recent liberal American ideals OTW fat chance. And i�ll give you an easy target and I�m willing to bet you can�t hit it with a fire hose��name one piece of technology that Clinton approved that wasn�t already in development ie existing�.just one it shouldn�t be so hard�..Single�.and just how did dipping wick willie create the military�..the same way that gore invented the internet�well at least he wasn�t personally stupid enough to make that claim.

And did somebody look narcissistic up in the dictionary today or what�started a thread with it and it�s in a few posts�..wow, way to use that new word in a sentence your teacher will be proud.


[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

Originally posted by keholmes
27jd,

ever heard of small federal government? Any of the social policies you think pass the American ideals test�.i�ll give you a hint only if you limit consideration to recent liberal American ideals OTW fat chance. And i�ll give you an easy target and I�m willing to bet you can�t hit it with a fire hose��name one piece of technology that Clinton approved that wasn�t already in development ie existing�.just one it shouldn�t be so hard�..Single�.and just how did dipping wick willie create the military�..the same way that gore invented the internet�well at least he wasn�t personally stupid enough to make that claim.

And did somebody look narcissistic up in the dictionary today or what�started a thread with it and it�s in a few posts�..wow, way to use that new word in a sentence your teacher will be proud.


[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

Gore never claimed to create the Internet. And if you like small federal government, how's the .5 trillion dollar defecit Bush created for ya?

Bush is a conservative like I'm a dolphin. He just uses the brand. He conserves nothing.

Yeah and O'Reilly's voting for Kerry. Guess the Lefties have really screwed with his brain.

Originally posted by 27jd
So you're saying Cheney is a liar? Hey we agree on something! But I don't think Cheney is lying in the above quote, a rare thing for this administration. You're immunity continues to amaze. I have presented logic, facts, and quotes from the very leaders you back, yet you still reject the truth.

I do not reject it, I just look at the whole case, yes Clinton had 8 Dod budgets each less than the year before, In Clinton time the miltary had to make hard choices and spare parts were a big issue, they had to cancel many things that they could be using now. One example is the A-10, the Air force was being limited in Wings, so they were going to let the A-10 be retired, well the f-16 couldnt do the job and it got so bad that the ARMY wanted to take the A-10's over...it is one of many examples. If you think Clinton strengthened teh US military you need to get a grip on reality.

Originally posted by 27jdAre you really trying to suggest, in front of everybody on ATS, that our current technology stems from Reagan's administration?

Most of it being used was delveoped during the 80's yes, purchased in the 80's and early 90's. So yes..that is a fact. The only thing Clinton did was increase the black budget a couple of times.

Originally posted by 27jdRemember, Clinton wasn't soft, spanked Hussein with Desert Fox, and Succesfully carried out a regime change in Kosovo, removed a regime that was ACTUALLY commiting genocide at the time we acted, and I don't recall that country spiraling into horrific chaos like Iraq, hmmmm, succesful regime change=Clinton, or bloodier, costlier, far from winning the peace, anarchy creating, terrorist creating regime change=Bush.

Spanking? ??

No Spanked is was happened in early 2003, before is was million dollar missles taking out $20 targets.
BTW in Bosnia, Clinton did that against teh UN and gave no bid contracts to Halliburton. Did you know this?

Originally posted by 27jdWho is the better wartime leader? Seems clear to any intelligent, free thinking individual. And after Kosovo, we were far more respected in the world, where as now we're feared and hated. How can anybody be so blind to the obvious?

Well Kosovo and Iraq are 2 very different situations. The only one that would be comparable would be Somalia. We didnt have the right equipment, our troops starting dying and Clinton out his tail between his legs and left, so as to avoid bad poll numbers. GW Bush however understands that you cant lead by being a morning poll reader. I will take Bush anyday over Clinton.

BTW - Did you know that papers have surfaced that place Saddam as being invloved in Somailia by collaberating with Al Qaeda?

Originally posted by Nox

I'm guessing Stanford.

The chances that you're in a liberal school like UC Berkeley are slim.

Liberals aren't necessarily anti-American. I think you're confusing Nationalism with Patriotism. They are different.

Nope UIUC

No I am not confusing the 2. When folks start compromising American security by defameing a sitting CiC and thus the troops and the mission, they are contributing to the enemy cause. But being that those that feel that was support Kerry who also committed this act....well lets see..

Below are some of the crimes Lt. Kerry USNR committed as a Ready Reservist,while he was acting as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War:

1. Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong flag was displayed
while our flag was desecrated, defiled, and mocked, thereby giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

2. Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on assassinating members
of the US Senate.

3. Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers before the US Senate
about crimes committed in Vietnam.

4. Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on national television, and
condemned the military and the USA.

5. Lt. Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders in Paris, in direct
violation of the UCMJ and the U.S. Constitution.

Lt. Kerry by his own words & actions violated the UCMJ and the U.S. Code
while serving as a Navy officer. Lt. Kerry stands in violation of Article 3,
Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.


SO I can see why they would feel that way when the candidate did likewise, the question is, was that a patriotic endeavor? Since he violated teh US Constitution, he is therefore a traitor. And where do you fall in this list?


Moderator Edit: Removed Excessive Bold

[edit on 23-10-2004 by dbates]

Originally posted by gooseHere is a shocker for you now hold onto the seat of your pants but O'Reilly recently said he would be voting for Kerry, he has known Kerry for a long time and said he is a true patriot and he is planning on voting for him.

Actually this would not be a big surprise as I didnt know he had chosen a candidate yet.

So, all liberals are automatically war criminals via John Kerry. John Kerry's actions reflect upon himself, not on the people who vote for him. There are a multitude of reasons why people vote for Kerry, and I'm because you think he is a war criminal is not one.


But, how does a thread about Bill O' Reilly turn into another Kerry-bashing thread? Oh yea, you are a troll. And why am I encouraging you?

[edit on 23-10-2004 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by keholmes
27jd,

ever heard of small federal government? Any of the social policies you think pass the American ideals test�.i�ll give you a hint only if you limit consideration to recent liberal American ideals OTW fat chance. And i�ll give you an easy target and I�m willing to bet you can�t hit it with a fire hose��name one piece of technology that Clinton approved that wasn�t already in development ie existing�.just one it shouldn�t be so hard�..Single�.and just how did dipping wick willie create the military�..the same way that gore invented the internet�well at least he wasn�t personally stupid enough to make that claim.

And did somebody look narcissistic up in the dictionary today or what�started a thread with it and it�s in a few posts�..wow, way to use that new word in a sentence your teacher will be proud.


[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

[edit on 23-10-2004 by keholmes]

Well I can think of one that he did give extra funding for. It was the armed predator system. He wanted Osama so bad that he pushed its developement and even wanted a LIVE test to use it.

But sadly when presented with the chance at Osama, he failed to act on it becuase he was worried about his poll numbers, seems he had some other issues at the time, Boben Se Knobbin at ze vite Howze?

But thats it, the only one. I would not have come across it if I hadn't read the 911 report.

get your copy here:

www.9-11commission.gov...

On behalf of the Democratic Party I apologise that we fielded a candidate in a time of war. Whilst you tirelessly fight from freedom I agree that freedom should be suspended indefinitely. Dictatorships are so much easier, why don't you head on down that way.

How dare we field a candidate who wishes to change America. By God us liberals are crazy... if only you had control of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches then you could surely make a difference.

Originally posted by Nerdling
On behalf of the Democratic Party I apologise that we fielded a candidate in a time of war. Whilst you tirelessly fight from freedom I agree that freedom should be suspended indefinitely. Dictatorships are so much easier, why don't you head on down that way.

How dare we field a candidate who wishes to change America. By God us liberals are crazy... if only you had control of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches then you could surely make a difference.

Whatever, but couldnt you have got one who didnt have this baggage?

Lt. Kerry by his own words & actions violated the UCMJ and the U.S. Code
while serving as a Navy officer. Lt. Kerry stands in violation of Article 3,
Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
EDSINGER you sound just like Hillary Clinton with your accusations or a VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY!!!

There isnt one?

I will greatly enjoy taunting the bejesus out of you when Kerry wins.

Originally posted by Nerdling
I will greatly enjoy taunting the bejesus out of you when Kerry wins.

Let's just stop encouraging edsinger by not replying to his posts. He obviously doesn't even want to talk about the issue of this thread and would rather talk about how bad Kerry is. Yet, I never see any posts by him on why Bush is good. edsinger has even admitted he doesn't support all of Bush's policies. So why the hell does edsinger have a Bush pin-up as his avatar? I think someone is deluding themselves.

But edsinger, no matter how bad Kerry may be, that will not make Bush any better. Get over it!

[edit on 23-10-2004 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by taibunsuu
EDSINGER you sound just like Hillary Clinton with your accusations or a VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY!!!

There isnt one?

Liberals these days are too boring to come up with a conspiracy. We're too afraid of offending people.

Is there a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy?

Originally posted by Solasis
Liberals these days are too boring to come up with a conspiracy. We're too afraid of offending people.Is there a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy?

I dont know, I never got my T-shirt.

Originally posted by Nerdling
I will greatly enjoy taunting the bejesus out of you when Kerry wins.

Well what if he loses? I hate to break it to you...but Kerry will loose, looks as if the Dems want it that way???

Originally posted by Jamuhn
He obviously doesn't even want to talk about the issue of this thread and would rather talk about how bad Kerry is. Yet, I never see any posts by him on why Bush is good. edsinger has even admitted he doesn't support all of Bush's policies. So why the hell does edsinger have a Bush pin-up as his avatar? I think someone is deluding themselves.
[edit on 23-10-2004 by Jamuhn]

Look This was about O'reilly, if you want to talk O"reilly fine lets talk O'Reilly

And of course I dont like everything about Bush. He is to liberal for me. But he is MUCH better than the traitor Kerry in the Position of POTUS.

Why the Avitar? Did you see my avitar before?



The reason for the new one is that makes a statement! It lets you leftists know that there are still folks out there that think your version of politics stinks.



[edit on 23-10-2004 by edsinger]

Your avatar doesn't say crap about the left. It says something about George Bush, the guy that's too liberal for you. So if you don't like liberal politics and Bush is too liberal for you, then why do you like Bush so much?


By the way, Bill O Reilly is going to get what he deserves.

Bush? Too liberal?

... What strange, mixed up universe have I shifted into?

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Your avatar doesn't say crap about the left. It says something about George Bush, the guy that's too liberal for you. So if you don't like liberal politics and Bush is too liberal for you, then why do you like Bush so much?
By the way, Bill O Reilly is going to get what he deserves.

My Avitar was a Flag and an Eagle, a Patriot...The real reason I have the Bush one is it pisses you leftists off to see such a strong image.

Let me see if I can explain this..

I am further to the right than BUSH, therefore if he is left of me , then he is a "libral' to me.

I have said many times, I dont love Bush, I just extremely DISLIKE the traitor Kerry. Sorry cant make it any more plain than that.


What if O'Reilly IS innocent? I dont know if he is or not but , in the end he will get it anyway..

Originally posted by edsinger
I am further to the right than BUSH, therefore if he is left of me , then he is a "libral' to me.

... Now, that's illogical. Liberals are left of the middle, and conservatives are to the right of the middle. if bush is a liberal to you, then that puts you at the middle. But it's a very strange middle, as Bush is quite right of the middle.

Of course, my statement about liberals being left of the middle is almost void; most modern political figures who are "liberal" are actually extremely moderate.

Originally posted by edsinger
My Avitar was a Flag and an Eagle, a Patriot...The real reason I have the Bush one is it pisses you leftists off to see such a strong image.

Let me see if I can explain this..

I am further to the right than BUSH, therefore if he is left of me , then he is a "libral' to me.

I have said many times, I dont love Bush, I just extremely DISLIKE the traitor Kerry. Sorry cant make it any more plain than that.


What if O'Reilly IS innocent? I dont know if he is or not but , in the end he will get it anyway..

Haha, you leftists? I'm probably more conservative than you are (in the true sense of the word, not this neo-con crap). I think your past avatar is more appropriate. So tell me, why are you voting for Bush? Is it because you want to see anybody but Kerry?

If so, I'll put you on the same list as Hannity & Colmes, and in the words of Jon Stewart "your political hackery...is destroying America."

I can at least respect many liberals in that they truly believe what they are voting for. You, you're just a sell-out, and you are as bad as the "Anybody but Bush" people.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Haha, you leftists? I'm probably more conservative than you are (in the true sense of the word, not this neo-con crap). I think your past avatar is more appropriate. So tell me, why are you voting for Bush? Is it because you want to see anybody but Kerry?

Well Kerry becuase of his actions and record is not qualified to be POTUS. His voting record it to far left. But the main reason for me voting for Bush is that he will have a lame duck 4 years and he can hammer the islamic radical movement without worry of reelection. If Kerry were elected , we will be confronted with a poll type foreign policy, and that is more dangerous than fighting the terror.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
If so, I'll put you on the same list as Hannity & Colmes, and in the words of Jon Stewart "your political hackery...is destroying America."

Not just "anyone but Kerry", if the Dems had put a conserbative such as Lieberman in , I would ahve had a tough choice.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I can at least respect many liberals in that they truly believe what they are voting for. You, you're just a sell-out, and you are as bad as the "Anybody but Bush" people.

LIke I said, it is more than that. I also repect them for their beliefs, they do not afford me the same ........