Today, the right wing is circulating a “fact sheet” on President Clinton’s Fox News interview. Here is one item, published on the Hotline Blog:
MYTH: President Clinton Said No One Knew Of Al Qaeda In 1993:
Former President Bill Clinton: “[No one] even knew Al Qaeda was a growing concern in October of ‘93.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 9/24/06)
FACT: Osama Bin Laden And Al Qaeda Were Well Known By The Time Clinton Was Inaugurated
The sole backup for this claim is a 2003 Q&A session with conservative author Richard Miniter, published on the National Review’s website. The interview doesn’t even rebut Clinton’s assertion.
Miniter says that Bin Laden was known to the Clinton administration after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. That’s true. What wasn’t known for several years was that Bin Laden had a terrorist network called al-Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission report makes that clear on page 341:
In 1996-1997, the intelligence community received new information making clear that Bin Laden headed his own terrorist group.
Clinton was right. The “fact sheet” is wrong.
I am wondering if any of the right wing Bush supporting trolls can explain why right wingers have to lie pathologically to argue their points.
September 25th, 2006 at 5:46 pmQuoting their own lies. Typical republican scumbags.
September 25th, 2006 at 5:48 pmWhat is going on with TP?
Stories are appearing, disappearing… Huh?
September 25th, 2006 at 5:53 pmThey have to circulate a “fact sheet” on a news interview?
Sounds like serious “damage” control to me?
Clinton must have been very effective at giving out Russian tattoos.
(If you don’t know what a Russian tattoo is, just ask me I will give you one).
September 25th, 2006 at 5:54 pmNotice there is no refutation of the fact that no one asked anyone from the Bush/Cheney administration a question of this nature in 42 appearances on the show??
The method of the right wing is to lie, lie, lie — they have no morals whatsoever (and they’ll probably tell you “why should we, it wins us elections!)
September 25th, 2006 at 5:55 pmThese right wing commentators are putz’s and I’m tired of us believing anything they say. I do know intelligent and insightful Republicans but these commentators are discrediting all conservatives.
September 25th, 2006 at 5:58 pmPATHOLOGICAL LIARS - ALL OF THEM. This is “classic” pathology syndrome to spin your own falsehoods and then refer to them as truth. It always catches up with you in the end, though.
Isn’t this what they did in the run up to the war? They shipped facts & info to the NY Times and then referred back to those articles as though they didn’t have a hand in initiating them? This is a very old Trick - that may work to fool some of the people some of the time….but certainly not all of the people all of the time.
It’s evident that the american public is getting wise to the right wingnuts shenanigans and outright lies….
The entire GOP is a group of horrendous liars…..
September 25th, 2006 at 5:59 pmLet’s keep the GOP in a perpetual state of ‘DAMAGE CONTROL’ until November…..they’re well on their way to implosion right now.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:00 pmSome of them lie, some of them have been lied to so often that they’re entire reality is fabricated from lies and distortions…they just refuse to acknowledge the facts that refute their reality. I guess “cognitive dissonance” is how it’s explained these days. Frankly, I prefer the term “ignorant”.
It has been a long and extremely expensive task undertaken by the rightwing over the last few decades, the creation of their propaganda infrastructure, but it’s finally paying dividends for them. Control of the media has been their goal (see Fairness Doctrine, Reagan) and if it wasn’t for the internet, some courageous TV talking heads (Stewart, Colbert, Olbermann come to mind), and, ummm…reality….it would be far worse.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:00 pmWhen I hear a Bush wag dogger use the word FACT, as Flush Limbaugh does, it means just the opposite of FACT.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:07 pmI am wondering if any of the right wing Bush supporting trolls can explain why right wingers have to lie pathologically to argue their points.
Comment by RealScientist
I think it was Benjamin Disrael who said it best,”A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy”
September 25th, 2006 at 6:12 pmBenjamin Disraeli, Speech in the House of Commons, Mar. 3, 1845 British politician (1804 - 1881)
A neo-conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:13 pmFranklin D. Roosevelt (1882 - 1945), radio address, Oct. 26, 1939
A “fact” sheet for a news interview? Are journalists so brain-dead and lazy that they can’t even watch or even listen to the interview themselves?
or…..
Are the “facts” just right wing talking points being routed to every talking head in order to skew the interview toward the right’s advantage?
Wouldn’t be the first time..
September 25th, 2006 at 6:14 pmThe spin that this blog uses when putting forth their “facts” is interesting. Yes, there was some “new” information in 1996-97 that showed indisputably that Bin Laden was heading AQ. However, what you didn’t read was that the intelligence community was already tracking AQ as a legitimate and dangerous terrorist organization. The “new” information in the 9/11 commission report merely verifies the suspected relationship between UBL and AQ. Get it right, Judd, and quit misleading the left-wing wackos on this site. They are already so ideologically blind that they will take any sort of crap you post here as the gospel truth.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:15 pmMore evidence Republicans don’t mind dividing America with their lies.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:23 pmThey are already so ideologically blind that they will take any sort of crap you post here as the gospel truth.
Comment by A+Real+American — September 25, 2006 @ 6:15 pm
The classic triad of right wing pathologies: lying, hypocrisy, and, as demonstrated here, projection.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:23 pm“Fact sheet” = doublespeak = lies = Republican
September 25th, 2006 at 6:32 pm#17-
Projection? I think not. Try prognostication. I’m sure you spend a lot of time on here, lapping this drivel up like is legitimate news. This crap is spin, pure and simple. You are being mislead in the worst of ways. It is sad, really, that the left-wing movement in this country does not respect it’s constituents enough to give them the real facts, sans spin, so that they can decide on their own what is the the no-shit truth.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:35 pmIt is sad, really, that the left-wing movement in this country does not respect it’s constituents enough to give them the real facts, sans spin, so that they can decide on their own what is the the no-shit truth.
Comment by A+Real+American — September 25, 2006 @ 6:35 pm
What you say here makes a lot of sense….if you replace “left-wing” with “right-wing”. In other words, you are projecting again.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:43 pm#19…thank you for that classic example of projection.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:49 pmToday at work all I had to say was “At least he tried”.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:50 pmSo the argument is, yeah, we Republicans stink at killing Osama, but Clinton stunk at it too? Wow, inspiring leadership.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:50 pm#19
Contrary to what you have obviously been led to believe facts do not have expiration dates. You trolls put a very short statute of limitations on the truth when you are caught with hands in Turdblossom’s pockets. What was a fact then is still a fact today, regardless of how uncomfortable it makes you. It was your leader that published the “fact” sheet as news, if we choose to disbelieve it, it is our privilege to do so in our own way, on our own terms, and in our time frame. If you have a problem REFUTE the facts, don’t attempt to alter them by changing a non-existent expiration date.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:53 pmHEY
September 25th, 2006 at 6:53 pm#21
What does ROTFL mean, you left-wing kook?
September 25th, 2006 at 6:53 pmfox tells lies….not that…is a FACT sheet.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:54 pmLies about Clinton and cutting gas prices just before the election.
I bet the sheeple are eating it up…
September 25th, 2006 at 6:55 pmI’m curious, ‘A Real American,’ whether you’ve ever strayed from the GOP position on anything….
I’m just saying, because to me, your blind following and acceptence of the GOP talking points is astounding.
Good for you, though. It’s a real accomplishment to swallow so much hook, line, and sinker.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:56 pmHEY
Comment by Wilco — September 25, 2006 @ 6:53 pm
Yo! (atleast that’s what I think a Steve would say… :)
September 25th, 2006 at 6:57 pmYour hypothesis is shoddy at best…Similarly, if I argued that the majority of people in prison had voted Democrat in the election prior to their incarceration does that mean Dems are more likely to be criminals???
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — September 25, 2006 @ 6:50 pm
Huh? What are you talking about?
September 25th, 2006 at 6:58 pmI’m not sure how things will go in Nov., but it really doesn’t matter any longer. The extremists that executed the coup and their braindead followers have destroyed the idea of honest conservatism and have fu*ked their movement good for the foreseeable future. Let’s not sweat the remaining lemmings, they’re afraid of their own shadows and like the cowardly warmongering chickenhawks that they stand behind, they will run from a real fight.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:58 pmAnd according Adam Curtis in “The Power of Nightmares”, it was only after western intelligence gave bin Laden’s movement the name, “Al-Qaeda”, did Osama himself start using the name in his propaganda.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:59 pmI’m curious, ‘A Real American,’ whether you’ve ever strayed from the GOP position on anything….
I’m just saying, because to me, your blind following and acceptence of the GOP talking points is astounding.
Comment by bobcat_grad — September 25, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
I’m guessing that ARA is actually a party operative who was assigned the TP beat at this morning’s strategy meeting.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:00 pmSo the argument is, yeah, we Republicans stink at killing Osama, but Clinton stunk at it too? Wow, inspiring leadership.
Comment by clb72 — September 25, 2006 @ 6:50 pm
No, the argument is Clinton tried and failed. Bush dismissed the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks by saying “I really don’t think that much about him” and allowed a task force, set up to get him, to be disbanded.
Ass. (Both you and Bush).
September 25th, 2006 at 7:00 pmWhen you say “us” I assume you are talking about yourself and the mouse in your pocket, because there ain’t anybody here that believes one word out of their mouths, including “a” and “the”
September 25th, 2006 at 7:01 pm#4 - The truth has a liberal bias!
This becomes increasingly clear as we watch ReichWingNuts try to cover their tracks and hide their dismal record of abject failure.
The only thing WingNuts have to share with the world is fear. This evil fear is gushes forth from under a mountain of lies.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:01 pmOh, and clb72, your Republican weenies in Congress refused to let Clinton expand wiretapping to track terrorists, yet the same asses are ready to pass legislation to make warrantless wiretapping legal. Funny that it’s already legal according to Bush and Gonzales.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:04 pmAnd according Adam Curtis in “The Power of Nightmares” (part 3), it was only after western intelligence gave bin Laden’s movement the name, “Al-Qaeda”, did Osama himself start using the name in his propaganda.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:05 pmNo, it means that they didn’t have the money to buy their way out of prison like the Republicans do.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:06 pmStill no explanation for the removal (and subsequent repost, then removal again) of the story from ealier. Something about a christian radical convention that was attended by a lot of Republican water carriers in which there was a lot of blatant gay-bashing and small mindedness going on.
Why was this story redacted TWICE, TP?
September 25th, 2006 at 7:07 pm“MYTH: President Clinton Said No One Knew Of Al Qaeda In 1993:
Former President Bill Clinton: “[No one] even knew Al Qaeda was a growing concern in October of ‘93.†(Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,†9/24/06)
FACT: Osama Bin Laden And Al Qaeda Were Well Known By The Time Clinton Was Inaugurated”
Rebuttal: President Clinton said (from above) not “of Al Qaeda” but “Al Qaeda “was a growing concern…”
Conclusion: The “Fact Sheet” is a “No Fact Shit”
Rebuttal: The “Fact” as stated above may be true as stated. However, the statement does not clarify by whom “Osama Bin Laden And Al Qaeda Were Well Known…” The erroneous and misleading implication is that President Clinton knew both Bin Laden “And” Al Qaeda. President Clinton did not deny knowing of Bin Laden. There is no proof that anyone outside the Islamic world knew of the relationship between Bin Laden and Al Qaeda prior to 1996.
Conclusion: The “Fact Sheet” is a “No Fact Shit”
September 25th, 2006 at 7:16 pmIn any case, I never understand what she is trying to say, even when I try.
Comment by RealScientist — September 25, 2006 @ 7:11 pm
Neither does she…. I mean he.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:17 pmWC, you totally misread what I said. Go back and try again. I am saying how does it make sense for Repubs to criticize Clinton for not getting OBL, when W has had 5 years to do it with no opposition and now pretends like it doesn’t matter.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:20 pmHow are we supposed to post links to things, TP, if everything with a link in it gets vaporized?
There is a point when the security systems become so severe and intolerable that no one wants to come to your house for a party anymore…
Later.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:21 pmCNN is doing a fact sheet as well. Seems like the gop is loosing this argument. imagine that!
September 25th, 2006 at 7:27 pmI guess that is why they had to put out thier own.
TP:
“Miniter says that Bin Laden was known to the Clinton administration after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. That’s true. What wasn’t known for several years was that Bin Laden had a terrorist network called al-Qaeda.”
So TP cites the 9/11 report which cited intelligence information from a 1996-1997 report that bin Laden was head of al Qaeda, but the the very next sentence it states…
“Also revealed was the previously UNKNOWN involvement of bin Laden’s organization in the 1992 attack on a Yemeni hotel quartering U.S. military personnel, the 1993 shootdown of U.S Army Blackhawk helicopters in Somalia, and quite possibly the 1995 Riyadh bombing of the American training mission to the Saudi National Guard.”
This sound to me that Clinton was relying on faulty intelligence. For TP to assert the it wasn’t clear that bin Laden headed his own terrorist organization called al Qaeda untill 1996-1997 is flat wrong in light of what the 9/11 report says.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:29 pmAhhhhhhhhhh……….
The more you guys carp about the Clinton issue, the more time is spent away from your general election campaigns, and the more people remember why they are glad to be rid of the Clintonistas ….
September 25th, 2006 at 7:29 pmOn CNN Richard Ben Vinesta just talked about the interviews he had with Shrub and Darth Cheney.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:40 pmThey did nothing about the Cole even though they were briefed. And Clinton told the Taliban twice any strikes against the US would be retalitation. He did this right before leaving office and it was told to shrub who chose to ignore it.
GOP aka pathological liars. And so obsessed with Clinton that it makes one wonder if their attention is not freudian - either wishing that he were still President today or rueing the fact that he is not….I suspect a little of both. Yes, keep focused on Clinton while you lose the House and Senate in the process…yukkers!
September 25th, 2006 at 7:46 pm#61, btru,
By “wars that are executed with competence”, are you referring to Somolia? Remember “Blackhawk Down”? As for Bosnia, that was a UN / NATO effort, in which Albanians were being slaughtered, so there was no larger war on terror involved in that conflict, so it was a small contained skirmish compared to the worldwide conflicts occurring today.
By all means, reminesce and keep looking backwards - that’s how the Dems lost power to begin with …
September 25th, 2006 at 7:49 pmbtru,
A couple days I challenged you to meet me here on this sight the day after the elections, but you refused to answer. I understand, the thought of having to discuss results in which ALL prog candidates lose, and the Dems fail to win be either house would be far too much for you to handle, with me grinning at you.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:51 pmThe typical troll response is very much in evidence today. It is called a “quantum leap in asininity.”
September 25th, 2006 at 7:52 pmYou are the freaking retards that keep brining Clinton into every debate. Nice pre-9/11 mentality you people have.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:59 pmI’d be happy to meet you. The problem is that I think there are a bunch of Dems that need to go, where you think all of your Repubs are just fine. See the difference between progressive and regressive?
September 25th, 2006 at 8:00 pmHere’s the damn truth…from BBC documentary THE POWER OF NIGHTMARES
Part III -
In January, 2001, a trial began in a Manhattan courtroom of four men accused of the embassy bombings in east Africa. But the Americans had also decided to prosecute bin Laden in his absence. But to do this under American law, the prosecutors needed evidence of a criminal organisation because, as with the Mafia, that would allow them to prosecute the head of the organisation even if he could not be linked directly to the crime. And the evidence for that organisation was provided for them by an ex-associate of bin Laden’s called Jamal al-Fadl.
JASON BURKE , AUTHOR, “AL QAEDA†: During the investigation of the 1998 bombings, there is a walk-in source, Jamal al-Fadl, who is a Sudanese militant who was with bin Laden in the early 90s, who has been passed around a whole series of Middle East secret services, none of whom want much to do with him, and who ends up in America and is taken on by—uh—the American government, effectively, as a key prosecution witness and is given a huge amount of American taxpayers’ money at the same time. And his account is used as raw material to build up a picture of Al Qaeda. The picture that the FBI want to build up is one that will fit the existing laws that they will have to use to prosecute those responsible for the bombing. Now, those laws were drawn up to counteract organised crime: the Mafia, drugs crime, crimes where people being a member of an organisation is extremely important. You have to have an organisation to get a prosecution. And you have al-Fadl and a number of other witness, a number of other sources, who are happy to feed into this. You’ve got material that, looked at in a certain way, can be seen to show this organisation’s existence. You put the two together and you get what is the first bin Laden myth—the first Al Qaeda myth. And because it’s one of the first, it’s extremely influential.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:02 pmbtru,
Once again, you fail to accept my challenge to be on this site the day after elections, and instead started talking about 2008. I credit you for recognizing the upcoming losses by Dems, and you are also correct, that the longer Dems are out of power, the more likely they can catch a bump in a presidential election year.
Here is the failing of progs. You keep counting on old trends, stats and cycles to give you a boost, but those cycles were based the normal response of parties adapting their platforms to the new political landscape, which progs / Dems absolutely refuse to do. It is for that reason that I don’t believe you will win any election until after 2008, to get the Hill’reh factor out of your party politics, then there will be a huge prog vs. moderate battle fo the heart and soul of the party. After that battle, hopefully, Dems will realign their party platform to attract a majority of the
September 25th, 2006 at 8:18 pmAmerican voters. I pray you do.
Dear Phony Liberal Christian - You slice and dice the language as well as any authentic liberal atheist I know - Congratulations!!! Naturally, you missed the basic point (so what else IS new??) but often you miss the tree looking at the forest. You poor little thing…..
September 25th, 2006 at 8:19 pmFunny, in the movie “Mighty Aphrodite,” Aphrodite is not a lawyer. She is a prostitute and porn star.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:31 pmA+Real+American: you must cry yourself to sleep when you think of the fact that the worst attack in U.S. history happened on George W. Bush’s watch and he did nothing in his eight months as President to prevent it. NOTHING.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:45 pmbtru,
I WANT AN EFFECTIVE OPPOSITION PARTY THAT SERVES THE MAJORITY OF AMERICAN VOTERS, NOT A BUNCH OF TERD THROWING BABOONS WITH NO VIABLE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:50 pmi cant stand the bush administration and he will go down in history as the worst president ever i believe. but there are democrats who are just as big a dirtbag as bush, such as lieberman. and there are also republicans who dont like bush either, which is coming to light in a big way because they were suckered into his bandwagon when the going was good, now they see its all a mess and want off the wagon. im not a liberal, im not a conservative, im not any political affiliation whatsoever. so just remember you cant blame either side cuz one side sucks azz as much as the other. i just happen to be on clintons side w this one.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:07 pmThey should know better than to challenge Clinton on the empirical facts of the matter - especially when the comparison case is George Bush. I say it again, Go Bill Go! I hate the damn song, but the words ring true, “you don’t what you have ’til its gone”.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:31 pmMike Wallace…Shame On You!!! Clinton was too smart for you.
Why are you asking these questions to our FORMER president?
WHO’S RUNNING THIS COUNTRY ANYWAY??? Bush or Clinton? I wish Clinton. Why not ask the Bush Clan about 911, Katrina, the lying war in Iraq, or global warming? Or why the whole world hates us now?
This republican administration with their corrupt tactics is a disgrace to our country. This administration had destroyed and divided the country. Is this administration so desperate to cover up all their mistakes that they have to blame our former president? Do you really believe the American people are so ignorant that we are going to buy this. I am 49 years old and this is the WORST administration and WORST president we’ve ever had.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:46 pmummm….Lieberman is an Independent not a Democrat.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:03 pmThere’s a reason Faux “News” wanted Clinton on their network and why there was a fake docudrama on tv trying to smear Clinton. It’s election time and Republicans are trying to run against Clinton again! After 6 years they’re still trying to run against Clinton! CLUE TO REPUBLICANS: It ain’t gonna work this time. Try another smear tactic before it’s too late!
September 25th, 2006 at 10:07 pm#60
“The terminology is used based on CURRENT KNOWLEDGE!!!”
Oh I get it, CURRENT knowledge, i.e. U.S. intelligence, legitimized Clinton’s inablility to recognize a threat. Why are you being an apologist for him? There is such a double standard when you use the same precursor with the WMD assessment of Saddam and Iraq. It’s not funny, it’s pathetic. BTW the history books say that it was known that bin Laden started and was active in al Qaeda operations well before 1996.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:53 pmsorry for the “country’s” and the mis spelling.
I went to a public high school….but got left behind.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:00 pmWC, you totally misread what I said. Go back and try again. I am saying how does it make sense for Repubs to criticize Clinton for not getting OBL, when W has had 5 years to do it with no opposition and now pretends like it doesn’t matter.
Comment by clb72 — September 25, 2006 @ 7:20 pm
Indeed I did! Please accept my apology.
As for my 2nd comment, I hereby redirect it to each and every rightwing troll here.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:17 pmHow are we supposed to post links to things, TP, if everything with a link in it gets vaporized?
There is a point when the security systems become so severe and intolerable that no one wants to come to your house for a party anymore…
Later.
Comment by unbelievable — September 25, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
Indeed! WTH is up with this site? The problems started about the time that TP started posting about “The Path to 9/11″ and I think we got one post from the admin addressing the issues. Nothing since then.
Sheesh!
September 25th, 2006 at 11:20 pmAlso - i as a newcomer (troll of course because I have a different opinion) would like to ask 2 things:
1. Would anyone here give Bush credit for anything he’s done in office?
2. Would someone please get with this website and update whatever technology they are using becuase this site is horrible. Is ThinkProgress.org some high school kids science fair project? Jeez.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:20 pm2. Would someone please get with this website and update whatever technology they are using becuase this site is horrible. Is ThinkProgress.org some high school kids science fair project? Jeez.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:31 pmComment by bonesTwo — September 25, 2006 @ 11:20 pm
It’s funny how even a new guy can point this out….
I will give credit to Bush for making us realize that democracy is so fragile it can easily be railroaded into a dictatorship.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:37 pmHow is this site so horrible? You post something and it shows up. Sometimes it is slow. How is this comparable to a high school kids science fair project???
September 25th, 2006 at 11:38 pm11:41 test
September 25th, 2006 at 11:39 pm11:46 what a suck ass site….
September 25th, 2006 at 11:45 pmbonesTwo. well, i hate to admit it, but, bush has done a few things right. the supreme court justices (that passed) were good choices. he has a very diverse cabinet. the economy has been very good for 5 years. whether you like it or not, he does what he says he will do. he doesn’t criticise previous administrations. the decision to go into Afganistan was right, although it’s turning sour now. there hasn’t been an attack here since 9-11. i believe he honestly thought saddam was a threat (like everyone else: the UN, kerry, gore, dems, republicans, etc.) and it would bring positive change to the region if we went to iraq. (I think it is obvious now that is not happening). although the situation has become disasterous, when he started out, he believed that what he was doing was the right thing for the people of america and the world. i believe he still thinks his intentions were right, but he has got to be having doubts about the execution of the plan.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:55 pmComment by bonesTwo — September 25, 2006 @ 11:20 pm
Give us a rundown of the things he’s done in office and I’ll take them into consideration.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:57 pmouch
September 26th, 2006 at 12:17 amComment by bonesTwo — September 25, 2006 @ 11:20 pm
I will give Bush full credit for the federal response to Katrina.
I will give Bush full credit for his vacation time.
I will give Bush full credit for giving tax breaks which disproportionately favor the rich.
I will give Bush full credit for turning a budget surplus into the greatest deficits of all time, all without even counting the supplemental “war” expenditures.
I will give Bush full credit for passing an unfunded mandate to the States in the form of “No Child Left Behind.”
I will give Bush full credit for being the first United States President to publically admit to violating our international treaty obligations by keeping over a dozen alleged criminals in secret prisons around the world.
I will give Bush full credit for being the first United States President to argue for the power and authority to torture suspects.
I will give Bush full credit for holding a United States citizen for 3 years in flagrant violation of his 5th and 6th Amendment rights.
I will give Bush full credit for committing the greatest “flip-flop” of all time by invading a sovereign country and toppling its government for the sole purpose of capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden, to not being all that concerned about Bin Laden a few months later.
I will give Bush full credit for killing tens of thousands of innocent children, women, and men.
I will give Bush full credit for the obscene profits raked in by: Enron during the contrived energy crisis; Halliburton through no-bid contacts; various defense contractors; and big oil companies.
I will give Bush full credit for backing out of the Kyoto Protocol.
I will give Bush full credit for invading a country on a false pretext.
I will give Bush full credit for being one of the, if not the most divisive President ever.
I will give Bush full credit for uniting global public opinion solidly against the United States.
I will give Bush full credit for sending more Americans to their death than Osama Bin Laden.
I will give Bush full credit for becoming the first de facto American dictator.
What will you give Bush credit for?
September 26th, 2006 at 12:31 am#107…thank you. Great post!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:44 amComment by bonesTwo — September 25, 2006 @ 11:20 pm
This site has been the pits ever since NSA tapped into the main routing hubs on the internet and diverted all the traffic from this site into their data base before the comments get posted here.
After a comment gets intercepted, NSA has to evaluate it to determine if it is posed by one of their paid agents, or is a post by some left-leaning liberal who obviously poses a threat to the security of this great nation.
Comments posted by the latter are then routed to secret sites overseas where the thread undergoes intense scrutiny; the data bytes are subjected to extreme temperature changes, and high-resistance diodes, putting the electrons in various stressed positions. The comments are subjected to tortured logic, and it is rumored that spell check and grammar check have been permanently disabled, crippling the ability to communicate effectively. This has had the unintended consequence of making many of the paid posters easier to spot.
Occasionally a post gets “lost” in cyberspace, never to see the light of day again. Whether these comments will ever be revealed, or whether they are kept in secret and solitary confinement for life, we will never know.
We are indeed fortunate that the NSA can complete all this in only 5 to 10 minutes for most comments. Thus the inconvenience to the unsuspecting public is de minimus.
(/sarcasm….oh, and if I hit a little too close to home with this little essay, it’s been nice knowing you all)
September 26th, 2006 at 12:45 amJuan C….is this really you? “the supreme court justices (that passed) were good choices”
September 26th, 2006 at 12:46 amRepublicans Are the Fear and Smear Party - you’re welcome. I just believe in giving Bush credit where credit is due. He has a list of accomplishments unmatched by any President in the history of the United States.
Here is another slogan for you:
REPUBLICANS ARE THE LIE AND DENY PARTY.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:51 amI give Bush credit for passing the Do not call bill, [Banning telemarketing calls.] Other than that, he’s a complete failure..
September 26th, 2006 at 12:55 am#111….great new slogan!
September 26th, 2006 at 12:58 amThe truth is out there… we’ll just never know it. It’s in Sandy Burglar’s socks and pants. (God bless the National Archive pee-on from the recovery team who had to re-catalogue the moist documents they did find in various nether regions).
September 26th, 2006 at 1:06 am112, the “Do not call” rules by the FTC was initiated under Clinton!
Federal Register Notices During the Rulemaking Proceeding
“Do-Not-Call” Provisions of Telemarketing Sales Rule; Meeting: Announcement of Public Forum on the “Do-Not-Call” Provision of the Telemarketing Sales Rule, 64 Fed. Reg. 66124-66126 (November 24, 1999).
http://www.ftc.gov/ bcp/ rulemaking/ tsr/ tsrrulemaking/ index.htm
Was the rule finally enacted under Bush’s watch, yes. But shall we allow Republicans to selectively blame Clinton for 9/11 while denying Clinton the credit for the Do Not Call list?
Or, in this case, give credit where credit is due. Rule making takes years. The good people at the FTC began this process in 1999 and stuck with it through the change in administration, through numerous hearings and thousands of public comments to create a rule which has increased the peace and quiet of many, many households. FTC, job well done.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:16 amWhat a long list of whining pissed off liberal losers who are STUCK with 8 years of Bush. My guess is that if GORE/KERRY had won (yes they LOST) we’d be negotiating with the BIN LADENS of the world about right now. Nothing better to do, nothing to contribute to this great country of ours, just sit around and whine and bitch about Bush. God bless Bush for giving you something to bitch about…
September 26th, 2006 at 2:25 amWhat a whiney sack of liberal losers. The way I see it if GORE or KERRY were in office we’d be negotiating our way out of this mess with the BIN LADENS of this world… Maybe even apologizing for the HORRIBLE THINGS This country has done to them eh?
I for one will never bow down or be ashamed of what MY country has done to be great. I for one am glad we have a man in office that doesn’t measure the direction of the political winds before having to make a hard decision. I seriously doubt there is a ONE of you who could do it any better.
However you do get an A+ in the WHINING FACTOR category!!!
September 26th, 2006 at 2:31 amnull?
September 26th, 2006 at 2:33 amHow appropriate!
Dear Braid Faire - After your publicly posted paranoia hits NSA Security Tracking Officials, might I suggest adopting a Groucho Marx disguise to throw them off the track??
As an unabashed convert to the conservative side of the fence, it is terribly amusing to read your ‘Bush credit List” and note your COMPLETE INABILITY to be at all objective. You did not deem as terribly important the fact the US has thwarted several attacks from terror cells and, merciful God, we have not suffered additional attacks thus far. (Having been critical of our former President from time to time, I nonetheless give him credit where credit is due. As I have stated repeatedly, his characterization of the terror hits which occurred on his watch as “law enforcement” issues are easy to label a mistake in hindsight - but like your argument, requires no great intellectual capacity. His efforts in Bosnia were honourable and many of his domestic strategies were well-intentioned.) But I do console myself that someone with your narrow perspective will NEVER be deemed fit to sit in on the bench.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:55 amBraid Fair - A couple of quick questions :
A.) How is a PROJECTED surplus - completely dependant on not-yet-collected revenues - squandered?????? the Dems were PROJECTING surpluses 10 YEARS out. Of course, they couldn’t take into account business cycles they were unsure of - but when did the facts EVER get in YOUR way????
B.) Please name ONE war involving military hardware in which NO innocent casualties took place —– just one…….
I will await your answer with great anticipation. FYI, crow is a tad easier to choke down if if you can whip up a decent Bernaise sauce and a decent bottle of wine……
September 26th, 2006 at 3:03 am#103 - Would the real Juan please stand up - and if YOU really posted 103, - - take a bow…..
September 26th, 2006 at 3:06 amClinton is at it again. Waggin his finger and revising history.
Clinton Myth: Rishard Clarke was fired by Bush.
Not according to Richard Clarke. Frontline interview:
“Shortly after the Bush administration came into office, we were asked to think about how we organized the White House for a number of issues, including cybersecurity, computer security, homeland security, and counterterrorism. I was asked for my advice, and I proposed that the counterterrorism responsibility be broken off be a separate job, and that the cybersecurity job be broken off as a separate job. I said I had done counterterrorism for about a decade, and I wanted to start working on cybersecurity, which I think is terribly important. That was later approved by the president.”em>
September 26th, 2006 at 3:12 am[…] The RNC is circulating a fact sheet debunking Clinton’s claims during his Fox News interview. It claims that al-Qaeda’s existance was well known in 1993. The 9/11 Commission report proves that’s wrong.read more | digg story […]
September 26th, 2006 at 3:57 amSomething I don’t understand:
Now Clinton in the interview was angry, and rightly so. I mean, how would you feel if you were in his place?
The rightwing seems to take the fact that Clinton was angry, as being a victory of sorts.
My question is: How should Clinton, as a human being, have reacted to that question?
September 26th, 2006 at 4:17 amI for one will never bow down or be ashamed of what MY country has done to be great. I for one am glad we have a man in office that doesn’t measure the direction of the political winds before having to make a hard decision. I seriously doubt there is a ONE of you who could do it any better.
Comment by Gary —
How do you feel about Reagan’s supplying both Iran and Iraq with weapons? Do you feel any remorse for the dead your party is responsible for? Does it make you proud to know your republican hero was a traitor? How else to describe a man that OK’d selling weapons to the people who held Americans hostage?
September 26th, 2006 at 5:04 amClinton Myth: Rishard Clarke was fired by Bush.
I said I had done counterterrorism for about a decade, and I wanted to start working on cybersecurity, which I think is terribly important. That was later approved by the president.â€
Comment by Fa Kin Su Pa
That was the equivalent of an “I’m leaving to spend more time with my family” statement. He was trying to save face, Fa Kin Stu Pid.
He was demoted, his staff eliminated, and he was locked out of policy meetings; in effect, a non entity within the administration. But you are technically correct - he wasn’t fired, he quit to save face. Too bad Bush didn’t listen to him.
September 26th, 2006 at 5:21 amRepublican myth: Clinton said Richard Clarke was fired by Bush.
Fact: Richard Clinton actually said
Not the same thing. Of course, the Fa Kin Stu Pid, who can’t even spell the name “Richard” the truth of this is probably unimportant provided they plant the meme, after all the message is more important then the truth now isn’t it?
September 26th, 2006 at 7:38 am“Never put a period where God has put a comma” — everything that’s screwed up is the fault of Clinton and the godless Democrats. Serenely, Bush sails on, across a sea of commas. Forget about an “October Surprise,” prepare for a “November Surprise” instead — after the election. That looks to be Bush’s best chance to try to clean up Iraq once and for all by going after Iran and bringing real democracy to the Middle East at last, before any meddling new Congress can stop him. Bush knows everything will be fine. He’s working his way through the commas and approaching the end of the sentence. He’s the democracy-bringer, and he’s doing God’s will.
September 26th, 2006 at 7:59 amThe saddest part is watching everyone argue over who has the bias. C’mon people, the left and the right have the bias. Everyone wants to make the truth fit their opinions, and politicians infinitely moreso.
The Republicans and Democrats may have been founded on different ideals, but when is the last time you saw either of them actually fight for something their party is actually based on? No, they both just fight for ruining the other party. They’re the same thing.
The only way things will change is if more Americans realize that and start attempting to support politicians who give a crap. If we have any left, that is.
September 26th, 2006 at 8:19 amRanger Rick
Those would be the independents. Unlike the big two, the independents are running on things they believe in, in the hopes of making some real changes to the country. In the end America’s best hope for the future is to see some non-Republican, non-Democrat faces in the Congress, but that is unlikely due to the defeatism that seems to mark American politics.
September 26th, 2006 at 8:46 amBruce > just curious are you an American citizen or live in Britain? Just asking because lots of Brits post on TP now!
September 26th, 2006 at 9:18 am#92 & #93
“It was Clinton that recognized the threat”
That is not what TP asserts…..
TP:
“What wasn’t known for several years was that Bin Laden had a terrorist network called al-Qaeda.”
September 26th, 2006 at 9:41 amJay Randal
I am a South African. When America does something the whole world takes notice.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:37 amI will give Bush credit for the following:
1. The correct response to our entire governments shift from the 90s of legal beagle approach to terrorism to a defined war with battle plans that include battles that must be fought even when they are hard, becuase we can’t sit on the porch and let crazy ass terrorists take pot shots at us anymore. You can disagree with the means and methods, but it is not an accident that we have gone 5 years and no attacks….and if you say it is you are ignoring facts.
2. The correct economic policy - lowering taxes for everyone (inlcuding the rich) has INCREASED the total taxes being paid into Washington. This is a fact, unarguable. What they do with the money when it gets there is a negative which I will address below, but you can’t get out of the recession that he inherited and then take a blow like 9/11 and create 2-3m jobs per year without the right economic policy. Take a look, this economy is actually better than the 90s. Dow at an all time high, jobs being created…..
3. Supreme court - Excellent choices for the court. What we need are judges that are dedicated to interpreting the laws, not writing them. Whether you agree or disagree with the law, the judge’s job is to tell you which side of it you are on. If you disagree, there is a process (called voting) where you can address your grievances. If there are enough of you that feel the same, you will elect a rep that will voice your opinion and or write a law that will become the new law of the land. The WRONG process is for some judge, conservative or liberal, to invent laws.
Things I think he has done a poor job of..
1. Spending. When the republicans in the senate have sent up spending bill, entitlement program, etc. he needed to veto them becuase spending is killing us.
2. Immigration - we need a fence built NOW and worry about giving all these illegals all sorts of benefits on the government dole later. This is a national security issue and he has failed to treat it as such.
I’m sure there are more things I could think of that he has done right, and wrong, but #107’s full rant of how Bush has done this and that wrong is classic rage. The president has a huge responsbility and if you want to take everything the local, state and federal government in all 3 branches has done wrong and put a list together and call it Bush’s failling, it would be easy to do for Clinton, Bush, Reagan, ….Adams, Washington. THat’s why its called Leadership, you set a direction and try to get everyone on board by delegating responsibility to quality people. In 100 years Bush will go down as a leader most remembered for the following:
1. The president during 9/11
September 26th, 2006 at 10:43 am2. The president that took a controversial stance on terrorism and actually acted on it
3. The president that made tough choices based on concivtion, not polls.
4. The president that started us on our guartanteed path to victory against terrorism.
Bruce > my youngest sister lived in South Africa for 2 years, around Capetown area > she sent me a long video of the area with Table Mountain in the background > very pretty area with vineyards! Are you a Afrikaner, meaning Dutch or English extraction, or a native South African?
September 26th, 2006 at 11:24 amOkay:
1: There was actually only 1 successful Islamic terrorist attack on American soil during Clinton’s reign, the first WTC bombing. After that all attempts were foiled and a lot of terrorists ended up getting caught. There was only 1 successful attack under the approach that was in place before Bush came into office. After Bush came into office this approach was dropped for eight months, and then a new approach was taken after 9/11.
Thus the fact that 9/11 was the last attack, does not really mean much when you consider that Clinton achieved much the same results, with using a legal aproach to fighting terrorism. Indeed one could argue that Clinton’s success was greater due to the fact that Clinton did it without alienating America’s allies, or unifying America’s enemies.
2: Actually it lowered it. The immediate result of Bush’s tax cuts was a over-all reduction in collections, which has taken years to reach the level where collections have been more then before the cut, and in a growing population this is not good. The Reaganomic approach to economics has thus far proven less then ideal, just look at the deficit.
3: All judges interpret laws. The myth that the Supreme Court is liberal or biased in that manner is total and complete kak. Lets be honest here, there are only 2 judges who were nominated by Democrats, only 2 yet there is this perception that the Supreme Court is somehow liberal, and not just liberal, but liberals making up laws. Complete and total poppycock, and an insult to America’s legal system to boot. Every time someone tells you about the supreme court writing laws, ask them to name one authored by the supreme court.
Next: Things he has done a poor job of:
Spending: He has cut funding to University bursaries and loans, he has cut funding to enviromental issues, and he tried to privatise Social Security. Where he has spent money are on wars, and on funding oil concerns. Make no mistake, there is no reason why oil prices should have gone down this close to the elections, except for the fact that many oil companies have grown fat under Bush.
He has not created entitlements for the poor, nor has he worked for the social good of America. The word “Entitlement” is in itself pure propaganda, it is used constantly to bash people who are currently hurting, yet who normally do actually come right. It is a minority of people who spend their lives on the charity rolls, and okay social security just like anything else can be crooked, but it is not a matter of the majority doing, nor proof of it not working.
Where he has created entitlements is in funding people who do not need it. The oil industry is making record profits, it does not need handouts from America’s tax payers.
Thus I both agree and disagree with your point here, corperate entitlements are disasterous, but social spending can prove worthwhile. If you have a more educated workforce, with better health care, and less poverty, your country will thrive, if you treat that as being entitlements, you country will degenerate.
2: Immigration:
I disagree with you, but not in the way you would think. What needs to be done is a serious effort to punish employers who are hiring illegal aliens in contravention of America’s laws. You don’t need a wall, America’s problem with illegal immigrants is not as bad as say, South Africa’s where we have a whole continent trying to get in, it just needs America to enforce its laws. You don’t need to do anything fancy, you don’t need to make a big production of it, all you need it to enforce the law.
Now for how Bush will actually be remembered:
1: The president who managed to produce all 4 of the top 4 worst deficit years in American history.
2: The American president who refused to listen to advice when it was offered, and demonised those who gave it.
3: The President who was in power on 9/11, yet who has constantly blamed the previous administration for what happened before then.
4: The president who presided over 2 major wars fought at the same time, with the second being a quagmire where America cannot win.
5: The president who set America on the road to bankruptcy.
6: The second American president to be forced to resign on issues of corruption, and abuses of power.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:38 amJay Randal
I am of English descent. Afrikaners are of Dutch extraction, but those of English descent are considered “English Speakers.” It is the same kind of divide you have in America between the North and the South, with the South being Afrikaners.
You guys even have the same religious divide, the same political divide and the same racist divide, heck even the same basic fight over who is a patriot and who isn’t. The sort of things which the American South accuses the American North of are exactly the same sorts of things the Afrikaner accused the English speaker of. It is quite spooky looking at it from a South African perspective.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:47 amI am confident with how history will judge Clinton’s response to his ‘one’ attack in 1993 vs Bush’s response to his ‘one’ attack in 2001. The sad truth for us is that if Clinton would have reacted in 1993 the same way Bush did in 2001, there is likely to have never been a 9/11. That is why he is so defensive on Fox News, he knows it too.
The amount of money coming in is a seperate issue from the amount of money going out. Bush cut taxes and more money is now coming in THAN EVER BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY. That is a fact. The deficit is from spending (and not on wars, i agree). So QUITE BLAMING THE TAX CUTS FOR THE DEFICITS. BLAME THE SPENDING.
I also like how you are blaming him for something that he didnt do - like privatize social security. What negative impact has this had on you? None. He tried and failed, and I think he should keep trying. What’s the alternative, raise taxes?
I agree with you about immigration, a wall and STEEP penalties for employers of illegals would do it. I know you don’t think a wall in necessary.
I really like this one: 6: The second American president to be forced to resign on issues of corruption, and abuses of power. Wow, you really have the facts on your side here don’t you? What laws did he break again? Leaking of a CIA identity? Torture? Listening to your phone calls? Looking at your checks to SupportAlQuedaNow.com? Or was it not taking terrorism seriously? Not connecting the dots? Not doing everything in his power to protect us? Which is it bonehead? All of this is mindless rant from someone so blinded by his hatred for Bush that you REFUSE to see anything positive about him.
It is hysterical how Dems keep trying to rewrite history, especially with Clinton’s latest attempt. In 100 years Bush will be remembered with the likes of Washington, Lincoln, Rosevelt, becuause he made tough choices that resulted in America having to defend ourselves. Clinton will more than likely be rememberd as a good president who presided over a time of peace and a great economy, but otherwise unremarkable. Oh, I almost forgot, and he was impeached.
History’s a bitch.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:07 pmUnder what basis do you assume that going to war in 1993 with a random middle Eastern state would have prevented the 2001 attack? It hasn’t prevented attacks on London, it hasn’t prevented attacks on Spain, it hasn’t prevented attacks on Italy, on what basis do you hold that Bush’s method has proved any more successful then Clinton’s?
Population growth plus inflation perfectly explains how you are getting more money in now. Indeed if America was NOT taking in more money now then ever before in its history, it would have to be the result of deflation and a shrinking population. (In other words, your argument is stupid.)
And here I was being civil, well I guess you are a wanker and therefor fully deserving of this next bit:
Leaking A CIA Identity: Would never be tied directly to him. It would not be one of the charges against him.
Torture on the other hand, is a war crime. Read the Geneva Conventions, you will find that those who authorise torture are war criminals, no exceptions. Bush however, would be unlikely to get charged with this, so moving on.
The Phone taps, sorry mate but without a warrant that is precisely what they got Nixon on. It is a abuse of power, and it is not like the warrants are at all unreasonable in how they are granted - they can be granted up to 72 hours after the initial wiretap. If Bush can be found to be specifically behind this, he will get charged.
Moving on: Bank Transactions:
No problem with that, international transactions should be monitered.
None of the above. The US’s legal code does not ban any of that behaviour. Near-sighted I am sure.
The big issue which Bush will get nailed on is one you didn’t even think about: The Military Tribunals. He instuted those tribunals and charged people with crimes while not granting them the right to see the evidence upon which they were getting charged. This is in direct contradiction to both the Geneva conventions, and the US Constitution. The ruling from the Supreme court was not on new law, but rather what old law meant, and this means that Bush is in fact a war criminal.
As for corruption, need I mention K Street? The Democrats will find something, because it is there to be found.
Clinton, won’t be remembered terribly. He will be remembered, mainly as a mediocre president who achieved record surplusses, but was otherwise, well, par for the course. This in itself is high praise.
Bush will be remembered, alongside names like Nixon and Grant. He will not be remembered as a great, because his achievements have all been to the detriment of America. There is already a strong school of thought amongst historians that hold, that he is the worst president in America’s history, in 100 years time, when the full debt from Global Warming has to be paid, I don’t think that opinion is going to change.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:42 pmGuess we’ll just agree to disagree. The basis of which I say that 9/11 would not have happened is that the following changes would have been made by Clinton, making it exponentially harder to complete this daring attack:
1. There would be intelligence sharing between fbi and cia which the clinton administration disallowed IN THE WTC CASE. The gorelick wall would not have been put up.
2. The Taliban would be out of afghan if clinton went in there. Without this uninterrupted base of support, hard to train, plan, etc such an attack.
3. The terrorist would be fighting us in Iraq, as they are now. Read the reports, bin laden and his boys have emphatically stated that losing there would deal a severe blow to their movement.
4. Homeland security would be in place.
5. The patriot act would be in place allowing the president to use all powers necessary to protect us such as wire tapping terrorist phone calls to the us, bank transactions, etc.
It is an assumption that this would have stoppd 9/11, but I think it is a fair one. It is certainly more likely that it would have prevented it than would not have.
And sorry, the population growth with low inflation argument is simply BS. The treasury recepits are far outpacing both growth numbers and of this, I’m sure you are aware. If this was the case, why wasnt the late 70s the greated boon of tax recepits ever to that point? The population was growing and inflation was in the teens - thanks to the calamity of the Carter admin. Just deal with it - reducing taxes increases revenues. It is a fact.
Phone taps and tribunals doth not make a war criminal. Protecting the country is his responsibility, and we have no obligation to disclose classified information to terrorists we capture on the battlefield. This is not a law enformcement effort, it is a war, and is different than Law and Order.
You can hang your hat on Global Warming being the paymaster for Bush if you want, it is kind of odd that Gore was in power for 8 years and now it is a big issue. What did he do about in his 20 years in congress and 8 in the white house? Becuase whatever it was, it didnt solve global warming did it? So why is bush, in his 8 years, the one who is really messing things up?
And all those Historians you are hanging out with - i’m sure they are tenured college professors at harvard and Colorado. But the fact is that presidents are remembered for big things, not little. Like impeachments, wars, etc, not global warming, japanese detention camps, etc. THat’s why the presidents I listed will have Bush among them, becuase he’s a leader who;s contribution to this country (specifically the beginning of the end for islamic terrorists) will be evidnet on a daily basis long after he is gone.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:30 pmBush has already admitted to committing renditions, and international crime. He has admitted to harsh interrogations and requested a re-writing of anti-torture laws in order to decriminalize actions already undertaken. He has ordered an invasion of a sovereign country based on “facts fixed around the policy” of going to war. (Downing Street Memo) If Saddam Hussein had ordered an attack against America and treated American soldiers and civilians in the same manner, we would charge him with war crimes.
Oh? The Mainstream Media somehow missed reporting when Congress declared War. Will you please provide us with the documentary evidence that Congress declared War? The Authorization to Use Military Force is not a formal declaration of war, by the way.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmThanks Briseadh na Faire for reiterating AGAIN why the right will win re-election in the fall. You guys just don’t get it, we don’t need Congress to declare War for us to be in one. We were attacked, that’s why we are in one, and now we are fighting back, and liberals just don’t get it.
September 26th, 2006 at 4:05 pm#137
Just how many al Qaeda terrorists did Clinton put in jail or kill? How many of al Qaeda’s lieutenants we taken out of action during the 1990s? Does someone have a list of names?
September 26th, 2006 at 6:59 pm[…] Think Progress » ‘Fact Sheet’ On Clinton Interview Gets It Wrong (tags: clinton fox politics america interview usa) […]
September 26th, 2006 at 8:16 pmTeen Girls Teen Titans Raven Tiffany Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:21 amTeen Girls Teen Titans Hentai Teen Girls That Are Hot
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 1st, 2008 at 8:56 pmGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:54 amGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 8:29 amGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 2:55 amTeen Girls Black Teens Kiss Lesbian Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 6:35 pmGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 2:05 amAccounting Financial Financial Success
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 10:06 amTeen Teens For Cash Nudist Teens
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 12:18 amGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 6:24 amTeen Petite Teens Teen Titans Hentai
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 9th, 2008 at 4:08 amGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 12:29 pmBank Routing Number Look Up
commercial banking loans
April 11th, 2008 at 10:33 am