Will NBC Be Suprised - VOTE

[Bill-SOCAL]

So Bill, If MSNBC has run this poll before. What do you think their intent, if any, may be?

The one and only thing any media outlet is concerned with, ratings.

[NorthernBoater]

Again, you have this backwards, they were trying to keep government out of religion, not religion out of government. But once you separate them it does not matter which direction you come from to try to introduce one into the other.

They made them separate and I cannot see any good reason to question their good judgment in this case.

Show me where they made them separate. All I know is of just one letter by Jefferson and that later became interpreted as law by our judicial branch. Why in our public school system can we talk about Muslim, Buddhism and other religions but talking about Christianity is taboo. Our society is full of double standards.

[Bill-SOCAL]

So did Bin Laden's and Sadam Husain's... And theirs struck first...

First, these two guys had nothing to do with each other.

bin Laden is a religious zealot. Hussein (can we at least get the guy's name right after all this time?) ran a secular government that shunned religion until towards the end when he embraced a sort of religion as a means of controlling his people. But keep in mind that even then he was a Sunni, which is the minority in Iraq.

What I still want ot know is why 4,000+ Americans are dead in a country that did nothing to us while the guy who killed 3,000 Americans in the Twin Towers still walks the earth a free man.

[RCprince]

. Hussein (can we at least get the guy's name right after all this time?) ran a secular government that shunned religion until towards the end when he embraced a sort of religion as a means of controlling his people.

Sounds like the Republican party and Christianity.
.

[RCprince]

Didn't the U.S. Under Who?... sh** G.HW.Bush train Bin laden to go after the Soviets.


Darin, for your viewing pleasure... Don't tell Hannity... http://www.viddler.com/explore/endgamenow/videos/127/

[Darin Jordan]

What I still want ot know is why 4,000+ Americans are dead in a country that did nothing to us while the guy who killed 3,000 Americans in the Twin Towers still walks the earth a free man.

I'm not sure I'd say he was "walking"... like Sadam, he's crawling around from cave to cave...

If the Russians couldn't get him in 10-years of fighting, you may conclude that it's a little more difficult to get him than it was Sadam...

Hey, look... I'm all for just letting this countries fight amongst themselves... fine... if we want to turn a blind eye to the rest of the world, I suppose I can live with that... But when they bring it to our doorstep... Them's fighten words...

[Bill-SOCAL]

If the Russians couldn't get him in 10-years of fighting, you may conclude that it's a little more difficult to get him than it was Sadam...

You do realize of course that one of the major reasons the Russians failed was due to the support of the US government. The irony is that we in essence created Bin Laden and the Taliban.

And again, Iraq was no threat to the US. They had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Hussein hated Bin Laden and was scared to death of Islamic Fundamentalism in his country. Yes, he was a brutal dictator. Yes, he killed his own people (with weapons we provided in more than one instance), but he was not a threat to you and yours. And now we have 4,000 dead Americans with many still in harm's way (including my brother), and for what??

Walking, crawling, whatever, Bin Laden has not been caught. And I want to know why.

[Darin Jordan]

Walking, crawling, whatever, Bin Laden has not been caught. And I want to know why.

I may not have my facts straight here, but isn't one of the reasons he's still around is that Clinton had him in his sights, then refused to pull the trigger... so to speak??

I'd like to know why they haven't gotten him yet either... But let's remember... the chase for Bin Laden is NOT a U.S. chase... it's a U.N. chase... Of course, as usual, we are asked to pull the weight there...

[Bill-SOCAL]

Well, here are some facts:

http://makethemaccountable.com/myth/ClintonAndTerrorism.htm

Also keep in mind that during the time Clinton was President that it was illegal for a President to order a "hit" on anyone. But despite all that, Clinton actually did make a work around of the ban to authorize action against Bin Laden. But blaming what happened on 9/11 on Clinton for not acting preemptively is a real stretch

Also, it is no small amusement for me that it was the Republicans who criticized Clinton the harshest when he did authorize military actions against terrorist camps because they said it was to divert attention from the Lewinsky situation. Now of course he is criticized for not doing more.

Kind of makes you wonder what would have happened had he not been diverted with all the BS the GOP and Kenneth Starr came up with almost from Day 1 of his tenure.

And I also find it amusing that nobody ever seems to remember that it was during Clinton that the first Trade Center bombing took place. And the perpetrators were caught, tried, and are in jail.

But you are right, 9/11 is Clinton's fault (I hope I live long enough for the day to come when the right finally stops blaming EVERYTHING on Clinton!!). Certainly Bush bears no fault, I mean it wasn't like he got a security briefing title "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US". Oh wait a minute, he DID get that!!

But this does nothing to try to explain why after nearly 8 years Bin Laden has slipped through our fingers. Frankly I am amazed that we have not Rush start blaming Obama for not catching Bin Laden yet. I mean it's been over 60 days now, whet the he!! is he doing??

[domwilson]

Bill, I am impressed with your memory. I recall the same things.

[AndyKunz]

But you are right, 9/11 is Clinton's fault (I hope I live long enough for the day to come when the right finally stops blaming EVERYTHING on Clinton!!).

You know what, Bill. I remember 1977-1981 very well. I remember gasoline prices not too distant from where they are now, and mortgage interest rates that today is considered high even by credit card standards. President Carter was blamed for a lot of it (some rightfully), but one thing I learned firsthand while working for the gov't was that he was personally responsible for some of the classified projects staying alive during those years, only to be used by President Reagan against a number of enemies.

So while I disagree with how the former President acts today toward others who have since held the office, I do commend him for several things:

a) Because he had the experience as a military officer, he made the right decisions for the future of the country.

b) Because he had a Christian background, he chose to overlook (forgive?) certain of his critics who didn't know better.

c) Because he knows his life is in God's hands, he chose to forego his lifetime right to Secret Service bodyguards.

d) Because he was public about his faith (remember, that's when most folks heard "born again" for the first time), he had respect from both sides simply for his openness.

e) Habitat for Humanity - need I say more? It's not a government program. It's how "welfare" should work. People helping people, not government doing for people.

I don't think his policies were all his own; I think he knew he had to please certain Democratic policy makers. But I also know that even when they tried to shut down certain projects, he flat out ignored them. THAT is very respectable.

I only hope that in 20 years you learn enough about President Bush to realize he wasn't quite as bad as the left thinks. I think historians in the future will look favorably on him.

Andy

[Bill-SOCAL]

OK. I was talking about the Right's obsession with blaming everything on Clinton, so I am not sure what your point is.

And you seem to have glossed over the vitriolic attacks on Carter for his "botching" of the Iran hostage rescue. It was sad to see how easily the right allowed a guy who made B movies in the war to attack the military credentials of a guy who actually served in the Navy. Carter was a nuclear trained officer. I went through the same program he did (I was an enlisted man) but I will put him up against a movie actor any day of the week.

We've got another Republican actor as our governor out here. Sadly we are paying the price for him to learn that playing the Terminator and actually governing the 5th largest economy in the world are very different things.

[AndyKunz]

Actually, I thought you guys had a Kennedy in charge. His speeches sure sound Kennedy-esque, although with the wrong accent.

And don't tell me his predecessor was on the right track. Nobody is that stupid.

Andy

[Bill-SOCAL]

And don't tell me his predecessor was on the right track. Nobody is that stupid.

Andy

Yes Gray Davis was totally off base. He borrowed money to try to balanace the budget, raised taxes, and took loads of special interest money.

Fortunately Arnold is TOTALLY different.

Arnie has shown how different by borrowing record amounts of money to try to balance the budget, raised taxes, taken special interest money (from different special interests) at a record rate.

He is completely different.

[Darin Jordan]

Arnie has shown how different by borrowing record amounts of money to try to balance the budget, raised taxes, taken special interest money (from different special interests) at a record rate.

He is completely different.

Maybe you guys need to take a lesson or two from Mrs. Palin... Her state has a balanced budget, BILLIONS put away for a rainy day, including a couple billion specifically for education, and is all setup to weather this storm...

Yup... she's just a "Moose Hunter"... Not qualified to run anything...

Our governer here isn't much better than yours..., and, in fact, our per-capita deficit is about the same as yours... or close to it...

Arnie isn't really a republican anyhow... very little he does even resembles anything "conservative"...

Regan cleaned up Carter's mess... I'll take someone with common sense over a degree in Nuclear Physics and high "ideals" any day...