Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The last time the federal budget was balanced and we were running a surplus, not a deficeit, which conceivably could have lead to paying down the national debt, was under Clinton.
Swallow the whole pill then.
The historically low interest rates for savings accounts forced older folks and everyone else with bank accounts not working into the stock market.
At that time there was a perception that the Internet would make everyone rich.
It had a big rise and also toward the end a big collapse that wiped out many Americans.
Both had nothing to do with Clinton, but if you want to claim some BS that there was a surplus DUE to Clinton, be ready to also take it in the rear over the collapse from the Internet Stock Bubble that destroyed national wealth as well. That was Clinton's fault as well then.
Just because the newest war hasn't reached the "boots on the ground" phase, doesn't mean it isn't yet another unwinnable, pointless, stupid foreign war that will waste billions (if not hundreds of billions) of dollars we don't have, cannot afford to borrow, and certainly cannot afford to pay interest to borrow. Both Dems and Repubs are equally to blame for endless warmongering, because they are the SAME political party.
"...the Security Council Resolution on Libya “authorizes member states to act as required to prevent harm to Libyan civilians, authorizes the establishment of a no-fly zone in Libyan air space...." What is the United States Doing in Libya?
"U.S. military personnel are present in activities led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But many U.S. lawmakers remain unhappy that Obama sent troops without the approval of Congress." http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201105271201dowjonesdjonline000 432&title=house-to-vote-next-week-on-libya-war-resolutiongop-aide (broken link)
I spent all of .1 seconds googling Clinton's very well known business friendly policies and came up with this. If you care to spend some time actually educating yourself, you'll find that Bill Clinton was extremely friendly to business, as are most Democrats.
I just don't spend enough time on these political forums to see how ridiculous the memes have gotten. Do Fox-sters truly think we have invaded Libya? Uh, no. We haven't. We're not going to. Just so you all know, we haven't invaded Pakistan either... limited airstrikes isn't an invasion.
Perhaps you haven't watched TV/ read a newspaper/ read a magazine/ talked on a phone with an informed friend or visited a news website in the last couple of months but Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama Declares War On Libya .
Perhaps you don't know what an invasion is. Sounds like it.
Perhaps you haven't watched TV/ read a newspaper/ read a magazine/ talked on a phone with an informed friend or visited a news website in the last couple of months but Nobel Peace Prize Winner Obama Declares War On Libya .
The democratic party is hellbent on raising taxes on "The Rich" AKA "The people who actually hire Americans" while forcing union regulations down the gullet of every entrepreneur in America.
I DARE you to find ONE news article that touted Bill Clinton as "business-friendly".
Heck...its even hard to type "Bill Clinton as "business-friendly" without laughing.
Clinton wasn't anti business. Remember worked with Rubin, Geithner, Summers, Greenspan and a myriad of other free marketers, he's why Glass-Stegal was repealed...
Actually,
I spent all of .1 seconds googling Clinton's very well known business friendly policies and came up with this. If you care to spend some time actually educating yourself, you'll find that Bill Clinton was extremely friendly to business, as are most Democrats.
An invasion is a military offensive consisting of all, or large parts of the armed forces of one geopolitical entity aggressively entering territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of either conquering, liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory, forcing the partition of a country, altering the established government or gaining concessions from said government, or a combination thereof.
No mention of ground forces being necessary to fulfill the definition of an invasion.
Now, as a soldier, you surely can understand this, right?
Last edited by CaseyB; 05-28-2011 at 05:05 AM..
Reason: response to deleted quote
You know what? I would think that anyone busting down the door of a man’s home with a platoon of light infantry would be prepared for anything. But it seems these black-nylon kill squads are only prepared for one thing: absolute and immediate submission. What, your surprised by our raid? Confused? Startled? Sorry, you’ll have to be killed to protect us.
That’s just a peachy picture of a patriotic free nation, now aint it?
Quote:
Compare and contrast with the Rules of Engagement our forces in Afghanistan are forced by pain of courts-martial to follow.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Uh, no. We haven't. We're not going to. Just so you all know, we haven't invaded Pakistan either... limited airstrikes isn't an invasion.
