Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (304607)	9/26/2006 6:06:51 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571808

Brumar, I don't understand the liberal obsession to defend Clinton. But all of the liberals are 100% behind him. He has to be depicted as the greatest of all Presidents. I noticed that as well. The recent FOXNews interview is bringing all of the Clinton defenders out of the woodwork. Never mind that what Clinton did or didn't do to get Osama should be a moot point. Tenchusatsu

To: Brumar89 who wrote (304607)	9/26/2006 6:10:42 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

LIAR. Clarke was demoted by Bush after the anti Al Qaida office in the White House was abolished and not replaced. Clarke was deeply disturbed by this but grudgingly accepted the demotion to cyber security since his old job (the most important in the country as it turned out) was done away with by Bush. Then many times clarke tried to get Riuce to pay attention to Al Qaida's threat but except for a single initial meeting, he couldn't get through to her. Finally, on 8-06-01, the CIA was able to get the warning through to Bush in Crawford. What did Bush do? Ignored it.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (304607)	9/26/2006 10:21:40 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

"But all of the liberals are 100% behind him. He has to be depicted as the greatest of all Presidents. " This affliction must be related to BDS. Most rational people realize that Clinton wa an embarrassment to the country and to his apologists.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (304607)	9/26/2006 10:55:32 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571808

>I don't understand the liberal obsession to defend Clinton. But all of the liberals are 100% behind him. He has to be depicted as the greatest of all Presidents. Really? I'm pretty liberal, and I don't really like him. I in fact worked for his wife's opponent in the Senate primaries this year. -Z

To: Brumar89 who wrote (304607)	9/27/2006 5:37:35 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571808

Clarke had the same job on 911 he'd had under Clinton. You can read it in Clarke's own book if you don't want to take my word for it. I've already posted that. Clarke claims he was demoted. It seems one of you has it wrong. I don't understand the liberal obsession to defend Clinton. But all of the liberals are 100% behind him. He has to be depicted as the greatest of all Presidents. Many liberals were not behind him all that much. He appealed more to the moderates in the Dem. party......after all, he was from Arkansas. Its only the neos and religious right who see him as liberal. What I like about Clinton is he knows how to deal effectively with the bubbas from the South. That's a hard one for northerners to pull off.