Question for debt Hawks....

[duane1969]

Umm...not sure, but from here it did NOT look like Iraq was "bipartisan" and agreed upon. Far, far from it.

Then you guys need to get some new media outlets up there, because the Iraq Resolution would have died quickly without bi-partisan support.

The Iraq Resolution passed the House with 86 Democrat votes. Had Dems voted 100% against it then the bill would have passed with a final vote of 215 yes and 214 no with 3 not voting, assuming none of the "No vote" members didn't vote against it. So yes, it would have most likely passed with a full partisan vote, but it wasn't necessary since 39% of House Democrats voted for it.

It passed the Senate solely because Democrats voted for it. Democrats held a 50-49 majority. A pure partisan vote would have defeated it. 58% of Democrat Senators voted for the resolution ensuring that a 100% vote by Republicans wasn't even necessary.

I agree with Iraq.. but since then the Dems have publicly said it was wrong.. the Republicans will not. As for the Tax cuts.. that was something the Dems were against since the 2000 election... what are you talking about there

Dems are saying it was wrong for partisan reasons and nothing more. If the president who took us into Iraq had been named Al Gore (who supported the Iraq Resolution) instead of George W. Bush then Dems would be defending the Iraq War to this very day.

[Imac7065]

Then you guys need to get some new media outlets up there, because the Iraq Resolution would have died quickly without bi-partisan support.

The Iraq Resolution passed the House with 86 Democrat votes. Had Dems voted 100% against it then the bill would have passed with a final vote of 215 yes and 214 no with 3 not voting, assuming none of the "No vote" members didn't vote against it. So yes, it would have most likely passed with a full partisan vote, but it wasn't necessary since 39% of House Democrats voted for it.

It passed the Senate solely because Democrats voted for it. Democrats held a 50-49 majority. A pure partisan vote would have defeated it. 58% of Democrat Senators voted for the resolution ensuring that a 100% vote by Republicans wasn't even necessary.



Dems are saying it was wrong for partisan reasons and nothing more. If the president who took us into Iraq had been named Al Gore (who supported the Iraq Resolution) instead of George W. Bush then Dems would be defending the Iraq War to this very day.

Uh.. actually they say it was wrong because all the evidence was a lie and Bush committed a war crime he will never be held responsible for. And no... Al Gore wouldn't have done the same. Clinton had a chance to invade Iraq in 1998 and choose not to do so because there was no proof of WMD's.. people love to forget that.

[SLNoble13]

Oh and don't forget, Clinton also had multiple opportunities to take out bin Laden. Had he done so, maybe we would not have lost the World Trade Centers, Pentagon and the hundreds of innocent lives lost.

[Imac7065]

Oh and don't forget, Clinton also had multiple opportunities to take out bin Laden. Had he done so, maybe we would not have lost the World Trade Centers, Pentagon and the hundreds of innocent lives lost.

He presented congress with an order to attack Bin Laden in 1998... they said if he did it they would accuse him of "wagging the dog" to distract from Monica Lewinsky.. your comment actually offends me as I am originally from NY and my Uncle was scheduled to be in the towers the following day. I myself was in the towers nearly a year to the day before it happened.


Clinton also made his entire presidential exit/entrance interview with bush about Bin Laden and Al Queda.. he warned him that they would be the biggest issue this country faces over the next 10 years.

Bush's response? He went on vacation for 8 months of his first year in office, and when presented with intel labeled "bin laden primed to attack the united states".. he went on vacation again.

So as I said.. your response offends me.

[SLNoble13]

He presented congress with an order to attack Bin Laden in 1998... they said if he did it they would accuse him of "wagging the dog" to distract from Monica Lewinsky.. your comment actually offends me as I am originally from NY and my Uncle was scheduled to be in the towers the following day. I myself was in the towers nearly a year to the day before it happened.

Ok first my comment was not directed towards you or anyone else. Second, show me the order that he presented and I will retract my statement.

In 1999, we had Predator missles honed in on bin Laden's caravan but the CIA were told to hold back. In addition, Clinton told the CIA to let him knwo where bin Laden was going to be 5-6 hours from then. Also, a request to go in on the ground was denied.

And by the way, I had family in the one of the towers!

[Imac7065]

Ok first my comment was not directed towards you or anyone else. Second, show me the order that he presented and I will retract my statement.

In 1999, we had Predator missles honed in on bin Laden's caravan but the CIA were told to hold back. In addition, Clinton told the CIA to let him knwo where bin Laden was going to be 5-6 hours from then. Also, a request to go in on the ground was denied.

And by the way, I had family in the one of the towers!

I hope they got out.. and I hope you are offended by bush as much as I am on this... Clinton laid everything I said out in an interview with Fox News of all people. It was the infamous interview when he told Chris Wallace he knew Fox's sole purpose was to propagate the right.

[SLNoble13]

I hope they got out.. and I hope you are offended by bush as much as I am on this... Clinton laid everything I said out in an interview with Fox News of all people. It was the infamous interview when he told Chris Wallace he knew Fox's sole purpose was to propagate the right.

I am in independant and sometimes I vote more on the Repub. side but others more on the Demo. side. I was offended by a lot of things that Clinton did, Bush did and not Obama.

I find it very funny that people say Bush couldn't kill bin Laden, Obama had to fix his dirty work. Clinton would not push the issue of killing bin Laden. They all have done something that had caused consequences on this country.

Look at LBJ who was a Democrat who pushed our country into Vietnam when the overwhelming majority of our country did not want to be there.

So my point is every President does many things throughout their term that offends many people. Its not a certain party kind of thing

[GroundSupport]

I said private sector jobs, pay attention. Show me military employment facts from 2001-20010 that show that the military grew by 1 million jobs as you have stated. That is a bold-faced lie, and you cannot prove even 1/3 of that number.

1.Have you ever been in a miltary town? Jacksonville NC for example?

I can ensure you the growth of the military during that time, made that town explode with home creations, businesses moving in, more and more families moving to town. That's one town out of hundreds of Military towns.

2. You do have the government contractors that work for all aspects of the military, from Maintenence to Admins to Mercenarys. The increase in Military = Increase of goverment contractors.

3. Then you have miltary suppliers from everything from food, to medical, to weapons, to gear.. More Troops, More Supplies needed.

Now to say there may have only been 1,000 jobs created is just a bold face lie.

I'm not going to find some stats to support my claims, but I lived it, I was there, I seen it with my own eyes.

Since, a lot of those jobs have went away due to Obama cutting back the Military. Heck, most people can't even go and enlist without having to wait a year or so to leave for bootcamp now days.

[GroundSupport]

[SLNoble13]

1.Have you ever been in a miltary town? Jacksonville NC for example?

I can ensure you the growth of the military during that time, made that town explode with home creations, businesses moving in, more and more families moving to town. That's one town out of hundreds of Military towns.

2. You do have the government contractors that work for all aspects of the military, from Maintenence to Admins to Mercenarys. The increase in Military = Increase of goverment contractors.

3. Then you have miltary suppliers from everything from food, to medical, to weapons, to gear.. More Troops, More Supplies needed.

Now to say there may have only been 1,000 jobs created is just a bold face lie.

I'm not going to find some stats to support my claims, but I lived it, I was there, I seen it with my own eyes.

Since, a lot of those jobs have went away due to Obama cutting back the Military. Heck, most people can't even go and enlist without having to wait a year or so to leave for bootcamp now days.

I can attest that Jacksonville, NC has grown big time in the last few years. My wife is from there and I know she has maintained contact with family there and I forget how many new schools they are building due to the rise of soldiers there now. I know I have seen more restaurants/housing/retail/entertainment/etc built there in the last 5 years then anywhere else I have been in the country.

Last figure I heard was roundabout an additional 50,000 soldiers but please don't hold me to that number b/c this is from her family members down there.