Worst President in History?!?

[pilotman2105]

re:1--well, duh?

It's called a fact. Hence why you can't dispute it.

re:2--Does "others" include the U.S.? Did we not willingly allow the 9/11 terrorists into our country? Did we not willingly "harbor" them until they attacked on 9/11?

http://www.dictionary.com

Harbor (v) - 1.To give shelter to: harbor refugees; harbor a fugitive. 2. To provide a place, home, or habitat for

Thus we did not "harbor" terrorists.

re:3--One man's terrorist is another man's "freedom fighter." If Bush had his way, all Americans that are anti-Bush would be labeled as "terrorists." Since he can't do this, he'll just have the IRS audit their tax returns. Welcome to the McCarthy era, part deux.

Are you trying to argue the point that the world is safer with terrorists? You're saying that more people live a better life with terrorists threatening their very existance?

re:4--I thought we went into Iraq to rid the country of weapons of mass desctruction...err, I mean liberate the people of Iraq? Yeah, that's the ticket...

Really? I thought that we were going to steal the oil and the sand for the beaches?

You mean there was a REAL reason we went to Iraq?!?

And whatever we do, "we must stay the course," even if we've f-ed up big time...

There is a double standard. If we stay, you'll complain about that. If we leave, then you'll complain about that.

And if you work for a major magazine that I read, I would be willing to bet that the editor is about ready to fire you. Your lack of ability to put a coherent thought onto paper (or into a post) is pretty embarassing.

 

[pilotman2105]

Actually, all INS had to do was a simple background check before letting these people into our country. Am I asking for too much here??

Talk to your buddy slick Willy. Since 9/11 was planned years in advance, I'm sure that he had a good idea what was going on under his watch as well.

By our government's deficiency in checking people coming into this country, we might as well had a banner up at the airport customs and immigration facilities that said, "Welcome terrorists." I stand by my statement that we willingly let them in (i.e.-"harbored" them), without any real background checks or other scrutiny before letting them through our border. That's a fact, Jack.

And I'll bet that if YOU ran the country that is the FIRST thing that you would have changed in the early months of 2001.

Ever heard the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20?"

Get a clue man...

 

[AeroBoy]

Alas, an independent in largely a sea of Republican hardliners. I am neither liberal nor conservative. Actually, I'm not a fan of Clinton, Gore, Bush, Cheney or Kerry. I make it a point to vote, even in the primaries and other dinky elections, and it's sad when I'm forced to choose the lesser of two evils for our country's top job of president.

Yes, hindsight is 20/20. However, that doesn't excuse the gross errors our government made. Period.

Harbor--To provide a place, home, or habitat for. We allowed the 9/11 hijackers into the country. We opened the doors to our house ("home" as per your definition)–i.e. our country–to them, without properly checking their credentials. I'd just like to know why.

And as far as the grammar police: a) this is a Web board, not an edited magazine; and b) I have the flu and I've still been working long hours in the office nonetheless (magazine's gotta get out somehow). So just back off there, Tex. Anyways, I've seen some of the fine writing skills from many "professional" pilots, and my minuscule error pales in comparison. And I don't publicly humiliate them; in fact, I happily edit their letters when we publish them to make the letter writer seem intelligent, without changing it for meaning, of course (lest I next be accused of bending their opinions).

 

[Typhoon1244]

Since 9/11 was planned years in advance, I'm sure that [Clinton] had a good idea what was going on under his watch as well.

If that were the case, then W knew about it too...since their staffs received terrorism briefings from the same people.

Sort of makes nonsense out of thattheory, doesn't it?

I'll say this for the 9/11 hijackers, they understood a concept many in our government don't: how to keep a secret.

 

[AeroBoy]

Typhoon--cute kid.

There is a double standard. If we stay, you'll complain about that. If we leave, then you'll complain about that.

We're already knee-deep in the muck. We need to finish cleaning up our mess, since our elected officials (executive and legislative branches) caused us to get into this situation. I'm not complaining about staying, but it's long been suggested that we never had enough manpower on the ground to properly do the job. Bush should have known better, and he was advised beforehand by many military experts that the number of troops he was sending in was insufficient.

And if you work for a major magazine that I read, I would be willing to bet that the editor is about ready to fire you. Your lack of ability to put a coherent thought onto paper (or into a post) is pretty embarassing.

It's likely that you do read the magazine I edit and write for. Your assertion that I'm on the verge of being fired is quite laughable--far from it. I like how you pull your "facts" from out of the air. My incoherency is probably due to the fact that I'm fighting the flu and have been working 14-hour days (16 if you include my commute time) this week. I'd like to see you do this with the fevers and fatigue. So go fly a kite, or something.

 

[pilotman2105]

We're already knee-deep in the muck. We need to finish cleaning up our mess, since our elected officials (executive and legislative branches) caused us to get into this situation. I'm not complaining about staying, but it's long been suggested that we never had enough manpower on the ground to properly do the job. Bush should have known better, and he was advised beforehand by many military experts that the number of troops he was sending in was insufficient.

I'm willing to entertain that if you provide proof. I have not heard that theory. Where are you getting your information?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And if you work for a major magazine that I read, I would be willing to bet that the editor is about ready to fire you. Your lack of ability to put a coherent thought onto paper (or into a post) is pretty embarassing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



It's likely that you do read the magazine I edit and write for. Your assertion that I'm on the verge of being fired is quite laughable--far from it. I like how you pull your "facts" from out of the air. My incoherency is probably due to the fact that I'm fighting the flu and have been working 14-hour days (16 if you include my commute time) this week. I'd like to see you do this with the fevers and fatigue. So go fly a kite, or something.

I never asserted that statement as fact. It was an assumption on my behalf (hence why I said "I would be willing to bet.") It is an assumption that I believe to be true. If it was fact, I would have stated "Your editor is about to fire you."

Edit:

And as far as the grammar police: a) this is a Web board, not an edited magazine; and b) I have the flu and I've still been working long hours in the office nonetheless (magazine's gotta get out somehow). So just back off there, Tex. Anyways, I've seen some of the fine writing skills from many "professional" pilots, and my minuscule error pales in comparison. And I don't publicly humiliate them; in fact, I happily edit their letters when we publish them to make the letter writer seem intelligent, without changing it for meaning, of course (lest I next be accused of bending their opinions).

Sorry that you do not take enough time to put effort into your posts. Continues with the credibility thing of your posts. I'm merely pointing out that you'll be more likely to "convince" people and lend yourself to being a professional by touching up those minor points.

 

[pilotman2105]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by pilotman2105
Since 9/11 was planned years in advance, I'm sure that [Clinton] had a good idea what was going on under his watch as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If that were the case, then W knew about it too...since their staffs received terrorism briefings from the same people.

Harbor--To provide a place, home, or habitat for. We allowed the 9/11 hijackers into the country. We opened the doors to our house ("home" as per your definition)–i.e. our country–to them, without properly checking their credentials. I'd just like to know why.

I won't deny the fact that security was lax which let them into the country. I will defend the fact that Bush can't be held 100% accountable for this problem. Just because 9/11 happened under his watch, does that excuse the lack of security during the Clinton and previous administrations?

If "we opened the doors to our house/home," then that must have been done prior to the Bush administration.

 

[TonyC]

Harbor--To provide a place, home, or habitat for. We allowed the 9/11 hijackers into the country. We opened the doors to our house ("home" as per your definition)–i.e. our country–to them, without properly checking their credentials. I'd just like to know why.

And as far as the grammar police: a) this is a Web board, not an edited magazine; and b) I have the flu and I've still been working long hours in the office nonetheless (magazine's gotta get out somehow). So just back off there, Tex.

By your abuse of the word, we also harbor murderers, rapists, child molesters, and bad rap singers (are there good ones?) just because they "live" within the borders of the U.S. Such a claim is preposterous.

I'll repeat my original assessment of your ignorance. Your grasp of the meaning of the word harbor is inferior to the grasp of those who claim English as their second or third language.

Perhaps you should take your flu to bed and don't come back until you're well - - you're embarrassing yourself.

 

[AeroBoy]

By your abuse of the word, we also harbor murderers, rapists, child molesters, and bad rap singers (are there good ones?) just because they "live" within the borders of the U.S. Such a claim is preposterous.

Yes, it is preposterous...and not what I said in the first place. Since when have we willingly allowed these types of people (bad rap singers aside) to enter our country? After they get in, all bets are off, of course. But the 9/11 terrorists went to al Qaeda training camps before coming here, not after they arrived on our soil. Background checks might have caught this--at least to catch a few of them and raise a red flag that something bad was going to happen. And it is just as much the Clinton Administration's fault as it is the Bush Administration's. I've never said otherwise. Read what I write, not what you interpret it as.

I'll repeat my original assessment of your ignorance. Your grasp of the meaning of the word harbor is inferior to the grasp of those who claim English as their second or third language.

I use the definition correctly. You obviously don't like it when your line of reasoning cannot be justified, so you just call me ignorant. That's mighty ignorant, if I must say so myself.

I'm willing to entertain that if you provide proof. I have not heard that theory. Where are you getting your information?

Both John McCain and Wes Clarke have made these assertions, among others. I find it interesting when a Republican and Democrat agree. For McCain's comments, see http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1834874 and http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-11-05-mccain-usat_x.htm -- See, I'm really not making this stuff up! Though I suppose it'll be dismissed by many here as info from the "liberal" media.

Sorry that you do not take enough time to put effort into your posts. Continues with the credibility thing of your posts. I'm merely pointing out that you'll be more likely to "convince" people and lend yourself to being a professional by touching up those minor points.

I don't necessarily have the time to footnote everything I write on a freaking Web board. Do some independent thinking and go to google and search for news stories on these topics. You're old enough that people shouldn't have to hold your hand...unless you're CitationKid. Sorry, couldn't resist.

I hardly think I'm embarrasing myself. Actually, some people's lack of having an open mind is the real embarassment here. Stop repeating the Republican party line like a good little robot. Ask questions, and don't accept everything at face value. That's all I ask, in addition to giving me a small amount of leeway on grammar (then again, when people tend to attack grammar, they do it because they don't have facts to counter an argument).

 

[pilotman2105]

Comment reserved for a time when I have gotten more than 3 hours of sleep. Rest assured however, comment is coming.