10 years ago today.... (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 08, 2024, 10:55:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  10 years ago today.... (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 10 years ago today....  (Read 5074 times)
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« on: January 20, 2011, 02:01:08 PM »

A great day
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2011, 02:49:44 PM »

And please don't come with the 9/11 BS...

A major event and the response is "BS?"
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2011, 03:01:29 PM »

And please don't come with the 9/11 BS...

A major event and the response is "BS?"

Yes, correct. Bush isn't a good president because he said some nice words and quoted the bible after 9/11.

Roll Eyes

Ok, you knew I meant the other responses to the attacks.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not necessarily but even so, that doesn't make it something that is worthy of approval?


But in what way was 9/11 a positive accomplishment of Bush? 

US gets attack; 1,000s die... and Heckav' job Bushie???

The response to 9/11. You knew what I meant.

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2011, 03:11:32 PM »

So let me get this straight, Bush is a good president because 9/11 happened? Unless you can say how other Presidents would have reacted differently (other than the bible quoting), that's basically what you're saying.

For probably the fourth time now, I have clearly said I approve of his response to 9/11. How the hell do you conclude that I think Bush was a good President because 9/11 happened when I literally said that wasn't the case? My point is just because other Presidents would have responded the same way doesn't mean his response isn't worthy of approval.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WztB6HzXxI

How this is better than Obama is mind boggling.   
But then again the American people re-lected this asshat.

Yes, he should have got up, ran out of the room and did...eh...did what exactly during those seven minutes? What would have happened differently?


Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2011, 03:19:32 PM »


He should have gotten up and acted like President.  You are claiming his response to 9/11 was so great.  Well there it was -- his response to an attack on this country is to just sit there.

"Acted like the President" and did what? There was more to the response than this but I know how his haters like the latch on to trivial matters.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it doesn't make me angry. I'm still waiting to find out what he would have done differently in those seven minutes that would have stopped Americans from dying. On the other hand, if he just stood up and walked out or explained why he had to leave, it would have been "Look how he traumatized those kids!"

Funny how you want to talk about responding. How long did the current President take to respond to that little oil spill in the Gulf?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2011, 03:27:42 PM »

Obama's supporters don't use Obama's response to the oil spill as one of his major accomplishments.

That has nothing to do with what I'm saying. He wants to complain about response time between Bush and Obama and I provided an example of Obama doing a far worse job.

 
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bush had nothing to do with the decisions made after 9/11? For whatever idiotic reason, you think that someone doing something that is worthy of praise is meaningless because someone else would have done the same. Mind bogglingly stupid.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2011, 03:31:43 PM »



Trivial matters?  The event of 9/11 is now to you a trivial matter.  Fascinating.

No, making an issue out of his seven minutes of reading a book is trivial. Don't bother responding if you're going to debate like a child.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So what should he have done that would have made an immediate difference.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, what national security decisions would have been made in those seven minutes that weren't made afterwards that would changed things?  

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I know. It wouldn't have stopped his haters from using it though!  

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

...

Wow. James Carville, that evil Republican operative, would like to have a word with you.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2011, 05:12:57 PM »


I am not debating like a child.  These are the seven minutes after planes struck the world trade center and before one had struck the Pentagon.  I don't consider what the President, any President, was doing during an attack on the country to be trivial.

Still waiting on something Bush would have done that would have had a different impact. Otherwise, yes, it's a trivial complaint.  




Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But he ended up making decisions afterwards and we have the result. So, again, what could have been done that would have brought about a different result?

Of course you don't have a specific decision that you wanted made during those seven minutes. Further proof that this is trivial.  

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 10 queries.