Deep Throat and Genocide by Ben Stein
06-06-2005, 01:44 PM
#1
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Deep Throat and Genocide by Ben Stein
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8242
I think Stein brings up a good point besides Nixon. Why does the political party that's primarily against the incumbent always white knuckle one mishap?
What that article suggests is pretty close to what Bush is doing right now. If you've actually taken the time to understand Bush's aggressive foreign policy it's actually quite brilliant. Whether or not our country has the patience for his agenda is another thing. But the dems and liberals latch onto the WMD lie like bloodsucking vampires. I mean so what?! Why not see the bigger picture we're trying to achieve?
Despite what Ben Stein says, I think this also holds true for Clinton. I mean Clinton was a very smart man. Had that conservative side to him that appealed to both sides at times. He was pretty much the exact opposite of Bush Jr. in every respect. Our economy had a stronger record for whatever reason (maybe 9/11 had a big part in it for Bush?) but his foreign policy was lacking big time.
His "sweep the dirt under the rug" foreign policy appealed to so many dems and liberals because it was passive. It was just enough to keep everyone comfortable for the time being. When he wasn't busy giving the UN a unnecessary hand job in Africa he was sweeping the potential WMD problem under the rug with Operation Desert Fox. For those of you that remember those "shock and awe" days of 1998, Clinton initiated Operation Desert Fox in order to degrade Iraq's ability to develop weapons of mass destruction. Imagine that. He did this during the most controversial times of his 8yr term. That said, do I even need to tell you what conservatives hold against him today?!
I mean so what?! Clinton got caught doing what half of U.S. Presidents have probably done. Something that most red-blooded men fantasize of doing throughout their married lives. But he trumped any male fantasy and did it in the oval office!
I think Stein brings up a good point besides Nixon. Why does the political party that's primarily against the incumbent always white knuckle one mishap?
What that article suggests is pretty close to what Bush is doing right now. If you've actually taken the time to understand Bush's aggressive foreign policy it's actually quite brilliant. Whether or not our country has the patience for his agenda is another thing. But the dems and liberals latch onto the WMD lie like bloodsucking vampires. I mean so what?! Why not see the bigger picture we're trying to achieve?
Despite what Ben Stein says, I think this also holds true for Clinton. I mean Clinton was a very smart man. Had that conservative side to him that appealed to both sides at times. He was pretty much the exact opposite of Bush Jr. in every respect. Our economy had a stronger record for whatever reason (maybe 9/11 had a big part in it for Bush?) but his foreign policy was lacking big time.
His "sweep the dirt under the rug" foreign policy appealed to so many dems and liberals because it was passive. It was just enough to keep everyone comfortable for the time being. When he wasn't busy giving the UN a unnecessary hand job in Africa he was sweeping the potential WMD problem under the rug with Operation Desert Fox. For those of you that remember those "shock and awe" days of 1998, Clinton initiated Operation Desert Fox in order to degrade Iraq's ability to develop weapons of mass destruction. Imagine that. He did this during the most controversial times of his 8yr term. That said, do I even need to tell you what conservatives hold against him today?!
I mean so what?! Clinton got caught doing what half of U.S. Presidents have probably done. Something that most red-blooded men fantasize of doing throughout their married lives. But he trumped any male fantasy and did it in the oval office!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post