Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, because America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." ~Newt Gingrich
wow how could some one be so ignorant of the facts
1. to th solamia issue...NEITHER congress cut funding (and it was a DEMOCRAT controlled congress at the time (1992) it became a UN issue from 1992 to 1995
2. clinton FAILED the terrorism issue...he thought santions (oil for food) and bombing would sove the issue...it didnt and half a million iraq CHILDREN DIED under clinton santions
3 clinton was impeached not because of monica, but because he is a SEXUAL HARRASSER and sexual ASSAULTER of paula jones..the "lie" that got him was about monica, but part of the sexual assault case of jones, which he paid a big amount of money to shut her up
Somalia was a democrat issue....really? Let's see what the Congressional Record says about that:
Statement of Republican Policy on U.S. Armed Forces in Somalia, Adopted April 1, 1993
U.S. military forces in Somalia have fulfilled the mission given them by President Bush. Republicans therefore call on President Clinton to bring our troops home.
...
Let's also ask John McCain about his speech on 13 October 1993.
Or Strom Thurmond if he was still around about his on 5 October of the same year.
Or perhaps Phil Gramm, or Dick Kempthorne or Slade Gorton, all Republican's as well. Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Alan Simpson, and Judd Gregg re: their comments and exhortations to leave Somalia after the 'Black Hawk Down' incident immediately after it happened.
Remember after 9/11 the right started claiming that Clinton should have had the same emphasis on fighting terrorism as Bush did after 9/11? (yeah, AFTER 3,000 people were killed) Well Newt was the Speaker of the House back then, why hasn't anybody asked him why if fighting terrorism was so damn important back then then why was his top priority impeaching President Clinton? Also why did the Republicans totally oppose all efforts Clinton made to fight terrorism? Clinton got zero support from the Republicans while Bush got 100% support from both parties, and he wasn't being impeached either
Not sure why you would think Newt would have a higher priority to fight terrorism over impeachment of Clinton ... they two issues are not related. Newt was the speaker of the house when Clinton was charged with lying to investigators ... which turned out to be true. It was Newt's job as speaker to head the impeachment. On the other issue of terrorism ... the speaker does not set foreign policy and does not "fight" terrorism as the speaker. Our defense agencies including military and CIA is responsible dealing with terrorism and ultimately its the commander-in-chief ... the president ... who hold the responsibility. Clinton's foreign policy on terrorism was a joke as he did relatively nothing to stop it or prepare our military to deal with it. Clinton decimated our military just as Obama is doing but in Obama's case he is going out of his way to empower our enemies.
Are you serious??? You don't understand why protecting us from terrorists should be a higher priority than impeachment?????
Impeachment is done very very very rarely and only in extraordinary circumstances (or supposed to anyway) We've only had 2 since 1789, so when we do do it it is by it's very nature a top priority
It wasn't just "Newt's job" to head the impeachment! That's bull****, you're trying to make it sound like he had no choice. HE WAS THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE
Why the hell are you all so obsessed with this "It's the President, not the Speaker" bull****? In most cases it's BOTH. If you think the President can just do whatever he damn well pleases then you have no idea in hell how our government is run
The country knew that it was only a matter of time before the left attempts to demonize Newt now that he is gaining support. Which ever GOP candidate is in the lead the left will go full steam telling lies and what ever it takes to demonize the GOP leader. Too bad its happened with the others like Cain but the good news is the country is on to the lefts dirty tactics and they won't listen anymore. So demonize all you want because no one is listening anymore ...
When he was Speaker Newt was more concerned with impeaching Clinton than with helping Clinton fight terrorism. That is not a lie it is a fact
You believing that Newt should have done something as speaker about terrorism brings up this.
If that is the case then poor Dirty Harrys and Nancy Pelosi watch is not looking very good.
Why hasnt Nancy or Harry stopped the RECORD number of terrorist attacks on US soil on their watch then?
Instead they worked on the scam HC bill instead of protecting US citizens. How sad is that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
