Yep, I told you so...

**Gotch** · December 18th, 2008, 07:52 PM

This seems to be coming down to demo vs rep.?

I voted for Nader so that I could say I voted for the crazy old man who didn't place second. Seriously thought of voting socialist so I could say I voted for the socialist who didn't win. I voted for Perot, twice and felt damn good about it.

So here's what a person who hates both sides thinks.

Bush has done a pi$$ poor job and the country is in worse shape for him. Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but laid the ground work for the collapse who are seeing now. He did this with bipartisan support on issues such as NAFTA and GATT. He also failed to do the things necessary to keep this country safe.

Now on to WMD.

I'll say this loud and clear....anyone who thinks Saddam did not have WMD's is either a raving idiot or is so blinded by partisanship that they are in need of a guide dog.

The man had chemical and biological weapons, that's a given. You guys who act like he didn't because we didn't find warehouses full are a riot, an absolute riot.

He had them, he used them on the Kurds. Do you really think he destroyed them? If so I have some beautiful beach front property in Keokee I want to talk to you about.

He had them, they still exist, probably in Syria

http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/2126/130/

**simple man** · December 18th, 2008, 08:48 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This seems to be coming down to demo vs rep.?

I voted for Nader so that I could say I voted for the crazy old man who didn't place second. Seriously thought of voting socialist so I could say I voted for the socialist who didn't win. I voted for Perot, twice and felt damn good about it.

So here's what a person who hates both sides thinks.

Bush has done a pi$$ poor job and the country is in worse shape for him. Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but laid the ground work for the collapse who are seeing now. He did this with bipartisan support on issues such as NAFTA and GATT. He also failed to do the things necessary to keep this country safe.

Now on to WMD.

I'll say this loud and clear....anyone who thinks Saddam did not have WMD's is either a raving idiot or is so blinded by partisanship that they are in need of a guide dog.

The man had chemical and biological weapons, that's a given. You guys who act like he didn't because we didn't find warehouses full are a riot, an absolute riot.

He had them, he used them on the Kurds. Do you really think he destroyed them? If so I have some beautiful beach front property in Keokee I want to talk to you about.

He had them, they still exist, probably in Syria

http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/2126/130/ </div></div>
So now we have a reason to "police" every 2 bit dictator with out-dated chem and bio weapons? People who act like the weapons we counted the first time we were in Iraq are funny. 1/2 a trill dollars worth. Real comedy act, too bad Bob Hope ain't around for the troops.

**PVVikeFan** · December 18th, 2008, 08:54 PM

My biggest problem with both wars is simply this:
When a war starts the politics should end. Don't hold back, don't drag things out a minute longer than necessary. The American public does not have the stomach for a prolonged conflict, and our troops should not have their hands tied. If politicians want to run a war let them go do the fighting. If they expect the military to fight them let them do it right. There is no such thing as a "nice" war. People die. Just a fact of life.

**simple man** · December 18th, 2008, 09:01 PM

There were gunships in the air when Saddam killed some of the Kurds...all we needed was the prez to pull the trigger. Like Clinton and Bin Lauden, it was outside the law at the time . Reason Bush declared "war" on terror" . Cut away some of the delays in taking action on situations.

**PVVikeFan** · December 18th, 2008, 09:04 PM

Maybe military service should be a requirement for future Presidents. Haven't had one of those for a while.

**plantsman** · December 18th, 2008, 09:57 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This seems to be coming down to demo vs rep.?

I voted for Nader so that I could say I voted for the crazy old man who didn't place second. Seriously thought of voting socialist so I could say I voted for the socialist who didn't win. I voted for Perot, twice and felt damn good about it.

So here's what a person who hates both sides thinks.

Bush has done a pi$$ poor job and the country is in worse shape for him. Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but laid the ground work for the collapse who are seeing now. He did this with bipartisan support on issues such as NAFTA and GATT. He also failed to do the things necessary to keep this country safe.

Now on to WMD.

I'll say this loud and clear....anyone who thinks Saddam did not have WMD's is either a raving idiot or is so blinded by partisanship that they are in need of a guide dog.

The man had chemical and biological weapons, that's a given. You guys who act like he didn't because we didn't find warehouses full are a riot, an absolute riot.

He had them, he used them on the Kurds. Do you really think he destroyed them? If so I have some beautiful beach front property in Keokee I want to talk to you about.

He had them, they still exist, probably in Syria

http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/2126/130/ </div></div>

Better believe he had them, and they are currently hidden in Syria. Just ask Israel. They can provide one with pics and any other evidence you need.

**plantsman** · December 18th, 2008, 09:58 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: simple man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There were gunships in the air when Saddam killed some of the Kurds...all we needed was the prez to pull the trigger. Like Clinton and Bin Lauden, it was outside the law at the time . Reason Bush declared "war" on terror" . Cut away some of the delays in taking action on situations. </div></div>

Outside who's law?

**NotSoSilentBob** · December 18th, 2008, 10:11 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have some beautiful beach front property in Keokee I want to talk to you about.
</div></div>

Tell me about this beachfront property.

**imported_ut1** · December 18th, 2008, 10:49 PM

And while at it, let's get off the Bush-Clinton old fart history and back to the original topic of how Obama lied about the gun issue.

**R13** · December 18th, 2008, 11:01 PM

First of all where'd you even get the article? I haven't heard anything about this from any news organization or seen it on any of their sites.....or any crap from the NRA about either. I also couldn't find anything on his site like it says. I highly doubt it exists and highly doubt they would even make time to do it. I am sure that guns are the last thing on his "agenda", too busy appointing his cabinet and trying to find out solutions to real problems that will be in his lap next month.