Maybe. I kinda doubt it.

I remeber Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Regan, Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43. (I actually *remeber* Eisenhower but I wasn't hooked into politics at that age. )
No, but the liberals have.
"Gathering a consensus"....delightful. Maybe he'd try to "conduct a dialog" or "raise conciousness", too. Clearly not CinC material...and to my shame I was willing to overlook that. Never again.

I seem to recall Gore was on the payroll when the script-writing was going on in the 90's.

Of Carter, Clinton, Gore and Kerry, I wouldn't want to have seen any of that lot at the helm on 9/11. For all his flaws Kennedy might have been able to handle it... he did OK with nukes in Cuba. But it's a highly subjunctive stretch... 2001 is not 1963.


And to get back on topic:

The Sub2K is a hell of a lot of fun in an inexpensive gun package. Make sure that you get the grip config that matches your carry piece and you are good to go. I had one fairly soon after they hit the market and caused quite a stir at the range I took it to ... nobody had seen one before. KelTec's customer service is awesome, btw.

No, the script was written by the PNAC.

looks like it's easier to meander off-topic than answer my point. You threw out a spurious remark, I replied in kind, quelle horreur!

You didn't make one.

I meant the episode where you deceide to let Bin Laden go because he's vacationing with friends. I don't see any reason to have expected anything different from Gore.

Yeah, well...my P-11 takes S&W mags. I'm seriously thinking about the Glock 17 version though because I wouldn't mind at all a pistol-caliber carbine with 33-round magazines.

That's why I have the Glock 22 Mag grip ... I have the stick for the .40, and I like the better one-shot stop percentages.

We got an "I like Ike" bumper sticker in the mail so I stuck it on the family car. What I didn't know was Pop was refused endorsement by the Republicans for reelection two nights before, so he was pissed. He ran as an independent and won handily. That's a pretty broad brush. Yes "gathering a consensus", isn't that what the Congress is for......advice and consent? Not of The New American Century. Because they wouldn't have driven the bad guys out of Afghanistan, back to Pakistan....temporarily?
Because they wouldn't have gotten us into this Iraq fiasco?
Because they wouldn't have pissed off half the world?
Because they wouldn't have swiss cheesed the Constitution?
Because they wouldn't have secured our borders?

At least Bill doing Monica was consentual, W doing me, is not.
Nixon and Bush piss me off the most, because I voted for both (once) and I feel personally betrayed. :mad:

I meant the bit where you decide to let Bin Laden go because you really wanted to attack Saddam all along.

Hardly comparable...Clinton/Gone didn't even take the shot when it was stone easy. Bush at least tried when it was much harder. His mistake was trying to appease the gang who was criticizing him for "acting unilaterally" and "being a cowboy" by letting the locals take Bin Laden on in the mountains.

Not the same thing at all as a clean shot in open desert in 1999.

Read II.2 as to what "Advice and Consent" applies to.

No kidding...what office?

To what are you referring?

C'mon, Clinton was playing Battleship. Try to figure out where he is and shoot that coordinate......long shot at best.

Bush blew it, when the whole world understood Afghanistan was expected, by sending in a small force to take Kabul, instead of doing it right and committing enough resources to seal the borders.
Probably, not to ofend the Pakis
He did the same thing in Iraq.:(