Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search
 




Average Rating
0.00

(0 votes)

You must login to vote

Authors Note: I received this as a "FwFwFw" so it's got around... I've cleaned it up a bit and changed what I new to be wrong... This is the bottom line

Now:

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good...?
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...?

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good...?
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad... ?

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good... ?
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad... ?

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists - good... ?
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad... ?

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good.... ?
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad....?

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good... ?
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in flight suit - bad... ?

Clinton says mass graves in Serbia - good... ?
Entire world says WMD in Iraq - bad... ?

Clinton Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good... ?
Bush Recession under Bush - bad...?

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - good... ?
Bush World Trade Centers fall under Bush - Bad... ?

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good... ?
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad... ?

Clinton Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - good...?
Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad... ?

No mass graves found in Serbia - good... ?
No WMD found Iraq - bad... ?

Milosevic not yet convicted - good... ?
Saddam in custody - bad... ?

HMMMMMM ..... it's so confusing! Isn't it? Until you consider the source is the media again...

I'm still perplexed... How about YOU? :-\

------
Daniel Lloyd Kennedy



Comments

The following comments are for "Let's See If I've Got This Straight..."
by daprdan

Apropos of nothing
The 'liberal' media? I hope you don't mean CNN, because there's about as much of a difference between Fox News and CNN as Coke and Diet Coke ... or Republican and Democrat for that matter. Yes, there are differences, but none of them are as major as some would have you believe.

All this rant proves is how similar the two parties have become, and that America (And Canada, and the rest of the world) should adopt a referendum government, in place of representative government, which is as Leo Strauss said; 'a thinly veiled cover for an oligarchy.'

"Entire world says WMD in Iraq - bad... ?"

Wow, somebody did a poll of 6 billion people. Amazing.

Personally, I didn't think there were WMDs at any time, if only for the fact that the scientists who were sent to inspect Iraq refuted this claim. Also, there were mass protests all over the world saying that this was just a war about oil and money. So no, ALL the world didn't think that there were WMDs.


There is one simple reason why Clinton never faced the heat from the media that Bush is facing now: the bombing of Serbia, nor any of the other wars under Clinton's administration, were as drawn out as the Iraqi war has been. And the American casualties were no where near as high (and as we all know, only American lives truly count, right?). Take Viet Nam: early on, it had the full support of America and the media. But as the war dragged on, people began to turn on the war and the administration(s). Same thing is happening here.

But that aside: spin, spin, spin on you crazy star.

Jason

( Posted by: eleutheromaniac [Member] On: August 7, 2004 )

let's see
how about -

"both wrong!"

?

( Posted by: mercer102 [Member] On: August 9, 2004 )

Spin
Some of these things are spun so much that they stop being facts any more.

The best thing about Clinton was that he was actually intelligent and he knew how to please the public. You have to admire him for that.

I notice, however, that the article only mentions what it cares to mention, and not other things that weigh on the subject - such as Guantanemo Bay perhaps? Again, only half the story is told by the media - the half that it wants to tell.

( Posted by: False Dawn [Member] On: August 9, 2004 )





Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.


Username:
Password:
Subject:
Comment:





Login:
Password: