MaggieMae
Reality bits
- Apr 3, 2009
- 24,043
- 1,635
Sadly, becuase it is about Obama, you are not interested in finding out whether or not such a thing has validity.
I am not saying "such is fact"....but I AM saying..."we should see what is true about it"
Afterall...it is quite interesting that Obama has not mentioned his name once...yet he mentioned Mubaraks name quite often during the same type of siutuation.
Does that not raise your eyebrow?
No.
Funy thing...
Many on the left are angry that more was not done to investigate Bush as it pertained to his decisions...as he was making them....and you showed anger that everything was not vetted properly...and angry at the subsequent results of such poor oversight....
And now?
You are more than willing to possibly get burnt again.
You are alllowing your partisanship to cloud your judgement....or...it was nothing but faux outrage over Bush's decision based on your partisnaship.
Me? I was pissed back then with how no one raised an eyebrow about Bush...and I am pissed that no one learned their lesson and allowing it to happen again with Obama.
What are you talking about? Which decisions made by Bush? Mubarak was an ally for more than 30 years; Bush supported his regime; Obama supported his regime. Egypt was the glue that kept peace in the immediate region--at least for a while. Were we supposed to just storm his palace once the protesters turned against him without thinking through 35 years of support? Libya has remained in the background ever since the deal was cut during the Bush administration that it would dismantle it's own WMD, and no one has been screaming for any "investigation" (although it was a tad curious that once again, it meant Halliburton got some more business).