Here is my exact comment you were responding too: "Seems like an obvious pattern to me. I thought Clinton's responses were too weak to discourage Saddam or Al-queida's behavior when he did them and history shows I was correct. Excuse me, maybe I should have used the PC description of measured, or internationally acceptable instead of wuss or near useless."

The title mentioned 8 years of wuss responses.

I did not say he didn't respond. I said his responses were too weak. You accuse me of lying based on what? It's damn obvious the responses were too weak or 911 would not have happened and inspectors would still have been in Iraq when Bush took over. I can understand partisan bickering but that comment is really low and out of line Chris.

What do you think he did that I said he didn't and how exactly do you think Republican's held him back. I recall several calling for stronger response.

Regards,
MArk