Bush is the best president since 1992. Bill Clinton was a failure, and his wife Hillary will be too

The rhetoric you're using is full of circular arguments which make your first argument invalid for many reasons. Again, Bus was the best president since '92 because Clinton down-sized the military and failed to recognize radical Islam as a threat to America, and another reason why Clinton was terrible is because he was too busy trying to cover-up the Monica Lewinsky scandal; how can a president lead our country when he's too busy trying to find a way out of getting in trouble for getting a oral sex, and the whole time one of the key players--Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was orchestrating 9/11; the 9/11 plot began in 1996, and last time I checked that was under Clinton's watch, but again is was in the oval office getting BJ's and taking to his lawyers about how he can get out of impeachment. Clinton downsized our military too, which showed he failed to prepare America for the War on terror. And if you knew your history, the anti-American & western movement in the middle east started way back with the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Christian Crusades hundreds of years ago. So it's not like Bush pissed off the middle east, they were already angry at the West way before that. Bin Laden started to hate after Saudi Arabia chose the U.S. to protect them over Al-Qaeda from Iraq, when Iraq was invading Kuwait. But lots of terrorist attacks on the U.S. happened on Clinton's watch, such as the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, the '98 U.S. Embassy bombings, and the 2000 USS Cole attack, and Clinton unlike Bush failed to confront these terrorist groups aggressively enough, which is why the following year they were able execute 9/11. Ever heard of the Sandy Berger scandal? Obviously not; Berger was Clinton's National Security Advisor who stole classified documents that were related to how the Clinton Administration reacted to intelligence about terrorist groups that threatened America, and Sandy stole them and destroyed them because the Clinton administration knew that since the 9/11 commission was grilling them about how they handled terror threats, and that everyone would find out that the Clinton Administration was not competent enough to confront the terrorist groups, thus allowing 9/11 to happened. And when Bush got into office in 2001 it was too late to catch up with the 9/11 plot, obviously Clinton and his staff was too incompetent to pre-pare the Bush administration with these real treats. And it doesn't take a genius to figure that out, yet you accept the challenge to my topic and write twice as much as I did full of false rhetoric that proves that you don't know what you're talking about, KNOW YOUR FACTS BEFORE YOU COME ON DEBATE.ORG AND TRY TO WIN AN ARGUMENT. Moreover, you prove that you are part of the majority of Americans that are unbelievably dumb and think Bush is the cause for our countries failures. You also desperately try and twist my words around by trying to make it look like I said Iraq and Iran had something to do with 9/11, which is NOT WHAT I SAID; I said we are fighting wars in the middle east and in countries like Iraq because of 9/11 and the War on Terror, and I'll spell-it-out for you since you like to twist words around, or maybe you can't comprehend information well, either way this is what I mean: 9/11 was a wake-up call for the U.S. and the West about the Radical Islamist and terrorist movement in the Middle East that is aimed primarily at the U.S. and Western Europe. The Bush administration did what Clinton failed to do, and confront the War on Terror aggressively to help prevent more 9/11's from happening again, and last time I checked, there hasn't been an attack on U.S. soil since then--which shows that Bush is very competent and doesn't listen to dumb people who don't realize what's at stake. And what is at stake is our country, and that's why I started this debate because I care about the future of our country and I know what's at stake. Our freedom is at stake, and it's taking a war to maintain our freedom, and wars are free--they cost lots of money, so you can't argument that Bush is carelessly spending money, because the money he's spending is helping to keep our country safe, so Americans back home can live their lives in freedom. You made this statement: "When the English pulled troops out of some regions we find the violence goes down. Troops are a lightning rod for violence. Most of the insurgence are simply fighting against a local occupation and don't travel around. The longer we stay the more power the terrorist groups in the region get." Your false rhetoric tries to make it look like only the English are doing something right, so you are obviously one of those Americans who blame America first, well violence has went down--not because the English are doing something we aren't doing, but it's because the TROOP SURGE is working. We started the war in Iraq, so I'm sure the American soldiers are in the more dangerous areas in Iraq, and leave the other countries who are helping out to secure the less dangerous areas. You're old enough to where you shouldn't be trying to desperately twist words around and use false rhetoric to make an argument. You also say "troops are a lightning rod for violence," well that's true, DO YOU KNOW WHY? BECAUSE OUR AGGRESSIVE AND OFFENSIVE STRATEGY IS ATTRACTING THE RADICAL TERRORISTS OVERSEAS, RATHER THAN ON U.S. SOIL. I GUESS YOU'D RATHER HAVE WAR ON U.S. SOIL AND MORE 9/11'S...THAT JUST SHOWS HOW MUCH COMMON SENSE YOU DON'T HAVE. JUST A LITTLE F.Y.I, since the SURGE is working and violence has gone down, Iraqi citizens starting to feel better about U.S. presence in Iraq, and they are also starting to realize that the Islamic Fundamentalists are doing more harm than good. You also said:"the longer we stay the more power the terrorist groups in the region get," HAHAHA, I like your creative use of spin and rhetoric tries to make it look like the terrorists are getting stronger since the war started in 2003, YEAH, THAT'S WHY THERE ARE OVER 200,000 DEAD, INJURED, AND ARRESTED INSURGENTS! NOT ONLY THAT BUT MANY LIKE BIN LADIN ARE HIDING IN THE MOUNTAINS. HOW IS A TERRORIST GROUP STRONGER WHEN THEY ARE IN HIDING? And yes many soldiers and innocent civilians have died, but it's mainly from the TERRORISTS AND THIER ROAD-SIDE BOMBS AND SUICIDE BOMBERS. Last time I checked, hundreds of innocent people die every time a suicide-bomber goes off. Now we can thank the Clinton Administration for not confronting this issue earlier and allowing them to get stronger through-out the 90's when they were in office! You're right Tatarize, there is no comparison between Bush and Clinton, because Clinton was a failure with the United States National Security, and BUSH HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF TAKING CARE OF THE PROBLEM!