English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

When I see some of the opinions based on Iraq, and how they are fuelled by Bush hatred, and at the same time, anything that Clinton did is put down by their hatred of him, I got a cool question to post:

Would the hypocrites out there, Leftie and Rightie alike, have any new opinion of the war had it been during the Clinton presidency? Would the "anti-Americans" support it, and would the "sheep" be against it all of a sudden? Also, would the conservatives be as quick to preach impeachment if "Swallow the Leader" had been played with Bush or Bush Senior?

This is going to be fun...

2006-06-11 10:38:48 · 2 answers · asked by The Phenomenal One 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

2 answers

You have a good question. Unfortunately you forget that the entire supporting cast of one president is different from another. Would Clinton's advisers tell him, "Go ahead and attack Afghanistan first, we'll give you a reason for Iraq in a few weeks."? Doubtful. The whole WMD thing was a fabrication within the Bush plan, and it was very important to his execution of war. Clinton was guilty of sexual misconduct, so what? I wouldn't care if Bush were guilty of the same thing, nor would I be surprised. Bush senior.... he was head of the CIA... if he played the swallow game, do you think we would ever find out? He has had the agenda that his C average son has been carrying out. I would say Bush senior and his interests are the ones running the show now. His son's cabinet are all his friends... Cheney, Rumpsfeld, Rice...and the master puppeteer Rove.

2006-06-11 15:05:04 · answer #1 · answered by dracomullet 4 · 0 0

where is the food?

2006-06-11 17:57:20 · answer #2 · answered by embigguns 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers