Why do so many people answer "Bush" questions with comments about Clinton?

Question

If you want to learn about Clinton, ask Clinton questions. Clinton has nothing to do with Bush.
There's a lot about Clinton that I don't like, but I don't care about him - he's out of office. I didn't even vote for him, ok?

Answer 1

because many things that happen to a country does not start or stop when a president takes office. there are things that president Clinton decided to do or not to do that effects todays culture. there are some things happening today that can be traced back to Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. also some people ask such hateful questions about Preident Bush that they want to remind them of the mistakes of the previous adminstration. no matter who wins in 2008 they will be directly compared to president Bush.

Answer 2

Because, a lot of people see now that their own society has basically backfired on them.

Clinton was impeached because of a sexual act he was basically "caught" doing. Everyone knows the story. But yet Clinton is still doing a lot and if he isn't doing things he has the intent to help America. Bush, on the other hand, was voted president and he pretty much . . plays golf and declares war. Now, I'm not saying I like or dislike Bush, it's pretty complicated, but that's the difference. How can you say that Clinton has nothing to do with Bush? The way I'm seeing it, they are both presidents that seem to be polar opposites in the peoples' eyes. Clinton seemed more human while Bush seems to weave around things. Like I said, who knows who's really a better person, you can't judge. But those are the appearances and that's why people bring the two up together.

When principals at schools get fired and another one gets hired, kids will talk about how much they liked or disliked the old principal. That's how it is when it comes to authority, people want to voice the fact that they dislike an action and to back themselves up, they use another authority figure to state their case.

You're pretty much saying that whatever people ask about is what they have to get. What's wrong with broadening the scope?

Answer 3

I think it probably has to do with the fact that so many conservatives were so rabidly anti Clinton during his administration that supporters of Clinton see the opportunity to engage in dialogue of an "I told you so" nature. There is a large population also that support the way things were going under Clinton's leadership and they feel as if President Bush has allowed all of that to go for naught. You are wrong on one count, Clinton has everything to do with Bush. If Clinton had stepped up and campaigned for Gore, even with the ripoff in Florida, Bush would probably have lost. That being said, anyone who wants to be a Bush supporter should stand up and be a Bush supporter, just as those who want to support Gore, or Clinton, or Reagan, or Carter, or Nixon or anyone else they feel strongly towards. It's probably frustrating to you, but I predict that if the next president has a different party affiliation than the current one, you will see a lot of people answering questions about the new president by comparing them to Bush.

Answer 4

The reason I answer by bringing up Clinton has mainly to do with the fact so many think he was great. I simply think he was lucky to have .com come alone during his watch.

I haven't seen many presidents or ones offered up for the office with a vision for this country. The only 2 I can think of in my life time were JFK & Reagan. JFK had a vision to create the technology that defines the 1st world by going to the moon. Reagan's vision was to end the cold war by bankrupting the USSR.

Would Bush been even remembered if it wasn't for 9/11?

Answer 5

I think it is a subliminal way of saying "I have God on my side" since Clinton was literally caught with his pants down.

People can be very self-hating.

It's funny how the same republicans that bash Clinton for the whole Lewinski scandal don't ultimately applaud him for creating "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and contributing to a number of other anti-gay laws.

Many people just talk about Democrats and Republicans as though they all think alike... it's alot trickier than that though.

For instance, it was Bush that recently made a law that stopped that evil Christian preacher (Rev. Phelps) from protesting the funerals of gay people who were murdered.

You have to look at how the people ACTUALLY vote on things before you can assume that they are on your side.

Answer 6

Lot's of reasons really. Sometimes as a "Nyaah! Nyaah!" thing as if to say, "Hey, your superhero sucked too!" Sometimes to prove a point, like Clinton had intelligence that supported an al-quaeda Iraq connection and just slapped at it.

It's not easy to admit that your leader is human and makes mistakes. Clinton supporters are quick to say, "Hey, it was just a BJ. He never killed anyone and he's not a big oil warmonger!" And regardless of what anyone says, whether or not other presidents did it too is just as stupid of an excuse as saying that Republicans bring up Clinton because they can't defend their position. I don't see how anyone Republican or Democrat can even have a position when the question is "Bush is stupid moron big oil warmonger baby killer New World Order Dick Cheney Israeli puppet?" Yeah, that's intellectually stimulating and worthy of debate.

If I thought that Democrats, Liberals, or whatever you call your brand of hate, really wanted to RESOLVE issues, not debate them, then it might be worthwhile to actually do it. But I guess I was naive to believe that this forum or any other on the Internet would lend itself to anything other than intellectual laziness and childish name calling, rumor spreading, and other forms of intellectual fraud. So, I'll keep on trying to at least give everyone the Libertarian point of view, or at least my version of it. God Save the United States of America, those people have it now.

Answer 7

To be frank, it's difficult to answer your question without mentioning Clinton's name. I don't mention the man unless asked about him. I admire President Bush, I think he's is doing a good job, and being ma-lined by a media that is out of control, and liberals who are still angry over the last two elections. As for Clinton, he was not my favorite person, but not for reasons you would guess. I didn't necessarily agree with his politics, but I think he was a consummate politician. My problem with him is that he and he alone squandered his presidency and his legacy. It was a shame to see a person that gifted waste his talent. If you don't want to hear about him I would suggest you not phrase your question the way you did. Thanks.

Answer 8

It is an effort to draw you and the read off the subject. What it does confirm is that both parties are bad and only serve their own interest and not those of "We the people." For every negative one could point out on Bush, a corresponding negative could be pointed out on clinton, and you could do that with every president in recent history.

Answer 9

If they are talking about Bush in a negative way then they have to say how Bush is so much better. I f they like Bush they have to say how Bush was a bad president... Personally Clinton was a so much better president!

Answer 10

NO!!!,Its because the next President will be called Bush Clinton...