How do liberals reconcile their "Clinton = good" and "Bush = bad" rhetoric?

Question

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia = good ... Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq = bad.

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia = good ... Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq = bad.

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia = good ... Bush imposes regime change in Iraq = bad

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists = good ... Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator = bad.

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy = good ... Bush bombs terrorist camps = bad.

Clinton commits felonies while in office = good ... Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit = bad.

No mass graves found in Serbia = good ... No WMD found Iraq = bad.

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton = good ... Economy on upswing under Bush = bad.

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden = good ... World Trade Centers fall under Bush = bad.

Clinton says Saddam has nukes = good ... Bush says Saddam has nukes = bad.

The list could go on and on ...

Answer 1

Clinton liberates Kosovar Albanians and deposes evil murderous dictator Slobodan Milosovic, total number of US deaths = 2. Civilian deaths = approx. 250. Within a year, Kosovo is autonomous and Serbia returns to relative peace.

Bush liberate Iraqis and deposes evil murderous dictator Saddam Hussein, total number of US deaths - 2500 and rising.
Three years out, the region has collapsed into Civil War, more than 100,000 civilians have died, and Iranian backed Shiites seem to be taking over. All the while, Iran and North Korea continue to develop nuclear programs that threaten regional and world stability.

Poverty has increased from 30 year lows under Clinton to nearly 14% under Bush.

Clinton said Saddam had WMDs, never said nukes. Only Bush said Nukes, and it was a lie and has been proven to be a lie.

Clinton lies about oral sex. Bush and cronies illegally out a covert CIA operative during a time of war.

And it's $315 Billion on the Iraq War, not $87 Billion. That was just one emergency budget bill.

Clinton = record surplusses. Bush = record deficits.

It's not that difficult to reconcile the truth. You, on the other hand? You need to use actual facts, first of all. And you've got a lot more Kool Aid to drink for you keep this up.

Answer 2

Easiest question I will answer today, for one thing your figures are flawed as is most of your facts. Bush is spending 10 billion a month in Iraq, we have been there over 3 years. that does not add up to 87 billion. Clinton did not run up a record deficit to award the very rich a tax cut. He left with a budget surplus and Bush has squandered that and is deficit spending at a record pace. Bush lied to take us to war with the Iraqi people. Clinton lied that he got a ********. 2500 + of ours dead in Iraq since the start of the war and occupation. 10's of thousands of Iraqi people dead. For what reason. None as I see it. We have no business in Iraq at all.

Answer 3

Well, if I wanted to give a retort I could ask you why cons do the same with bush=good, clinton= bad.
But if you would like a fair and balanced view of libs and cons and the bad they both do, read william blum's'book "Rogue State" The government of the US is rogue.
In my opinion what is bad about Bush is he has no positives regardng either domestic or foreign policy and as a result we are suffereing at home AND abroad. As for Clinton, WACO and having an extramarital affair. (It was a stupid thing to do)
But, I also see what your viewpoint is, and I hope you can look at the reference I gave you and be a bit open-minded.

Answer 4

Clinton leads USA into financial golden era = good

Bush leads USA into the largest financial crisis ever = bad


Clinton policy messes as little as possible with 3rd world countries = good

Bush destroys Afghanistan and Iraq, and disposes of several democratically elected leaders and places new, USA-friendly dictators = bad

[edit]: I'm not a liberal nor a democrat. Both parties are pretty much the same with only minor differences. Fortunately I don't live in no-choice USA.

Answer 5

Its the results that count, isnt it? Clinton led the country to the era of the biggest prosperous boom ever. Bush is leading the country to the biggest financial disaster ever. The country is going to suffer the biggest budget deficit in history - at $600 billion.

Answer 6

blame it on clinton, then lie some, better than thinking, when all else fails, scapegoat ... i don't exactly think he's a saint also lets go other way around, eh? that yugoslavia thing was horrible especially with the nukes that were used by clinton in yugoslavia , and lemme mention nukes In Iraq 2 by the 2 bushes of course they were mini-nukes but I sense our american hypocrisy

Answer 7

I agree. It seems alot of Americans view Clinton as the uncle we all have who drinks and carouses with women, and they all find his antics amusing, but Bush is viewed as the big ol' dumb uncle who mispronounces words and can't tie his own shoelaces without instructions.

Why is no one crying for us to bring the troops home from Bosnia? Remember them? Hint: They were already there when Bush took office.

I never see anyone protesting that.

Answer 8

clinton-got milosevic -pull troops out
bush-got saddam, were still there.
and by the way were spending 250 million a day in iraq, get your numbers right.

bush-2,500 dead american troops
clinton-less then 100

bush-300 trillion dollar deficit
clinton-200 million surplus

clinton-warned bush about bin laden
bush-ignored clinton and played golf

bush-tax cuts for rich
clinton-cuts for middle class

Answer 9

It's very simple, if it's not a Democrat in the office then it's not good. Bush is taking the slack for the crap job Clinton did.

Answer 10

And the full of the Morning to you too lassie! a superb day the following in Cali! the purely element I have researched that i'd attempt a holistic mind-set to is TMJ previous to any surgical operation. purely because I have heard some all of us isn't delighted with the end results of the surgical operation! yet certain from time to time i want to throw my palms up interior the air and bypass holistic because i think which ever dogs on the time is lower than vet care is on too a lot medicine. yet I have not truly had a lot extra adventure with it than that. Oh and that i probably might want to factor out none of my dogs have TMJ (thanks Jesus) I in simple terms researched even as a pal of mines dogs become clinically determined with it. She opted for the surgical operation! not a pleased camper after surgical operation!*;*