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

6 answers

easy there mate. clinton was far more harmless then georgina witherington bushapia

2006-07-16 00:09:29 · answer #1 · answered by lazrer 3 · 0 0

You are so ignorant to think that anyone gave a rats *** about clinton and his little affair. Everyone knew he was a dog even before he his the white house. What we had heartburn with was the crooked deals, selling of technology to china, rape charges, the list just went on and on. In the mean time, we are being attacked by terrorist all over the freaking world and not a damn thing is being done. That is why we loathe that lazy self centered bastard. We are also is Iraq because Clinton never did a damn thing to stop Saddam. Hell.....he was probably on Saddam's payroll too. So those of you that think this is all about the rich man getting oil, you screw yourselves. Yes, this is about protecting and bringing stabilization to an area that happens to provide most of the oil to the world. Get real and get a clue.

2006-07-16 00:34:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You're right, man. Oilmen started this war, not Saddam who refused UN inspectors entry, and certainly not his violations of the treaty that went into effect at the end of the Gulf War. Nope, it has to be all about the oil.
I couldn't care less about Clinton's affair. What I do care about is his policies of selling national secrets to our enemies, his lukewarm approach to dealing with terrorism, his starting wars we had no business in (Haiti and Bosnia), his economic policies that cost many their jobs, and the high taxes that accompanied his presidency. Also, riding a bubble economy until it popped, yeah, that's a problem. He's a better ex-president than he was as president.

2006-07-16 00:10:18 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0 0

...Jesus Christ...what makes you think you'll get a real answer to your question. As seen from too many of the above, all they'll do is throw back everything Clinton has done and uphold the perfection of Bush, or be smart and not even bring him up. I don't think any Conservative will really ever hold him responsible for his crimes. Now, Clinton wasn't perfect. He couldn't keep his pants up and God knows he should have gotten rid of N. Korea and Osama bin Laden so Bush, in all his perfection and splendor, wouldn't have to deal with it and could focus 100% on the War for Oil. I mean, Clinton doesn't have to do everything, just make sure Bush wouldn't have to deal with this and get wrinkles on his perfect face. But wait, didn't they critisize him FOR doing something? I believe they accused him of trying to start a war just so he could get everyone's minds off of the whole "Swallow the Leader" fiasco. In fact, they made a movie just about that, called "Wag the Dog". But Bush starts a war with Iraq and he is given little to no question. Oddly enough, there is little to no connection between Iraq and 9/11. This is the synopsis:

1) Muslim Extremists attacked 9/11, That sounds like Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. They're religion moreso mirrors that of Egypt. And if I'm correct, Egypt, nor Iraq, are primarily Muslim countries. But Saudi Arabia is.

2) It was said that Osama bin Laden commited 9/11, so why haven't we caught him? I'll tell you why. The Bush Adminstration need a boogeyman to get approval for their War for Oil- oops, War on Terror. If they were serious about protecting America, why are they brushing off attempts from N. Korea to nuke us?

2006-07-16 03:47:33 · answer #4 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 0 0

If Clinton had not wrapped his little thingy with Monicas mouth. Ben Ladin would have been in our Jails and not on the prowl as he now is. Or can you not remember that far back. They tried to give him to us and Clinton Had better things to do.

2006-07-16 00:11:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

ONE BJ REALLY MADE THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE CAPTURE OF BIN LADDEN... YOU ARE SO INTELLIGENT YOU RADIATE IGNORANCE (BET YOU DON'T GET THAT DO YAH)... I AGREE WITH THE PERSON ASKING THE QUESTION, VIETNAM AND ITS OFF SHORE OIL, BOSNIA AND ITS RUSSIAN OIL, IRAQ AND ITS OIL, NEXT BEING IRAN AND ITS OIL... WHY ISN'T ANYONE IN DARFOUR OR SOMALIA? NOTHING THERE TO STEAL THAT'S WHY... DARFOUR IS SUFFERING MORE THAN IN IRAQ UNDER SADAM... SOMALIA IS ON THE BRINK OF CIVIL WAR BUT NOBODY CARES DO THEY...

2006-07-16 00:23:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers