And a real president was elected!
2006-07-21 08:30:12 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Yes. Would have been better if he was taken away in handcuffs though.
2006-07-21 08:33:52 · answer #1 · answered by Lupin IV 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Excuse me while I vomit loud and long!!! You are one sick puppy if you believe that. We traded in an Oxford scholar with a high IQ for one with the IQ of a toad (sorry - I apologize to all toads) and who is barely a functional illiterate. Bill Clinton was one of the most intelligent people to ever be president although he did have his problems when it came to women. Bush is a fool and no woman in her right mind would want him touching her.
During the Clinton years, we had a balanced budget, gas prices were cheap, inflation was kept in check, the stock market was booming and so on.
During the Dummy years we've got a needless war that is costing thousands of lives and creating many widows in this country, not to mention there are children who will never know their fathers. The budget is so out-of-whack it will take God-knows-how-many years to get it balanced again. Inflation is creeping up - been to the store lately? The stock market is down....but that's all right because gas prices have hit record highs and Big Oil is making billions in profits.
About the only similarity between the two is that neither was in the military during the VietNam era. At least Clinton was in school getting an education. The Crawford Clown was hiding in the Air National Guard, thanks to daddy's influence.
Your hero Bush - is without a doubt, the most totally inept and hopeless - not to mention helpless - fool who has ever occupied the White House. He's a stooge and a moron and America will be lucky if it survives his administration.
2006-07-21 15:43:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe the proper way to ask your question is:
Will you be happy when George Bush's reign of terror ends?
And don't you miss the days when we elected a real president like Bill Clinton.
2006-07-21 15:33:29 · answer #3 · answered by Boo R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean back when our Nation had a Surplus?
Before the criminals took over the white house with the Fear card?
when gas was under $2.00 gallon?
Before 2.6 million jobs left our shores?It's getting harder by the day to argue that the invasion of Iraq (whether justified or not) has been good for the Middle East. Sectarian violence is claiming thousands of civilian lives a month in Iraq. The sectarian attacks are simply horrific--and worsening. Iran has increased its influence in the region. The United States now has diminished sway (and is doing nothing, it seems, to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon and Israel). The central flash point of the Middle East has erupted into a war. The revived democracy in Lebanon is being blasted away. And with the United States stuck in Iraq, for the foreseeable future, Bush and his key aides avoid any real discussion of the deteriorating situation there. so you are typical...... Rove's political strategy: embrace the war and attack the critics as gutless cowards.
2006-07-21 15:41:58 · answer #4 · answered by tough as hell 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton's presidency had plenty of problems, but it wasn't a reign of terror. I was happy when it was done though. I was happy with Bush enough to vote for him, but have been disappointed in him on many issues lately.
The bush haters, keep it coming, you're good for a laugh... morons...
2006-07-21 16:00:50 · answer #5 · answered by trc_6111 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton makes a much better U.S. citizen then U.S. President. At least he is going to Africa and suggesting to their government that they get off their royal *** and do something about the poverty and starvation in their own country rather than expecting the rest of the world to bail them out. He is also on great terms with father and son Bush and I think that speaks volumes! I, for one, was not happy with some of his choices he made as President, but I sure didn't go on a website and bash him into the ground.
2006-07-21 16:20:33 · answer #6 · answered by coco 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton's reign of terror??? What would you call Bush's two terms? Reign of Satan?
I'll second Boo R's response!
2006-07-21 15:33:39 · answer #7 · answered by kturner5265 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope, you are an idiot. George W. Bush a real president. I am glad that you think rela president's are people that lie about their military records, get busted drunk drivnig, and choke on pretzels.
That's all without even mentioning his unauthroized illegal war that he is fighting in Iraq now. Why be a part of the UN IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THEIR SUGGESTIONS?
2006-07-21 16:36:19 · answer #8 · answered by AnswerMan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Reign of terror" is an irresponsible way to put it (you sound like the liberals on this site) but..........
When Bush beat Gore it was a day for celebration and history will show how bad Clinton really was for America.
2006-07-21 15:33:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you autistic or something? His reign of terror? Bush = real president? That's laughable.
And I do not say this as some insane liberal, I'm fairly conservative. Bush dissapoints conservatives just as well as everyone else.
2006-07-21 15:33:49 · answer #10 · answered by suliman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was way more happy that Al Gore didn't win, but yes I was happy to see Bill leave.....if only he could have pardoned a few more criminals before he left though.
This is what was wrong with Clinton...looks eerily similar doesn't it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Clinton_administration_controversies
2006-07-21 15:45:13 · answer #11 · answered by jpxc99 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋