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

Instead of running around now with Bill Gates trying to make up for the years that he did nothing in office.

2006-07-21 15:47:52 · 15 answers · asked by rottenkid4560 3 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

15 answers

Yes, he should have stopped the Genocide's.. Of course no president will do that, will they?

sassikatz04- Ok, read this very closely.. THAT WAS NOT BIN LADIN, IT WAS RAMSEY YOUSEF!! HE WAS CAUGHT AND THROWN IN JAIL FOR LIFE!!

PLEASE stop using that...

2006-07-21 15:51:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

bill Clinton should have never been president. jimmy carter should have been the humanitarian, the radical Muslims were emboldened by carter's inability to do any thing about the Iran hostage crisis, the hostages were released, the day Ronald Reagan was sworn in as president, the Shaw of Iran said the U.S. now had a cowboy running the show and were afraid Ron Reagan would nuke em. you should also read the book, dereliction of duty written by buzz Paterson I'm sorry but i have to add to my answer bill did give a few things north Korea nuclear power plants via jimmy carter , china solid rocket booster fuel technology which until then the u.s. was the only country capable of sending a rocket to the other side of the world.gave us the 38% capital gains tax instead of 27%, gave our senior citizens a 4% raise in their s/s checks then a 6%tax increase on their s./s income, gave us the death tax, so our parents can give their life savings and you can pay the 55% tax on their already been taxed hard earned saving , personally i can't wait to get another Clinton in the white house.

2006-07-21 16:04:07 · answer #2 · answered by vallestone 1 · 0 0

He couldn't have been. He had no credentials, and he still does not have any justifiable credentials along those lines. He is still a fraud for those that know him. Despite his southern smile.

It is really difficult to tell what your question is exactly because President Bill Clinton wasn't just our president, exactly. He never qualified for a security clearance via the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), nor did most of his presidential staff either, there again, mostly folks from Arkansas. Most of them would not even file their background forms with the FBI because they knew they couldn't pass the questions the FBI would formulate for them. It was eight years of jest, at the white house, unbecoming as it had never been before, drugs, homosexual activity, deceptive activity, unbecoming conduct by white house staffers. You name it. It was there. Oh well, you might say, it's gone now. Yes it is finally. And out of sight and out of mind? Not just yet because history has yet to fold it into the relevant corners so that it will retain us for future times. As for being a humanitarian, part of that definition is being a philanthropist. How could he have been? He needed a legal fund of money just to fight the court cases against him. Oh well. Oh yes, he does get big dollars now that he is out of office. Why not? Isn't this a great country?

2006-07-21 16:23:22 · answer #3 · answered by jcorcor 3 · 0 0

Clinton did plenty while he was in office, all presidents have, it's their job. The problem is that people like you don't realize what he did therefore he is a bad president. Get a Republican up there that starts wars with countries that have done nothing to them and they are the greatest president ever to you. Clinton did more to improve minorities' education and financial vitality in this country than any president since Lincoln, but I guess that means nothing to you. Clinton did plenty while in office, please don't make statements like that. I can't think of anything "good" Bush has done in office other than responding to 9/11 with the war in Afghanistan.

2006-07-21 15:59:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If he had acted like a President should back in 1993, when Bin Laden first attempted to blow up the Towers, we probably wouldnt be in this position right now. What Im saying is, he was completely worthless!!

2006-07-21 15:51:04 · answer #5 · answered by Katz 6 · 0 0

uh... he sent troops into Somalia and Kosovo?

both regions that were worse off than Iraq?

are you actually a Republican criticizing someone else for humanitarian efforts?

That's like Parris Hilton calling Mother Teresa self-absorbed?

2006-07-21 15:49:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yea somewhere along the line you missed his good deeds. For heaven sakes he is one man, he did more for this country than both BUSHS combined. He has always done good deeds sorry you missed them but I didnt. One key one is the budget..you like your gas prices and the war we now fight for it? Sad but in a way that was a big step for humanity

2006-07-21 15:52:39 · answer #7 · answered by Kay O 3 · 0 0

Everyone has to travel their chosen road to get to the present. Perhaps he feels he is atoning for his lack of leadership and sins while in office. Either that or someone is paying him a lot of money. Who knows......

2006-07-21 15:52:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

He was an outstanding president. I wish he was in office today instead of the mental midget in chief.

2006-07-21 15:50:47 · answer #9 · answered by notyou311 7 · 0 0

Well he was a humanitarian with that intern, Monica! Charity anyway!

2006-07-21 15:53:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers