Yes, Clinton was MUCH better than Bush as a president. He implemented many great programs; welfare to work was one of them and did many things for the underprivilidged. The only thing he had a problem with was keeping his pants zipped. Sad. He could've gone down in history as a pretty good president too. Bush, on the other hand, has done everything possible to put this country in the hole. Just look at all of the negative things that have taken place since he's been in power; we have lost rights as land/homeowners, we are in a war, Katrina victims are all but forgotten and the area is still a disaster, many people in his cabinet have bailed out, his public rating is one of the lowest of any president, he is arrogant and never owns up to the garbage he does.
2006-07-29 12:34:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by MadforMAC 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that George Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush are better than Bill Clinton any day of the week. Both Bush's are strong leaders who can face their critics head on. I consider Bill Clinton as a weak leader because he was not a good leader of America put was helpful leader for the World.
2006-07-29 20:02:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Republican triumph of 2004 was less about the electorate's overwhelming love for the Bush agenda than it was about the failure of Kerry and the Democrats to present an enticing and viable alternative and a cohesive vision for the future.
As it stands today, there's little evidence -- outside of the Social Security issue -- that the Democrats have changed all that much since Kerry's defeat in November. They don't appear positioned to take advantage of Bush's dropping poll numbers any more than Republicans are queuing up behind the president as a strong leader of the party. It seems in some ways that both parties are doing their best to lose.
2006-07-29 20:26:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by tough as hell 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No way. Bush is a much better President and Man. Clinton was an idiot dominated by his wife who could not make a decision without her permission. Bush at least talks straight an we know where he stands instead of lying. "I didn't inhale" "No sexual relations with that woman"
2006-07-29 21:56:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Garth B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton caused 9/11.
Bush prevented any more 9/11 like events.
Hmmmm, I wonder which one is better.
2006-07-29 19:34:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton has his problems, not all of his choices were good. . .but compared to Bush!??!?? Bush...not vetoing any bills(including spending bills)in his presidency until stem cell research bill but instead doing "signing statements", when he signs a bill he enters a statement saying which parts of the bill he disagrees with and won't enforce or comply with....sneaky way to have a line item veto-which by the way has been found to be unconstitutional by the supreme court....won't enforce border security...signed an agreement with Mexico that we would consult with them before we take any actions on illegal Mexican immigration...signed an agreement with Mexico and Canada that if we have a disagreement over standards of products being imported to our country from theirs we will go to arbitration conducted by three international lawyers to decide if they have to follow our standards(lets just give up our sovereignty now!?). .lowered the amount of money available for college and increased the interest rate to students and parents borrowing money for college. . .and on...and on...and on....
2006-07-29 20:20:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Rhonda S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I know Clinton has, does and will do more for this country than Bush.
2006-07-29 19:29:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by pkb 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have never met PRESIDENT Bush, so I can't say whether I like him or not. I'm not intellectually challenged or DEFICIENT and actually, I'm not even a Republican.However, I don't think many people could have led our country better the last six years, except maybe me, lol. J/K. I do wish we could raise FDR from the dead though, he would have been awesome right about now! And, oh yeah, he was a Democrat, not that it matters...
So here's why I approve of PRESIDENT Bush as President:
He hasn't defended himself on Hurricane Katrina. Everyone wants to blame him, but really, Louisiana is NOT the only state that was heavily damaged by the hurricane. What about Mississippi? Oh, that's right, their STATE government took care of them...and they asked for federal aid immediately. In New Orleans, it was announced by the mayor, the senator, and the governor that they did not need federal aid the day after the hurricane. Yet after all hell broke loose, the National Guard was sent in...and quickly.
The wire-tapping was a great idea. Too bad the media got ahold of it. Why was it a great idea? Because it allowed the government to listen in on calls placed from known Al Qaida operatives to the US. They were NOT listening in on Joe Schmoe telling his best friend how much p***y he got the other night, or Jane Doe telling her sister how much pot she smoked. So, nice job media, ruining that one.
The so-called "leak", which was in fact the disclosure of DECLASSIFIED information. The CIA agent that was "outed" hadn't been a covert agent for over five years. Yet President Bush isn't defending himself on that either.
He's been accused of "lying" about the WMD's, and yet hasn't defended himself. I really wish people would get over that one, because no matter how many times they're told that the Democrats "lied", and the soldiers over there (and who were there in the last three years) that have found evidence that there HAD been WMD's also "lied"...they won't listen.
I could say much more on how he's NOT a bad president, but I'm not going to waste my time. If some of these people REALLY wanted to know, they would watch FahrenHYPE 9/11 (which disproves much of Michael Moore's lovely
"documentary"), stop watching Loose Change, and maybe take a look at truthorfiction.com, snopes.com, popularmechanics.com (and search for the story about debunking the 9/11 conspiracy myths), or www.strategypage.com (and search for the story on the War in Iraq).
Here's what I like about President Bush:
He's true to his word, especially away from the cameras. I've heard many stories about how he shows his respect for our Armed Forces members, has taken the time to pray with someone just because they asked him, given hugs and comfort to those who have lost loved ones in 9/11 and the War...
Overall, he shows his integrity in private. That's what matters most to me. I couldn't care less about how well he speaks (or doesn't, as we all know is true), because that's his public face.
I like the fact that he illegalized partial-birth abortion within his first few months in office, yet has left abortion alone other than that, even though he feels it's wrong.
I love the fact that he doesn't listen to the war protesters, and instead listens to the soldiers on the ground. Most of them say we CAN'T pull out...and we'd better not. Also, many of them have said that even though they were injured, they would go again and again. I saw that on, if I remember correctly, CBS news, which, as most conservatives know, leans to the left. I've also talked to many soldiers myself, and most of them have told me the same thing.
Most people that have met him say he's not the "bumbling idiot" many think he is. He's actually very poised, respectful, and most of all, he demands respect without saying a word. I've known people that met the President, one of which didn't like him at all until they met him, and voted for him in 2004 based on their impressions.
This is a man that despite the opposition, has offered very little criticism. Sure, he said to the UN, "If you're not with us, you're against us." He was right at the time, and now...they're with us. Even the UN has admitted that we're doing a fine job in Iraq, and that the country's come along infinitely quicker than they initially thought. More countries are volunteering to help us, too.
I would put more reasons, but I figure it's a waste of time. I'm not going to convince anyone that I'm right, and anyone that already has an opinion isn't open to anything else.
I'll just put it this way: I've heard all the reasons that people hate President Bush, and not one of them is valid. Not one of them holds any weight, or contains logic. And believe me when I say that I WANT to hear a real reason to hate the guy, just so I don't have to face the fact that most of my friends are wrong
2006-08-02 02:35:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by chippychip 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
By far. We had respect all over the world and a surplus instead of a deficit. He was brilliant and now we have a moron in charge. Bush has all but ruined this country.
2006-07-29 19:29:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by notyou311 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO! Clinton is sleezy.
I think Bush is in with "big oil" though.
2006-07-29 19:28:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by CoCoKauai 3
·
0⤊
0⤋