NEOCONS, YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE. ANYTHING CLINTON DID YOU WERE AGAINST.
YOU ALSO BLAME CLINTON FOR ALL OF BUSH'S FAILURES. THAT IS SO CHILD LIKE TO NOT ACCEPT BLAME.
2006-08-15 12:54:46 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
TO AH HA; WHAT DID IRAQ HAVE TO DO WITH THE WTC '93 ATTACK? STILL NOTHING.
2006-08-15 13:00:01 · update #1
TO MAHS89; NEOCONS NEVER SUPPORTED CLINTON. THAT'S A LIE.
2006-08-15 13:01:11 · update #2
clinton didn't have the b*lls to attack anything oh except for monica. Ane look at you calling the kettle black The damnocrats have blamed Bush from hurricanes to al gore's lie of global farting
2006-08-15 12:59:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
this is what happened when Clinton tried to stop genocide in Kosovo (much like they say they are trying to stop in Iraq)... the only difference is, Clinton told us straight up that we were going in for this reason... no WMD issues
Quotes from the right when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia
"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)
"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)
2006-08-15 13:00:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You should read "Hazardous Duty" by Colonel David Hackworth before you brag about Bill Clinton's leadership. You will find it at your public library or buy it on E-bay. Hackworth held 9 Purple Hearts, 10 Silver Stars and the Distinguished Service Medal. He's buried at Arlington National Cemetery. He didn't have much respect for Clinton.
2006-08-15 13:09:15 · answer #3 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton was good at handling a cigar, oh wait that was monica, but other than that he can go into the pile of crooked politicians, oh, wait thats all of them, republican, democrat and liberal, wont bother independants , dont like kicking people when they are down......But keep up your bush bashing, thats really working, if anything it'll do what it accomplished last election and another republican will be pushed into presidency by hate mongers from all over......
2006-08-15 13:01:02 · answer #4 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Clinton attack Iraq in 98 and the republicans supported him. he just didn't finish the job
2006-08-15 12:59:34 · answer #5 · answered by mahs89 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Clinton was a total wuss..he decapitated the military, he hated the military as evidenced by his running to Moscow to protest against Vietnam...the draft dodger hated the military...he goes to Bosnia and kosovo, without...UN sanction...ohhh...what was that???? without UN sanction???? oh my...but the dimwitted followers of president "PRIAPRISM" IGNORED THAT LITTLE THING...and Sudan wanting to hand over osama 3...count 'em...3 times and bubba said No....i better not....thank God for president Bush, having to clean up after president 'priaprism"...thank god president bush fights terror instead of running away from it.....
2006-08-15 13:12:35 · answer #6 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that would depend on what the meaning of the work "is" is...seems to me the master of parsed sentences is hardly a measure of a good president. Why blame bush...why not blame FDR or Ike. of even god forbid...Reagan....
How bout htis...let's ask John kerry how often he changes his turban now that the radical muslims have washington all boxed up...oh wait...thats right he lost...hmmm...
2006-08-15 13:01:18 · answer #7 · answered by ggroess 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton was only interested in interns! Ask Hill!
2006-08-15 12:58:55 · answer #8 · answered by Bawney 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Clinton didn't have the balls to invade. He was to busy trying to create his Legacy with a misguided domestiv agenda, and cozying up to terrorist Yasser Arafat.
When he wasn't taking advantage of young, ugly, plump white house interns, that is!
2006-08-15 12:59:33 · answer #9 · answered by thealligator414 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
NeoCons can't accept blame for anything because they know their entire way of thinking is built on LIES and god forbid you challenge those lies. When you do that, they HAVE to go on the defensive because their entire house of cards would come tumbling down if the truth ever gets applied to them.
2006-08-15 13:00:45 · answer #10 · answered by politicallypuzzeled 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋