Why do Repubs talk about Clinton getting a BJ, when W is out blowing oil execs right now?

Question

At least Clinton was the reciever...

Ahhh, riling up a few Yahoo cons, nothing better. They can sure dish it out, but they cant take.

Answer 1

Their false hysteria exists for 3 reasons:

1-Clinton is a Democrat,the party of the masses rather than the
elitist few aristocrats.
2-George W. Bush's self-inflicted disaster in Iraq is worse than a
grown man's private behavior.
3- It's about sex.Sexual hysteria to conceal reasons 1,and 2.

Clinton was the receiver all right;
And WE THE PEOPLE are the recievers of the enormous bill for Bush's overconfidence in domesticating a part of the world that didnt want us there to begin with.

Answer 2

nicely, Johnny, as quickly as upon a time, long until now, there became this concern called "integrity" interior the presidency. Richard Nixon had to renounce because of fact human beings believed he did no longer have sufficient integrity. nicely, bill Clinton form of took out integrity from its container on the shelf, and he threw it down on the floor, and he stomped on it and smashed it with a golf club. Then he threw it around the room and it fell in the back of the settee and no-you are able to nevertheless get it out back. it rather is why all our flesh pressers are thieves and criminals in the present day. And Bobby, it rather is the certainty.

Answer 3

Because Clinton enjoyed it and Bush didn't. More really, Clinton was really doing it, then killing Bagdad janitors (by bombing Saddam's government offices at night), or sending million-dollar cruise missles to blow up tents in Afghanistan or aspirin factories in Sudan (chemical weapons, mind you), or playing Wag the Dog by bombing Serbians in order to make the Serbian province of Kosovo safe for Albanians--all interestingly timed to moments when news was getting tight about his penal picadillos.

That W is 'in bed' with the oil execs is a figurative expression, distinctly not real. Clinton's plus his worse-than-Nixon cover-ups was definitely real, Monica pulled out the dress to show the spots to prove it. If we thought Nixon was dirty because he covered for some over-zealous friends, how does Clinton get a pass for failings he did all himself?

Bush has his failings, but you seem to be fussing about something else. Did you really have a question in there somehow?

Answer 4

God, I wish this was the case.

This strange ideological view keeps boiling with the "I don't know how to think" crowd.

War for oil, but where is the oil?
Blowing oil execs, but what good is that doing?
Bush diplomatic relations with Saudi is at "its worst" and then when seen smiling and eating falafel together "Bush is in bed with Big oil"

It takes just a little reasoning to conclude that someones point of view is crap.

Answer 5

In answer to your question, the reason Republicans made such a big deal about Clinton's BJ was to distract attention from the real issues, and to try to prevent Clinton from accomplishing his agenda, which was at odds with the Republican program of making the rich richer, and screwing everyone else. They used that issue, and other so-called moral issues, to get back into power so that they can continue to cut taxes for the rich, and cut pay and benefits for everyone else.

Answer 6

You are such an idiot even your insulting questions don't have it right.

If there were any blowing going on the oil execs would be the pitchers, not the catchers, since it's the government that has the power to lower their taxes, give subsidies, etc. Bush would get the under-the-table kickbacks from them as a result of his political help. Bush has no reason to blow them.

Answer 7

Until you are capable of asking an intelligent question, I think you need to go lay down for a nap and a bottle and let the adults talk.

Answer 8

What exactly is he doing for the oil companies?

And for that matter, why would it be bad if Bush was the "giver" rather than the "receiver"? Are you a sexist or a homophobe? A tolerant person wouldn't give a damn who was blowing whom.

Answer 9

This is disrespectful to two men the citizens of the United States elected to the office of president. It is an unfair comment on two men, both of whom have worked hard to protect and better our country. Just because you do not agree with them, does not give you the right to trash them as human beings. Shame on you!

Answer 10

I dont get why they talk about Clinton at all. FYI, he is no longer president just like Bush Sr isn't... ya know.