Anyone Else Wish Jimmy Carter & Bill Clinton Would Keep Their Mouths Shut?

Question

Funny how the two worst presidents in history have the gall to bash the Bush administrations handling of terror. Carter, the pathetic lib, never met a fascist he didn't like and Clinton caused 9-11 with his inaction during his pathetic eight years of "leadership" let's hear the stupid answers from the libs, always makes my day!

thank you libs, like I said, you make my day!

LOL, stop libs, my ribs are hurting I'm laughing so hard!!

Answer 1

Amen, brother.

And to go even further, Carter's actions toward the Shah of Iran are why Bin Laden hates us so much. I know those hostages in Iran couldn't wait for him to leave office. Being a Navy man and a nuclear physicist, he did push for more nucleur power in our military though. (Betcha whiney liberals forgot that point, didn't ya?)

Clinton was an all-around failure. The country was in an awful recession when he left office. The White House had to suffer through so many scandals (Whitewater, FBI file-gate, travel-gate, Monica-gate, etc.), the entire office's reputation was dishonored. It carries over to Bush but Clinton does get full credit for that. The most scandalous White House in history. He stopped the US military from bringing in Osama Bin Laden, and was the main target used for training the Al Qeada troops. (Even Hillary admits this.)

Thanks guys - you did a great job!

Answer 2

i might want to to, as Clinton went against God's regulation, and had an affair. also, Jimmy Carter by no ability genuinely ran for president. Jimmy Carter does a large number of missionary artwork, and only feels like someone i might want to work out interior a church. No offense to bill, yet I trust Jimmy over him.

Answer 3

By your own outright lying and false claims you have merely proven that either you are stupid or a puppet.

Carter may not have been a great president but there was no way in the world he could have ever been a friend of fascists. That's what right wing conservatives do. Bush has strong personal and business ties with some of the worse dictators alive today. Bush's granddaddy was a close supporter of Hitler and helped fund his rise to power:

http://rain.prohosting.com/imoffi/njan12004.htm

Clinton could not possibly have caused 9-11 any more than you could have.

If your lies reflect where your conservative party is heading in the next few years then God help America because you'll bring this great nation to it's knees through your dishonesty.

Answer 4

Personally, I wish they would say and do more.

George W. Bush is the worst president in history.

Carter is no friend of fascists -- you clearly know nothing about the man. And we had 8 great years under Clinton. Saying he caused 9/11 over and over doesn't make it true.

With Bush, the men behind the worst attack on American soil are still not captured or killed. We invaded Iraq under false pretenses and no exit strategy. Our international credibility is at an all-time low. Gas prices have skyrocketed while oil companies are making record profits. The Dept. of Homeland Security is a money-sucking joke (while FEMA has been gutted and was criminally incompetent during Hurricane Katrina). Global warming is getting worse, but our current administration pretends it doesn't exist.

This country is a mess.

I have no problem with two of our ACTUALLY INTELLIGENT former presidents speaking up and helping us figure out how to fix things.

Answer 5

If Clinton was sooooo bad with National Security, why did 9/11 happen on W's watch? and now the world hates us so we will have to be even tighter on security untill someone fixes this mess.

CARTER AND CLINTON are much better than Bush.

Answer 6

Oh, I could not agree more! YES! You are right on. No one looks at how pathetic Carter and Clinton were on security, but now they are treated like the ultimate experts.

Answer 7

Maybe you should wonder the same about yourself ? They have opinions like everyone else does and that includes you! And here is some truth for you - A recent informal, unscientific survey of historians conducted at my suggestion by George Mason University’s History News Network found that eight in ten historians responding rate the current presidency an overall failure.The reasons stated by some of the historians for their choice of the presidency that they believe Bush’s to be the worst since are worth repeating. The following are representative examples for each of the presidents named most frequently:

REAGAN: “I think the presidency of George W. Bush has been generally a failure and I consider his presidency so far to have been the most disastrous since that of Ronald Reagan--because of the unconscionable military aggression and spending (especially the Iraq War), the damage done to the welfare of the poor while the corporate rich get richer, and the backwards religious fundamentalism permeating this administration. I strongly disliked and distrusted Reagan and think that George W. is even worse.”

NIXON: “Actually, I think [Bush’s] presidency may exceed the disaster that was Nixon. He has systematically lied to the American public about almost every policy that his administration promotes.” Bush uses “doublespeak” to “dress up policies that condone or aid attacks by polluters and exploiters of the environment . . . with names like the ‘Forest Restoration Act’ (which encourages the cutting down of forests).”

HOOVER: “I would say GW is our worst president since Herbert Hoover. He is moving to bankrupt the federal government on the eve of the retirement of the baby boom generation, and he has brought America’s reputation in the world to its lowest point in the entire history of the United States.”

COOLIDGE: “I think his presidency has been an unmitigated disaster for the environment, for international relations, for health care, and for working Americans. He’s on a par with Coolidge!”

HARDING: “Oil, money and politics again combine in ways not flattering to the integrity of the office. Both men also have a tendency to mangle the English language yet get their points across to ordinary Americans. [Yet] the comparison does Harding something of a disservice.”

McKINLEY: “Bush is perhaps the first president [since McKinley] to be entirely in the ‘hip pocket’ of big business, engage in major external conquest for reasons other than national security, AND be the puppet of his political handler. McKinley had Mark Hanna; Bush has Karl Rove. No wonder McKinley is Rove’s favorite historical president (precedent?).”

GRANT: “He ranks with U.S. Grant as the worst. His oil interests and Cheney’s corporate Haliburton contracts smack of the same corruption found under Grant.”

“While Grant did serve in the army (more than once), Bush went AWOL from the National Guard. That means that Grant is automatically more honest than Bush, since Grant did not send people into places that he himself consciously avoided. . . . Grant did not attempt to invade another country without a declaration of war; Bush thinks that his powers in this respect are unlimited.”

ANDREW JOHNSON: “I consider his presidency so far to have been the most disastrous since that of Andrew Johnson. It has been a sellout of fundamental democratic (and Republican) principles. There are many examples, but the most recent would be his successful efforts to insert provisions in spending bills which directly controvert measures voted down by both houses of Congress.”

BUCHANAN: “Buchanan can be said to have made the Civil War inevitable or to have made the war last longer by his pusillanimity or, possibly, treason.” “Buchanan allowed a war to evolve, but that war addressed a real set of national issues. Mr. Bush started a war . . . for what reason?

Answer 8

Your right. But what pisses me off was how President Clinton got all the credit for th economy when really it was our Congress who constantly had to guide him throughout his choices. President Clinton was just too busy blowing his bimbos. Let's give a hand for our Congress who had to put up with the old fart!

Answer 9

I remember when ideas were exchanged, not shouted down. If you don't like the criticism, ask yourself why. Is it because it is all untrue? Is it because it cuts a little close to home? Superior ideas usually win out, no? Why not let them, instead of trying to silence dissent?

That, my friend, would be fascism- when dissent is disallowed.

Answer 10

LOL

Anyone else remember what it was like under Clinton?

Remember when the president said "the economy is strong"...and that was actually true???

Remember what it was like to have a balanced budget? A budget in surplus for the first time ever?

Remember how the foreign policy was sensible?

Remember how the world didn't hate the US?

Remember how gas wasn't $3 a gallon?