A question with Honest Information. THANK YOU.
Clinton' problem was that his whole life was spent just caring about one person: himself.
While in office, he just took care of his own personal desires, and let the country go to hell.
We paid for it with his recession and bin Laden.
2006-09-02 23:17:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Try looking into the Bin Laden family and the ties to the Bush family. Bin Laden is a Saudi royal family, they've been embraced by the Bush family for years. So don't go blaming Clinton for all that's wrong in the world today. Osama is just the "radical" in the family, or at least we hope so.
Media manipulation? Geez! You must watch Faux News.
2006-09-02 23:22:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not True. Osama Bin laden has been active since the early with the knowlege (and in the case of Reagan and Bush Senior encouragement) of the american presidents. these two republicans are mostly to blame but clinton also has a share of the responsibility. Politics is about what is not what you would like to be. If she are honest you will acknowlege the responsibility of all instead of blaming just the person you do not like.
2006-09-02 23:57:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by malcy 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Shhh, you're not supposed to rock the boat. TV told me Bill Clinton as the best president ever so we have to do what TV says.
As TV always remind us Bill Clinton lead the nation throughout a period of economic propserity (but don't you dare dig deeper to see that the actual reason for the period was the mass integration of the windows platformed PC to pretty much every business all over the country and the resulting productivity gains).
You have to do what TV tells you, otherwise you'll be accused of being a BushBot.
Read this message then destroy it before they catch you with it.
2006-09-03 02:45:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Except if you are trying to blame the failures of Bush administration on past leaders, otherwise the Clinton Administration did what it could to pocket and stop Osama bin Laden. There were occassions when Sudan was bombed for habouring Osama.
The political philosophy then was to deal with the problem rather than the symptom. The administration was dealing directly with the political leaders of this countries that were harbouring Osama, which in my opinion frustrated Osama than what the present administration is doing.
This also ensures that he did not have a parmanent base to settle down and carryout his attacks than his present state.
2006-09-02 23:22:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by MAFOKOCHIZHI 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Clinton is responsible to his people and has to accommodate diverse divisive views. Cannot act with the same speed and irresponsibility of Osama. But Osama is accountable to none. Hence in any democracy the response would be slow and considered, no matter who is American President.
Yours is like the American psyche during the Cold War years when Russians launched their first Sputnik, but American's kaputnik plumetted to earth. Wait. You will see any American President decisive and swift, If he enjoys the monolithic support of British citizenry. But with half the British citizenry supporting mullahs in the name of freedom of religion and freedom of speech, you are weaking American's resolve to fight terrorism even further.
2006-09-02 23:31:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by bankman 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Did George Bush or Osama Bin weighted down objective eleventh of September? Bin weighted down. i have generally been counseled it replaced into Bush's fault, pondering I watched video clips of him basically sitting there truly of doing some thing about the airplane ingredient, What ought to human beings have conventional for him to have carried out about the airplane ingredient. positioned on a superman custom and fly to NYC to ward off dropping all and distinctive. George Bush replaced into at a florida training with a room complete of kids even as he heard the information of the planes flying into the area commerce center. What the hell did adult males and women anticipate the guy to do. ought to ought to he have all started screaming and yelling and run out of the room. you need to be certain the seem of challenge on his face even as it replaced into being whispered in his ear what had handed off. Bush did the right ingredient via technique of perfect calm for the sake of the little ones. Liberal Hater evidence proves the administration knew about the attack or replaced into criminally negligent Then instruct it. allow's see this so referred to as data. He ought to've had them shoot the airplane down. How? George Bush received comprehend-how "after the planes had crashed" into the commerce center. no human being had any skills that the planes the position going to crash into the change center until eventually it handed off. even with the reality that they'd understanding, do you think that is largely that ordinary to shoot down a airplane complete of persons over a city.
2016-12-06 05:25:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You know...as much as I like bashing politicians, looking back and placing blame isn't going to change a thing. The real question is about NOW.
Personally I don't think TrashBin should be the big concern today. There is a beady-eyed psycho at the help in Iran. How do we help the Iranian people free themselves of him?
2006-09-02 23:18:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
you blame it on Clinton but personally i blame it on the whole bush family. when George Bush's father was running there was a war and now his son is running and were at war again. i think that if the united states stays out of other countries business we would be fine. why do we care what they do its there country their religion let them run it the way the want and the united states needs to worry about the united states. and further more get the bush family out of presidency
2006-09-03 01:02:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You've convinced me. Clinton knew everything, and could control everything, and chose to allow bin Laden to act.
Makes perfect sense. And of course, Bush has done such a wonderful job that ever since he took office, we've been completely safe, and not a single American has suffered any harm.
No? Then by extension, that means Bush knew nothing, and could control nothing, and had no choice or ability to respond at all.
And just out of curiosity, how is over half a trillion dollars of new debt per year every year since 2001 considered conservative?
2006-09-02 23:16:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
2⤊
5⤋