So Slick Willie is afraid of a little TV movie that nobody has seen yet, whats he afraid of? Maybe because he let Bin Laden get away when Sudan offered him, maybe he's afraid that Madeline "half wit" Albright warned Pakistan about the US coming to capture Bin Laden will get out? or is it that he just let terrorism run rampant during the '90's allowing Al-Qaida to bomb the USS Cole, US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya killing over 225 men, women, and children and injuring over 4000? and don't forget the first World Trade Center bombing! Why is BJ Clinton trying to pressure ABC to edit or censure this film? I thought the libs believed in "Free speech" I guess that just applies to a no talent fatass like Michael Moore when he makes a movie packed with lies about Bush. I'd love to hear the libs answer this one and please, come up with something original instead of "It happened on Bush's watch" What is Clinton afraid of??
2006-09-09 13:58:47 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
the damnocrats are scared of the truth so much that they would violate free speech
2006-09-09 14:14:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
you talk a lot about a movie you haven't seen... and some people have seen it, but you know what's funny, almost all the ones that were there, say that the movie is all lies? odd? maybe they all don't remember what happened? maybe they are all trying to "hide the truth"? Maybe it's just lies...
and I'm getting REALLY SICK of Republicans crying about Clinton's failures after the attacks while he was in office, and then NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT BUSH'S BLATANT FAILURES AFTER 9-11? You cry we didn't get bin Laden before and then you DO NOTHING TO GET HIM NOW AND JUST JUDGE CLINTON!
I guess Clinton was suppose to get Osama after 4,000 injuries and 200 deaths, but Bush shouldn't after 3,000 DEATHS?
WHY ARE REPUBLICANS AFRAID TO GET BIN LADEN? Every time I ask that question Republicans say "Bin laden's not that important" and the bash Clinton for not getting him... it's time to stop being two-faced children about the war on terror Republicans...
and you have about as much facts that Sudan offered him bin Laden as we do that Bush said the constitution is a "GD piece of paper"... it's all second hand rumor...
2006-09-09 21:13:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, all that about terrorist attacks is true. So, why then was the Bush Administration not paying any attention to terrorism before 9/11 and how come it's fine with you that Bush has not captured Bin Laden in FIVE YEARS. We caught the people responsible for WTC 1993 and they are ALL IN JAIL serving multiple live sentences. If Clinton is responsible for Cole etc. you must apply the same standards to Bush and hold him accountable for 9/11 --Bush is all the more culpable do to the very facts you state.
Clinton has a right to challenge errors of fact -- and ask for any to be corrected (them of course there is an aspect of him trying to protect his legacy)
I be more impressed if you could prove that what Clinton says are errors of fact aren't (errors of fact).
2006-09-09 21:15:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hey, he tried to rewrite the definition of having sex, so why not history. You got to figure history is not important as important as sex. 50 years from now, no one will really care, it will be 2 pages in a history book. But people will still have sex.
He want to put his imprint on the world.
I agree with you. I am so tired of everyone blaming Bush for the WTC center, including he orchestrated it, but no one remembers he did happen the first time when Billy Boy was president. Maybe he actually planned both of the attacks. Figure if he planned it and he can convince the world that Bush did it, maybe Hilary will get elected and he can disgrace the white house again.
Bet no one thought of that scenario.
2006-09-09 21:08:17 · answer #4 · answered by starting over 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Yes, the smartest thing he could have done is ignore this and allow it to be regarded as fiction. By protesting it and organizing the Dems. to quash the program, he's only going to make people watch it. You won't hear about it on FOX because it sends people to another station. I haven't watched TV (took it out) since January to read books but I'm watching that tomorrow night. It will be interesting to see what the results of it airing will be...if ABC doesn't cave in or repeatedly label it as fiction before each segment. It's actually amazing that they even allowed this to be made. So, what WERE the documents Sandy Berger attempted to steal from the National Archives? Hmmmmm....
2006-09-09 21:07:10 · answer #5 · answered by stklotto 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Your logic is flawed, like many typical conservatives, to jump from criticizing the movie to slander to censure (I think you meant censor) to assumptions, to lies to claiming Bill is afraid.
I think you are afraid... just the way they want you to be.
It is a movie, it is inaccurate, he made a comment about the inaccuracies. Big deal.
Clinton should be criticized for some of his real errors, bombing the Sudan and passing NAFTA, you won't (nor will your kind) because it is lock step in line with the Bush Doctrine you love.
Because you still don't get the basic fact that these politicians of the two-headed business class party don't care how many of the Young Republicans, angry talk show listeners (frustrated about their jobs, impotent to help themselves) care about whatsoever.
They are happy you preoccupy yourself with such nonsense, you took the bait.
Whatever your political beliefs are, I wouldn't want you in my trench pal, you have flawed logic and are unstable.
2006-09-09 21:11:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
He's afraid of ruining Hillary' chance of running and WINNING!!He's still a fool and the American people won't be fooled again...
2006-09-09 21:20:33 · answer #7 · answered by peaches 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's a dramatization, you mental midget.
The real question you SHOULD be asking is WHY are they making a movie without talking to, or getting info from the REAL people that were there?
It's not like this happened 100 yrs ago, and all the people are dead, so you have to make stuff up.
This happened 5 years ago. Many of those people are still around.
2006-09-09 21:04:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
What the f*ck is wrong with you hypocritical Republicans? Bill Clinton was and still is a great man leave the man ALONE!! Why are you so intent on slandering him? He can't be president again , but his wife can run for the White House, maybe that's what you cowards are afraid of! Get a damn hobby or something and get off of Clintons d*ck!! B*tches!
2006-09-09 21:07:47 · answer #9 · answered by KK 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
Hey deuce, I see you're in a sunny mood today!
2006-09-10 03:03:52 · answer #10 · answered by keepitsafe2think 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋