I guess if that were true, they really COULD have impeached and removed Clinton from office...why would they concentrate on Monica gate, when he was responsible for all of that?
2006-09-12 04:17:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by hichefheidi 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
It wasnt just the clinton adminstration or the bushs administration, this has been a pot of water building steam and just waiting to blow up...you can point fingers at anyone you want maybe even blame charlie manson for it , it doesnt really change what happened or that many innocent people died not just in the trade center but from many wars through out history, many people have died, many people have theories but facts can always be manipulated with many habds floating around it but realize we are losing the war, not the war on terror but the war on humanity, we fight amongst ourselves with no true care about the losses. Democrats are to busy screaming and fighting and having bratty hissy fights about their "political party foes" but when do they prove they are no different, where are their ideas there true thoughts. Republicans are no better, although they dont scream and jump up and down , they still point fingers, just give it up.....Politicians are nothing anymore, they are only out for self interest , themselves....I dont want a utopia world of flower trending hippies because that is totally unrealistic without adding heavy drugs, but, I would only hope that if people can have faith in a GOD no matter what faith you follow, understand , no GOD would truly tell you unbelievers are heathens, just live and let live, Life is troublesome enough in our own little worlds, jobs, kids, bills, everyday life without worrying about other peoples stupid tantrums...sorry for the rant but it is a bit aggrevaiting especially reading through a lot of these questions...try and have a good day......
2006-09-12 11:33:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by lost&confused 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Man that is a republican comment if I ever heard one. Keep in mind, I don't usually discuss politics because it usually will turn into a heated arguement, but when Clinton was in office this country was NOT in debt. He cut military spending. Yes when he did this alot of bases were closed, and people got put out of work, but "He may have lied, but noone died" I have a son that is a segeant with the U.S. Army. He is currently serving his second term in Iraq. I wish you could talk to him. He will tell you we don't belong there. The first time he was there, he believed his president, that there were weapons of "Mass Destruction" there. Now, he just calls it a police action. But, Congress declared war, and war it is. My son says that we need to be out of that country. The people hate each other and they hate themselves. He hopes that he will be stateside when civil war breaks out there. I feel that the war on terror is focused on the wrong part of that desert. We should have Bin Laden in custody by now. They are the one responsible for 911. The only thing 911 did for our country is take away our civil rights. I want to ask if, if we have so many soldiers protecting us in Iraq, who is here in the States protecting us?? Think about that....
As for your comment about Clinton. I feel that he did a fine job. The economy was much better. Gasoline prices was less than $2.00 a gallon. But, Clinton wasn't a greedy oil man. Bush on the other hand.............well, let his record speak for itself. Now, he is trying to whip the country back into shape before the 2008 election so that he can say look what the republican party did for us.......Don't want to start any debates, so I will keep the rest of my comments to myself, and I definitely don't want the secret service knocking on my door......just because I have an opinion, and I am expressing it......Just one of our civil rights that is being immposed upon. Thanks to 911 and the Bush administration.
2006-09-12 11:39:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by patti_tree 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have a real question, are you seriously mentally retarded? To even ask a question like that, you'd almost have to be, much like George W. Bush himself.
If anything at all , William Jefferson Clinton made great attempts at disrupting Al-Qaida pre-9/11. In 1993 following the first attack on the World Trade Centers, Clinton and Terrosist Czar Richard Clark immediately brought down the capture of Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheik Mohammed in the failed planned Operation Bojinka, where planes were to be blown up in mid-air over the Pacific.
Al-Qaeda is believed to have conducted the bombings in August 1998 of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 200 people and injuring more than 5,000 others. Shortly after this, Clinton issued a global contract on the head of none other than Osama Bin Laden, being how he is NOT a political head, execution can and was authorized, however, internal US sources denied this from ever happening due to personal interests.
Groups like the Carlyle Group clearly voiced protests to this because one of its larger shareholders, the Bin Laden family were attempting to protect their son. Also, Bin Laden gained access to Afgahanistan through the recently coup party, the Taliban.
The Taliban have had negotiations with U.S. and Argentinian petroleum companies. In 1997, a delegation from the Taliban went to Texas ( who was being governed by George Bush at the time) for talks about the construction of a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. The Taliban spent several days in Sugar Land, Texas, at UNOCAL's company headquarters. In spite of the civil war in Afghanistan at the time, both Unocal and Argentinian Bridas were in competition to construct the pipeline . In 1998, the Taliban were in discussion with UNOCAL in the USA and with Bridas in Argentina in an attempt to agree the building of a gas pipeline across Afghanistan. By the way , UNOCAL once hired Harmid Karzai as a consultant during this time, who later becomes head of Afghanistan. Obviously this is a game plan for the US , specifically George Bush to gain a fortune in the mid-east.
So before you attack Clinton, go point the fingers to Bush and his cronies, and stop the bullshit because you and I and the rest of the world know who was at fault and who wasn't , that's just typical conservative white-trash arguments.
2006-09-12 11:40:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by clockwork_mike 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Change the question. What should be done to the USA for causing the war in Iraq. As far as national debt is concerned, I think you are mistaken. In Clinton's time national debt was lower than it has been for decennia.
2006-09-12 11:25:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dick V 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Here's a thought - just off the top of my head mind you....
How about the war in Iraq was actually caused by Iraq? Hmmmmm - go figure!!! When was the last time you heard about utter and complete peace in the Middle East? Like, never?!
2006-09-12 11:22:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by PlainLana 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Stop the blame game. That's how Republicans deal with the fact that they can't come to terms with the real issues the country faces.
Blame on the Democratic adminsitration that hasn't been in office for years!
Evey time a Republican is in the White House there is some war or "conflict" in the world where we have become the insurgents...
2006-09-12 11:19:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Angela 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Maybe he had a part in the Holocaust, the Korean war and the Vietnam war too. Lets string poor old Bill up!
2006-09-12 11:22:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by Chuck P 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Funny
I know you meant it as a joke, but it is typical of the republican propaganda machine to turn everything around and put the blame on the honest and righteous. Kinda like making Kerry look like a trator when in fact he was a war hero.
There are many that choose to beleive the bull that the Reps dish out. I feel sorry for their lack of perspective and reality.
2006-09-12 11:23:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Imaginer 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Bush and Iraq is so messed up blaming Clinton is a symtom of it.
Crazy.
2006-09-12 11:16:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋