Bill Clinton's daddy wasn't in the Oval Office as a previous President who wanted to get rid of Saddam, or Sodom, as one former President pronounced it. I guess it's kind of difficult to have your own agenda when you can reminisce about previous failures in the White House, including other family members who were in the Oval Office doing all of those 'prudent' things before you got there. Anything that happens 'between the sheets' is none of anybody's business but Hillary's and Bill's and whoever else was 'between the sheets'.
Our own two-party system plagues us with the growing inability to focus on anything of value, instead choosing to torment the opposing party with slaps to the face.
We need to all focus on the problems, not on the people who can provide the solution.
It does help to have a President who can direct a conversation or speech with a mastery of the English language, or at least elements of a high school diploma. 'Red-necking' your speeches and responses do not appeal to the middle-class, most of which DID graduate from high school and knows bullcrap when they smell it.
2006-09-24 08:39:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Another Guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Kennedy had a whole corus line and kept us out of extinction in the cuban missle crisis. When they bombed the World trade center. Clinton with diplomacy never cost so many lives.
He went after the ones who did it, not every nation in the middle east. He balanced the budget brought down crime and the economy was great for the middle class.
Now lets look at the facts: Bush through deception plungled us into a seemingly unnecessary and endless war with Iraq that is costing billions of dollars and thousands of lives.
Facts: Millions of Americans are without healthcare.
While Bush promises healthcare to any and all Iraq citizens.
Bush and congress are destroying the middle class by giving tax breaks to the very rich. Out-scouring the good paying jobs to foreign countries voting against the minimum wage and making highter education afortable only for the rich.
While forgetting the middle class build our great country with their hard work and taxes and creativity. Under the present system the rich is getting richer and the poor is getting poorer.
Bush and congress has single handle destroyed most of the social programs others established. Such as social security, medicare. What about the Genevia convention, right to privacy and other established laws and principals. All thrown out.
Our public schools system with the voucher system is about to go bank rupt. So only the rich can get an education.
illegal drus are the biggest problem in our society and little if any federal aid is available to fight them. They have spent billions rebuilding Iraq. So far nothing has been done in Louisanna.
I don't care what he does in his private life. That shouldn't have even made the papers and if it had been a Republican than it wouldn't have even been mentioned.
2006-09-23 09:54:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
First off, is this a question or a statement.
"Seriously, Clinton is worse than Bush" It makes you sound like you think that President Clinton is worse than President Bush.
Second, I can understand Iraq, but what about Afghanistan, the Taliban and Al-qaida, and 9/11, what was the U.S supposed to do if you're so smart or you're one of those 9/11 conspiracy theorist nutcases.
You know the majority of the 3k American soldiers think otherwise.
Well, you can do better as Prez. right.
Errr..... 3/4 are clear-thinking and rational Americans.
2006-09-23 10:06:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Lone solider 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
the majority of people don't believe that Clinton is worse than Bush... this shows in the popularity polls that clearly show that, even with Clinton's transgressions, he's still more popular than Bush is or has been (with the exception of post-9-11 when everyone rallied around the president, which was a good thing)...
andy g: EVERYONE ignored them... Republicans in congress during the Clinton admin... Bush in his first 8 months... The elder Bush in his presidency... Reagan, Carter, then dem congresses under Bush and Reagan... EVERYONE...
and no one in the public said "we should really go get them"... NO ONE I EVER HEARD ONCE BEFORE 9-11?
but it's all clinton's fault?
it's everyone's fault for not seeing it...
2006-09-23 09:44:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Clinton was so worried about the BJs that he passed up opportunites to stop terrorist, passed on the opportunity to kill bin laden, so many things he just checked out on. So yeah, Bush is a much better Prez. Chavez is a moron, Almenahjad (or however you spell that Iranians name) is a nutcase, The Kim Jong Il from N. Korea is psychotic......so yeah Bush is a pretty good guy!
2006-09-23 09:48:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Star G 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
I seriously believe that having sex with an employee in your office would get you fired in most companies. Then to do that while other countries are trying to get you to take over control of OBL and you are too concerned with your employee sex problems to do anything to stop terrorism, well that is much worse than doing the job you were elected to do, which is what bush has done.
I want someone who can run a country, not someone slick talking BS artist who is more worried about the latest sex scandal. And yes, it is an embarrasment to have your president on national TV lying about having sex with an employee and trying to parse the meaning of is.
If our President has to lie about sex, we are in serious trouble, because honesty is one thing you need in the WH and if you lie about sex you WILL LIE about anything.
2006-09-24 08:03:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Clinton is a sleaze bag. Before becoming president, he was known as "Slick Willy" back in Arkansas. A title he deserved. He is a low-class human being. The lowest things he does lately, is going to foreign countries and making asinine statements. Don't forget his lying, getting caught, getting disbarred, paying fines.
War is hell. Clintonistas were cowards. They made no effort to curb terrorism when he was in office: a marked dis-service to our country and a dereliction of duty.
Do you want an erudite President to sit in his oval office and lie, convincingly to most liberals, on national television? If you do, you are goofy.
The Islamo-fascist terrorists brought war to us and our country. Fighting Islamo-fascist terrorists is the right thing for Mr. Bush to do. If you have a better idea, get elected President, then do it your way.
Your bellyaching in public serves no purpose, other than to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
How much bellyaching do you do about the carnage on our highways? As many as 41,000 dead and 600,000 injured every year. Even without war, soldiers die in training and in civilian accidents. If you are worried about someone dying, should we disband the military? I don't think so.
2006-09-23 10:04:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
I don't care that Slick Willy got a hummer in the Oval Office. More power to him I said. What I care about is that after he got caught, he lied about it, under oath.
I don't know of too many Presidents that haven't had at least rumored, if not confirmed, pecodilos going on while they were in office. They were just smart enough and honest enough not to get caught and not to lie about it.
2006-09-23 09:53:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by APRock 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
All politicians lie, they are human. The main difference between the lies told by Clinton and Bush is the body count.
2006-09-23 09:53:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by TheNewCreationist 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
I am in total agreement but not only that, how long ago was it that Clinton was in the WH ? Eventually this generation of Republicans will get old and die out.
2006-09-23 09:51:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by planksheer 7
·
1⤊
1⤋