Why bush isn't threatened to be fired, whereas Clinton was obliged to explain himself about his private relation (even it was bad relation)
2006-09-23 12:17:30 · 19 answers · asked by nehot 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Clinton was a master liar. he knew a lie when he sees one. when warmonger presented case for war, he knew it was bullshit and continue with his blow--job. bush on the other hand is a master idiot, he fell for it. when war goes horribly wrong, he cover the lie with more lies.
Clinton lies..........nobody dies
bush lies........2698 us soldiers .......100000 civilian dies
i will take slick bill anytime
2006-09-23 12:50:14 · answer #1 · answered by AlfRed E nEuMaN 4 preSIDent 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There was much more to the Clinton affair, other than the affair. If you took the time to read some of the posts here today, you would see Clinton made the same statements in 1998 as did many of his cabinet. Not to overlook Kerry and Kennedy. The same as you hear from Bush.. wonder which ones are
lying??????????
As I see it, all of those dems are now saying just the opposite.. the only thing that changed is; Bush won the election ... twice. So, destroy Bush is the mantra of the day.
2006-09-23 19:27:35 · answer #2 · answered by mrcricket1932 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What is worse: Letting Osama Bin-Hiding go, or going after him?
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of
mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President
Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.We want to
seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." -
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
Iraq is a long way from here, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the
risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons
against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18,
1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." -
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution
and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on
suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl
Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998
2006-09-23 19:28:12 · answer #3 · answered by Steven B 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Which is worse?
1) Cigar
2) Travel-gate
3) FBI File-gate
4) IRS Cisneros-gate
5) Pardon-gate
6) Failure to adequately respond to the first attack on the world trade center
P.S. Look up the word 'lie' in the dictionary. Then document what Bush lied about.
Maybe we are at war because Clinton lied to you about #6 above! just maybe.
It may be time for you to start thinking - try it.
2006-09-23 19:26:01 · answer #4 · answered by Doctor J 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush never lied about the war. It is made up by the whack job lefties.
Even during the run-up to the war 90% of Democrats also believed Saddam had WMD's. They based this only The former CIA's lead, who is a DEMOCRAT, and believed those reports.
Stop the Bush lied BS because it is old and absolute nonsense.
2006-09-23 19:29:30 · answer #5 · answered by Bill 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
We all know that Clinton lied, he was a fool for lying on national television. However, with Bush he is saying the intelligence given to him was incorrect. Whether he twisted the intelligence to suit his agenda is something we may never know but unless we find out for sure you can not impeach.
2006-09-23 19:23:21 · answer #6 · answered by remmo16 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hey your buddy John Kerry made a case for war with Iraq. British intelligence at the time said that Saddam was trying to produce weapons of mass distruction. Remeber the reason that we could go to war was because the Congress approved it. (With democrat support). Oh yeah, and Bush did not lie purposely under oath.
2006-09-23 19:20:04 · answer #7 · answered by Adam 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Well no one died because of the cigar and thousands have died because of the war. So I would have t go with the war lie being worse.
2006-09-23 19:23:02 · answer #8 · answered by a4140145 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Playing with a cigar and being oblivious to what is going on outside your house.
2006-09-23 19:23:00 · answer #9 · answered by Boredstiff 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I dont know...did thousands die from Clinton's cigar play?
2006-09-23 19:25:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋