2006-09-26 13:24:34 · 13 answers · asked by david c 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
i think it's a defense mechanism. it's like they're running around like a chicken with it's head cut off, and they don't know what to do, so they just start spitting out hate.
2006-09-26 13:28:01 · answer #1 · answered by mamabird 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's all they know how to do. They certainly can't explain why we got hit with 9/11 while Bush was reading about pet goats to children. They can't explain why the Taliban is rising again in Afghanistan because they decided to make some more money for Halliburton in Iraq. A prominant women's rights activist, who was doing the CRIME of having schools for GIRLS, was murdered very recently out there by the Taliban. This isn't the first one, either. So much for Bush's "They will greet us as liberators" bullpucky.
Hint: 9/11 happened on Bush's watch when he had intel that something was going to happen. You wanna blame someone? Blame the idiot who can't even say nuclear correctly and would rather read "My Pet Goat" than the intelligence reports. He brags about NOT READING and that he has OTHER PEOPLE do his reading for him.
While I have a problem with Clinton taking advantage of his position of power with women and with his enaction of NAFTA, he was a MUCH better president than Bush. He actually can ACT like he has an ounce of compassion and love. All I see from Bush is a rich, spoiled, arrogant, hateful, holier-than-thou hypocrite. Using power to seduce women is nothing compared to the hundreds of thousands of women and children Bush has had a hand in slaughtering.
Guess that shouldn't come as a surprise. He used to stick firecrackers up the behinds of frogs as a child. You know what kind of people animal abusers grow up to be. Psychopaths.
Look people, Bush's daddy and Reagan armed both Saddam and Osama Bin Laden. Their type of foreign policy, REPUBLICAN foreign policy is what caused 9/11. You won't hear it on the news but you can't prove what I just said wrong. Our country armed BOTH Saddam and BIN LADEN. You know, the guy that orchestrated 9/11.
Wake up people. It's time to vote in November. Let's get these bumbleflocks outta there.
2006-09-26 13:36:44 · answer #2 · answered by Cerulean 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bush is not the greatest, but Clinton is worthy of blame. Just look at how angry he got when:
1. The 9/11 movie was coming out.
2. Wallace was interviewing him.
Reason: Because he didn't like being busted and exposed.
The man is the biggest disgrace in Ameican history, and not matter what faults Bush has, he is elevated to sainthood by reason of comparison.
2006-09-26 13:27:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We have a new traditon in American politics: making the current president and the party that controls congress the whipping boy for the opposition. The GOP did it to slick willie; now the dems are doing it to Dubya. No one with a lick of common sense will ever want to be president again. This automatially disqualifies anyone actively pursuing the office from serious consideration in my humble opinion.
2006-09-26 13:32:53 · answer #4 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You go guy, I agree with you 100%. Bush has screwed up the whole world and poor ole Bill is still getting blamed and he has been gone six years. How much longer can he take the blame for Bushes mistakes?
2006-09-26 13:26:50 · answer #5 · answered by 51ain'tbad 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton's denial of responsibility for not killing Bin Lauden is strangely familiar to his denial of having sex with Monica. Now once again Hillary is being drawn to his defense when she should have the smarts to stay out of the mess. The facts spoke for themselves and the conservatives had nothing to do with it . Wise up.
2006-09-26 13:28:01 · answer #6 · answered by mr conservative 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They both are great failures in some ways, but clinton is married to a witch/
2006-09-26 13:28:33 · answer #7 · answered by Breeze 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah...i have asked similar questions.
Why is it that they refuse to accept the fact that he had an agressive anti-terror campaign...without doing research?
Why is it they refuse to accept the fact that he got the U.S. a net profit of $127 billion...without doing research?
Why is it they refuse to accept the fact that during his terms in office, the standard of living for the middle-class was higher...without doing research?
They only talk about his BJ, because they DON'T KNOW THE FACTS!
http://www.mikehersh.com/Clinton_vs_Terror_Republicans_vs_Clinton.shtml
2006-09-26 13:28:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Then buy Howie math they have 2 years to catch up to Slick Willie!
2006-09-26 13:26:25 · answer #9 · answered by Bawney 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
which year was a failure? I still have not found one. Are you still alive? Sounds like it is a success to me.
2006-09-26 13:26:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋