UNDER FALSE PRETENSES?
THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE TALKING ABOUT HIS GLOBAL INITIATIVES THAT HE HAD RAISED 8 BILLION DOLLARS FOR. INSTEAD THE FAUX NEWS REPORTER TRIED TO USE IT AS A SLAM SESSION, AND BILL ATE HIS LUNCH FOR HIM.
2006-09-27 12:52:12 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Was good to watch an articulate man with a brain.
2006-09-27 12:55:58 · answer #1 · answered by beez 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
YES very proud, about time we had someone with backbone. Chrissy Wallass lied just like Rush lied before when he said the same thing on his show. It had been a while since anyone stood up to the bullies at FOX, i read the text but I never watch TV. he really did pull Wallass shorts up in his crack. Now if we can get Rush to debate James Carvelle that would be a hoot.
One thing for sure Clinton is the neocons worst nightmare. He has been made very wealthy by there hatred, he plays them like a violin. There so stupid they don't even know they have been had by the master. Clinton would have never excepted that interview if it did not fit his agenda, he knew they would try to bushwhack him and he was ready. Even bad news is good news when it's free and it shifts the conversation away from the Republican propaganda and to the Democrats and there agenda. Game and match, Clinton again.
BTW, Bill Clinton now gets $2 million per speech, thanks to neocons and there hatred, would you pay $2 million to hear Bush speak?
2006-09-27 13:04:26 · answer #2 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think its ridiculous that in America News Reporters aren't harder on our politicians. The media should be just scrutinizing the government. I think its perfectly fine for the reporter to start asking old Billy boy hard questions. I heard on a talk radio today that Katie Couric was too easy on Condi Rice, I was almost ready for Couric almost asked Condi if she could wash her car. I just got a kick out of that. The reporters should just start asking people especially government employees the hard questions. I mean what the heck is the media good for if it just like a lap dog at times. I don't care if its left or right start asking the hard questions and get to the bottom of the story and I don't care about reporter's political ideology.
2006-09-27 13:05:52 · answer #3 · answered by Jason 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
at the initiating, i'm vote casting for Ron Paul no matter if I even ought to jot down him in on my poll. as far as oil being $one hundred twenty 5 a barrel is going, there's a larger image right here. it really is my conception that environmentalists are the biggest clarification for prime gasoline/oil expenditures. each and anytime we even imagine about drilling for oil, right here comes the litigation, and courtroom situations, from enviromental communities, and shuts it down. EPA regs are so tight that we received't even construct a clean oil refinery in u . s . a . (very last one outfitted contained in the '70's), and meet their criteria. The Greenies favor $5+ gasoline, as that keeps anybody from driving, and 'polluting'. grant, and insist are often the biggest motives for inflated expenditures, and if the provision is regulated then...Dems have blindly lengthy stood in help of environmental lobbyists, and it truly is the only reason i will by no skill help any Democrat EVER. i hit upon it regrettably relaxing that we've environmental regs that forestall us from drilling contained in the Gulf of Mexico, at some historic previous/ water barren area website in our waters close to Cuba. yet it would not end Mexico, or Cuba from doing it only on their area of the line, sticking their straws interior an identical oil we arent 'allowed' to take. So we purchase the oil from them that we (the u . s . a .) must be getting for ourselves. we received't drill there as were protecting the ambience?! i hit upon it suspisiously satirically conveient that there's a barren area section, or some indangered creature each position we've oil to be drilled. i wager different international places do exactly not pollute, and were the only ones, so that they get a loose bypass to take our oil. flow make sure!
2016-11-24 23:20:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bill Clinton was great,, he had every right to defend his presidency, which the fiscal conservatives have been slamming for 14 years now,,, along with his character,,,
but Americans will defend him because he admitted to being a human being with dignity, and morality,, not to mention he was capable of balancing the budget,,,
2006-09-27 13:00:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It is time for the Democratic members of our burdened country stand up and tell the Proto-Fascists Republicans where to stick their propaganda. Thank you Bill!
2006-09-27 13:10:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yeah! mean ole' Fox! They asked him a hard question. But he showed them! He called them conservative! Yeah! Go Bill!
2006-09-27 13:01:21 · answer #7 · answered by Ha! Invisible! 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope.....
The last time he was wagging his finger, the world knew who Monica Lewinsky was.
Bill melted down....He was exposed for the faux president he truly was....Have courage to face the truth.... 3 Cheers for Fox News
2006-09-27 12:55:26 · answer #8 · answered by e_guanajuato 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I salute ***President William Jefferson Clinton***. Your peace and prosperity sir were astounding and yes he stuck it up faux's behind.
2006-09-27 12:57:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I can only imagine what George would do if they asked him off the cuff questions.
D-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-h-h-h-h-h-h-h has anybody seen "My Pet Goat?" I need some intellectual stimulation. How bout' those Cowboys?
2006-09-27 12:56:06 · answer #10 · answered by Thomas S 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋