If Bill Clinton can be impeached and put on trial, then can't George Bush as well; or did I miss the lesson about an extra marital affair being more criminal and dangerous than murder? I always thought an unstable insane mind is worse than an overly amourous one.
2006-11-13 01:43:46 · 23 answers · asked by Hailstone Mary 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
It depends who does who but, yes, it is a bigger crime
Anybody who has fun is a criminal...you should know that
2006-11-13 01:46:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
c'mon bill clinton was one of the best presidents that this country has had in a long time. I think bush is doing a terrible job and he is messing this country up just like his father did. Well I guess it is right what they say about the apple not falling too far from the tree huh? I think that was the least we had to worry about was clinton fooling around on his wife. Do you think he was the only president to do so ? Check your history alot of them did it ,just did not get caught. Yes an unstable mind is far worse than amourous one . i ll take amourous over unstable any day. good luck and god bless and happy thanksgiving.
2006-11-13 01:59:36 · answer #2 · answered by Kate T. 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You could be right. But, cheating is only bad if you get found out. Murder is only bad in some mines if you don't have a good reason for it. Besides Bush is just doing just like his dad did. Just more had to show up the old man you know.
2006-11-13 01:51:57 · answer #3 · answered by ranchforman57 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ha ha! Boy, are you going to get a backlash here...
Have you never been out with your missus and been caught glancing at another woman? Of course it's worse! In fact, Mrs. Bush has probably told him she'd rather George started world war three than have him getting sucked off by the secretary. And as he's not that bright, he probably took the old ball and chain at her word...
2006-11-13 01:49:09 · answer #4 · answered by lickintonight 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It wasn't the affair that got Bill in trouble, it was LYING UNDER OATH.
I can not think of a SINGLE issue that is worse that an ADMITTED liar as leader of the USA.
You can say what you want about Bush "misleading" people. Congress has all the same intel that Bush had and they voted YES to invade Iraq.
2006-11-13 03:14:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I totally agree, Hailstone. Surely impeachment cannot be very far away. Perhaps that's why he is delaying the decision to withdraw from Iraq - because he knows that the government will support him whilst troops are still in the dangerzone as unanimity is everything when at 'war'. However, as soon as those troops start coming home, I reckon he will be impeached before he can say his own name.
It does seem to be double standards, though.
2006-11-13 01:47:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bill Clinton was not impeached for cheating on his wife with a young girl. He was impeached for committing a serious crime, perjury. Most people end of in jail for such an offense. You may disagree with the policies of this administration, most people do, but he has committed no crime.
2006-11-13 01:56:05 · answer #7 · answered by Bill 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Up front you may desire to think of the respond on your question obvious. of direction not! Killing dissimilar human beings is on no account going to be extra valuable than mendacity approximately sexual misconduct. all of us be attentive to that (i wish!). yet you're perplexing movements with purpose. Now I disapprove thoroughly of the invasion of Iraq, for an entire variety of motives yet I do a minimum of understand many of the Bush / Blair reasoning. on the different hand, Clinton can not declare any greater motives for his affair - and, for the correct element for which the attempt to question him became into made, for mendacity approximately it. Daft i be attentive to, yet finally in our western societies it is the element that impacts your question. additionally and with admire, please could our fellow contributor stop attempting to declare God with the aid of fact the only guard of the yankee united states (and, by making use of inference, merely people who supported the conflict?). And oh confident, to my different chum, i will not be attentive to the respond on your question (till it is the Judiciary, Congress and the White residing house) yet then i'm from the U. S. why could I? It does not recommend i will't have valid and for sure concept out motives for opposing the invasion...
2016-10-17 05:32:16 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The truth us any US president would have done the same. Afghanistan had to be done in response to their belligerence after 911. Saddam was trying to fool the world that he still had WMDs, and it worked. Maybe that dweeb Gore would have done a better salesman job when it came to Iraq, but we would be there today regardless. It was the move to make on the world's chess board.
2006-11-13 01:54:32 · answer #9 · answered by hankthecowdog 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are both horrible, however, Bill Clinton did not put us in danger or kill a bunch of our young men and women. The issue he has was between he and his wife, and it appears she got over their issue. Our country is a little backwards at times. God bless
2006-11-13 01:47:15 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, i agree. It is insane what people in our country of idiots will do. Besides, wasn't Saddam found guilty of invading a small country? Sounds familiar George. Anyways, if you would happen to find my myspace page, i have a countdown on it as to when bush gets out of office. I cannot wait!
2006-11-13 01:46:25 · answer #11 · answered by Jon C 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋