English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Somehow Clinton's 1 lie is supposed to be equal to Bush's 1000s of lies and deceptions and contradictory statements. Somehow 1 democrat scandal is supposed to be equal to the dozens and dozens and dozens of republican scandals. Somehow they purport to be the "party of morality" yet it doesn't strike them as worse that their party is easily more immoral than our party.

Every day, the republican party says or does something terrible and the response is always, "Remember Clinton's lie!" And that is supposed to wipe the slate clean?

Where is the SENSE OF PROPORTION? Is this the lottery effect that because you know somebody wins, you think you have a shot to actually win the lottery? 1 plane crashes, so you can't ride any more planes? How about if 80% of the planes crashed?

2006-11-17 06:19:26 · 28 answers · asked by thehiddenangle 3 in Politics & Government Politics

Yes, Clinton was concerned about terrorism and Iraq. But Republicans were too busy investigating his Christmas Card list to give a damn. Republicans were against doing anything about terrorism prior to 9/11.

There is no doubt that many Americans, including Clinton, were concerned about WMDs in Iraq. But Bush connected Suddam to 9/11 falsely and enhanced WMD evidence from "we think" to "we know".

Yes, I know all about Rush Limbaugh purported "Clinton Scandals". They threw everything at the wall at him for years and they found ONE scandal: a sex scandal.

And that "Clinton raped Social Security" quote, what a laugh. What do you think Bush is doing today? That's $500B in debt next year including the "raping of social security".

2006-11-17 06:31:21 · update #1

28 answers

Republicans are masters at propaganda

2006-11-17 06:22:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

To start off with let me make two things clear. I'm not a Republican. I don't think any LIE by a politician is acceptable.

That said, what I do remember about Clinton's lie is when he said at a press conference 'I did not have sex with THAT woman'. That was pure lawyerspeak. This country boy knows what he was really saying. 1. He was trying to get by on a technicality that if you and I tried it with our wives the only way we'd be able to satisfy a woman after they got through with us would be orally. 2. Being from Arkansas and learning about WJC long before you did I knew that Bill had sex with several other women other than Hillary after they were married. So yeah Bill lied.

He would have granered my respect if he'd have said, 'Yeah I got a BJ'. So what's your point?'. And they (the Republicans) couldn't have done a thing about it.

Now if a politician tells me 'from the information I have I believe someone is going to try and do this country harm and I'm not going to let it happen'. What ever he does I consider that a good faith act. Even if the information was wrong. Did he lie? Maybe, maybe not. If the 90% of the weathermen say it's going to rain tomorrow afternoon and 10% disagree, I'm carrying an umbrella. If it doesn't rain I'm not going to complain the 90% were wrong.

It's that thing called intent. There's a difference between a lie and an untruth.

Why don't you post something you think is a Republican lie, offer your proof, and see what your responses are.

What's the difference between Barney Frank and Tom Foley? Not very much. One's a Democrat, the other is a Republican. Both have in my opinion questionable moral values.

Both parties have fleas and if you hang with them you will have some fleas too.

2006-11-17 15:09:09 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 1 1

How bout Foley and Haggard tho. And the GOP has known that Foley was like this for years
Clinton balanced the budget, put a 100,000 new cops on the street, 50,000 new teachers in the classroom, reformed welfare, transitioned the military from the cold war to Iraq, instituted the Brady Bill. In 2000 the Millenium plot was foiled that was 12 airliners that were set to crash into buildings. - 9/11 report
Paul Bremmer Bushs civilian govenor of IRAQ
"I cant understand why Clinton is so obsessed with catching Ossama Binladen"
"I dont know where binladen is and I dont really care" Bush 2003
"there is no evidence that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9/11" Bush Feb 2004and 9/11 report
"Iraq has no WMD's and does not have the capability to make WMD's"
"Of the few chemical weapons most were destroyed by miltary strikes in the late 90's"
David Kay Bushs Chief weapons inspector Jan 2004

In 1993 when there was flooding all along the Mississippi, Fema and the federal Govt handled the problem tremendously well exactly opposite to the Katrina Debacle.
In 2001 the ACE was set to redo the Louisiana levy systems to make them stand up to a category 5 BUT!!!!! The funding was cut out of the budget by Bush and the GOP. The Boys at ENRON and WORLDCOM got their taxcuts tho
200 agents and 70 million dollars were spent, over a thousand supenas issued from 98 to 2000 and Foley was having sex with congr Pages. So instead of working on counter terrorism all charges were dropped and we chose??????????????
To investigate a BJ???!!!
And dont even try to deny this, the country was in great shape in 2000.
NOW!
Unafordable health care, 3 dollar a gallon gas, a crushing debt for generations to come Govt programs that didnt work from day 1
(No child left behind, Medicade prescription drugs) 4000 less cops and firemen work in NYC then did on 9/11
The GOP waited 50 years to come to power and what do they have show for it broken promises, failed govt and the complete reversal of Americas fortune and reputation
EVERY PRESIDENT IS UNDER OATH
TO PRESERVE PROTECT AND DEFEND THESE UNITED STATES

2006-11-17 14:21:47 · answer #3 · answered by gdeach 3 · 2 3

Desperation? I've always thought the same as you on this point. It's one of the reasons I ended up voting Democratic in the mid-terms. The tenor of the Republicans runs from hysteria to finger-pointing and back to hysteria again. I think a lot of folks are tired of it, therefore the election results. Right now, Clinton's approval rating is over 70% in this country, and Bush's is around 30%. If that doesn't tell you that most Americans are very aware of the b.s. I don't know what will.

2006-11-17 15:04:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Clinton was brought up for impeachment because he lied to a "Grand Jury" not because he lied to you when he pointed his finger at you.
He was Disbarred and no longer can practice Law because he lied to a "Federal Judge" in Arkansas not because he lied to you when he pointed his finger at you.
So that`s 3 Lies right there.
And there are many more.
He Lied when he told the American public that there were no longer Nuclear Missiles pointed at America. He knew there were at least 300 Chinese missiles pointed at us at that very moment and he helped them do it with the technology he gave them.
He lied about the Government travel Office when he replaced all those Gov. career people that were in it and destroyed their lives to put his Arkansas friends in the Office. They spent all their life savings to clear their names.
Those are 2 more of many.

The Republican Party never said it was the party of morality it was the Left propaganda that said that they said it.
As far as the 1000 lies Bush told, name one. That also is Left propaganda.
For every Republican scandal there is a Democrat scandal of equal or greater value. You just haven`t been told about them, one can easily look them up.

2006-11-17 14:59:56 · answer #5 · answered by Gone Rogue 7 · 0 1

If you think that Clinton only told one lie it's obvious that you need to drink the Kool-Aid,and get on the spaceship. Also I could name just as many democrat scandels as you can name republican ones. It's not which political party they are affiliated with it's the fact that they are polititions. Do some research,and maybe some day you can break free from the cult you're involved with

2006-11-17 14:25:45 · answer #6 · answered by Carl The green's keeper 3 · 3 1

Are you talking about that Andrew Jackson Cherokee thing???

When he killed all the Indians so the New York investors could have the Smokey Mountain Gold.

Yeah that's a big one. But it was before the polar shift when the Plutocrats were the Blues and the working class was Red.

Go big Red Go

2006-11-17 14:28:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

This is my view on it: Clinton made mistakes. Bush made many more mistakes. To damn near outright pardon Bush and yet hold Clinton responsible for all he's done is sheer lunacy. Wouldn't it make sense that if one should be held responsible, so should the other?

2006-11-17 15:18:15 · answer #8 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 1 1

You are exagerating.

For one thing, Clinton's one little lie happened while the man was under oath testifying in a court of law. The President of the United States intentionally lied under oath. That is a biggie.

Foley and Haggart are getting exactly what they have coming to them aren't they. They are history. The Republicans didn't try to excuse their behavior. As soon as the level of their transgressions were known they were gone.

2006-11-17 14:21:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Billy`s ONE mistake come on. True if you just close your eyes and wish problems away you make fewer mistakes but he made his fair share.

Just because you think some thing in your mind was amistake does not mean it was one.

By the way Rape and Sexual assault are way up there. 7 women still to day Say Billy did that to them. How many more are out there.

2006-11-17 14:48:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I'll make a deal with you. You list the documented, verifiable lies that Bush has told while in office, and I'll list the documented verifiable lies that Clinton told while in office and we'll see who's list is bigger. I'll bet you a Coke that Clinton's list is much longer.

2006-11-17 14:41:51 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers