I DON'T WANT THE COKE ADDICTED AWOL CHIMP LOOKING THROUGH MY MAIL ANYMORE.
2007-01-06 16:39:51 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The answers to this question are scaring the bejesus out of me. Clinton didn't "fight the terrorists"? And Dubya is?? Where? How? Isn't his family friends' black sheep son still running around loose somewhere? And isn't it true that we're not even looking for him? (But we sure found Saddam in HIS hide-y hole----Of which, I am glad! Don't mistake my intent here.)
Oh! And "Clinton was a Communist"? The writer probably doesn't even know what the communist philosophy consists of. Not only that, but who's afraid of communists now? (Paranoid, time-warped, 50s throw-backs, that's who.)
And just because I "don't have anything to hide" (in terms of terrorist leanings), does not mean I want to give up the freedom to have private mail remain private!!!!!
You kooks scare me. I might be living next door to you. And that frightens me more than just about anything!
2007-01-06 16:59:09 · answer #1 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 5⤊ 6⤋
No he had his chance to fight terrorism and he blew it. Besides there are rules that state he cannot serve again and most Americans know that.
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, accepting Bin Laden when offered by the Sudan in 1996 for example, an estimated 6,000 people in New York and Washington, D.C. that are now injured or dead would be alive today.
2007-01-07 09:57:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Only a Constitutional amendment can allow Clinton, or any other President who has served two terms, to run for President again.
2007-01-07 00:42:12 · answer #3 · answered by amg503 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah we need Clinton (either one) like you need another hole in your head. You like to blame everything on Bush, including a hurricane, what would have happened if Clinton was still in office when 9/11 occurred? What would he have done? Most clear thinking people know, he could not have handled it in any way, shape or form. Like the USS Cole it would have gone unavenged. Bush makes his share of mistakes, obviously, but he is doing a much better job than Clinton could even dream of doing.
2007-01-07 01:06:48 · answer #4 · answered by Cinner 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Yes, lets get Clinton back so he can get a b.j. in the Oval office from an unsuspecting 19 year old intern (Who was fat and ugly by the way) Clinton was a do nothing! Is that why you libs want him back. He cut military spending in half and gutted out military. Yea, thanks for nothing Bill, You loser!
2007-01-07 01:27:07 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes bring back Clinton, so we can have more Government Cover Ups, maybe we can let Berger into the National Archive again. Then he can devastate our military again, create more social programs that will wreak havoc on our economy. The record DOW, so much for that.
2007-01-07 00:57:37 · answer #6 · answered by Jon M 4 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Woah! Look at all those thumbs down! The Republicans must be out tonight! (Oh yeah, its Saturday)
To your question: The only Clinton we can have now is Hilary, Clinton has served 2 full terms and in the US that is as much as anyone can have.
P.S. Ben Franklin said,"Those that are willing to give up their liberty for security deserve neither."
P.S.S. Bush didn't give anyone life. (how ridiculous to insinuate that, and liberals are being called crazy?)
2007-01-07 00:55:06 · answer #7 · answered by Jamie R 4 · 3⤊ 5⤋
Yes bring back Bill he was the man
2007-01-07 01:29:49 · answer #8 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your ABSOLUTELY NUTS! No, No We Don't, and No! He is not interested anymore as Monica Lewinski has pursued other ventures in life rather than a old, ghostly-looking, worn out dude that was and still is a do-nothing like Jimmy Carter. I hope all your mail gets seriuosly looked at. PEACE!!!
2007-01-07 01:04:22 · answer #9 · answered by David H 4 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Nope, Bill is off the table once and for all but you can always vote for his co president in 2008 if you like. The odds favor her running if not winning. Since I consider Bill Clinton to be one of the more forgettable presidents in American history, not really so much bad as just there, please forgive me if I don't join you in your wish.
2007-01-07 01:04:12 · answer #10 · answered by idiot.truther 1 · 5⤊ 4⤋