I am trying to get into that Liberal mindset, but I just can't.
2007-03-02 01:35:20 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Because THEY were in control. That's their definition of good times. The rest of humanity doesn't count.
2007-03-02 03:04:41 · answer #1 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 16⤊ 1⤋
Perhaps there are Americans with a heart and can put themselves in the shoes of others and know how they would feel if a country decided to invade them and turn their world upside down. Just because it thought something was happening or because they felt threatened by us. Feeling threatened is not justification for going to war. The U.S. is not the keeper of the world, nor do we have the right to place a strong-hold on another country, without the support and concrete proof and not without the approval of the United Nations.
I believe that the United Nations (meaning all nations united) is suppose to have the interest of all nations in it's view. It's with their guidance that major decisions should be made and Bush went against them. His claim to fame will be that he provided new and renewed hatred for the United States of America.
Clinton was about peaceful settlement of differences if possible. Not slay them at the first hint of subversion.
Sure Clinton has his foibles. He is human, after all. But I'd rather it be a personal (private) issue then an issue that truly affects all of us.
2007-03-02 02:03:15 · answer #2 · answered by T esira 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
all the assaults you reported were no longer on the size of 9/11, and the Oklahoma city bombing become performed via a white American, no longer an Islamic Revolutionary Organization 17 November. for the period of Clinton's presidency, the authorities did not video demonstrate this is voters like Bush did so that they couldn't have time-honored the guy would blow up the progression.
2016-11-27 00:02:54 · answer #3 · answered by rasavong 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, generally speaking, compared to Bush, any presidency that didn't kill 3100 US soldiers, wound 23600, kill between 50000 and 100000 enemy "combatants" (because no one can agree on the actual number), kill 133 British soldiers, and another 134 from the other coalition forces in a war that less than half the country supported at it's onset (I'm counting Afghanistan and Iraq as two separate wars) was a success. Better "stagnation" -and I don't think we stagnated- than an unnecessary body count.
2007-03-02 01:45:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
well, because it cost a lot less than the stagnation and quagmire under the bush regimes, in both money, lives, civil liberties, and our health and that of the world environment in general.
2007-03-02 01:53:31 · answer #5 · answered by rand a 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"8 years of stagnation and quagmire under Clinton"?
LOL
It's not hard to see why you're unemployed.
2007-03-02 02:02:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
8 years of stagnation and quagmire?
Where were you in those 8 years?
When Clinton was Commander in Chief, America was a proud nation, and loved by much of the world.
Our economy was booming.
He left the next president a huge surplus, which Bush tore through like a rip in the nation's trousers.
Bush loves giving billionaires welfare in the form of huge tax cuts, year after depressed year.
Were you away, and only rely on what Rush Limbaugh tells you, about those 8 years?
.
2007-03-02 01:44:07 · answer #7 · answered by Brotherhood 7 · 6⤊ 4⤋
Because my 401k went up up up and since Bush has been in it's gone down down down. Only an idiot with no understanding would ask such a question.
2007-03-02 03:53:30 · answer #8 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You have to realize where they are coming from. In thier minds, defeat of America is a success. So stagnation and quagmire under Clinton to them is a good thing.
2007-03-02 01:42:18 · answer #9 · answered by dr_tom_cruise_md 3 · 7⤊ 5⤋
The majority of people in this country fail to realize that the economy cannot turn around in 24 hours. Reagan and Bush Sr. spent a decade building up the economy which was flourishing at the time it was handed ofer to Clinton to flush it. These short sited people associated clinton with prosperity and success only because clinton was in office at the time of his predecessors triumphs. 8 years to to undo all that work, and now W is finally getting things back on track.
2007-03-02 01:45:09 · answer #10 · answered by xooxcable 5 · 1⤊ 6⤋
Steve C,did you not notice we were attacked throughout the 90's? We entered the Bosnian crisis late. They were bombed by NATO for over 3 months (civilians were killed),there was Rwandan genocide,Ok bombing,Somalia mess,etc. Yea,it sure was peaceful. Not!
2007-03-02 01:49:59 · answer #11 · answered by chickyboom 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋