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

Liberals are supposed to "respect the office of the president." Yet it's different with Clinton, because he commited adultry? Is it because Clinton's not in office - doubt it - I bet conservatives were as vehement in their rants against Clinton while he was in office. Maybe it's another reason - and it starts with the letter "H"

2007-03-09 01:57:43 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

I would hope that people realize that committing adultery is something that has been done by millions of Americans everyday. But how many of us have sent our friends and family to be slaughtered so that we can steal oil for ourselves and a few of our chosen friends ? How many of our former presidents have cost the American people so much in every aspect ? After the murdering b***** leaves office an investigation will all of a sudden be launched and he'll go down in history as another insane lunatic just as Hilter did ! What is sad is that Americans have set back and watched this freak destroy our nation and allow it to become overrun by a bunch of murdering thieves from Mexico. But why should he care ?

2007-03-09 02:41:25 · answer #1 · answered by mikey 3 · 2 1

i'm not sure what you're pertaining to... I even have yet to take heed to a conservative say that Obama replaced into not THEIR president, the way this way of large form of liberals did approximately Bush. i've got not seen any "a million.19.2013 -- Obama's final Day" bumper stickers on any vehicles. Protesters for the time of the inauguration ceremony have been almost nonexistent. i might say the Republicans are maximum honestly taking the intense street, whilst positioned next to the same old Democratic Bush-basher...

2016-10-17 23:01:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It has nothing to do with the adultery. It has to do with the letter in parentheses after his name. If Bush did exactly the same things in office (policy-wise and in his personal life) that Clinton did, Republicans would still be cheering him on. It was Clinton's political party, not his actions, that made Republicans "h"-word him.

2007-03-09 02:02:51 · answer #3 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 1 0

Well, most are idiots who have this idea that the Clintons are power hungry despots.

That statement alone, but esp coming from a Bush supporter is really insane.

The Bush family is the largest power hungry parasite family in the history of the Modern World....Only the Juli of ancient Rome might be on par.

2007-03-09 02:04:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

I truly think that it is only the radicals on each side that are keeping this nation divided. George Washington was afraid of it. I am sure this next election will show how many people are upset about it. A more middle-of-the-road candidate will probably win.

2007-03-09 02:06:56 · answer #5 · answered by RJ 3 · 2 0

Cons are just mad because Clinton was very popular so the adultery is the best they could come up with to attack him. It allows them to ignore Bush's legendary incompetence. They can say "At least he didn't cheat on his wife," while Rome burns around them.

2007-03-09 02:04:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

It goes both ways, Libs bash Cons and vice versa. It's just a convenient way to dumb each other down.

Both sides have valid points, but neither side likes hearing criticism. Most people don't like their faults being questioned.

2007-03-09 02:05:20 · answer #7 · answered by Just A Guy... 5 · 2 0

I don't bash Bill Clinton for committing adultery.

Nor do I blame him!

2007-03-09 02:00:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

What's your definition of "bashing"?

If someone says, "Bill Clinton and Mrs. Bill Clinton are liars", is that considered bashing by you, even if it's demonstrably true?

2007-03-09 02:37:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Republicans think they get appointed by God because sane people would never vote for them.

And you probably know about 'divine right', insult God-appointed people and you are insulting God himself.

It's an insult against God and our democracy.

2007-03-09 02:03:26 · answer #10 · answered by ck4829 7 · 5 0

fedest.com, questions and answers