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

Why is it that the only bad thing you hear about Bill Clinton is that he had a sexual act and then tried to cover it up?? What the heck does that have to do with him as a President?? If you can say you never ever had a sexual act such as he did, then deface the man as much as you like, but to jump on a ban wagon to deface his entire Presidency due to his mistake in judgement and allow a man (Bush) who kills thousands, lies to the the entire american country, has more cover ups then any previous president, steals the presidency 2 times, lines the pockets of big business, lies about his affiliation with the armed services, denies any knowledge of something that passes through his desk, uses a scape goat (Libby) to take the fall for his own doings, uses the excuse of his lies that it's something that he needs to do to protect us from... ignores the UN, and basically the most dishonest man ever to take on the Presidency?? And you go off on a man that had sex during his term?? WOW !!!!

2007-03-13 08:12:07 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

33 answers

I know exactly what you mean....

Life under Clinton:

Longest economic expansion in American history
More than 22 million new jobs
Highest homeownership in American history
Lowest federal income tax burden in 35 years
Lowest unemployment in 30 years
Paid off $360 billion of the national debt
Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus
Lowest government spending in three decades
Raised education standards, increased school choice, and doubled education and training investment
Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
Lowest crime rate in 26 years
Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union
Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html

Life under Bush:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070225/ts_alt_afp/useconomypoverty_070225003515

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009222

2007-03-13 08:18:50 · answer #1 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 5 10

I'm no big fan of either president. However, facts are facts. Bill Clinton lied under oath. It's that simple. Our entire judicial system hinges on the fact that, when people are under oath, they will tell the truth.

As a lawyer, Bill Clinton was very well aware of the definition of perjury and the fact that it was a felony that could be punished by a prison term. He chose to lie under oath anyway...you choose the actions, you choose the consequences of those actions.

2007-03-13 09:00:30 · answer #2 · answered by RMarcin 3 · 0 1

Let me break down your argument, which will be rather easy seeing as though you are a name calling liberal. Bill Clinton passed up a chance to get Bin Laden 4 times during his presidency and that contributed to 9/11. The President of the United States lied to a grand jury about having sexual relations with Monica, that was the crime not the bj. The reason the budget was balanced was because of the republican congress. By saying Bush has killed thousands, shows your true ignorance. I don't believe Bush has killed anyone, the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan kill our troops and civilians. What has Bush lied about? Your weak spined democratic senators voted for authorization of the war and were given the same intelligence as the president. What did he lie about with his armed services, Dan Rather lost his job over that, He has cut taxes which has stimulated massive growth in our economy. Libby was convicted of perjury not outing a CIA agent. The UN is a weak organization that is corrupt and would not stand up to Hussein because of 17 past resolutions, now top that Liberal and I would love to debate you anytime, tech4731@yahoo.com

2007-03-13 08:23:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 4

No, on the instant's Bush-fans are the former day's Clinton-Haters. the individuals who had to deliver down Clinton for no longer with the flexibility to maintain his wee-wee in his pants are the individuals who safeguard the mass-murdering, raping, thieving, mendacity, loathsome, moronic, traitor in place of work on the instant. (I by no skill cherished Clinton, yet wasn't a "Clinton-hater" -- I by no skill hated all people until this lot stole my united states of america.)

2016-10-02 01:36:59 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

You cannot compare the differences in infidelity between any ole' American, and the man in charge of the most powerful government in the world. He made an *** of himself, his wife, his family and America as a whole. I'm pretty sure that even on that one day, hundreds of thousands of people died around the world because of violence, war, neglect or hunger and as the one person in the world most capable of fixing those problems...he had his pants around his ankles.

When you're elected to that office, it's not because the people think you are most deserving of the perks that taking that title offers. You're voted into office to think of yourself last in a long line of 300 million Americans, whether they voted for you or not. How can someone be so dedicated to his presidency and do such a good job if he has time to get a hummer? I'm pretty sure there's always going to be an issue that needs handling as the President.

2007-03-13 08:47:23 · answer #5 · answered by jdm 6 · 2 3

You can start by educating youself a little more than by what you hear on CNN or get in a 10 second sound bite. What is your evidence on all of this? Clinton was on tape lying under oath. Sure Bush may not be the "perfect president" in your eyes. He's NOT in mine either. The president has a lot to deal with. In my opinion there are a lot of elected officials in Washington on both sides of the isle who need to go. There are way to many career politicians who are fat, dumb and happy with the status quo. Do yourself a favor though, quit listening to Democrat and liberal media talking points to get your political info!!!!

2007-03-13 08:28:14 · answer #6 · answered by @#$%^ 5 · 4 3

Unabashed Clinton lovers are ridiculous. Aside from his marital problems and lying under oath there are plenty of reasons to not like him. MOST Americans never voted for the guy. A fact that many Clinton lovers don't even know. He never had a majority of the country vote for him. And to preempt any of the idiots out there who claim he did have a majority go look up the definition of the word majority then look up the election results.

Clinton destroyed the intelligence gathering community in this country by adopting the Torricelli Doctrine. He slashed the military. His version of compromise was shutting down the government if he didn't get his way and blaming it on the Republicans. The fact of the matter is that the accomplishments of the Clinton era were in spite of him not because of him.

2007-03-13 08:26:55 · answer #7 · answered by C B 6 · 5 5

As always, Austingirl/Elcat 's only position on any political issue is a copy/paste from a dem's website. Try to gather and analyze information for yourself otherwise your no use to anyone

2007-03-13 14:28:22 · answer #8 · answered by Shawn S 2 · 0 0

I Personally, liked Bill, and it will take many years , before people realize just how good of a President he really was. and he did not do anything that most of the old guys in, Washington, have not done.........did you see where one of the main Guys,.. to lead the charge for his impeachment, Finally came clean, and confessed to having and extra Marital affair, even back, when he wanted Clinton impeached for it, For the very same thing he was doing at the same time. Now that's what I call a Hypocrite, Amen, to That.

2007-03-13 08:36:20 · answer #9 · answered by ThomasL 6 · 2 4

Sorry to say you are not educated on Clintons political dealings, his foreign policy, his 'mistakes', how he let Al Quida go when we could have ended that fiasco, how he ignored the bombings of U.S. military. He said 'it's the economy stupid' and that is all he cared about and if Newt Gingrich had not brought in the Republican Congress he would have failed at that also. He hated our military and did not want to deal with any issues in which he could not depend on his charisma to build himself up.

Do I hate him, absolutely not....he is just a very flawed human being who I respect for how much he overcame coming from such a dysfunctional family and marrying a dysfunctional woman.

2007-03-13 08:21:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

Another mistake in judgement ......

ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKS RESIGNATIONS FROM PROSECUTORS


* March 24, 1993, Wednesday
By DAVID JOHNSTON, (Special to The New York Times); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 1, 1053 words
DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States Attorneys, leading the Federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton. Jay B. Stephens, the ...

2007-03-13 08:36:19 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

fedest.com, questions and answers