Dismissal of US attorneys. Clinton dismissed several times the paltry 8. Carter did it at the behest of one under investigation. No problem there.
Information gathering under Clinton.
Google carnivore (i'd post the link but the liberal yahoo answer Nazis would report me).
Stopping ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Herzegovina was OK when Billy boy took action.
Think people, think!
Weather you agree or disagree with this admin, there IS a double standard. To think otherwise is unfathomable.
2007-03-20 11:50:58 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Fortunately, the negative and angry answers don't represent the majority, so you can relax. Those that rant and rave about Bush probably weren't around for Carter, or Clinton, or Nixon for that matter, they really don't have a good perspective on politics today.
Not knowing about you, just on the surface you seem to be rational and that's necessary regarding politics today. When you have politicians that knowingly collect the money so they can run, then, end up collecting money forever to feed their ego so they can continue to run. They are not working for the people. They have the people fooled. And, the uneducated fools are the ones that spew the conspiracy and liar rhetoric...They can't be stopped, hopefully they will grow up! But, they are not the majority.
Not a Republican or democrat, I'm a pre-Parot independent. Hate the republicans for the way they treated Clinton, and am mad a the democrats for the way they treat Bush...in the end it all politics and money.
We can move from this realm in the long term by voting our the wall flowers and dinosaurs out, no matter what party.
2007-03-20 12:11:27 · answer #1 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Currently, we are living in the Bush administration... Clinton is now in the history. If the Justice Department acted unethically then this should have been investigated while Clinton was president. I guess that it was not... too bad; it still does NOT excuse the current administration. We live in a democracy, not a kingdom or a dictatorship. Just because one president of another party "got away with something" does not just wipe out the other president's infractions.
By the way, the issue is not exactly the dismassal of attorneys... the issue is whether the attorneys dismissed were dismissed for investigating Republicans AND then given poor reviews to justify their firings. The other issue is that the Attorney General's department appeared to mislead Congress on these dismissals. Attorneys can be dismissed for any reason... but if the reasons given for the dismassals were unfounded then there is going to be a problem. I am baffled as to why the Attorney General's office used incompetency (or lack of effectiveness) as the reason for firing... also, I am baffled as to why they tried to mislead a Congressional investigation. This is not a scandal on the par of Watergate but we should hold the Attorney General to the highest standard.
2007-03-20 12:13:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Weather [sic] you agree or disagree with this admin, there IS a double standard. To think otherwise is unfathomable."
Apparently, you're not thinking very hard. Aside from the factual errors and non-sequiturs in your argument, I think it's very funny to see Bush supporters use the excuse of, "Well, some other president did it, so there."
We're not talking about history. We're talking about the present. If Bush does something illegal, stupid, immoral, or deceitful that another president also did once upon a time, that doesn't make it any more right. That just means that they were both wrong to do it. It's a grade schooler's tactic to argue by shifting the attention to what someone else did when Bush is the person on trial here.
2007-03-20 11:58:21 · answer #3 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It's not a double standard if I disagreed with Clinton, too. You insist that I think, yet you automatically assume that because I strongly disapprove of Pres. Bush, I must have automatically approved of Pres Clinton. It's not an either / or situation. I am perfectly capable of disliking both of them.
Maybe YOU need to stop justifying everything Bush does by comparing him to past presidents. If he's a bad president, he's a bad president. The fact that Clinton or Carter were bad presidents don't make Bush less bad.
2007-03-20 11:57:02 · answer #4 · answered by yossarius 4 · 6⤊ 0⤋
how many times have these same questions been asked... thoughtfull answers given...
and COMPLETELY IGNORED by Republicans time and time again...
when will you guys start thinking and VASTLY oversimplfying everything and remembering things in your favor...
the simple fact is... Clinton went to stop the genocide... Bush went to find WMD... these were both their stated main goals... there is no denying this... and it's a huge difference
and many presidents fire attorneys at the beginning of their terms like Clinton did... but why did Bush fire his now? that is the issue here...
this is only a double standard to those who care more about calling names than the facts... that much is more than clear to most people... as is evident by Bush's approval rating...
paint it all however you want... but we are thinking... that's the problem... it all doesn't add up for Bush...
2007-03-20 12:18:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, in 25 years, 5 US Attorneys have been dismissed midterm. 5 in 25 years. Bush just dismissed 8 of the US Attorneys, he appointed himself! More than anyone else in 25 years. Of course it's in this administrations's interest to encourage you to be mad at Democrats-so you don't see what these guys have been up to. Do you notice he just made a deal with Mexico? You're repeating stuff you hear.
2007-03-20 11:58:01 · answer #6 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I totally agree. But I think the reason they're making it such a big deal is because he made that one big mistake. Now every little thing is put against him. But I also sort of disagree with you. Just becuase someone commits a crime and gets away with it doesnt make it OK for everyone else to get away with it too. But I think you already know this and I'm glad you're making this point and that you're not afraid to let your opinion out.
2007-03-20 11:56:54 · answer #7 · answered by kadmarco 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Some years back the satlelight picked up 8 mobile launchers not long after INSANES son killed 5,000 KURDS with poison gas,5 were captured,1 was stripped, now alquida is back to useing poison again. Iraq's are sending letters from usa, inciting our officials which in turn incite the people, this order comes from alquida in Afganistan. bush is RIGHT, otherwise alquida would be here in the free world. =Nazi's in USA are dying from a vile they illegally stole and opened along with their partner a communist leader.= this is for the person explaining this question.
2007-03-20 12:12:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
They have short and convenient memories. Clinton fired ALL the US attorneys, then appointed his own,and then fired 33 of those! Double standard? Nah! And what is Breaking the law when you fire some one that is appointed and serves at the pleasure of the President? Stupid statement!
2007-03-20 11:58:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
its what he does in response to whats happening. he made an assumptions that there were nuclear weapons to start a war. he's done alot of messed up stuff. you're right that some people take it too far and other presidents have also started wars, but out of all those silly presidents, bush is just plain out a stupid idiot.
2007-03-20 11:55:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋