Clinton is garbage, both of them.
2007-04-21 14:53:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bawney 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, probably because the bill that Clinton vetoed didn't provide for an exception for the health of the mother -- basically the same bill that Bush signed into law. Bush obviously doesn't care about mothers or women since this type of abortion is ONLY used in the most EXTREME cases and only to save the life of the mother.
No woman has ever walked into a clinic and asked for a partial birth abortion. It's a procedure of last resort and is never used to voluntarily terminate a pregnancy. It's maybe turned to a few dozen times a year at most.
The impact of the law is that both the mother AND the child will probably die now. Prior to the law and the misguided SC decision at least the mother stood a fighting chance. Now the doctors will have to wait until the baby is dead before they can try to help the mother. It won't save "millions of babies" but it will kill a few dozen women. Sick and misguided.
2007-04-19 13:31:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bostonian In MO 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Partial -delivery abortion can infrequently be spoke of as a scientific technique! that's risky! and by no potential in the excellent activity of the mum and the baby. BUSH IS the greater suitable guy! Abortion is genocide! that's racism against the smallest maximum unvoiced contributors of the society. Abortion is homicide for the sake of convienience. decrease than 0.a million% of all abortions are through rape or incest... the rest are convenience! that's an atrocity to us as a human beings and might make ABE LINCOLN resign the presidency if he have been right here!
2016-10-12 23:44:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
STAY FOCUSED! Riddle me this: Why would Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, hire Raul Yzaguirre of La Raza to be her co-campaign chairperson? La Raza is a racist group, pro-Illegal Immigration and anti-American! Congress is about to vote on HR Bill 984, "gagging grassroots groups". The other is House Bill 254 that will resrict even further legitimate Free Speech!
2007-04-19 16:03:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by ShadowCat 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Bostonianinmo is misinformed along with millions of Americans. Partial birth abortion is NEVER used to protect the life or health of the mother. That is like saying the bomb squad stopped halfway though the front door the detonate the bomb to save the structure of the house. If they were concerned about the house, they would take the bomb all the way out and then deal with the bomb. It the life and health of the mother is your concern, you don't STOP the delivery before the head comes out to kill the child. You would fully deliver the child and then deal with whether it could survive.
2007-04-19 14:53:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by STEVEN F 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Why did Clinton veto the same bill? Any baby born from Monica would have had disastrous effects on his presidency.
The best President is Bush.
2007-04-19 13:05:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
You have two questions here. To answer your second, there is no doubt in my mind that Clinton was by far the better President.
2007-04-19 13:04:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by kobacker59 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
i dont think cheerleaders wear jockstraps. clinton is the best president bush cant zip his fly without rice and cheney helping.
2007-04-19 13:08:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Clinton's credo was to destroy America, President bush got elected to try and put it back together.
2007-04-19 13:04:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋
Check out this interesting video:
9/11 cartoon remix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxnbhh2r6...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtl9jdpoe...
2007-04-19 13:30:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋