Does Clinton's past behavior as president have anything to do with Bush's pattern of behavior as the current president? The faults of one do not exonerate the faults of the other. Then they are both wrong, just in different ways. One lied about sex and the other lied about war.
2007-07-09 21:37:51 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Probally because they wonder why the people are critizing Bush for doing something, when they didn't critize Clinton for doing the exact same thing.
An example being:
They say iraq is an illegal war, when Bush had congressional approval.
But they then get thier back up, when its mentioned that Clinton attacked/invaded:
Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, kosavo, haiti, Sudan
all without either Congressional or Un approval.
One broke the law (BC) and one didn't (GB)
2007-07-09 22:14:12 · answer #1 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Could it be because the Cons are sick and tired of the double standard that has been applied to President Bush?
I mean look at it, every time the Dems go wild about something that they think Bush is doing that might be "illegal" they tend to forget the Clinton already did the same thing.....need examples?
The Libby thing, how many crooks did Clinton pardon the last few hours he was President?
The firing of the Federal Prosecutors, how many did Clinton fire?
The claim of "Bush lies to get us in Iraq", come on, do your homework, Clinton was saying the same thing about Iraq long before Bush was around the White House.
2007-07-10 01:33:22 · answer #2 · answered by jonn449 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush's only defense for the atrocities he's committing is to rehash the Lewinsky episode. Clinton got more accomplished during his administration than Bush ever will and Clinton shouldn't be remembered for an indiscretion that didn't cost any lives.
2007-07-09 22:32:33 · answer #3 · answered by Debra D 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are referring to Clinton's lax policy on terrorism and foreign affairs. Remember, the World Trade Center was attacked once before 9-11 and Clinton did very little to beef up national security in the U.S. Therefore many tough situations were left on Bush's plate which Clinton avoided while he benefited from a flourishing economy in his term.
2007-07-09 22:45:06 · answer #4 · answered by billybutsky 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i in my view well-liked the incontrovertible fact that Clinton replaced into waiting to artwork with the two facets of the aisle. there have been a TON of issues approximately his administration that i did not like or accept as true with - yet I by no skill "HATED" the guy. He replaced into (in spite of each and every little thing), "a guy" and that i'm useful the guy in place of work now has carried out a TON WORSE than what Clinton has carried out. yet to respond to your question: LIBS do not care approximately something that differs from their point of view. that is high-quality for them to spew hatred and destructive comments; despite the fact that, a conservative doing this could gasoline their hearth to declare "Republican Conservatives are RACISTs and BIGGOTs!!" they are the worst.
2016-11-08 21:33:31 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's because they have no where else to go! The impeachment of Bill Clinton was a farce and they don't care because they were nearly successful in attempts to get him out of office for doing something just about every last male Republican would do except those who are still in the closet!
They're hypocrits!
They pretend to be superior morally and that they are on a higher plane close to God!
Actually I think they're on a lower plane and closer to hell since most of what they say is only to benefit big business and they'll disquise the issue by screaming about how they're so righteous while clutching the Bible and wrapping themselves in the American flag. Most are chicken hawks like Cheney/Bush. Cheney with FIVE deferments to avoid going to Viet Nam and George W Bush with 3 months of actual duty in Texas Air National Guard flying in the skies over Texas to prevent invasion of what? MEXICO?
Thanks
2007-07-09 21:55:41 · answer #6 · answered by telwidit 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Very good question. To answer this you have to realize that conservatives are not all aligned with Dubs but when you refer to the NEOCONS I agree. The problem with the far right is that they have a mental degenerating disease that affects their logic and as such, are unable to debate and defend their point of view. As a result, they rely heavily on attacking the other side.
2007-07-09 21:54:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
clinton's wiretapping, gestapo-like use of the DOJ, arbitrary bombing campaigns and inability to catch terrorists who struck the US like bin laden lead pretty well into Bush's pattern of blunders.
and clinton lied about a whooooole lot more than "just sex."
2007-07-09 22:08:29 · answer #8 · answered by kujigafy 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I'm guessing it's because liberals keep saying that Bush is the worst president ever, because of the things he is doing. So conservitaves politely remind you that Clinton did far worse.
2007-07-09 21:56:19 · answer #9 · answered by bigdaddy33 4 · 3⤊ 4⤋
they try to show where democrats made similiar or the same mistakes in the past, problem is the whole point of being liberal is to not make the same mistakes as the past. Therefore, to liberals, this is not a valid argument.
2007-07-09 22:03:18 · answer #10 · answered by PD 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋