that her husband comes as part of a package deal, and he is the guy that was impeached for lying under oath and "other things" in the oval office? What's wrong with this picture?
2007-08-30
16:39:10
·
24 answers
·
asked by
en tu cabeza
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
So person, does your answer have anything to do with my question?
2007-08-30
16:56:02 ·
update #1
Bladesmith, I think you missed the point of my question: No I don't think Hillary is any different that Billary. They are a package deal. They made a deal a long time ago. He will probably be a sec. of state or something.
2007-08-30
17:00:03 ·
update #2
Eric, I am very informed about the past and history etc. Notice I didn't say anything about political parties. I just can't understand how we could elect this pair. We went through this already! The clintons put this country through a lot and devided us for months. We have more important matters than this kind of crap. Elect someone who is a decent human being for God's sake.
2007-08-30
17:05:53 ·
update #3
Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002. Mrs. Clinton addresses the Senate on the use-of-force resolution. "The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt," she declares, citing Saddam's record of using chemical weapons, the invasion of Kuwait, and his history of deceiving U.N. weapons inspectors. "As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets," she continues, adding that Saddam "has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members."
Note how she plugs her husband's decision based on the same intelligence that President Bush is alleged to have lied about.
Flash forward to January 27, 2007. On the campaign trail in Iowa, Mrs. Clinton demands that President Bush "extricate our country from this before he leaves office." And she promises that, if elected, she will end the war quickly.
What I find troubling about Mrs. Clinton's record on Iraq is that it tends to follow, rather than lead, public opinion.
2007-08-30 16:45:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
All we're going to get if Hillary is elected is a conservative Democrat who will throw the liberals a bone (universal healthcare) knowing that such a concept has no chance of passing the Congress (even with a slightly Democratic majority).
When are the people of this country going to stop obsessing about the personal weaknesses of politicians and start focusing on just on their policies.
Hillary's husband shrank the size of the federal govt, got welfare reform through the Congress, continued the free trade policies started by the Bush I administration (these are all indisputable facts and anyone who would deny them is an idiot), and governed during what would most would agree was a very prosperous time in our history (oh, that's right -- all of the good economic times were as a result of Reagan/Bush I, right! Is the right now going to blame Clinton for the current housing/mortgage crisis?).
Anymore, I quite frankly DO NOT CAREwho my president does in the Oval Office. The Presidency is not a position of moral or religious leadership. It is about keeping our country economically prosperous and safe. (I have some issues with Bush too, but he has kept us safe since 9-11).
I just evaluate the current occupant of the White House and look at his in-office accomplishments and failures. To ascribe any benefit to his predecessor or successor is just mental masturbation.
I don't think Hillary would be any worse (or rather, different, than her husband).
2007-08-30 23:53:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
I realize that he paid dearly for what he did, and more importantly? I realize that they are not Siamese twins and that she won't require his help in any shape size or form to perform her duties as President. If, as she has claimed, she makes him Ambassador at Large, we will have a highly skilled diplomat who can help restore our badly damaged relationships with our Alllies. Whatever you might think of him, he is highly respected and very much liked around the world. After the experience of the last 6+ years there are millions of us in this country looking back with fondness and longing at the Clinton years. His approval ratings in this country right now are twice what the current President's are. I think after the experience of George Bush and Company that people are starting to put what happened with Clinton in perspective and finding that they can largely forgive him and move on. If you can't then that's your prerogative. But it's already become clear that he is a boon to his wife's campaign and not a detriment.
2007-08-30 23:55:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
George Washington warned us about party allegiances over 200 years ago in his farewell address.
Unfortunately, both sides, right and left, have ignored his warning. Now, due to increased knowledge on propaganda and persuasion techniques America is more polarized than ever before.
I just wish people would vote on the individual instead of a party. I also wish they'd vote for their own self-interests instead of someone elses interests.
All I see when I watch the media is a cival war over two fascist regimes ... the extreme right and the extreme left.
Its just sad that America as a whole is uneducated and uninformed.
2007-08-30 23:45:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by eric 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
I'm not voting for Hillary, but considering what we've had in the White House in the last 6 years, I'd say that if Hillary was elected both of the Clintons would be bringing integrity back into the white house again compared to the Bush administration.
2007-08-30 23:44:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
The left wing thinks George W. Bush has polarized the country?! They haven't seen ANYTHING if Hillary Rotten was elected.
2007-08-30 23:59:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Its possible that our decline in military recruiting can be blamed on the fact that people are afraid of what she would be like as Commander in Chief. Quite a few military members are not going to stay in if she gets in the Oval office.
2007-08-30 23:57:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by smsmith500 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I am not a Hillary supporter and I don't plan on voting for her... but I don't have a problem with Bill Clinton being married to the President... seriously, why would you care? He won't have any more influence than say Nancy Reagan.
2007-08-30 23:50:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by cattledog 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
I don't want to vote for her, but if the democratic party chooses her, I'll vote for her. I think, I understand your point of view, but I think you're jumping to conclusions. Nobody really knows, how things will be for the USA, if Hillary wins. I think we can honestly say though, that the Republicans will have some difficulty in their run for the President's office, because of Senator Craig.
2007-08-30 23:45:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
really Bill Clinton comes as well??
thanks for telling me,i would have made a huge mistake.
PS. whats wrong with this picture?...the fact that your to ******* dumb to relise that people do know that bill is part of the package
2007-08-30 23:58:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋