2007-10-07 11:17:45 · 13 answers · asked by . 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
well, first thing you need to remember is that it wasn't Clinton's definition of sex, it was the Congress' definition that sex was- INTERCOURSE, not a head job, or a p*ssy-licking.
As far as Bush goes, I'm thinking that he's, never in his entire life used a dictionary for anything other than snorting his coke.
2007-10-07 11:23:26 · answer #1 · answered by graciouswolfe 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Is George W. Bush's definition of success as President as accurate a Bill Clinton's?
2007-10-07 18:27:30 · answer #2 · answered by LastGnerve 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Clinton's definition of sexual relations was like a lowlife frightened highschool boy's definition. "I didn't technically have sex with her, honey." After all the crap Bush has taken through his presidency, I say he fears very little.
They're two very different people. Bill's wife is even frightened by a television station. :o)
2007-10-07 18:24:16 · answer #3 · answered by pgb 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Of course it all depends on what your definition of "is" is. Right? If "is" means was or has been, well perhaps but maybe not. If your definition of "is" means will be or is now, perhaps, but maybe so. It all depends.
2007-10-07 18:21:54 · answer #4 · answered by Wayne G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. My definition of toture must vary widely from your definition of torture.
2007-10-07 18:24:50 · answer #5 · answered by vegaswoman 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Depends on the vitiated view of the courts.
2007-10-07 18:25:11 · answer #6 · answered by Professor Sheed 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That depends. On what your definition of 'is' is.
2007-10-07 18:21:18 · answer #7 · answered by eldude 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on what the meaning of "as" is.
2007-10-07 18:22:42 · answer #8 · answered by commandercody70 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ha, ha! Nice you have a sense of humor!
2007-10-07 18:25:40 · answer #9 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
ask craig
2007-10-07 18:28:57 · answer #10 · answered by joyce s 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋