Wow, you need to re-read history and bone up on your reading comprehension.
America was greatest during the Eisenhower years.
2007-11-07 01:21:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
3⤋
The economy was held up on artificial struts; aka the .com boom. It went bust simply because it wasn't as sound as it looked. You do choose to ignore the Republican dominated congress, curious but I digress.
Whoops I forgot the crime thing, here it goes; your second argument is wrong. Here check out the national crime rates. It spans 1986 to 2005. (7) Crime rates have dropped since the Clinton administration, as least until 2005 I'm not sure if the data for 2006 is compiled yet.
Just how are you making your third argument, that one just seems to subjective to be considered valid, unless you are blaming the US for Chinese refusal to abide by environmental law.
We had allied help in Afghanistan and Iraq, so I'm not sure what your 4th argument is about. After all Clinton used the US military without a declaration of war more than any other president in history since 1950, at least as far as I could count them(1).
Then there is also the little case of Chinese campaign finances. Clinton got donations from a front man used as cover for a Chinese officer in charge of aerospace technology(2). Guess what Clinton sold to the Chinese while in office, aerospace technology(3). There was also white water, attorney general firings(4), a massive number of pardons involving friends and political allies (5), and the whole perjury thing(6),
2007-11-07 04:05:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by 29 characters to work with...... 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I just have to say Kudos to all the great answers here before me. So many great comments about the scum that is Clinton.
I am 37 yrs old, so I don't know about Eisenhower. As a young adolescent I was never prouder of America as during the 2nd Reagan term. He was knocking down walls, hunting terrorists and carrying a big stick. Plus we were all rolling in prosperity. At least around my family.
Stupid question, great answers.
2007-11-07 12:49:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Wine and Window Guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
While I agree with others that the Eisenhower years were among the best in America's history....the Clinton years were very good. Yes the economy was great because of smoke and mirrors and a bust was looming, it was a very sustained economic boom. Crime was down (in large part to the great economy). The environment was not cleaner, however.
The problem with Hillary is that she has an aura of sleeze around her like I've never seen in a politician before. I think the Republicans are holding their aces in their sleeves and you see a lot of filth coming out about her.
People seem to have forgotten Whitewater, which was all Hillary's doing.
They have forgotten the large number of pardons Bill signed for many 'friends' of the couple that were either in federal prisions or on the run.
I personally don't trust 'carpetbaggers', politicians that move to one area to run for office that they never lived in. She did this when she decided to run for Senate in New York even though she never lived in the state. I guess she felt she couldn't get elected in Arkansas.
I don't like how wishy-washy she is. Bill, no matter how you felt about him, stuck to his guns. Hillary switches positions depending on what way the wind is blowing. She doesn't vote her conscience, she votes for what she thinks people want to hear. That means you won't get a politician doing what she thinks is best for the country, but what she thinks is best for her career.
There are many fund-raising problems surrounding Hillary that have come up this presidential campaign that have been unethical. She has had to give money back at least once because they were from illegal contributions (of course she gave them back after she was caught).
Finally there is the situtation in Michigan. Michigan, in an attempt to get more political notice to its struggling economy, decided to move up its Presidential Primary elections to compete with New Hampshire and Iowa. This upset the Democratic party and ALL of the candidates agreed to boycott the states primary. When the day to remove their names for consideration came, each of the candidates fullfilled their promise to remove their name. All except one that is. Take one guess who the Democrat was that 'stole' Michigan from the rest of the candidates, screwing over the state of Michigan as well.
Hillary is a bad choice for President. Personally I would like to see Obama vs. Romney. That will be a nice change of pace voting for who I think is the best candidate instead of voting 'against' someone as I've had to in years past.
2007-11-07 01:47:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Downriver Dave 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
I'm not so sure America's greatest time came during Bill Clinton's presidency. After all, there were terrorist attacks that were largely ignored. However, while I liked President Clinton, that does not extend to Hillary Clinton. He is a charismatic "people" person. She is an angry, power hungry woman whose smile is as fake as a plastic Christmas tree. America under her leadership would be a catastrophe.
2007-11-07 01:28:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by missingora 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
Because the economy was in recession and he was afraid of a blemish on his legacy when we had a clear kill chance on Osama Bin Laden. This is why poll chasers don't make good leaders and every decision isn't made with referendums by the American public. We are a Democratic "Republic" not a Democracy!
This is why we are in Iraq because Bill was afraid of being "unpopular". On the other hand he was a good president that stayed out of the way of a ball that was set in motion by the Regan /Bush Sr. administrations which caused slow long term growth which Bill eventually eroded with higher taxes causing the recession towards the end of his term.
2007-11-07 01:26:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
The economy was based on the dot.com boom, and we all know how real that was! Funny how all these corporate scandals were discovered right after he left office, yet the Liberals blamed George Bush? In 1998 the country was already heading into recession. Where are your facts?
Balanced budget? We had a Republican congress.
How short is your memory? The country wanted CHANGE!!! Just like they do now.
2007-11-07 01:30:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by Stereotypemebecauseyouknow 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Assuming that your premise is accurate, I would answer that Hillary and Bill are two different sides of the coin. Bill was a moderate, fiscally speaking. Hillary's stance on just about everything is anti-free trade and anti-capitalism.
Also, I could be wrong, but don't we have allied help in Iraq and Afghanistan?
2007-11-07 01:23:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
What about White Water, Lewinsky, firing of all Attorneys (sound familiar) and etc. Hillary does not stand firm on what she believes. She grand stands and does not commit herself and then changes her mind. For instance, the illegal immigration issue in New York. She wants to spend, spend, spend. How about allowing $4,000 to each baby born to those who have incomes of $80,000? The child can spend it on education, house, and etc. Who will check the parents that they don't use the money. Health care to everyone. Well, she is hurting middle America. And you know, I don't trust her. She's scary.
2007-11-07 01:51:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Snoot 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
I agree if it comes down to the choose between Hillary and a Republican. I just plan to vote for Congressman Kucinich in the primaries because he is my political twin.
2007-11-10 18:59:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You were asking for trouble when you gave your opinion this time huh? (smile) I will only comment on your question. Hilary and Bill are two different people. Personally, I don't trust her as far as I can see her. While Clinton had personal issues, I always felt he did have a genuine desire to work for the people. His wife is power hungry and will do ANYTHING to get it.
2007-11-07 01:28:18
·
answer #11
·
answered by Bridget W 2
·
3⤊
1⤋