Why is it republicans use the statement, "Clinton lied." as justification...?

Question

for their own decietful president?

Yes Clinton lied under oath even but... how does that in any way justify the unehtical actions of this administration?

well then cookie monster... its a good thing I havent said that, isnt it. Do you have some type of point though?

Laci- That is the issue, you ASSUME I had no issues with clinton. I did I just dont speak of them anymore as he is no longer relevant.

Answer 1

The mass failure of the Bush administration is so enormous the Republicans do not have anything to debate about except for Clinton's affair. It is true that Clinton's actions did not cause death and destruction. The Republican's use this constantly to appeal to their religious followers. However, the actions by several Republican govt officials recently involved in sex scandals destroy this moral debate.

Answer 2

If you feel that Clinton is no longer relevant, then why even bring him up in this question? I was incredibly upset that he wasn't removed from office. My husband was an officer in the Army (but AF now) and I can tell you that if he had pulled that number, he would have been kicked out. So as the Commander and Chief of the military, he should have had the same punishment as my husband would have.

Bringing up Clinton doesn't justify a thing. You're right. But it's so easy for people to judge Bush when we haven't even walked in his shoes for a split second.

One instance is that no one likes war. However, we don't know what intelligence he saw that caused him to turn down the road that we had to go on. You can argue all you want that it was incorrect intelligence. However, what proof do you have other than what comes from the press? Second, he had to act on what he had at the time. I think that if someone (one Pres Clinton) had followed that advice, we'd still have the World Trade Center standing where it belongs.

No one is perfect. You're not. I'm not. NO ONE IS. So, if you think you can do a better job than Clinton, Reagan, Bush or anyone else for that matter, then run.

I notice from your questions that you're passionate about politics. So, put your money where your mouth is and see if you make things better.

Answer 3

I don't know where or about what, Bush lied. On the subject of WMD's, most members of Congress, (both parties) agreed.
Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and if fact, most if not all the current presidential candidates supported the war in Iraq.

As far as using the statement "Clinton lied", keep in mind he did and it is widely known he did, repeatedly. However, other than a number of vocal partisan democratic supporters, no one has said, or can prove, Bush lied.

In fact, I challenge anyone to prove Bush lied. Relying on faulty or (later proved) wrong intelligence is not lying.

Answer 4

As salaamu 'alaikym, my friend.

Insha'Allah, as Bush cites "executive privilge" and refuses to testify "under oath" they seem to think that he is not lying.

They blame others in past administrations so as to deflect attention for what this administration is and has been doing.

Politics is not longer about honest representation of the peoplel it is about power, getting it and maintaining it. Responsibility, truth and moral ethics have nothing to do with it and have not for a long, long time.

Ma'a salaam

Answer 5

It amazes me that people are stunned in any way when politicians lie. They start lying when they hit the campaign trail and don't stop until they are either out of office or become private citizens who complain that politicians lie. The real justification shouldn't be "clinton lied" but rather "we all lie so get over it".

Answer 6

The loony bin element at the core of the Republican cult have a fear and loathing of sex and just assume that the rest of the world shares their mid evil views. What they are saying is that he committed the ultimate sin, Of course he does more constructive work for his fellow man on any day before lunch than the entire burch of religious freaks will ever do in their whole miserable lives, but that is simply beyond their capacity to understand. They dwell in their own little bottom feeder world and with their heads shoved way up in that dark place where the sun does not shine, they will probably never find their way out.

Answer 7

Truth about the Perjurer in Chief is hard to escape. Yet there has been no ethical violations of either the same magnitude, or in any way provable in court, like they were against Slick Willie, perpetrated by President Bush. So what's your beef ? And the legal proof for your statements ? You have none.

If you did, Mr. Bush would have to face a grand jury. He isn't, nor will he.

Case dismissed !

Answer 8

The difference is Clinton was a proven liar.

Simply calling Bush a liar doesnt make it so. Although it seems alot of people think repeating it over and over makes it true.

Answer 9

Two wrongs seem to make a right. Probably whenever you insult Bush, his supporters (presumably Republicans) consider you a Democrat, and in turn insult your last president. Vice versa, if a Republican insults say, Obama or whoever, then a Democrat will logically insult McCain or whoever, to justify their party's/candidate's actions. Logical defense mechanism.

Answer 10

To detract attention away from their hero, and to shift blame. There is no way that what Clinton lied about, comes remotely close to what Bush lied about. The oath thing is totally irrelevant. *sm*