A. George Bush is a complete & total idiot. He has made an embarrassment out of our country. However, its not totally & completely his fault that there is a war, but he does have some power to pull out our troops.
B. bill clinton getting a bj from his wife has absolutely nothing to do with how he ran the oval office. I am sick of people saying that. During his presidency the unemployment rate was at its lowest.
My biggest Beef with Bush is that he doesn't give a crap about the price of oil/gas. They know that we are being screwed but don't care because they've got friends in low places if you know what I mean & are making a killing off of oil right now.
2007-11-21 01:36:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sugar Magnolia 6
·
1⤊
8⤋
Why ? For the same reason the Clinton Administration took credit for an already growing economy: the President gets the credit / blame for everything.
I think President Clinton got slightly screwed (pardon the pun), because he was planning on hitting bin Laden again, but was warned off by his staff because of political considerations with his impending impeachment over the Lewinski Scandal.
JUST FYI to everyone who says Pres. Bush gave us "false information" regarding WMD... that was the SAME information that Pres. Clinton had been operating with... from CLINTON's CIA Director George Tenet (1996-2004):
September 5th 2001, Tenet presented the Worldwide Attack Matrix, a blueprint for what became known as the War On Terror.
September 12th 2001, At a meeting on December 12, 2002, Tenet assured Bush that the evidence against Saddam Hussein regarding WMD's amounted to a "slam dunk case."
2007-11-21 03:17:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by mariner31 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
First I have to respond to the idiot that think Bill Clinton had skills. His only skill is to be so damn proficient at deceiving people. He wasn't referred to as SLICK WILLY for being slick at his job. His wife is just as bad.
Now to the real question. Whenever there is a war, it becomes the responsibility of the President in office. Blame is always given to that person. Just as the economy, when good, the President is praised, when bad, the President is blamed. It is just one of the perks that accompanies the job. But also remember, if we are ever Attacked on American soil again, Bush will all of the sudden become a Hero to the American people, and his Presidency looked at in history with pride because of his stand on Terrorism.
2007-11-21 02:06:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Glenn T 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
If you want to find blame for being FORCED into this war...... Start with the limp wristed liberals who threw away the Vietnam victory (Nixon & Ford )...... who failed to take action when America was invaded by Iran ( Carter )..... did nothing about nine Americans held hostage in the middle east......did nothing when 214 sleeping Marines slaughtered in Beirut.....nothing about poor Mr Kinghoffer who was pushed off an ocean liner in his wheelchair.....nothing about the 200+ people blown out of the skies over Scotland......did nothing about the car bombing of the twin towers.....did nothing about the two American embassies bombed......did nothing about an attack against a US Naval ship ......night clubs bombed....airlines hijacked and navy personnel murdered.....
MAYBE..... If we had taken violent action from the start.....we would not have been FORCED to fight back now
Have you noticed since we bloodied their nose 6 years ago.....there have been no terrorist attacks against any American targets.....ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.....do you think they got the message there is no more "free lunch"......that we WILL strike back
2007-11-21 14:09:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kojak 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your quite right! Blaming this war on Dubyah is dead wrong!..He had no say in the matter at all, he was put there to do what he was told to do by the big oil corporates and the arms industrials!..Also because he's not to bright and could be convinced {it seems by 'shotgun Dick' that its all Gods will} That America must shore up its oil supplies, and that Iraq was the logical target!..Dubyah just did what he was told to do!..So you got "weapons of mass destruction" Dubyah didnt lie when he talked about that!..He really believed it, he was told to believe it!..You got uranium being 'smuggled from Nigeria..Massive 'pipe guns' being built to fire Saddams 'atomic shells'on Israel..Dubyah believed all this absurd nonsense!..And he wasnt the only one, lots of Americans believed it thinking "The President wouldnt lie to us!" And Oliver North!!..Are you serious? He didnt blow the whistle on 'rubbish bin laden!'..Where did you get that one from?..North was supporting bin laden because of what he was doing to the russians in Afghanistan! It was the British who first brought up bin ladens potential as a terrorist organiser in 1989!..The Americans were actually supporting bin ladens 'hesboola freedom fighters' by supplying him with arms and ammunition, including stinger shoulder launched missiles!..C' mon..get it right!
2007-11-21 03:48:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by paranthropus2001 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
North did not. Bin Laden wasn't a known player back then.
It's blamed on President Bush because Liberals have problems distinguishing cause and effect.
2007-11-21 02:02:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by RTO Trainer 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
Actually using dated information is the same as using false information. You could also say germany produces nerve agents in large qunatities which would be viable info according to your stance, though it is dated some 65 years.
2007-11-21 03:47:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If the biggest worry the US had was that the Prez was doing the hokey pokey with an intern, I'd be happy.
As for now, we have- Iraq, Iran, Afganastan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, New Orleans, Health Care, Housing Market, Social Security, Infastucture Collapse, and the Deficeit. That's just to name a few, I'm sure others could add plenty more.
A BJ and a dirty dress are looking pretty good right about now.
2007-11-21 01:38:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
8⤋
Thank you! I am sick of Bush getting blamed for EVERYTHING!!! People need to look at the bigger picture and what happened in office prior to him getting elected in!!!
2007-11-21 02:03:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Bitsy 3
·
2⤊
4⤋
i agree that clinton could have taken care of bin laden before 9/11 occurred, however that has nothing to do with our occupation of iraq. that responsibility lies with our commander and chief mr. bush
2007-11-21 01:34:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by scott A 5
·
5⤊
6⤋