Don't ask Don't tell. AS if Daddy Bush moved in with JR? LOL
Nobody who researches the 30 yr alliance called Clinton buys they came seperate. That tag team comes attached. Bag and baggage. Now a new book says she had bouts of depression as First Lady. The mistake is running on a record that has been so widely documented. Yet to hear Bill tell it last week in Iowa he has no idea what happened back when. How inconvenient for them. Considering we are living in these days of video and You Tube. Propaganda works if one stays uneducated about their candidates.
2007-12-03 01:12:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mele Kai 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If so....(not giving thought to the size of the 'If")
Is it funny that it was during the Clinton years, that we were seen and respected highly on an international level?
Didn't I at least heard rumors of a national surplus?
Wasn't it cheaper to go to college?
Even when in the mist of a scandal did he not still maintain popular in opinion...
Now to me, if you want to see this as being a "direct mark on Hillary Clinton" then go ahead but I wouldn't give her that much credit...
Besides, in retrospect I think the scandal, or as you state it "debacles" would have more than likely to have divided the two, I really don't think she had contol over him.
2007-12-03 00:55:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by jerome2all 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because Bush's record was not like his father's, and he also hung around the WH for a while and helped with his dad's campaign. People who voted for W in 2000 expecting another HW had a rude surprise. The same thing would happen with Hillary, so it's best to separate her from her husband's good record on peace and the economy.
2007-12-03 00:47:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
What record are we talking about?
I'm not sure you know this... or are smart enough to to comprehend it... but there is no law nor clause in the Presidential Oath of Office that has anything to do with maritial fidelity! None!
Clinton lied when asked a question no one had the legal right to ask him. Bush lied to the tune of three thousand dead soldiers in Iraq. There's a difference!
You're just scared to death that someone of intelligence and substance might take the job away from the blabbering retard you elected twice. Hillary is smart, informed and has integrity. Bush is a spoiled little brat who's daddy bought him out of the war and into the white house. Please stop acting like he earned a damn thing in his beer-soaked, cocaine-filled lifestyle!
2007-12-03 07:16:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why do conservatives look the other way at Romney's record, and Giuliani's lies and McCain's BS? Huh?
Romney slams the Democrat's healthcare plans - BUT THEY'RE IDENTICAL TO THE ONE HE SIGNED INTO LAW IN MA!! So, you don't mind him doing one thing and saying whatever he needs to, to get elected?
Or how about Rudy, now there's a Republican candidate for you. Claims he "led" on 9/11. Well, the firefighter's union hates him because instead of buying the radios they wanted he bought a cheaper system from a buddy. They didn't work in tall buildings or the subway. 343 firefighters died on 9/11 because they never heard the order to evacuate. Or how about his multiple affairs? Using city funds to pay for an affair with his whore, Judith Nathan. Or the fact that he announced on television to reporters that he was leaving his wife - BEFORE HE TOLD HER!!
Guess that's what you clowns call "family values." Huh?
And McCain. Hell, no one on the planet has bowed down and kissed George's @ss more. Real tough guy you got there.
So instead of spreading your lies and your filth about the Democratic candidates, why not get a candidate who isn't a complete and total joke?
2007-12-03 00:36:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by wineboy 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, Hillary is not Bill, having said that, I'd vote for McCain or Huckabee before Hillary, she is way too compromising and duplicitous for me.
2007-12-03 01:01:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by alphabetsoup2 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't support Hillary, and I hope she loses the primary, but she stands, and is running on her own record, not Bill's.
Not that it will stop you from dredging up old bullsh** again and again.
2007-12-03 00:34:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
I dont care of bills record cause im not voting for her
2007-12-03 00:41:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by BUSH/ISRAEL =warcriminal 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I have not heard liberals trying to discount BJ's record. He is the most positive mark Hillery has to point to. She is a far worse crook than BJ ever imagined himself to be.
2007-12-03 00:34:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
3⤋
Lack of accountability is a liberal trademark...the similarity between the two empowers their weakness and propensity for skulduggery.
2007-12-03 00:33:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
5⤋