English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Don't you think Hillary would the same thing that Bush did. She vote the war, I don't see the difference when Democrat say they don't want someone like Bush.

2007-12-21 08:50:37 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

16 answers

No, I dont, Bush has lied to us all and since Bill did an awesome job running this country I think his wife will be just as good or even better

2007-12-21 09:54:04 · answer #1 · answered by Don't Cha 2 · 1 1

I am not a fan of Hillary, though I think she couldn't possibly do nearly as bad a job as Bush has done.

Yes, I'm unhappy with her for voting to empower Bush to invade Iraq--even though that's not exactly what that resolution was about.

But the massive screwup in Iraq, our spectacular failure, that's 100% Bush's fault. Bush is the one who listened to idealogues rather than experts (Hillary or her husband would never have been so stupid!). Bush is the one who went in with insufficient troop strength and watched the country descend into total chaos, while all the time insisting everything was going great. Bush is the one who destroyed the US's image and prestige in the world, who ignored treaties and international law, who justified and authorized torture, who suspended habeas corpus, who declared himself above the Constitution, etc. etc., I could go on and on.

If she gets elected (still a big IF, I believe), Hillary wouldn't do any of that stuff. Mostly because the Republicans won't LET her. The Republicans as minority are able to keep Democratic presidents in line much better than Democrats are able to rein in Republican presidents--as you can see with the current setup.

2007-12-21 08:59:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

First of all I am definitely not voting for Clinton. Yes I hate what Bush has done to my Country that I served 7 years to protect. He has lied at every turn to hide his and Chaney's plan to establish once and for all major bases in Iraq in order to be able to hold influence over all the Arab oil producers in the middle east as well as have a strategic influence on Russia. I was with him when he invaded Afghanistan but he lost me when he failed to finish the job and rushed into Iraq without any real urgency. If I have a choice to pick the best chance to make change in Washington and the World I vote for Obama as he is the one candidate with the least baggage and seems to be the most honest of the bunch.

2007-12-21 09:07:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

possibly Hillary became fooled, yet so were countless different authorities officials. The quite undesirable element about all of it is that the favourite public at tremendous became warned that the Bush administration became mendacity and trumping up intelligence information to latest a faux image to the Congress and the favourite public. i will undergo in innovations reading over and once extra interior the paper comments from those days retired senior intelligence officials who had had get entry to to a similar intelligence information which Bush and company were distorting, who suggested that the information did not help the allegations that Iraq possessed guns of mass destruction on the time or that they posed an drawing close probability to the U.S. the favourite public chosen to believe a mendacity scumbag like George Bush over those who had no vested interest in distorting the reality. the top result's the most important deficit in U.S. history and the upward thrust of yet another Republican nutcase, John McCain, who has no compunction antagonistic to occupying Iraq for yet another 100 years, all on the cost of the yankee tax payer. i desire the yankee public enjoys listening to the barbs of their grandchildren thanking them for the fullyyt unnecessary enormous debt they have surpassed them interior the destiny for the enrichment of company usa on the on the spot. interior the top, the favourite public will deserve regardless of the actuality that diatribes their descendants would hurl at them, because it will be their personal fault for trusting their authorities to shady and corrupt men like George Bush and Dick Cheney.

2016-10-19 22:26:25 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Hillary will do what her husband did check the polls and govern accordingly,she had access to the same intell as President Bush,and for all you Bush haters here is some news for you Hillary is not going to get the nomination and an even bigger shock awaits you W cant run for election again,I know it makes you sad but it is true,here are some mind blowing facts for you ,we are in the longest up trending economy since President Roosevelt,no matter how much the main stream media wants the economy to tank it continues to grow,even with the sub prime trouble caused by uneducated people buying homes they could not afford on ARMS,the economy continues to grow,Lowest rate of taxes on low to middle income earners in twenty years if adjusted from cost of living and personal income growth,Not one single terrorist attack since 9-11 I guess it is better to fight and kill them over seas than to let them kill us here in our country what a crazy idea,after four years of war we have lost 4231 service men and women in ww2 we lost an average of 635 service men a week,small buisness growth is up over all 35% that means individuals have started and mantained private buisness growth to the tune of 370 new buisness's a week for the last seven years never happened in America's history,if you dont like President Bush vote for change and that is what you will get higher taxes,sluggish economy,weaker defense,resesive economic growth,but hay the rest of the world will love us as they use us like a door mat.

2007-12-21 16:50:11 · answer #5 · answered by Big Daddy D 3 · 0 1

Ew. There is no Republican currently running for whom I would change my vote to Hillary. (In fact, as it stands now, the only way I'd vote Democrat is if it somehow turned into a fight between Bill Richardson and Ron Paul, and only because Ron Paul wants to do things too quickly.)

2007-12-21 09:57:16 · answer #6 · answered by Richard S 5 · 0 1

You are right. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are controlled by special interests. The driving force behind the war in Iraq is AIPAC. Candidates from both parties fear them, except for one man that rises above the special interests and fears no one.

Ron Paul

2007-12-21 09:41:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

She voted for the war before she learned the truth about WMD. After she learned it was a lie, she changed her mind, and thankfully so. I'm bewildered at those who think we still should have invaded Iraq even though the reason was a lie.

Most candidates did the same, and only a few were wise enough not to fall for it in the first place.

2007-12-21 08:54:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

ALL top tier candidates have said they would support a pre-emptive nuclear strike or at least leave the option open....so both parties are bipartasan blowhards....I can only believe Ron Paul position, its the only one that makes sense.

2007-12-21 09:42:08 · answer #9 · answered by Al 6 · 0 1

A LOT of members of congress voted for the war. Based on the lies that Bush fed everyone.

2007-12-21 08:58:19 · answer #10 · answered by gromit801 7 · 2 4

fedest.com, questions and answers