user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
I can't choose! I can't choose!
Great question.
by mojo on Tue Nov 09, 04 12:18pm
[+]
You know ... I've wondered about this ...
What do repressed homosexuals who are ashamed to admit they're gay usually do? Prosecute gays.
Similar situation with Republicans and Clinton. They love him, but such an admission would destroy their world view.
The funniest thing I've heard from the right, specifically, Bob Novak, is that Clinton's success in the economic well being of the United states was based on Pappa Bush (What a joke).
I suppose it's mostly jealousy. When in doubt, attack the man. What I find disgusting is the amount of tax payer money the republicans spent on prosecuting a man for lying about a blow job.
Maybe they are repressing latent Liberal attractions?
And maybe, just maybe, clinton wasn't the flawless saint the left paints him to be. And he actually did so some things in office that left the nation worse off. Saying that we had a weaker military because of clinton and then backing it up with documents of his massive cuts to the military budget, and castration of the CIA, is not mindless clinton bashing. It's pointing out his actual failings. But rather than put saint clinton up to scrutiny the left denounces all legit criticisms as heresy.
He's been out of office for over a term, now, herz. Let it go! ;-)
So we can expect no further praise or condmenation of people like FDR, reagan, kennedy, lincoln, washington etc? The moment they step out of office all the good or bad of their term is erased? Interesting.
Some of the criticism was silly by anyone's standards, unless, of course, you believe that Clinton murdered his enemies and ran drugs while he was governor of Arkansas.
Or that he went awol from the airforce to snort coke off a hookers ass, and has an IQ of 80. Those kind of ridiculous assertions?
Clinton's IQ is 80? Wow, so he's only 5 points higher tan Bush.
than bush--guess my IQ is pretty low too.
herz: Most of us do not turn red and foam at the mouth when someone mentions Lincoln, these days.
I don't really care about Clinton, honestly.
I like Ike!
Cath: you by any chance hear some of the comments about reagan about the time of his death from several high ranking democrats?
Some in poor taste, that I heard.
But ... I haven't heard much recently and I don't hear Reagan-this and Reagan-that on a regular basis.
I do hear Clinton-this and Clinton-that, though.
And, I will say to you again: perhaps you should consider setting the bar for your own behaviour and ethics a bit above the minimums you perceive in The Opposition? I mean, really, herz! The Far Right does quite a few things that I find ... slimy. I don't follow suit, even though they set a precedent.
Because ...
... because it's slimy.
So let's get this straight before we move on: it's not fair to blame clinton for things he actually did in office that are still affecting us today, simply by virtue of him no longer being in office? Yes or no please.
Hate to break this to you, guys, but Clinton is still in the news by virtue of: his book, his heart surgery, Hillary, etc. It's only natural that people talk about what or whom is currently in the news.
Cranky: Have you ever actually listened to Limbaugh? He doesn't mention Clinton (at least not Bill) on his show very much anymore, unless Clinton is mentioned in the news (like I stated above).
same reasons liberals are so obsessed with Bush and I'm neather.
by seon on Fri Sep 02, 05 6:40am
[+]
|
|
