Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton and Bush (Dum Bass Alert!)
Times Union ^ | June 28, 2003 | Anonymous (you'll see why)

Posted on 06/28/2003 6:50:39 PM PDT by fightinJAG

Clinton and Bush

First published: Saturday, June 28, 2003

Comparisons between Bill Clinton and George W. Bush persist. I don't ever recall the specter of the last president looming so large over the incumbent as Clinton looms over Bush.

The nation must be close to evenly divided over which one has been the better president. If you are going to argue their merits as leaders, you have to exclude their personal shortcomings. George W. had a drinking problem and now his opponents are accusing him of being a liar. Bill Clinton's appetite was not for alcohol but he lied and he may have ruined his reputation with the shortcomings in his character.

One reason we keep drawing comparisons is their age. They are both 56. The other reason we're having a hard time forgetting Bill Clinton is that there's no outstanding Democrat forcing him out of the limelight. All good Democrats are waiting for a candidate to emerge about whom they can become enthusiastic. They don't see one yet.

For the first time, President Bush is beginning to look vulnerable. His approval ratings are still high but his critics are louder. It seems likely those ratings will slip if the economy doesn't improve dramatically and if efforts to achieve peace in Iraq don't progress as quickly and favorably as the war did.

Bill Clinton is easier to be enthusiastic about and easier to detest than George W. Bush. Or so it seems to me, anyway. George W. has a simple likability about him. He doesn't seem like a Phi Beta Kappa but neither do we. Clinton is bright but confusingly complex.

Democrats are accusing the President of lying to us about the reasons for the war in Iraq, about a connection between Saddam and Osama bin Laden, about ``leaving no child behind'' and about who will benefit from tax cuts.

The President's justification for going to war with Iraq was always the threat Saddam Hussein posed to the United States with his weapons of mass destruction. There's been so much talk about those weapons that newspapers are even referring to them as ``WMD.'' I'm not an apologist for the President but his critics see evil that I don't see. I believe he honestly thought Saddam had nuclear or biological weapons that were a threat to us. I believe he believes the tax cuts will help everyone, I believe he believes his plan for schools will help every child. The fact that he may be wrong about all these things doesn't make him a bad person.

Maybe we ask too much of politicians. We expect them to be nice, intelligent, honest and of good moral character. That's a lot to ask. We don't demand that of any of our other heroes or public figures. When we look for a doctor, we don't check into his preferences in matters of religion, sex, exercise or food. All we ask is that he be a good doctor. If a politician is experienced in government and expert at leading us, maybe we shouldn't expect him to be of sterling character, too.

Maybe we could agree that Bush and Clinton are both OK -- but different.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: adulterer; billclinton; clintondefenders; criedoncue; georgebush; georgewbush; gwbush; impeachedpresident; kneepadbrigade; liar; liedoncamera; liedunderoath; perjuror; presidentbush; rapist; serialrapist; sexaddict; sexualharassment; sinky; slurpslurp; vrwc; whatdefinitionofisis; wtc1993; wtc2001; x42

1 posted on 06/28/2003 6:50:39 PM PDT by fightinJAG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Michael Milken
Yeah,doesn't this remind you of that 80's drivel from a book called "I'm OK, You're OK"?

This guy needs to go stare at his lava lamp a while longer.
3 posted on 06/28/2003 7:09:32 PM PDT by fightinJAG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Anonymous (you'll see why)

You got that right!

4 posted on 06/28/2003 7:22:06 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Yeah,doesn't this remind you of that 80's drivel from a book called "I'm OK, You're OK"?

I think "I'm OK You're OK" was '70's but what's the diff?

(steely)

5 posted on 06/28/2003 7:44:42 PM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Theese guys really think they are clever. They believe they are actually fooling people. We will see in 2004.
6 posted on 06/28/2003 7:48:44 PM PDT by bluefish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Bush and Clinton are different, and Bush is okay, from that point on, the author and I cease to agree.
7 posted on 06/28/2003 7:57:11 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (The unborn are more human than the monsters who would deny them the right to live!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Have you ever noticed that writers have a difficult time naming any *specific* legislative accomplishments by Clinton?

Not so with Bush. Even Bush's critics have to admit that Bush pushed through at least two major tax cuts, educational reform, and prescription drugs (with a privatization option for all of Medicare).

Ever notice that writers have a difficult time naming any treatied foreign policy accomplishments of Clinton's own doing (though he did sign GHWB's NAFTA)?

Not so with Bush. Even Bush's most wild-eyed critics have to admit that Bush killed the Kyoto Treaty, the International Criminal Court, and the U.S. - CCCP ABM treaty.

So what did Clinton *DO* in his 8 long years in office?!

8 posted on 06/28/2003 8:05:59 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluefish
You're right! This is called leveling the playing field.
9 posted on 06/28/2003 8:13:35 PM PDT by CyberAnt ( America - You Are The Greatest!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
W. has Laura. Bill had Hemorrhoid Hillary. Any questions?
10 posted on 06/28/2003 8:15:42 PM PDT by JusPasenThru (We're through being cool (you can say that again, Dad))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JusPasenThru
LOL
11 posted on 06/28/2003 8:17:31 PM PDT by CyberAnt ( America - You Are The Greatest!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Thank God they are different. How he comes to this is just weird, but I sure don't think Bill Clinton is okay. This guy doesn't really know the truth about Clinton's lies ,coverups and downright treason obviously. He just knows what the media has told him, it is all about sex! HAH! If only that was all it was about.
12 posted on 06/28/2003 8:22:22 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Bush is a good president and a decent human being. Clinton is an infected pimple on the buttocks of American history.
13 posted on 06/28/2003 8:26:39 PM PDT by babylucas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Unlike Klinton, this guy actually inhales - often...
14 posted on 06/28/2003 8:34:41 PM PDT by trebb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Great photos and Freeper report about Bush Visit to
California on Friday!!!!

See link and read posts 72 and beyond for the Great News!!

Wish I'd been there!

Freepers Bush to visit L.A. FRIDAY (6/27):
Join Ted Hayes & FR for pro-USA rally:
"Thank GOD it?s W!" - 5 pm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/933686/posts?page=79


15 posted on 06/28/2003 8:49:48 PM PDT by Joy Angela (Freep Hillary at a Book Signing Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Maybe we could agree that Bush and Clinton are both OK -- but different.

No, I'm afraid that's just not possible.

Unlike this anonymous author, I am old enough to remember Clinton's so-called "presidency". I have studied Bill Clinton for almost a decade, and probably know more about him than most people that have known him, let alone voted for him.

Bill Clinton is NOT okay. Aside from that glaring faux pas, the author does make some good points.

16 posted on 06/28/2003 8:56:30 PM PDT by Imal (The Leftist Motto: "Celebrate Perversity")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southack
>>>So what did Clinton *DO* in his 8 long years in office?!

In 1993, Clinton gave working American's the largest tax increase in history and raised the Social Security tax on American seniors and the elderly poor. After opposing it for years, Clinton finally signed the GOP version of welfare reform, contained in the Contract With America. In fact Clinton signed 65% of the CWA into law, like the $500 per child tax credit; allowing Social Security recipients to earn $30K per year before any retirement benefits are lost, up from $11k; an anti-crime package that limited death penalty appeals, along with more money for prisons and law enforcement; enforcement of child support laws, tax incentives for adoption and an elderly dependent care tax credit.

Clinton also did wonders for the US military. He cut the Defense Dept budget roughly 37.5% in eight years. The sad thing here is, the GOP controled Congress for six of those eight years and let it happen without putting up a fight.

17 posted on 06/28/2003 9:07:19 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
<< Clinton is bright but confusingly complex. >>

Billy-Bubbah is glib.

And glib tongued.

But he's also thicker than two planks. And, too stupid to remember anything he's previously said, wickedly weaves his own complexity.
18 posted on 06/28/2003 10:46:49 PM PDT by Brian Allen ( Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muggs
ping
19 posted on 06/28/2003 10:55:38 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
To make this comparison equal, democrates must allow Bush another 6-years to achieve personal glory. Of course, Bush has never made a name for himself at the expense of decency. The bar for presidential lying was lowered by Clinton, therefore, democrats should not be upset when they idealogically preceive that Bush has lied (no proof, only their feel good distinctions). Clinton was out for himself first, and the socialist second. Bush is not trailer trash and he does not need to enrich himself, and he is grounded in both a strong marriage and religious faith - things that Clinton(s) will never be accused....
20 posted on 06/29/2003 12:10:14 AM PDT by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
If you are going to argue their merits as leaders, you have to exclude their personal shortcomings. George W. had a drinking problem and now his opponents are accusing him of being a liar. Bill Clinton's appetite was not for alcohol but he lied and he may have ruined his reputation with the shortcomings in his character.

I wonder if the author is still beating his wife.

Bubba is a sex addict, a serial rapist, and a sexual predator. He used cocaine by the admission of his own brother, Roger. He lied under oath, he lied convincingly(>) on camera wagging his finger at America. He is a manipulator who exhibits phoney emotion ("I feel your pain" and crying on cue, witness the Ron Brown funeral blooper).

Bubba brought character into the discussion when he said that his would be the most ethical administration.

21 posted on 06/29/2003 1:41:24 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
We know what President Bush and President Clinton did in airplanes:

BUSH

SINKY

Which activity takes more brains?

22 posted on 06/29/2003 1:57:16 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
In 1993, the WTC was bombed by terrorists. 8 years later in 2001, the WTC was bombed again (by planes used as an explosive device).

We know how each president responded to these attacks.

23 posted on 06/29/2003 1:59:29 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Bill Clinton's appetite was not for alcohol

He sure looks bombed on something in this photo. The herpes on his lip indicates some other problems as well.

24 posted on 06/29/2003 2:02:24 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
They look like they just backed into the tow in the rear and the guy on the right looks like he he backed into somthing he didn't want to back into.
25 posted on 06/29/2003 8:03:42 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: timestax
bump
26 posted on 07/14/2003 2:47:01 PM PDT by muggs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: muggs
ping
27 posted on 07/14/2003 2:48:08 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Maybe we could agree that Bush and Clinton are both OK -- but different.

Gag, barf, choke,(sound of me keeling over.......)

28 posted on 07/14/2003 2:49:28 PM PDT by cardinal4 (The Senate Armed Services Comm; the Chinese pipeline into US secrets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southack
So what did Clinton *DO* in his 8 long years in office?!

Lied, cheated, groped, raped, covered-up, commited treason, put condoms on the Xmas tree, slandered Billy Dale, Got a 200 dollar haircut on the ramp at LAX while countless flights diverted and delayed countless others, testified before a grand jury, an intern, was impeached, signed Kyoto, signed ICC........oh he did a lot. Its just that most of it was criminal.

29 posted on 07/14/2003 2:53:36 PM PDT by cardinal4 (The Senate Armed Services Comm; the Chinese pipeline into US secrets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Southack
So what did Clinton *DO* in his 8 long years in office?!

Not "what", but rather "whom". And the answer is: anyone he could find (whether they be willing or no).

30 posted on 07/14/2003 2:58:59 PM PDT by kevkrom (Dump the IRS -- support an NRST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: timestax
p i n g
31 posted on 07/14/2003 8:40:38 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
The difference in character between Clinton and Bush is blinding! First of all, you'd have to be both a moron, and have a memory of 22 seconds not to know that the entire world believed Saddam had WMDs for years. Saddam told us himself that he did. Why do you think he went out and bought all those chemical suits for his military? Because they're fun to wear in the desert?

The democrats climbed all over Bush for not figuring out that the terrorists might hit us, and now they are condemning him because he DID figure out that Saddam might hit us. Maybe we shouldn't have. Maybe we should have allowed the terrorists to get those weapons and take out LA (just think, no more Hollywood weirdos) or New York City. Maybe that would make the dems happy.

It seems that the only thing that will make them happy is if our economy is in the dumps, our military is defeated, and there's a major terrorist strike somewhere in the US. That's really rather pathetic isn't it?

32 posted on 07/14/2003 8:49:20 PM PDT by McGavin999 (Don't be a Freeploader, contribute to FreeRepublic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999
Well said.
33 posted on 07/15/2003 8:30:13 AM PDT by fightinJAG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson