Why is Clinton so hated in America?

[SirFox]

Hello Everyone!

I am trying to understand why America hates Bill Clinton as much as it did / does. America elected Clinton to the White House TWICE like George Bush. I have started this thread to understand. I talk with fellow Americans on a daily basis. I have never had a satisfactory answer. Would you care to tell me your thoughts?

[Sandy]

i'll tell you mine ok. i worked in a sewing factory for 12 years ok. clinton signed the bill to send things overseas to be made. quoting that ut wouldn't hurt the americans. it didn't hurt us it freaking killed us. all the shirt factories around here closed. why pay anywhere up to 10 to 114 dollars an hour ? when you can send it overseas and pay them 5 dollars a day ? hes a liar and a cheat. and i did not vote for him.

[Seeker]

I find it interesting that, I couldn't find anyone who would addmit to voting for him in his secord term. Yet he still got the job ..... go figure!

[Annie]

This has to be one of the scariest things I've done! I like him, I voted for him twice and I would do it again if I could.



<runs and hides>

[Frank_2525]

I believe that President Clinton is disliked because in both elections the vote was close to 50/50. That means that around 50% of the people did not like him, some of them were vocal. The comedeans spent a lot of time using him as a source for their jokes and the public believes what they see on TV. Then he told a lie and got caught.
Was Bill Clinton a bad president, well a population as big as The USA is very slow to change. It will take 8 to 12 years before we can look back and honestly evaluate the effect he had on this country. It will be history that judges him as fairly as it is possible to judge someone.

[sweetgapeach]

This has to be one of the scariest things I've done! I like him, I voted for him twice and I would do it again if I could.



<runs and hides>

I always liked him too !!

[SirFox]

i'll tell you mine ok. i worked in a sewing factory for 12 years ok. clinton signed the bill to send things overseas to be made. quoting that ut wouldn't hurt the americans. it didn't hurt us it freaking killed us. all the shirt factories around here closed. why pay anywhere up to 10 to 114 dollars an hour ? when you can send it overseas and pay them 5 dollars a day ? hes a liar and a cheat. and i did not vote for him.

Thanks SANDY.

[spare_change]

This has to be one of the scariest things I've done! I like him, I voted for him twice and I would do it again if I could.



<runs and hides>


LOL -- hunting for my gun!

[Willy S]

I don't think he is -- it depends very much on where you are. He's not hated in NY state. We even sent his wife to the Senate.

[Annie]

I don't think he is -- it depends very much on where you are. He's not hated in NY state. We even sent his wife to the Senate.





.... <runs and hides behind Willy>

[Willy S]

I'll protect you , Annie! (If I can!)

[spare_change]

Bill Clinton was what we call an opportunist, as is his wife (a subject for another time). The man truly has no core beliefs, but rather will spout whatever is the most politically advantageous position at that point in time. Like Kerry, you can't pin him down - where he comes from, what he thinks, what his core beliefs are -- because, frankly, he doesn't have any. He mastered the politically expedient. (After all, he blows up aspirin factories in foreign countries to divert attention from his impeachment. He made us redefin the definition of is, and he made a blowjob a nonsexual act).

His lack of moral fiber, his lack of a set of core beliefs, created an administration of political cronies running amok without any guidance or goals. I think history will judge Bill Clinton harshly -- but that remains to be seen.

How did he get elected? He was like the bad boy in high school --- nobody would associate with him, but everybody kind of envied his "stick it" approach to moral and political conventions. So, he got the "cute bad boy" vote. He rode the back of a Republican-generated economic boom, and left with the economy headed for a mess. His accomplishments in office are almost nil -- when taken in the larger context.

It's tough to like a man who comes to office with almost no expectations -- and fails to meet every one of them.

[Penny]

According to you the only one that is moral and not an opportunist is George Bush :( The country had the biggest surplus in history when he left. The economy was truely great. Not fudged great like now. I wish he could run again

[Barkiss]

According to you the only one that is moral and not an opportunist is George Bush :( The country had the biggest surplus in history when he left. The economy was truely great. Not fudged great like now. I wish he could run again

No offense Penny, but that's like blaming the person who got hit with a water balloon for getting hit with it. Sure he is covered in water and sure he has pieces of balloon all over him, but he's not the one that filled it up with water and he's not the one who threw it. Clinton's economy was a water balloon filled to capacity. Between that and 9/11 we are just now seeing recovery.

I do not agree with everything Bush is doing. I feel he sometimes acts like a renegade cowboy. However, we are much better off with him in office, than John Kerry or Bill Clinton.

[SirFox]

America's overall image abroad under Bill Clinton changed for the better.

Countries that disliked America's arrogance abroad seemed to start believing in her again. The good relations seems to have been altered under George Bush.

Does that mean that the dislike of Bill Clinton for some was based on Monica Lewinsky or on that he lied to the country about his affair with her?

Where there economic reasons that are exclusively related to Bill Clinton's handling of the presidency? Or did Bill Clinton have problems relating to the American people or vice versa. I was already abroad at that time.

[Traxster]

I'm afraid there isn't enough space here for me to tell you ALL the things Clinton has done that made the Great USA worse off. One small thing is he had Bin Laden in his hands and just let him go....

[Barkiss]

America's overall image abroad under Bill Clinton changed for the better.

Countries that disliked America's arrogance abroad seemed to start believing in her again. The good relations seems to have been altered under George Bush.

Does that mean that the dislike of Bill Clinton for some was based on Monica Lewinsky or on that he lied to the country about his affair with her?

Where there economic reasons that are exclusively related to Bill Clinton's handling of the presidency? Or did Bill Clinton have problems relating to the American people or vice versa. I was already abroad at that time.

The one thing no one can disagree with is Bill Clinton is incredibly charasmatic. He speaks well. He looks good on TV. He is an excellent ambassador. However...although that improves relations outside the U.S., it doesn't run a country. He got elected and re-elected because of his charisma, period. In the corporate world you would never hire this guy to be CEO, but PR Director...hell yeah!

[SirFox]

The one thing no one can disagree with is Bill Clinton is incredibly charasmatic. He speaks well. He looks good on TV. He is an excellent ambassador. However...although that improves relations outside the U.S., it doesn't run a country. He got elected and re-elected because of his charisma, period. In the corporate world you would never hire this guy to be CEO, but PR Director...hell yeah!

Thanks Barkiss

[lovemakenman]

He's the only man that could cheat and get away with it.

[cherokeered]

I don't hate him....

What happened was between him and his wife...it was a marriage issue and no one elses business

He didn't start a war over it.....

[Seeker]

No need to run and hide, Annie! I admire you for saying that you did! Many people that I know, flat out deny they did. This has to be one of the scariest things I've done! I like him, I voted for him twice and I would do it again if I could.



<runs and hides>

[lovemakenman]

I don't hate him....

What happened was between him and his wife...it was a marriage issue and no one elses business

He didn't start a war over it.....
No one elseses business, he ran the country it was our right to know what he is doing wrong when in office. they both got caught doing wrong things with money and he got caught with cum stains on some girls dress. not right no way no how.

and many wars were started over it. he had Benloden in his hands and let him go

[cherokeered]

Oh please....


I voted for him twice and would take him over Bush any day.....

I'm narrowing my eyes at you Love....stand-off time....this is why I don't discuss politics....


but, I'll kiss you anyway....you is the man.....:kk

[Suzy_Q]

My answer to the clinton question is that he was the worst president we have had. if it wasn't for him our country wouldn't be overrun with illegal aliens, and all the good paying jobs wouldn't have moved overseas,and the fact that he screwed up our school systems,I could go on and on but it would fill this entire page up plus some,,,I didn't vote for him.

[spare_change]

My answer to the clinton question is that he was the worst president we have had. if it wasn't for him our country wouldn't be overrun with illegal aliens, and all the good paying jobs wouldn't have moved overseas,and the fact that he screwed up our school systems,I could go on and on but it would fill this entire page up plus some,,,I didn't vote for him.

I like the way you think ...... nobody REALLY cares that he got a blowjob in the Oval Office ----- the man was a mental and moral incompetent.

[surfnchat]

Either you hate him or love him... It depends on the party line and which set of inane pundits you listen to. I didn't vote for him the 1st election and I did in the 2nd. (Come on, Bob Dole for Prez? Yuck.)

I really don't like either party. They have too much in common.

My favorite saying is this:
Democrats f*ck the interns... Republicans f*ck the country. :D

[Cotties]

That was a good read foxx. Well done. Also well done Annie and Penny. We already knew that you guys are in the minority here. Well done again.


God Bless America and no place else. I forget whose slogan that was but it wasn't Big Bills.
Hello Everyone!

I am trying to understand why America hates Bill Clinton as much as it did / does. America elected Clinton to the White House TWICE like George Bush. I have started this thread to understand. I talk with fellow Americans on a daily basis. I have never had a satisfactory answer. Would you care to tell me your thoughts?

[cherokeered]

Finally...the voice of reason....

Cherokee will not discuss politics any further....

[spare_change]

America's overall image abroad under Bill Clinton changed for the better.

Let me shift the focus, ffox -- tell us about the European opinion of the US and Bush and the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq? Why won't countries like France and Germany join the war on terrorism? Why don't they recognize and defend Israel's autonomy? Why didn't they join in the effort to remove Saddam Hussein? The countries of Europe have suffered thru terrorist atttacks for a lot more years than we have -- why don't they do anything about it? Why didn't the European nations support resolving the Bosnia crisis? Why didn't they criticize Russia for the Chechnyan situation? Why are they only about talk and negotiate, and why do they actively block, via the UN, actions that try to address these issues?

But, of course, you have to suffer thru my opinion first -- LOL. Europe, thru the EU and the euro, etc. has changed --- the countries have lost their identity and their autonomy. An individual country is hamstrung and can't do anything without involving the other nations. They are truly paper tigers, not capable of mounting an initiative without first getting a consensus and support -- for fear of ruining their economy. They try to pretend that they are still relevant on the international stage by posturing and preening, but in fact, bring nothing of substance to the game. I don't think the US is arrogant -- rather, I think we have come to realize that Europe is impotent and irrelevant.

So, as an American who has lived in Europe -- what do you think? It seems to be easy to blame the governments -- as if those governments weren't a direct result of the people. Have the people lost their focus? Their moral compass? Or, are we wrong?

[SirFox]

Let me shift the focus, ffox -- tell us about the European opinion of the US and Bush and the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq? ...So, as an American who has lived in Europe -- what do you think? It seems to be easy to blame the governments -- as if those governments weren't a direct result of the people. Have the people lost their focus? Their moral compass? Or, are we wrong?

I am going to play diplomat here, SPARE, for your enjoyment. I have no problems addressing the questions you raise and would be delighted to answer some of them. As you are running for President now, (it's official, yes?), let's open this on another thread...or I can E-mail you on this.

I would like to stay on the subject of Clinton here.

[SirFox]

There are some very strong opinions here. That was to be expected. While continuing on this thread, how does Clinton compare to Bush or vice-versa as you prefer?

[Cotties]

What I can gather about the dislike of Bush from many Europeans, Australians and Americans while being in none of these countries is that when he went to war nobody liked his war cry. He had to motivate people in America by playing up to their weaknesses. The word "God" was appearing everywhere, muslim and terrorist was used too often and in the same sentence, the word crusade popped up and there were many other strong comments from him. People began to realize there was a new war beginning and thought by going anti Bush they could slow this down but as most of us know the ball was rolling for quite a while.

So a few more choices were made about the war that went against their fears. The election happened in the states and the media wanted a good show. Everything about Bush's relationship with the Bin Ladin family to why he was so involved with so many large companys that could profit from his decisions. Peoples minds were made up that the world had become worse off and he was to blame in some way. This may sound simple but this is how many people choose to think. The same way he motived many Americans.

Now for what I think in my own fantasy land. The war in America was picked by Al Quaeda along with the Taliban. America said screw this! we aren't going to fight it here as we need to protect our people and these guys would have used a bigger bomb if they could and they probably will soon. So off to Afganistan they go. It was easy as the people thought they were pricks as well but the bastard Bin Ladin casually dissapeared as these "terrorist" we want are everywhere in the middle east but still made up of small minorities willing to fight to the death. So then we still have Saddam sticking his finger up at everyone saying come here terrorists you can be our friends. So America says thank you. Kicks his ass again and gives the majority of the people their country back but find every terrorist from every country congregating there to fight. Now the people we have liberated and the allied force have a fair playing ground and we need to win it there. If we back off again they will bring the fight to us again.

I use the word us sometimes. I changed my way of thinking a bit after the Bali bombing a years after 9/11. 202 foriegners died and nearly all of them being Australians. When they asked the bomber why Australians he said he thought they were Americans and casually shrugged his shoulders and laughed. He then said whats the difference.
Let me shift the focus, ffox -- tell us about the European opinion of the US and Bush and the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq? Why won't countries like France and Germany join the war on terrorism? Why don't they recognize and defend Israel's autonomy? Why didn't they join in the effort to remove Saddam Hussein? The countries of Europe have suffered thru terrorist atttacks for a lot more years than we have -- why don't they do anything about it? Why didn't the European nations support resolving the Bosnia crisis? Why didn't they criticize Russia for the Chechnyan situation? Why are they only about talk and negotiate, and why do they actively block, via the UN, actions that try to address these issues?

But, of course, you have to suffer thru my opinion first -- LOL. Europe, thru the EU and the euro, etc. has changed --- the countries have lost their identity and their autonomy. An individual country is hamstrung and can't do anything without involving the other nations. They are truly paper tigers, not capable of mounting an initiative without first getting a consensus and support -- for fear of ruining their economy. They try to pretend that they are still relevant on the international stage by posturing and preening, but in fact, bring nothing of substance to the game. I don't think the US is arrogant -- rather, I think we have come to realize that Europe is impotent and irrelevant.

So, as an American who has lived in Europe -- what do you think? It seems to be easy to blame the governments -- as if those governments weren't a direct result of the people. Have the people lost their focus? Their moral compass? Or, are we wrong?

This is my longest ever post. I see youth in it but its what I think.

[Sandy]

well this is how i see it ok, it may be wrong to everybody else, but here goes ok. i like bush a hellva of alot better than clinton. bush went to war after 9/11. we had to take a stand ok. i agree with that much. we're also heklping them put their life back together ok, thats good to. weapons of mass destruction, yes they were there. bin laden is not stupid ok. he moved all the weapons, or had his people move them. why nobody can fogure that one out idk. i mean think about it. it took years and i mean years to plan 9/11. so he had plans for when we struck back, i think everybody so has underestimated him. will they find him, no. not till he wants them to. as for the hurricane. new orleans gov't screwed up. they knew it was coming, and could have had people out of there. they knew the levee would break, they waited till the last minute, and started yelling for help. and i know for a fact they were advised by my state what to expect. they want to blame bush for it though. wrong. fema has to answer for alot of things to. :spbx:

[Penny]

Yes we did need to go to war after 9/11 with the Taliban in Afganastan not the Iraqis that had nothing to do with it :(

[dartgirl]

Bill Clinton did some incredibly stupid things, I am amazed that NY voted his wife into office. That still boogles my mind. If she runs for president I will definetly not vote for her. I think it is going to take alot to get our country back on track. There are just to many bleeding heart liberals that thinks the government needs to take care of everyone. What happened to being responsible for yourself and taking care of your own instead of having a bunch of kids you can't support and standing there with your hand out wanting the government to support you and them. Oh no, I found my hot button again.

[Penny]

What happened to being responsible for yourself and taking care of your own

Exactly why are we rebuilding Iraq?

[Shiane]

Did I vote for him? HELL NO! and yes im a Democrat!

What did he do while he was in office that was positive.
1. Family Medical Leave Act
2. Don't Ask Don't Tell (regarding gay's in the military)
3. Earned Income Tax Credit
6. Defense of Marriage Act
7. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (For the most part good)
8. North Korea Nuclear agreement (don't need anymore nuclear bombs)

What was Negative.
1. Brady Bill (5day waiting period, gimme a fuckin break, guns don't kill people, people kill people)
2. North American Free Trade Agreement (So long jobs)
3. Omnibus Budget Reconcilitation Act of 1993 (didn't do shit for the working class)
4. Welfare Reform (HAH! what a joke)
5. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (just for the N.R.A.)
6. When Al Qaeda bombed the WTC, should of kicked their ass then!
7. Whitewater Scandal
8. Clinton's Body Count (makes ya go hmmm)
9. Pardon's controversy (most of those people should have went to jail)


Ok thats all I have time for. No I didn't like Bill Clinton, and I still think he's a jackass!

Don't even want to get started on Georgy Boy, money grumbing, gas price gouging asshole!

[Trev]

Why don't you tell us how you really feel. :lmao

Did I vote for him? HELL NO! and yes im a Democrat!

What did he do while he was in office that was positive.
1. Family Medical Leave Act
2. Don't Ask Don't Tell (regarding gay's in the military)
3. Earned Income Tax Credit
6. Defense of Marriage Act
7. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (For the most part good)
8. North Korea Nuclear agreement (don't need anymore nuclear bombs)

What was Negative.
1. Brady Bill (5day waiting period, gimme a fuckin break, guns don't kill people, people kill people)
2. North American Free Trade Agreement (So long jobs)
3. Omnibus Budget Reconcilitation Act of 1993 (didn't do shit for the working class)
4. Welfare Reform (HAH! what a joke)
5. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (just for the N.R.A.)
6. When Al Qaeda bombed the WTC, should of kicked their ass then!
7. Whitewater Scandal
8. Clinton's Body Count (makes ya go hmmm)
9. Pardon's controversy (most of those people should have went to jail)


Ok thats all I have time for. No I didn't like Bill Clinton, and I still think he's a jackass!

Don't even want to get started on Georgy Boy, money grumbing, gas price gouging asshole!

[Shiane]

No I think I'll pass lol!

[Barkiss]

No I think I'll pass lol!

I say please go on...you are obviously educated and opinionated on the subject....which leads to good reading!

[Shiane]

I say please go on...you are obviously educated and opinionated on the subject....which leads to good reading!

I think it's because it makes the veins in my forehead bulge like waterhoses, and you guys find that amusing lol! Sheeeesh I wish valium was over the counter !!

Ohhh God now don't get me started on the FDA and making it illegal to get cheaper drugs from Canada that our American drug companies make!!! :nu

[Trev]

I think it's because it makes the veins in my forehead bulge like waterhoses, and you guys find that amusing lol! Sheeeesh I wish valium was over the counter !!

Ohhh God now don't get me started on the FDA and making it illegal to get cheaper drugs from Canada that our American drug companies make!!! :nu

go on, where listening....

[Barkiss]

I think it's because it makes the veins in my forehead bulge like waterhoses, and you guys find that amusing lol! Sheeeesh I wish valium was over the counter !!

Ohhh God now don't get me started on the FDA and making it illegal to get cheaper drugs from Canada that our American drug companies make!!! :nu

No please go ahead....I've got a beer and my feet are propped up...and if that vein pops...you're a nurse, you can fix it! ;)

[SirFox]

SHIANE. I think that you are dying to tell us. I can feel it is on your heart. Please tell us. I enjoyed reading your first post... the second should also be good!

[Shiane]

Alrighty then you guys pick a subject, one subject gun control, oil prices, why Bush doesn't do something about the gas prices, medicare reform, social security, abortion, whatever, it doesnt matter to me.

[Barkiss]

Let's go with oil prices...seems to be a hot topic today...

[Shiane]

Okie Dokie Oil prices it is!

[SirFox]

Let's go with oil prices...seems to be a hot topic today...

Actually I was going to ask you about gas prices....

SHIANE: Just take the lot....and tell us about everything!!!!

Come on....Sweet Heart.

[Shiane]

Anyone really know just how much interest the Bush family has in the oil industry? A Bunch! I don't think anyone really realizes how much. You gotta ask yourself who Bush is lookin out for, himself or the country. Hmmm with gas at nearly $3.00 a gallon it shouldn't be hard to figure out. He's sitting in office, making a killing on oil, the other day he said something about the oil prices, what about the past year of sky high oil prices, why is it a concern now?...... hmmm when's the election? Meanwhile middle class and poor families are being negatively affected by the high prices... not just at the gas pumps. It's making everything higher. Delivery of everything, from food, to lumber, to grain. My question is when is it goin to stop? We have enough oil here in the states, ooooh yeah something about shipping our oil to other countries like Japan. When are we going to take care of America and not the rest of the world!

[Shiane]

Unfortunately my time is up today, i'll be back tomorrow! Have a good one guys!

[Barkiss]

Unfortunately my time is up today, i'll be back tomorrow! Have a good one guys!

Well..that's not exactly how a debate is supposed to work, but I suppose my opinion will wait...;)

[Annie]

6. When Al Qaeda bombed the WTC, should of kicked their ass then!


Shiane the WTC was Bushes problem not Clintons. Did you mena the USS Cole? But the real problem started when Daddy Bush was feeding Al Qaeda weapons long before Clinton and DuYa took office.

[Cotties]

Because America blew it up to take out Suddams forces.Exactly why are we rebuilding Iraq?

[Cotties]

Are you saying people from the middle eastern countries had nothing to do with 9/11? Afganistan may have been a former strong hold of Al Qaeda but you don't find many Afganis directly involved in 9/11.


America needed a better place to fight the terrorists than Afganistan. As we can see, once the forces arrived in Iraq the insurgents[terrorists] came out of every surrounding country to fight. They don't want to free Iraq thay want to stop western influence around the world and anyone who is our friend is their enemy.

I believe Bush did mislead many as the plain truth of the stiuation was not palletable to most. He needed to start fighting back and didn't have much time. Should he be voted out for misleading. I don't now.

I once thought the oil was relavent. It is but not to the degree I once thought.

What do you think Ms Penny
Yes we did need to go to war after 9/11 with the Taliban in Afganastan not the Iraqis that had nothing to do with it :(

[spare_change]

Shiane the WTC was Bushes problem not Clintons. Did you mena the USS Cole? But the real problem started when Daddy Bush was feeding Al Qaeda weapons long before Clinton and DuYa took office.

I think she is referring to the original bombing in '93 when they blew up the van in the basement.

[spare_change]

Yes we did need to go to war after 9/11 with the Taliban in Afganastan not the Iraqis that had nothing to do with it :(

9/11 is not the primary reason we went into Iraq -- we went because we believed that Hussein was supporting the terrorist activities, that he was supporting the very terrorist groups that executed the attack (a fact that has been proven over and over, but conveniently forgotten), that he had WMDs, that the potential of those WMDs would fall into the hands of terrorists and, like it or not, because Hussein DID have the most lethal weapon of mass destruction --- oil.

No serious, intelligent person can possibly believe that the nerve gases, etc. that were used against Iran and the Kurds in the previous 10 years just ceased to exist - it is not the nature of a dictator to give up his ultimate weapon. So, why didn't we find it??? Because they moved it!!!! It was shipped to Iran (remember during the first war Hussein deployed his airplanes to Iran so that we wouldn't destroy them!) or Syria -- the single largest facilitator of terrorism in the world today!

Hussein did not provide direct support to the 9/11 terrorists -- instead, he provided support to the organization that planned, ordered, and supplied the terrorists who did it. That's a pretty damn fine line to draw if you think we shouldn't go after him for it.

[spare_change]

What I can gather about the dislike of Bush from many Europeans, Australians and Americans while being in none of these countries is that when he went to war nobody liked his war cry. He had to motivate people in America by playing up to their weaknesses. The word "God" was appearing everywhere, muslim and terrorist was used too often and in the same sentence, the word crusade popped up and there were many other strong comments from him. People began to realize there was a new war beginning and thought by going anti Bush they could slow this down but as most of us know the ball was rolling for quite a while.

So a few more choices were made about the war that went against their fears. The election happened in the states and the media wanted a good show. Everything about Bush's relationship with the Bin Ladin family to why he was so involved with so many large companys that could profit from his decisions. Peoples minds were made up that the world had become worse off and he was to blame in some way. This may sound simple but this is how many people choose to think. The same way he motived many Americans.

Now for what I think in my own fantasy land. The war in America was picked by Al Quaeda along with the Taliban. America said screw this! we aren't going to fight it here as we need to protect our people and these guys would have used a bigger bomb if they could and they probably will soon. So off to Afganistan they go. It was easy as the people thought they were pricks as well but the bastard Bin Ladin casually dissapeared as these "terrorist" we want are everywhere in the middle east but still made up of small minorities willing to fight to the death. So then we still have Saddam sticking his finger up at everyone saying come here terrorists you can be our friends. So America says thank you. Kicks his ass again and gives the majority of the people their country back but find every terrorist from every country congregating there to fight. Now the people we have liberated and the allied force have a fair playing ground and we need to win it there. If we back off again they will bring the fight to us again.

I use the word us sometimes. I changed my way of thinking a bit after the Bali bombing a years after 9/11. 202 foriegners died and nearly all of them being Australians. When they asked the bomber why Australians he said he thought they were Americans and casually shrugged his shoulders and laughed. He then said whats the difference.


This is my longest ever post. I see youth in it but its what I think.

An outstanding, reasoned, and sensible post - not because I agree with it (parts I do and parts I don't) but because it deals with reality not with how it feels or how it looks, but rather, how it is!!!

[spare_change]

Exactly why are we rebuilding Iraq?

We are rebuilding Iraq because it was not our goal to eliminate Iraq -- rather, it was our goal to build a thriving democracy in an area where a significant portion of the world's wealth rests in the hands of a few despots.By doing so, we have a sphere of influence in the area for years and years to come. In addition, our military (in a reduced form) will remain in that area for the next 20 years that will act as a deterrent to human abuse and misery--- just by their very presence.

[lapsnshaks]

penny you there

[lapsnshaks]

Shiane the WTC was Bushes problem not Clintons. Did you mena the USS Cole? But the real problem started when Daddy Bush was feeding Al Qaeda weapons long before Clinton and DuYa took office.

annie what part of chicago r u from

[lapsnshaks]

annie cubs or sox

[Cotties]

Annie sleepsannie cubs or sox

[SirFox]

Can we get back to the main thread here, please?

The question was "Why is Clinton so hated in America"? So far some there have been some very strong opinions against Clinton and some very favourable opinions concerning the man.

Do you dislike the man because he was a tall man or because you felt he could have done something for the country and he blew it? :blowjob:

[Sandy]

he blew the job, he was good at double talking, just so you would vote for him. i don't think the man can think for himself. by signing the bill to send our stuff overseas, he killed us.

[Shiane]

I think she is referring to the original bombing in '93 when they blew up the van in the basement.

You are so correct Spare, terrorism started years ago we (America) just thought it would not and could not happen on American Soil, boy were we wrong.

Back in the 1970's The Weathermen a group of radical left-winger's, they bombed university buildings, government organizations, and corporate headquarters.

1993 The van in the basement of the WTC.

Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, on April 19, 1995. (too close to my home)

Theodore Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, was high on the FBI's Most Wanted list between 1978 and 1995, caught him in 1996.

The USS Cole

September 11, 2001, we all remember that one.

[Shiane]

Can we get back to the main thread here, please?

The question was "Why is Clinton so hated in America"? So far some there have been some very strong opinions against Clinton and some very favourable opinions concerning the man.

Do you dislike the man because he was a tall man or because you felt he could have done something for the country and he blew it? :blowjob:

Ya know, I guess my reason's for not liking Clinton are because I saw too much of his crap when he was Gov of Arkansas.

Ever wonder why the Clinton years were also called the teflon years? Because no matter what kind of crap he pulled it just slid off his back. He should have been held accountable for his actions. I just don't think the man has one ounce of truth or morals, and I don't think anymore of his wife either! God for bid she's a candidate in 2008, one Clinton was more than enough for me!

[spare_change]

Can we get back to the main thread here, please?

The question was "Why is Clinton so hated in America"? So far some there have been some very strong opinions against Clinton and some very favourable opinions concerning the man.

Do you dislike the man because he was a tall man or because you felt he could have done something for the country and he blew it? :blowjob:

Because he was a tall man????? What kind of convoluted logic brought that on?

[Shiane]

lol Spare! I thought he meant character not stature too!


Ya know something else I don't like about Bullshit Bill is that even now I can't even enjoy good cigar without thinking of him and her and uhhhhhhhh!

[Annie]

You are so correct Spare, terrorism started years ago we (America) just thought it would not and could not happen on American Soil, boy were we wrong.

Back in the 1970's The Weathermen a group of radical left-winger's, they bombed university buildings, government organizations, and corporate headquarters.

1993 The van in the basement of the WTC.

Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, on April 19, 1995. (too close to my home)

Theodore Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, was high on the FBI's Most Wanted list between 1978 and 1995, caught him in 1996.

The USS Cole

September 11, 2001, we all remember that one.


When did the threat to us start?


The answer as far as the United State is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; (Carter)

* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983; (Reagan)

* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; (Reagan)

* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; (Reagan)

* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; (Clinton)

* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; (Clinton)

* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998; (Clinton)

* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; (Clinton)

* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; (Clinton)

* New York World Trade Center 2001; (DubYa)

* Pentagon 2001. (DubYa)

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).

I think that part of the reason we became such an easy target is what happened in the Marine barracks. My cousin had very strict orders. We were on a "peacekeeping mission" and under no circumstances were we to shoot... now imagine that! He joined on the "Buddy Plan" with several of his closest friends from high school. He went all through basic training and AIT and then to Beirut with these men. A few weeks after they got there he was putting them in body bags. We should have ended it then and there!

The odd thing is that Reagan was considered one of our better presidents. Go figure!

[Shiane]

When did the threat to us start?


The answer as far as the United State is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; (Carter)


(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).

I think that part of the reason we became such an easy target is what happened in the Marine barracks. My cousin had very strict orders. We were on a "peacekeeping mission" and under no circumstances were we to shoot... now imagine that! He joined on the "Buddy Plan" with several of his closest friends from high school. He went all through basic training and AIT and then to Beirut with these men. A few weeks after they got there he was putting them in body bags. We should have ended it then and there!

The odd thing is that Reagan was considered one of our better presidents. Go figure!

Depends on if you mean attacks from foreign or domestic terrorist, the US has always been a target! In 1970's at the end of the Viet Nam war the Weathermen, were some of first domestic terrorist. I was basically looking at some of the attacks on American Soil. I do realize there have been countless attacks on American's in various parts of the world. The Marine's killed in the barrack's attack was a tragedy to say the least, and so many more, each one a tragedy. I just don't think anyone believed an attack would happen here, but it did happen, more than once, and each one of our lives has changed because of it. It really hit me when i flew to Indy and the national guard with automatic weapons were all over the airport 1 yr after 9/11. I think that any attack on any American, foreign or domestic should be met with incredible military force & trade embargos. Realistic, maybe not, but thats just how I feel about it. That would require the US to be self sufficient, and we're not, we rely too heavily on international imports.

I do think that all of our previous presidents have made mistakes in not getting tougher on terrorist, not just one, all of them. I can't place the bame on one in particular, although some were tougher than others.

America has always been at the top of the hit list and always will be. They hate our freedom, our democracy, our success, our don't fuck with us attitudes. All of them would like to knock us down, and unfortunately the threat of terrorism is now part of our everyday lives.

[SirFox]

Depends on if you mean attacks from foreign or domestic terrorist ....were tougher than others.

America has always been at the top of the hit list and always will be. They hate our freedom, our democracy, our success, our don't fuck with us attitudes. All of them would like to knock us down, and unfortunately the threat of terrorism is now part of our everyday lives.


SHIANE: Who is "they" and "them" above?

[Cotties]

"Can we get back to the main topic" You asked a hell of a broad question Foxx. I'm sorry if the topic was manifesting into something of more substance.


Back to Bill and his charactor. What I don't see enough of from anti Bill people is the fact that he gave the face of America a fresh likable figure. If we put his policies aside you can see he did alot of good for america. He showed the world that America is so diverse that a man like Bill can still get a chance of running the country. I saw him again on T.V yesterday in africa [i think], still trying to better the world & keep his face on T.V.

When a man like George Bush retires from office he will probably go back to his multi million dollar companys that have very little to do with helping the world or America but did help him get elected. George is a stronger leader and isn't so interested in being loved by all.

If America could find a compromise of these two men you might have a great leader again one day.


Where do you stand Foxx?????


Can we get back to the main thread here, please?

The question was "Why is Clinton so hated in America"? So far some there have been some very strong opinions against Clinton and some very favourable opinions concerning the man.

Do you dislike the man because he was a tall man or because you felt he could have done something for the country and he blew it? :blowjob:

[Cotties]

Now thats an interesting read. Sorry Foxx but I want to talk about it. Shiane, the American communist party would have loved that post. I did not want to pick at it too much because I loved the fact that you expressed yourself.


I will say something about the second paragraph. The reason you believe America has these problems. Nobody hates American freedom[lots of countries have more], your democracy[they don't really care who is in power or how they got there],success is true[America has influenced many parts of the world by taking what they want and offering a few lots of money without realising or caring about the consequences] and the don't fuck with us attitude is not a good way to approach any relationship. It often leaves no room for a sensible compromise.

My country has used America and other countries as a role model to keep itself weathly and make a better life for its people. The route of this problem is tricky and you may be correct. I'm just glad we can talk about it.
Depends on if you mean attacks from foreign or domestic terrorist, the US has always been a target! In 1970's at the end of the Viet Nam war the Weathermen, were some of first domestic terrorist. I was basically looking at some of the attacks on American Soil. I do realize there have been countless attacks on American's in various parts of the world. The Marine's killed in the barrack's attack was a tragedy to say the least, and so many more, each one a tragedy. I just don't think anyone believed an attack would happen here, but it did happen, more than once, and each one of our lives has changed because of it. It really hit me when i flew to Indy and the national guard with automatic weapons were all over the airport 1 yr after 9/11. I think that any attack on any American, foreign or domestic should be met with incredible military force & trade embargos. Realistic, maybe not, but thats just how I feel about it. That would require the US to be self sufficient, and we're not, we rely too heavily on international imports.

I do think that all of our previous presidents have made mistakes in not getting tougher on terrorist, not just one, all of them. I can't place the bame on one in particular, although some were tougher than others.

America has always been at the top of the hit list and always will be. They hate our freedom, our democracy, our success, our don't fuck with us attitudes. All of them would like to knock us down, and unfortunately the threat of terrorism is now part of our everyday lives.

[spare_change]

I am going to suggest that any discussion of Clinton, just like the man himself, has become irrelevant. He was an incompetent leader who made decisions based on personal political gain, and who, like lots of our psuedo-leaders, believed that the way to get personal legitimacy was not thru dealing with the American people and American issues, but rather thru pussyfooting around with and kowtowing to international interests who would rather stand by the side of the road and watch the parade than get involved in the action, who make themselves feel morally superior by pretending to be capable of judging the actions of the people who do get involved, and who are now finding out that their own inactions are coming back to roost, that the time they spent sitting on the Seine, sipping wine, and sniffing at the actions of America could have been better spent addressing their own issues that now riot in the streets.

Let's move on to a subject that has relevancy in today's world.

[Jy]

You know, after that, there really isn't anything else to say, is there?
Thanks for the insight, cowboy.


Next time though, don't pussyfoot around the subject; just tell us how you really feel.;)

[Zpanther]

I am going to suggest that any discussion of Clinton, just like the man himself, has become irrelevant. He was an incompetent leader who made decisions based on personal political gain, and who, like lots of our psuedo-leaders, believed that the way to get personal legitimacy was not thru dealing with the American people and American issues, but rather thru pussyfooting around with and kowtowing to international interests who would rather stand by the side of the road and watch the parade than get involved in the action, who make themselves feel morally superior by pretending to be capable of judging the actions of the people who do get involved, and who are now finding out that their own inactions are coming back to roost, that the time they spent sitting on the Seine, sipping wine, and sniffing at the actions of America could have been better spent addressing their own issues that now riot in the streets.

Let's move on to a subject that has relevancy in today's world.

History is never irrelevant. If we concentrate totally on the present without consideration of history, we'll spend too much time repeating mistakes. Nothing wrong with discussion of Clinton or any other historical subject if some are interested in it. You don't have to participate if it's a subject you're not interested in. We all make our own decisions about which subjects interest us.

[spare_change]

History is never irrelevant. If we concentrate totally on the present without consideration of history, we'll spend too much time repeating mistakes. Nothing wrong with discussion of Clinton or any other historical subject if some are interested in it. You don't have to participate if it's a subject you're not interested in. We all make our own decisions about which subjects interest us.

I couldn't agree more -- as an avid student of history, I absolutely believe in the value of understanding what has happened, and why.

Succumbing to the current pop culture mentality that the man IS the history, however, is a grave, and potentially fatal, mistake. To confuse Clinton the man (I almost choked on that) with the follies and foibles he has foisted on history is seriously flawed. Blowjobs in the White House is not history; the crime he committed on the American people in Bosnia or Pakistan are.

Further, the fascination that certain elements, particularly in Europe, have with Clinton is based on a single fact: his catering to the whims of certain European cultures in order to curry favor, made them feel better about themselves because he gave them credibility at a time in which particular governments, and Europe in general, are in danger of becoming irrelevant on the international stage. His romancing of the secular forces within Europe gave them a false sense of legitimacy and credibility they neither earned nor deserved.

My point is merely that Bill Clinton, the man, is irrelevant - I'm guessing how tall he is does not present significant insight, nor does his use of good Cuban cigars. If you want to discuss the Clinton years, and the catastrophic damage his administration wreaked on American foreign policy, military, and intelligence services, however, that is a much, much different issue, and I welcome reasoned, intelligent discussion of that.

[Zpanther]

I couldn't agree more -- as an avid student of history, I absolutely believe in the value of understanding what has happened, and why.

Succumbing to the current pop culture mentality that the man IS the history, however, is a grave, and potentially fatal, mistake. To confuse Clinton the man (I almost choked on that) with the follies and foibles he has foisted on history is seriously flawed. Blowjobs in the White House is not history; the crime he committed on the American people in Bosnia or Pakistan are.

My point is merely that Bill Clinton, the man, is irrelevant. If you want to discuss the Clinton years, however, that is a much, much different issue, and I welcome reasoned, intelligent discussion of that.

I understand what you're saying. Got it the first time. But some people may have an interest in discussing a subject others aren't interested in or conisder irrelevant. That's okay too. If someone is interested in starting a thread and others are willing to respond it's a good thing (unless it's totally out of bounds for the site). Doesn't matter if one member welcomes a particular discussion or not.

;)

[SirFox]

I understand what you're saying. Got it the first time. But some people may have an interest in discussing a subject others aren't interested in or conisder irrelevant. That's okay too. If someone is interested in starting a thread and others are willing to respond it's a good thing (unless it's totally out of bounds for the site). Doesn't matter if one member welcomes a particular discussion or not.

;)


Thank you ZP. Just returned from a short trip and saw COTTIE's and SPARE CHANGE's remarks. To say that a man is irrelevant seems to me to irrelevant as well.

I started the thread on Bill CLINTON because I wanted to understand the REAL reasons for some Americans to have disliked him. Indeed, I do have my personal opinions concerning CLINTON as well as I do concerning GEORGE W. BUSH. It just so happens that the same opinions cover Mr BLAIR in the UK, Mr CHIRAC and VILLEPIN in France, BERLUSCONI and PRODI in Italy and many more leaders today:

A CLEAN UP JOB IS NEEDED TO rid this World of politicians who only consider gain or who are incompetent in their jobs. The World is a rapidly shrinking area with many people, many problems, and those ARE NOT BEING addressed at this time.

[spare_change]

Talk's cheap

[SirFox]

Talk's cheap

Agree with you SPARE.. we happen to be plagued with all sorts of talk these days. :D

[cherokeered]

Clinton is about to be passed by Bush for this honor I think....


Cherokee...trying not to talk politics but can't seem to keep quiet....:nu

[SirFox]

Clinton is about to be passed by Bush for this honor I think....
Cherokee...trying not to talk politics but can't seem to keep quiet....:nu

CHEROKEE: I have been meaning to ask you why you utilise the third person....in many of your messages... :)

[cherokeered]

CHEROKEE: I have been meaning to ask you why you utilise the third person....in many of your messages... :)

A great many people seem concerned about this...lol

Seems I have unnerved a few people...

I wonder what they are worried about? Me, myself or I....lol

;)

[Annie]

A great many people seem concerned about this...lol

Seems I have unnerved a few people...

I wonder what they are worried about? Me, myself or I....lol

;)

Now that's funny! I don't think they are worried about any of those people Red! I think they might be worried about you!


... I'm not though! I know better... :)

[cherokeered]

Now that's funny! I don't think they are worried about any of those people Red! I think they might be worried about you!


... I'm not though! I know better... :)

Now why would they be worried about me...lol

Cherokee....;)

[spare_change]

Now why would they be worried about me...lol

Cherokee....;)

If you ain't worried, I ain't worried ---- let them wonder. Too much living to do to be concerned with what others worry about.

Besides, here you can be any way you want to be !!!

[Cotties]

I for one have not worried a bit . I love a women who is different:sc .A great many people seem concerned about this...lol

Seems I have unnerved a few people...

I wonder what they are worried about? Me, myself or I....lol

;)

[cherokeered]

I for one have not worried a bit . I love a women who is different:sc .

Thanks.....

Cherokee....:kk

[Cotties]

"Thank you Z.P" We're big boys and I'm sure you don't need Z.P to keep us in our place. I would have preferred either you[Fox] or Z.P to make some constructive comments in regards to Bill and George. Spare doesn't need me defending him but I will say this. Spare has always protected peoples freedom of speech at married and flirting. His words were strong on the subject as to provoke a conversation. We were asked by Foxx to return to the subject that he had typed at the top of the post. It ran its course and no-one had any real input. So instead of making a new political thread we decided to carry on the political subject and alter it. We all new this topic would be tricky but I just love a women{or man} who has an opinion. I didn't like being told to talk about Bill and nothing but. Nobody owns a thread and it should be encouraged to manifest for the better. I feel this thread is dead unless somebody[Foxx] keeps stimulating the inital question or WE can continue to discuss what comes to mind..Thank you ZP. Just returned from a short trip and saw COTTIE's and SPARE CHANGE's remarks. To say that a man is irrelevant seems to me to irrelevant as well.

I started the thread on Bill CLINTON because I wanted to understand the REAL reasons for some Americans to have disliked him. Indeed, I do have my personal opinions concerning CLINTON as well as I do concerning GEORGE W. BUSH. It just so happens that the same opinions cover Mr BLAIR in the UK, Mr CHIRAC and VILLEPIN in France, BERLUSCONI and PRODI in Italy and many more leaders today:

A CLEAN UP JOB IS NEEDED TO rid this World of politicians who only consider gain or who are incompetent in their jobs. The World is a rapidly shrinking area with many people, many problems, and those ARE NOT BEING addressed at this time.

P.S Bill is still a good guy in my books Spare..useless but a nice guy

[SirFox]

"Thank you Z.P" We're big boys and I'm sure you don't need Z.P to keep us in our place. I would have preferred either you[Fox] or Z.P to make some constructive comments in regards to Bill and George. Spare doesn't need me defending him but I will say this. Spare has always protected peoples freedom of speech at married and flirting. His words were strong on the subject as to provoke a conversation. We were asked by Foxx to return to the subject that he had typed at the top of the post. It ran its course and no-one had any real input. So instead of making a new political thread we decided to carry on the political subject and alter it. We all new this topic would be tricky but I just love a women{or man} who has an opinion. I didn't like being told to talk about Bill and nothing but. Nobody owns a thread and it should be encouraged to manifest for the better. I feel this thread is dead unless somebody[Foxx] keeps stimulating the inital question or WE can continue to discuss what comes to mind..

P.S Bill is still a good guy in my books Spare..useless but a nice guy


Cotties: I am kind of slow at this time in the morning so I will not respond to your ascerbic comments except to tell you this.... :na

[Cotties]

Thanks for being cool Foxx. There is a lot I can probably learn from you and Z.P when it comes to politics.. Just getting you two to post a bit more is the real problem I face... Putting up with me is your problem:D I can't help you with.Cotties: I am kind of slow at this time in the morning so I will not respond to your ascerbic comments except to tell you this.... :na

[Zpanther]

"Thank you Z.P" We're big boys and I'm sure you don't need Z.P to keep us in our place. I would have preferred either you[Fox] or Z.P to make some constructive comments in regards to Bill and George.

There you go..... You and Spare clearly would prefer that Fox and I comment on subjects that interest you..... and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. But don't expect me to necessarily do what you or Spare or anyone else 'prefers.'.......... But then you already knew how I feel about that didn't you? ;)

[spare_change]

There you go..... You and Spare clearly would prefer that Fox and I comment on subjects that interest you..... and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. But don't expect me to necessarily do what you or Spare or anyone else 'prefers.'.......... But then you already knew how I feel about that didn't you? ;)

Actually, you have misrepresented what was said -- I suggest you might want to read the comments again. Nobody said anything about what you should or shouldn't comment on -- I have always advocated free interchange here. I'm sure neither Cotties nor I care what you and Ffox comment on --

[Cotties]

You know I love ya Z.P. [maybe not as much as the girls]. You also know we aren't angels but love a fun debate. We also kinda need you and Foxx to comment as Barkiss has gone missing and no-one else will put up with our bullshit.LOLThere you go..... You and Spare clearly would prefer that Fox and I comment on subjects that interest you..... and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. But don't expect me to necessarily do what you or Spare or anyone else 'prefers.'.......... But then you already knew how I feel about that didn't you? ;)

[Cotties]

I care!


And I will tell ya Spare, your words can be intimidating to newbies. Not that any newbies posted on that thread that I saw.
Actually, you have misrepresented what was said -- I suggest you might want to read the comments again. Nobody said anything about what you should or shouldn't comment on -- I have always advocated free interchange here. I'm sure neither Cotties nor I care what you and Ffox comment on --

[Zpanther]

I am going to suggest that any discussion of Clinton, just like the man himself, has become irrelevant. He was an incompetent leader who made decisions based on personal political gain, and who, like lots of our psuedo-leaders, believed that the way to get personal legitimacy was not thru dealing with the American people and American issues, but rather thru pussyfooting around with and kowtowing to international interests who would rather stand by the side of the road and watch the parade than get involved in the action, who make themselves feel morally superior by pretending to be capable of judging the actions of the people who do get involved, and who are now finding out that their own inactions are coming back to roost, that the time they spent sitting on the Seine, sipping wine, and sniffing at the actions of America could have been better spent addressing their own issues that now riot in the streets.

Let's move on to a subject that has relevancy in today's world.

I don't think I misinterpreted that statement. That was a clear statement that Fox's thread and any further discussion on the topic he initiated was considered by you to be irrelevant ending with a suggestion that 'we' move on to something you consider to be more relevant. You're entitled to you opinions like everyone else here so that's fine, but in MY opinion that kind of attitude doesn't stimulate discussion. It stifles it. If someone isn't interested in a subject someone else is they can ignore or post what they think about it and spend their energy on a subject that does interest them.

[spare_change]

I don't think I misinterpreted that statement. That was a clear statement that Fox's thread and any further discussion on the topic he initiated was considered by you to be irrelevant ending with a suggestion that 'we' move on to something you consider to be more relevant. You're entitled to you opinions like everyone else here so that's fine, but in MY opinion that kind of attitude doesn't stimulate discussion. It stifles it. If someone isn't interested in a subject someone else is they can ignore or post what they think about it and spend their energy on a subject that does interest them.

Well, you are certainly allowed to have your opinion - whether it be based in fact or not. Since I wrote the post, I probably understand what was intended. However, if it was misinterpreted to believe that I was attempting to stifle discussion, then that was an error in choice of words.

However, I will remind you that Clinton being irrelevant was, in fact, my opinion, and like you, I am allowed to post my opinions here. And, as you suggested was one of my alternatives, I did, in fact, post what I think about it.

[Zpanther]

Well, you are certainly allowed to have your opinion - whether it be based in fact or not. Since I wrote the post, I probably understand what was intended. However, if it was misinterpreted to believe that I was attempting to stifle discussion, then that was an error in choice of words.

However, I will remind you that Clinton being irrelevant was, in fact, my opinion, and like you, I am allowed to post my opinions here. And, as you suggested was one of my alternatives, I did, in fact, post what I think about it.

There you go. As I said, nothing wrong with people starting threads and posting their opinions. Nothing wrong with people responding with different views. Nothing wrong with some of those views being that they think others interests are ill-concieved or irrelevent or attempting to divert attention to subjects they are more interested in. Nothing wrong with others posting their opinion of that opinion. All part of the exchange of different points of view on a variety of subjects. I actually enjoy reading all these different opinions.

[SirFox]

We ALL have our opinions that are often based on "facts", ONE source of information, and very few comparisons. We have tendencies in today's world to be certain that we are right, that there are no other viewpoints possible.

It peeves me to see that openness, for a lack of a better word, is not a forte anywhere in the World: we all have rather direct approachs and sometimes feel that we know better than anyone else where the truth lies.

There are no absolute truths whether they be concerning Clinton or Bush, or any nation, or, its peoples. There are truths which elude all of us. Indeed some of us are better in the know about certain events than others. That is normal. What is NOT normal is the ability to crush other's opinions: I personally resent the dictatorship of ideas which runs something like the following recently said: "If you are not with us, you are against us."

Sorry I do not buy the statement or its philosophy or the undercurrent that it suggests. I will fight those people in the World who live by that statement.

I am proud to have been raised as a child of people who fought the Naziis in the British and Dutch armies, the French Resistance from the beginning in World War II. My family lost 50% of its people to a dictatorship that was finally crushed.

I have seen the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia, the various dictatorships in southwest Africa, the Trujillos, the Stalins, the Hitlers, the Petains, the Castros, the Chavez, the Pinochets, Franco, among others during my life. I do not wish to subject my children or anyone to living to these people.

If you believe that it is only "over there" that these regimes exist, then you are making a mistake: we have them in our own backyards as we start with censoring information and the exchange of ideas.

Thus, let's discuss current events in a gentlemanly fashion without resorting to diatriabes and accusations.

[simplygrace]

Please are you KIDDING!! the man doesent even know what is,IS!! OMG!!!:cry:

[chiboy_67]

Thus, let's discuss current events in a gentlemanly fashion without resorting to diatriabes and accusations.

a noble thought, but it's a challenge to pull off. have seen many message boards go down in flames because of the rancor these topics bring out. good luck and stay gentlemanly.

[mrdiscreet]

Let's do the timewarp again

With a jumpt to the left, and a turn to the right

(Rocky Horror Picture Show)

[Domus]

My favorite president...:) I loved his married and flirting affairs...:)

P.S. SirFox, can you place flower and beer can on Morrison's Grave....:)

[SirFox]

My favorite president...:) I loved his married and flirting affairs...:)

P.S. SirFox, can you place flower and beer can on Morrison's Grave....:)

I can certainly do your bidding but it will have to wait until December; no trips scheduled into Parisuntil then.:)

I think he was not so bad in "foreign affairs".

Domus: you can call me "fox" if you want.

[Domus]

I can certainly do your bidding but it will have to wait until December; no trips scheduled into Parisuntil then.:)

I think he was not so bad in "foreign affairs".

Domus: you can call me "fox" if you want.


Thank you, Fox...:)
Last Month, Last Song of the Year...Perfect...:)
Please, tell me is it a problem for you and how to send you
money for flower and can of beer...:)

Of course, Clinton was good in "foreign affairs"...
but In the Name of Love and Flirting it was my pick...:)

[bigrred30]

I know for me it is the fact that as Commander in Chief he committed adultry and wasn't held to the same standards as our military is held to. This and the fact he lied about it and tried to twist it to his benefit. That's why I dislike him.

[SirFox]

I know for me it is the fact that as Commander in Chief he committed adultry and wasn't held to the same standards as our military is held to. This and the fact he lied about it and tried to twist it to his benefit. That's why I dislike him.

What bothers you more, that he committed adultery as a man, that he lied about it to a nation, or that he was the leader of a country who should be an upstanding citizen?

Are you jealous that Monica took care of him? :D

[Carlfy]

Well you win some and loose some, think we all lost here. You got Clinton we got Blair, now you have that pratt Bush and we have the idiot Brown, wouldn't trust them witht e remote for the TV never mind a country.

[SirFox]

Well you win some and loose some, think we all lost here. You got Clinton we got Blair, now you have that pratt Bush and we have the idiot Brown, wouldn't trust them witht e remote for the TV never mind a country.

And we have SARKOZY who hasn't understood anything either...with his divorce and his new wife....

[Barkiss]

It's amazing what happens when you put humans in a position of authority. It is certainly time for us to create a robotic society which will not make mistakes who can run our countries!

[SirFox]

It's amazing what happens when you put humans in a position of authority. It is certainly time for us to create a robotic society which will not make mistakes who can run our countries!

I tend to agree with you SIR BARKISS: One can accept mistakes of almost any kind...and if SARKOZY wants a new wife because his wife left him, what man would want to stop him?

Now with BILL CLINTON, he made a mistake. As president he should have said to the nation that he had actually had "sexual relations with that women?" Would that have meant that in America, he would have had to resign?

I wonder what I would have done had I been president in that situation. I think the first thing would not to have been caught in the act. :lmao

[Barkiss]

I tend to agree with you SIR BARKISS: One can accept mistakes of almost any kind...and if SARKOZY wants a new wife because his wife left him, what man would want to stop him?

Now with BILL CLINTON, he made a mistake. As president he should have said to the nation that he had actually had "sexual relations with that women?" Would that have meant that in America, he would have had to resign?

I wonder what I would have done had I been president in that situation. I think the first thing would not to have been caught in the act. :lmao

In all honesty, I would probably have lied also. Now...can you believe a man that states "in all honesty" I will lie? hmmm

[SirFox]

In all honesty, I would probably have lied also. Now...can you believe a man that states "in all honesty" I will lie? hmmm

I hear you. "Honestly" is our President's favorite word. It works for many people.