Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentGovernment · 1 decade ago

I can't believe it!! Did Slick Willy Clinton finally tell the truth?

I FINALLY found something that finger-wagging Slick said that made sense, at least inasfar as I can find, and believe me, I do keep track of this rascal.

"The problem with ideology is, if you've got an ideology, you've already got your mind made up. You know all the answers and that makes evidence irrelevant and arguments a waste of time. You tend to govern by assertion and attacks."

Amen! And if that isn't the definition of an arrogant LIBERAL know-it-all, I don't know what is!

Truer to form the other day, he was in Maine trying to whip his..er, I mean..whip up support for that worthless liberal governor they have there, old Whatshisname. He called this guy "progressive" (liberal joke) and "conservative" (biggest side-splitter of all).

I am ready for some changes myself, but the thought of the Clintons, Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Boxer, Gore, Kerry, Reid and company in charge makes my skin literally crawl.

We might as well bring in Michael Moore as VP if Hils wins.

16 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    DO YOU THINK HE WOULD TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS?:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::What part of the War on Terrorism do they support?

    By Ann Coulter

    PRINTFPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=Print"

    This year's Democratic plan for the future is another inane sound bite designed to trick

    American voters into trusting them with national security.

    To wit, they're claiming there is no connection between the war on terror and the war in

    Iraq, and while they're all for the war against terror -- absolutely in favor of that war --

    they are adamantly opposed to the Iraq war. You know, the war where the U.S. military is

    killing thousands upon thousands of terrorists (described in the media as "Iraqi civilians

    ," even if they are from Jordan, like the now-dead leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi).

    That war.

    As Howard Dean put it this week, "The occupation in Iraq is costing American lives and hampering

    our ability to fight the real global war on terror."

    This would be like complaining that Roosevelt's war in Germany was hampering our ability to fight

    the real global war on fascism. Or anti-discrimination laws were hampering our ability to fight the

    real war on racism. Or dusting is hampering our ability to fight the real war on dust.

    Maybe Dean is referring to a different globe, like Mars or Saturn, or one of those new planets

    they haven't named yet.

    Assuming against all logic and reason that the Democrats have some serious objection to the war in

    Iraq, perhaps they could tell us which part of the war on terrorism they do support. That would be

    easier than rattling off the long list of counterterrorism measures they vehemently oppose.

    They oppose the National Security Agency listening to people who are calling specific phone numbers

    found on al-Qaida cell phones and computers. Spying on al-Qaida terrorists is hampering our ability

    to fight the global war on terror!

    Enraged that the Bush administration deferred to the safety of the American people rather than the

    obstructionist Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, one Clinton-appointed judge, James Robertson,

    resigned from the FISA court in protest over the NSA spying program.

    Democratic Sen. Russell Feingold called for a formal Senate censure of President Bush when he found out

    the president was rude enough to be listening in on al-Qaida phone calls. (Wait until Feingold finds out the

    White House has been visiting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "MySpace" page!)

    Last week a federal judge appointed by Jimmy Carter ruled the NSA program to surveil phone calls to

    al-Qaida members in other counties unconstitutional.

    Democrats oppose the detainment of Taliban and al-Qaida soldiers at our military base in Guantanamo,

    Cuba. Democrats such as Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee,

    have called for Guantanamo to be shut down.

    The Guantanamo detainees are not innocent insurance salesmen imprisoned in some horrible mix-up like

    something out of a Perry Mason movie. The detainees were captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan.

    You remember -- the war liberals pretended to support right up until approximately one nanosecond after

    John Kerry conceded the 2004 election to President Bush.

    But apparently, imprisoning al-Qaida warriors we catch on the battlefield is hampering our ability to fight the

    global war on terror.

    Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin has compared Guantanamo to Nazi concentration camps and Soviet gulags,

    based on a report that some detainees were held in temperatures so cold that they shivered and others

    were forced to listen to loud rap music -- more or less approximating the conditions in the green room at

    "The Tyra Banks Show." Also, one of the detainees was given a badminton racket that was warped.

    New York Times columnist Bob Herbert complained this week that detainees in Guantanamo have

    "no hope of being allowed to prove their innocence." (I guess that's excluding the hundreds who have been

    given administrative hearings or released already.)

    Of course all the usual "human rights" groups are carping about how brutally our servicemen in Guantanamo

    are treating the little darlings who are throwing feces at them.

    Democrats oppose the Patriot Act, the most important piece of legislation passed since 9/11, designed to make

    the United States less of a theme park for would-be terrorists.

    The vast majority of Senate Democrats (43-2) voted against renewing the Patriot Act last December,

    whereupon their minority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, boasted: "We killed the Patriot Act" --

    a rather unusual sentiment for a party so testy about killing terrorists.

    In 2004, Sen. John Kerry -- the man they wanted to be president -- called the Patriot Act

    "an assault on our basic rights." At least all "basic rights" other than the one about not dying a horrible death

    at the hand of Islamic fascists. Yes, it was as if Congress had deliberately flown two commercial airliners into

    the twin towers of our Constitution.

    They oppose profiling Muslims at airports.

    They oppose every bust of a terrorist cell, sneering that the cells in Lackawanna, New York City, Miami,

    Chicago and London weren't a real threat like, say, a nondenominational prayer before a high school football game.

    Now that's a threat.

    :::::;

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Sadly, our country is too split up for anyone to really realize any true hard facts. The democrats blame the republicans and the repubs blame the democrats.

    I cannot think of the name right now, but the movie that just came out with Robin Williams running for President. Something like that needs to come along this country and unite everyone. It shouldn't take a war or a major attack on America to bring us together.

    We have already forgotten 9/11. We point and blame. The liberals blame, but don't have a better plane. They blame for the sake of blaming. The republicans, we're just as screwed up as the democrats.

    1/2 the people in this country don't want a democrat in the gov't and the other 1/2 don't want a republican in gov't. Let's find a common ground and work from there. Compromise on both sides would work out. But this is just an ideal idea that our founding fathers had. They didn't even want the idea of a two party system.

  • huenke
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    i think via fact the entire united states of Israel experienced his voice as he spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai... national Revelation is the only reason any Jew believes in G-d. Christians have self belief in Jesus via fact they're naive and their Preacher instructed them to have self belief. Muslim's have self belief via fact Mohammed's armies placed swords to their ancestors throats. any further stumpers? technological know-how easily disagrees inclusive of your stance on the the immortality of the human spirit. there replaced right into a x-ray technician back interior the previous due eighty's that used particular equipment to image amputees limbs. They have been genuinely decrease off, yet rather seen interior the photos. If the soul exists it is not a stretch to have self belief in G-d. I even have had touch with a ghost at an previous townhome i used to lease. It replaced into freaky weird and wonderful stuff that i don't experience i could desire to get into however the immortality of the soul is sparkling and easy.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yeah, Slick Willy told the truth, finally. The difference I see between Willy's lies and Bloody Georges is that Willy's lies resulted in a soiled dress. Bloody Georges have, so far, resulted in the slaughter of over 2000 of our young people. Hardly a parallel.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I think it's funny, how you talk about how ideologies turn people into closed-minded people but then you just do more labelling and biased name-calling.

    Both sides are arrogant and both sides have ideologies. Seriously, you can see it in your own party if you look close enough!

  • 1 decade ago

    Ok everyone is entitled to their opinion so here is mine.

    I happened to like President Clinton. So what if he messed around with some girl who knew very well that he was married. She is just as much to blame as he was but you know what, that is no ones business but his wife's.

    I happen to think he was a darn good president. And if he were able to run today I would vote for him. I wouldn't vote for his wife if she ran but I would President Clinton.

    I am tired of the rich people in this country getting richer and the poor can't even get by. Working a minimum wage job does not cut it in this country. If this so called wonderful President that we have right now would mandate that every employer pay a livable wage we wouldn't have the poverty problem this country has.

    So you can call democrats what you will, but until you walk in a persons shoes who doesn't have a pair, you will know why we would rather have democrats in office than the republicans.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    If you open your mind just a crack you'll see that what he's saying about ideology applies to the Bush administration. If you can't see that then you really are blind.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Ever hear of balance of power or checks and balance. This is sourly needed now of all times. One party rule just isn't working. I can cite the reasons but you have already heard them hear and do not believe them. I just hope with a phlosophy like yours that all freedoms are not lost forever. It is a dangerous situation right now and we are closer to a dictator then I have ever seen in my 60 years. We do not invade another country without good cause like we are attacked, we have never been torturers, holding prisoners without due process. This is not the America I grew up in and I do not want my grandkids to grow up in this environment.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    vote Mrs. Clinton in 2008

    Source(s): thanks
  • 1 decade ago

    well... he is kind of right there... just look at the Bush... his ideolidgy is based on the "fact" that god made him president. And thanks to that he thinks all he says and does is right and therfore he doesnt need to look at facts or evidence to make up his mind.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.