Bush FAR more dangerous than Clniton
|
Posted By: Valerie Posted on: Dec. 8, 2005 at 9:50 AM  3 Comments
|
3.8 / 5
Based on 13 ratings.
|
Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
Am so tired of hearing people yammer about Bill Clinton and his having (gasp) sex in the White House. Well, his dalliance in the White House did NOT kill 2,100 and counting of our service men and women now did it? Did he lie about it? Yes. Did it effect his ability to run this country? No. I won't "bash" Bush/Cheney. I will, however blame them for many, many things. The undeclared war this administration lied us into, leading to senseless deaths of thousands and no clear exit strategy. I will blame this administration for cutting the funding of: head start (what happened to the 'No Child Left Behind' lie?), college loans, heating assistance for the poor. I will ask them about the no bi8d contracts in Iraq that ALL are going to Haliburton and it's subsidiaries. I will ask them why they ignored the Governor of Louisiana's plea days before Katrina for 5 million dollars to help with evacuations. I will blame this administration for it's unbridled spending....turning Bill Clinton's surplus into an ever growing deficit of over 8 trillion dollars. I will ask Bush/Cheney why neither of them have seen fit to attend even one funeral of one of our fallen service members. I will ask them why, when Ambassador Joe Wilson spoke out about the no evidence of WMD they "outed" his wife Valerie Plame who was an undercover CIA operative. This is treason, plain and simple. I will ask them where 78 billion missing dollars are in Iraq. I will ask them about the Downing Street Memo that clearly shows they were gearing up for this idiot war in 2002 and earlier. I will ask the Republican House why they could spend 60 million dollars on Bill Clinton's dalliance, yet cannot fund programs for our children, elderly and homeless. I will ask them why we cut funding to the Veteran's Administration, yet continue to send billions overseas. I will ask about the record profits of the oil companies, but what could we expect with two oil men at the head of this administration. I could ask all I want. But, as has happened since the minute W walked into the White House, appointed by the Supreme Court, not elected - he, nor his administration will answer. Why? They too are liars, of a far more dangerous ilk than Mr. Clinton ever thought of being.
Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.
Signup for an accountComments:
|
Dec. 8, 2005 at 02:51:43 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Valerie -- Good on ya, girl! The Nobel Committee, who will award Playwright Harold Pinter the Peace Prize for Literature this weekend, has released his taped acceptance since health prevents Pinter from attending the ceremonies in Sweden. Pinter devoted nearly an hour to a discussion of Iraq: "You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force of universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis. "The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them" Mr. Pinter will likely be ignored by the Bush supporters who'd prefer to criticize Clinton, argue that "Happy Holidays" is a sacriledge or whine about the slashed tires on their SUVs. It's up to us to get the real world issues on the table and thanks for doing your part. |
||
|
|
Dec. 9, 2005 at 09:15:59 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Well said, covered good points and missed nothing! An excellent read.
|
||
Clinton-bashing has become a tired, outdated gambit from the Rush/Rove "WHEN QUESTIONED, ATTACK" PR Playbook which diffuses discussion by dragging red herrings through honest inquiry.
Unfortunately, some of Bush's grassroots (crabgrass? artificial turf?) supporters have adopted the strategy and can't let go of the topic.
Those who have moved on get their talking points from GOP.com. There, those bereft of intellectual curiosity are taught to connect the NeoCon dots and there are canned Letters to the Editor and Talking Points for talk radio for the Kool-Aid drinkers.
The issues you raise are spot-on! Let me add one more about "conservative" fiscal policy:
Ignoring for the moment the $253,000,000 Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska, what kind of government would cut social programs for the needy by $50,000,000,000 while giving tax cuts of $70,000,000,000 to top bracket taxpayers? Clearly NOT a compassionate government. And, since the net result is a $20,000,000,000 increase in the federal deficit, it's obvious that it's NOT a conservative government.
Anyone else care to ask a question of the Clinton-bashers?
Report Abuse