Quote:
Originally posted by Rich
lol, yes comparing Bush to Clinton in a logical way is very easy..... 
Good thing you left that one up to someone else. 
|
First of all, I think Clinton was a fine president. I have always said that. But in this game we call politics it is easy to do what I am saying.
If you're a Democrat or a liberal, you take everything and twist it, conveniently leaving out all factual evidence against that particular point of view or dismiss it for some other innocuous reason. Republicans do the same thing. This is exactly what politics has become.
For example, a lot of Democrats like to say that Bush is ignoring the Constitution and has violated international law. These are the two most popular examples today. What they don't mention is Clinton (maybe mistakenly) bombing a factory in Sudan based on CIA intelligence only and signing CDA and COPA - both of them violations of the constitution. You could also throw that Kerry voted for the Patriot Act in there.
Another example I can give is Democrats saying "Bush invaded Afghanistan and didn't get Osama". That is true. Maybe that is because of ineptness or maybe Osama is just that good. But in the game of party politics, if you are a Democrat, you say "Bush is inept". Conveniently left out, in order to win the argument, is the fact that Osama declared war against the US in 1998. What is usually not mentioned is that launching a few missiles into the desert in Afghanistan and into a factory in Sudan didn't get Osama either. Forcing Sudan to expel Osama didn't do any good either and - in the Sudan government's opinion - just made matters worse.
This is the kind of story-telling that I don't really like about party politics.