Why is Clinton's ugly ass on the news again?

[Lechium]

Quote: (Originally Posted by JulieCitySlicker)

You know,that comment really pisses me off! Not all of Americans are rednecks Just the ones that live in my parents area I can't stand those dillhole white trash predjudice assholes I'm glad I move away from those worthless piles of ardvark poo!

Why is it ok to stereotype Dutch people, but not Americans?
*so confused...*

[JulieCitySlicker]

I don't recall me being the one bashing dutch people here

[Said Eyes]

Maybe not, but you're pissed off with someone saying stereotyping is moronic. Which is it, Julie, Which is it?

[fluttergirl]

I'm not goiong to wallow through all the bickering, I was a young teenager when Clinton was Pres, so I'll just give my two cents-
Yes, Clinton was good for America economically, but so was his cabinet, his advisors the two hundred ppl a day who told him the facts, gave him reports, etc. I think it's a little naive to just hand a good economy to him. He wasnt a great president, however.
Personally, I cannot trust anyone who can first cheat on their wife, then lie to her about it,then, on a much more personal level, lie to me, an American citizen, under oath, while being the President of the United States. I personally think he should have been impeached. He committed the crime, he shouldn't have gotten away with it.
Bigger picture-what was America suppossed to do? Sit back and say nothing? Become the land of 'heartless, greedy capitalists' who not only stab each other in the backs for money, but cheat on their wives as well? The President is the image, the figurehead of America to the rest of the world. It was bad enough that he did what he did. Then he showed the rest of the world and America that he did not even have the courage and decency to admitt he did it. By lying under oath, and breaking our laws to suit him, he undermined everything a president stands for.
again, just my two cents.

[heinzel]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

First of all, I have every right to stereotype the Dutch... because in every thread regarding American politics, you do that very thing Heinzel. You stereotype every American as a far right, Jesus freak. So, I'm returning the comments. To Lechium... judging by your posts, you seem like the typical trendy, liberal who worships the ground Michael Moore walks on. You seem like the type of person who hates conservatives because it's the "cool thing to do." One of those, "I hate the President because Maynard says he hates the President..." types.

I'm not stereotyping every american. Im having a discussion with americans, and it happens to be republicans which im having the discussion with.

So chase, you lame dumbass. Not every person who doesn't agree with you is a stereotype. This is exactly the point why i don't agree with Bush, cause i think that bush steroetypes all foreign people, cultures and states.
So stop the stereotyping and start having a discussion. If you don't like chase stop replying please, because it's lame what you do, your almost like hellboy and that extermanetordude.

[Lechium]

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

I'm not goiong to wallow through all the bickering, I was a young teenager when Clinton was Pres, so I'll just give my two cents-
Yes, Clinton was good for America economically, but so was his cabinet, his advisors the two hundred ppl a day who told him the facts, gave him reports, etc. I think it's a little naive to just hand a good economy to him. He wasnt a great president, however.

He had a great office, yeah. He had selected and appointed people in his office. Great president is one that surrounds himself with capable people, because running a country (ANY COUNTRY) is too much for any one person.

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

Personally, I cannot trust anyone who can first cheat on their wife, then lie to her about it,then, on a much more personal level, lie to me, an American citizen, under oath, while being the President of the United States. I personally think he should have been impeached. He committed the crime, he shouldn't have gotten away with it.

You're missing a point -- his crime was not directly related to his activity as a president. Do not hold presidents for higher standarts than others -- this is just a job, and you want not a saint to be doing it, but a qualified person.

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

Bigger picture-what was America suppossed to do? Sit back and say nothing? Become the land of 'heartless, greedy capitalists' who not only stab each other in the backs for money, but cheat on their wives as well? The President is the image, the figurehead of America to the rest of the world. It was bad enough that he did what he did. Then he showed the rest of the world and America that he did not even have the courage and decency to admitt he did it. By lying under oath, and breaking our laws to suit him, he undermined everything a president stands for.
again, just my two cents.

You know what? Rest of the world LOVED Clinton. Moreover they had thought that Monica incident was really unimportant. Moreover most people (including me) have hard time understanding on why Americans care so much about that entire ordeal.
If you want US's image to get better in eyes of other nations -- get rid of Texan hick who's currently in office. Really.

[JulieCitySlicker]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Said Eyes)

Maybe not, but you're pissed off with someone saying stereotyping is moronic. Which is it, Julie, Which is it?

Oh well, forgive me for not agreeing with everything everyone says Like I give a rip, I wasn't put in this world for everyone to like me
Besides that,that wasn't what I was pissed about!

[fluttergirl]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lechium)

You're missing a point -- his crime was not directly related to his activity as a president. Do not hold presidents for higher standarts than others -- this is just a job, and you want not a saint to be doing it, but a qualified person.

No, you missed my point, dear. My point wasnt that what he did was wrong. It wasnt that I couldnt trust a man who would cheat on his wife. It was that I cannot trust a man who got on national television, adn lied straight to his teeth to the American Public.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lechium)

You know what? Rest of the world LOVED Clinton. Moreover they had thought that Monica incident was really unimportant. Moreover most people (including me) have hard time understanding on why Americans care so much about that entire ordeal.
If you want US's image to get better in eyes of other nations -- get rid of Texan hick who's currently in office. Really.

Then the rest of the world lives a standard of life that is far differed than the one in America. (I'm not speaking finacial, but moral). And isnt *this* stereotyping? The rest of the world is a farily large generalization, if you ask me. Anyways, I said it was my opinion, and it is. The vast majority of people who think that Bush is a stupid hick are the same people who assume that everyone from the South is a stupid hick. Where hes from and his public speaking abilities have nothing to do with the decisions he makes as a president.
And wasn't this thread about Clinton, anyways?

[Lechium]

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

No, you missed my point, dear. My point wasnt that what he did was wrong. It wasnt that I couldnt trust a man who would cheat on his wife. It was that I cannot trust a man who got on national television, adn lied straight to his teeth to the American Public.

Everyone makes mistakes. Clinton's mistake did not hurt anyone, while Bushe's killed thousands of people...

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

Then the rest of the world lives a standard of life that is far differed than the one in America. (I'm not speaking finacial, but moral). And isnt *this* stereotyping? The rest of the world is a farily large generalization, if you ask me. Anyways, I said it was my opinion, and it is. The vast majority of people who think that Bush is a stupid hick are the same people who assume that everyone from the South is a stupid hick. Where hes from and his public speaking abilities have nothing to do with the decisions he makes as a president.
And wasn't this thread about Clinton, anyways?

You see, US is driven by yellow press, like National Inqueror, and TV shows about private life of celebrities.
In US, like nowhere esle, public figures private life matters a lot. That's fucking retarded if you ask me.
Morals? Morals are ok and all, but jut because person has set of morals somewhat different from yours it doesn't make him an unfit person to do his job.
Not all American share your morals as well, you know.

[fluttergirl]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lechium)

Everyone makes mistakes. Clinton's mistake did not hurt anyone, while Bushe's killed thousands of people...

Yes, people do make mistakes. The one i believe you are alluding to would be the war on Iraq. Well, let's see, how many timess do we have to go over this? Kerry, the author of the book that landed Bush in an inquisition, Powell, everyone of any standing has said that given the same information Bush was, they would have made the same decision. So. not his bad, but his Intelligence people's.
I'm not saying my morals are right and his are wrong. I'm saying my morals make me not trust him. This is my opnion, I dont know why youre trying to prove it wrong, because you cant.

[Lechium]

His intelligence people were wrong? But I thought that:
a) president is the position of supreme responsobility, i.e. if his people fuck up, than he takes the fall with them.
b) a lot of people were saying that the info on Iraq's WMD was no good. I'm not sure that everyone else would had made the same descidion.
c) it is presidents job to pick intellegence people who can be trusted. 9/11 was a major fuck-up on intellegence part as they didn't see it comming. You'd exepct him to overhaul intelligence and made it good, right? If he didn't that it is his fault.

[fluttergirl]

a) which he has done. hence, the inquisition to what happened, but if kerry had been president, then it would have been his fault as well. so, while the cards may fall that way, common sense deems that if everyone else is saying they would have done the same thing, he cant be blamed for it, unless, youre just looking for a reason to blame him.
b) whether the info was good or not is irrelevant, it was the info he was given
c)then it is also the fault of Clinton, the president before him, as he had the same ppl/position/amount of blame to carry from 9/11 and such, it just happened to fall under Bush's presidency

Again: It's my opinion, it wont change
Wasnt this thread suppossed to be abot Clinton? I love how whenever anyhting about him or Kerry or any other Democrat comes up, everyonme points fingers at Bush

[Lechium]

Quote: (Originally Posted by fluttergirl)

c)then it is also the fault of Clinton, the president before him, as he had the same ppl/position/amount of blame to carry from 9/11 and such, it just happened to fall under Bush's presidency

There was about a year+ between 9/11 and invasion of Iraq. In this time Bush had to remodel the intellgence that has proven itself not to work properly. Yet he didn't.
That's 2 major intellegnce oooops's in a row. One is a mistake, but two is a pattern. Unforgivable.

[Chase]

Heinz... don't ever call me a "lame dumbass" again. If you want to be rude, then let's be rude you utter piece of garbage. See, it's easy being an asshole. I don't understand how you come to the conclusion that Bush stereotypes everyone? Dutch media must be incredibly biased and anti-American because the President hasn't publicly made stereotypes about multiple cultures.
I have just one question for those who think that the President is a "liar" and whatnot... is John Kerry a liar for voting for the use of force to oust Saddam Hussein? He, as well as, a broad coalition of other nations believed that Hussein was a threat... are they all liars as well?
Lechium believes that the President hasn't really done anything to thwart terrorism following 9/11... that's obviously not true. Bill Clinton didn't really do much of anything to stop terrorism after the first WTC attack, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and embassy bombings. What was he doing? Also... was it okay for him to send in troops to Kosovo... was that justifiable? Was it okay for him to call for air strikes on Baghdad based on the same intelligence that George W. Bush used? Did Bill Clinton make mistakes when he sent troops into Somalia? What about when he sent troops into Haiti to put Aristide in office? Believe it or not... but people died during Clinton's administration.

[fluttergirl]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lechium)

There was about a year+ between 9/11 and invasion of Iraq. In this time Bush had to remodel the intellgence that has proven itself not to work properly. Yet he didn't.
That's 2 major intellegnce oooops's in a row. One is a mistake, but two is a pattern. Unforgivable.

he didnt immediately go into iraq....
besides, a complete overhaul, after the counrty has had a hit as big as 9/11? that kind of thing takes time, a lot more than a year. it requires inquisitions (which we had), searches, research, etc. its not something that can just change at the snap of anyones fingers, president or not.
for the fifth time, perhaps youll have some reponse this time
Why is thread going to bush? i thought it was supposed to be about Clinton?
and, again-it is my opinion, it will not change. period.