I was referring to the challenges he faced as president which were not of his own manufacturing. He inherited a booming economy; he had no 9/11. The WTT basement bombings were kid's play in comparison. I'm always happy to make your day RMTex!
he also claimed to be a uniter, not a divider. however his actions as president and especially his war of choice in iraq have left this country more divided and polarized than most of us have seen in our own lifetimes.
It depends on what you mean by Watergate. If you mean the initial break in, then it is somewhere in the middle of scandals. If you mean the fact that Nixon tried to rig the system, destroy evidence, obstruct justice, discussed bribes, and ways to prevent the crime from ever coming to justice then I don't believe it is possible to overblow any scandals by an executive branch involving all of these. Anytime a leader tries to do these things so there is never an oversight that is bad news.
uhhh....no. A blowjob in the whitehouse is overblown. But if you think Watergate is overblown, that completely explains your non-chalant attitude about GWB's misdealings. So say no more. Your fringe opinion is duly noted.
When Clinton came into office the economy was in recession and the deficit was at record levels. True when GW Bush came to office the economy was shaky but not at recession and the the US had a surplus.
If you want accuracy, let's have accuracy, shall we? The WTT basement bombings were Radical Islam's first attempt at destroying the building. When it did not succeed, that's when planning began to hijack airliners to crash into the WTT. Clinton knew Al-Qaeda was the biggest security threat to the US, and informed Bush of this at the beginning of the Bush Administration. Bush was hell bent on invading Iraq and deposing Saddam from day one. Bush ignored Al-Qaeda until 9-11 occurred. He even ignored a briefing one month before 9-11 that specifically stated Al-Qaeda planned to hijack planes to use for terrorism. This has been well documented by the 9-11 commission. Furthermore, if we took $60 million dollars to hire a partisan Special Prosecutor ala Ken Starr to investigate this President's actions since 9-11, President George W. Bush would be impeached...and more than likely convicted. Questions?
I do not think this is factual. I think we were officially out of recession at the time of the election. Now we were in recession for most of the year before the election, ie the campaign season. And Bush 41 was most unsympathetic wrt those impacted by it. Clinton also had charisma, which Bush 41 certainly lacked.
I think to be fair that a Special Prosecutor would have to look for a pattern of corruption starting with W's 18th birthday. $60 million will notget the job done. More like $600 million
Really? You truly think that a sitting president should get off for tapping the offices of the opponents? Or is it the coverup you think was "overblown"?
You might be right that by the time Clinton took office we had official gotten out of recession (two successive quarters of negative GDP) either way though the deficit was at record levels (since then exceeded by the current Admin.) and the economy wasn't on very solid footing since unemployment was still high and consumer confidence low. The point being that Clinton didn't have it easy when he came into office and certainly didn't inherit a robust economy. The economy didn't start booming until 1995.
are you saying no laws were actually broken? so why did nixon resign? simply because its an overblown scandal?
I didn't say that no laws were broken. It was a petty coverup of a petty crime(s) akin to political hijinks. Yes, it was extensive.
An abbreviated list of what came to be subsumed under the catch-all name "Watergate" includes burglarizing the office of the psychiatrist of Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the secret Pentagon Papers; sending out a "mugging squad" to attack Ellsberg; using the IRS, the FBI, the CIA and other federal agencies to harass and intimidate political opponents; planning a break-in at the Brookings Institution; forging cable messages intended to implicate President Kennedy in the 1963 assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem; exchanging government favors for campaign contributions; "laundering" money raised through illegal contributions; concluding a series of real estate deals that made Nixon a millionaire while in office; arranging government-funded improvements on Nixon's private residences; and infiltrating and sabotaging the campaigns of political rivals............. is now........... political hijinks Giddy, please pass the duchip on the left hand side. You've smoked enough!!
which one is petty to you? breaking and entering? so when a president coverups a petty crime then it is considered petty?
