| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | ILikePie (49)
04/26/2008 | So was Hitler.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | blue47 (12)
08/21/2007 | He didn't get almost 4000 soldiers killed for no reason did he?
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | doobiesNhof (21)
05/24/2006 | So, Clinton gets a blow job from an intern and some want him impeached. That was a personal matter that should have been left alone. Bush on the other hand is responsible for the deaths of thousands in Iraq in a war fought under the shroud of lies and deceipt. What a sham he hasn't been ousted.
(7 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | zuchinibut (36)
05/19/2006 | Things are going well for me now, and they were fine for me back when Clinton was President. The only difference now is who is doing the complaining. I don't feel that Clinton did any worse than Bush, but I'm not going to say that he did any better either.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Djahuti (54)
05/19/2006 | As undesirable as Clinton may have been,he just can't measure up to the total disaster Bush has been.Remember,Clinton left office and we had a large Economic SURPLUS.Clinton had also been keeping an eye on Al-Queda (who were actually FUNDED by Republican Presidents back when they (al queda)were fighting the Russians!)Bush cut the program for this surveilance and WHAM,months later,9/11.The day after September 11th,the United States had,possibly for the first time in history,the sympathy and support of almost all of the international community.Instead of getting Bin Laden,as he VOWED to do,Bush decides to go after Hussein-and does so by Bombing Iraq against the best advise and intelligent objections of the UN.Today,we have more terrorism globally,and less allies than ever before.No sir,Clinton looks pretty good next to Dubbaya,and that took a LOT of bad decisions and abuse of power to achieve.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | EschewObfuscation (61)
05/18/2006 | Denigrating his predecessor is not a defense.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Drummond (54)
05/18/2006 | Yeah, those Clinton deficits. All that international bad will. Those years of recession. Horrible time.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | magellan (153)
05/18/2006 | Whether or not it's true, I think this is an awful argument. Who cares? For those of us that consider ourselves Americans first, and members of a political party second, this is as bizarre and partisan an argument as there is.
Let's make the standard excellence, not guys we don't like from the other team.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| jaywilton (26)
05/18/2006 | I'm not a politically-minded person;but
having seen Hotel Rwanda...I think Clinton is hard to beat.After his presidency,he flew to Rwanda and admitted he was too busy doin' Monica.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| edt4 (99)
05/18/2006 | Sorry to break this to some people, but American foreign policy was in place and functioning long, long before Clinton was born, much less became President...
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | abichara (60)
05/18/2006 | Sure Clinton wasn't great either. I suppose that means that we have to select better leaders, rather than those which merely tell us what we want to hear!
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-11 OF 11 | View All |