bodhisattva wrote:
I too choose to blame Clinton based on a vague statement that had Iraq and Al-qaeda in the same sentence, rather than hold the commander in chief who was responsible at the time for manipulating evidence that had come to light years after the whole Clinton statement.
President Hoover was blamed for the problems in the country when he took over as President. Hoovervilles says it all. But now the United States knows that Hoover was one of the country's best president.
Each President's actions affect the country's future. I'm not saying its ALL of Clinton's fault for the mess were in. But that he played a role in where were at today.
Edit: I didn't even read that file thing about the vague statement either. Clinton has done a few things that weren't exactly good for our country.
Its more so I think we should hold the people who have been in and currently are in power responsible for what are country goes through.
We never thought there was going to be a WWII; WWI was supposed to be the war to end all wars but that never happened and look...Were now supposedly in a "war on terrorism" I still personally think that was a ploy to get people to support Bush's actions. I support the troops but not war itself. I think our troops should be safe but that ain't happening anytime soon.
I believe there will never be stability over in the Middle East and I'm sure a lot of people feel the same and will use "no stability" as an argument to pull out but were already over there, I think we should help the people of those countries to give them a little bit of hope.
Edited, Feb 10th 2007 7:05pm by Sogoro