StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I keep hearing that Clinton was a bad president who sucked up to the euroshits and made bad decisions for america and stuff like that.

Now, why exactly was he a bad president?

His Divine Shadow wrote:I keep hearing that Clinton was a bad president who sucked up to the euroshits and made bad decisions for america and stuff like that.

Now, why exactly was he a bad president?

Well, other than the fact that I don't really like having a rapist for a Head of State, the guy put multilateralism above national security to the point of compromising some defensive measures and intelligence. This was not done to sabotage America - he was not really a traitor - But his administration operated on the principle that it was worth giving some things up for "peace". We see the result of that in the DPRK's rampant lunacy today, unchecked by his "peace", just to quickly name the most blatant failure.

And, of course, for his more detailed and confessed sexual engagements, we do know that he performed some whilst engaged in military strategy. In the long run that's damning, even if the Clinton Charm kept him alive in the short term. History in the USA won't be kind to a guy who got a blowjob in the oval office while U.S. troops were in action - You can excuse him for the first, but the timing part is what kills it.

Of course, like most politicians he was in it for personal power and gain - but he was very blatant about it, as the list of all the bribes and gifts accumulated by himself and his family and close staffers indicated. The pardons he issued in his last hours in office are the most offensive abuse of Presidential power since FDR tried to stuff the Supreme Court.

Must - refrain - too -- early -- for - head to blow off

Sorry there isn't enough time or space to go over all of the problems

Highlights: Whitewater, Monica, Jennifer Flowers, cigar, lying, Kosovo, Somalia, largest tax hike in history, on&on &on

I don't see what was wrong with Kosovo, that was a good time for the US to enter a war, and with the support of pretty much every nation, it also stopped the crimes against humanity being comitted there, alot better than trying to emulate the Prime Directive and it's moral cowardice.

Or do you mean it was badly handled.

Pretty much, Clinton did nothing while in office.

Clinton could not effectively handle Iraq, nor could he effectively deal with Al Queda. America would pay dearly for his shortcomings here on Sept 11th.

I don't even want to begin talking about the foreign policy disaster known as the Agreed Framework.

Are you kidding?

Clinton was one of the most influential people in the world of Funk, and still carries much power and wisdom in the Hip-Hop era today. He created Da Funk, and...

Oh wait, you mean Bill Clinton. Sorry about that....

*Puts away backet of black paint and cancels trip to D.C.*

Whats so bad about Clinton?

The long and the shorty of it starts with how he made his Money

What do I mean? Well... if a sitting President gets any gifts from forigen leaders or cash or anything he must report it publicly at the end of the month

However any assets he owned before he went into Office don't have to be reported, and thanks to loop-hole added in the 1900s niether does any increase in old Assets


Basicly
Old Bill took Millions of Dollers in CASH and Gifts, Gave it to himself via "Donating" gifts he had receaved to the Clinton Musem(Which is next door to his NY Estate BTW) and the America public had no way of knowing about it until after he was out of office

It ended up with Clinton reciving during his Eight Years in office, Roughly Six million dollers in Un-marked and tax free gifts

By the way, stock is what he mainly got along with art which he turned around and sold until by the time he had walked out of office he had roughly five million tax free dollers siting in the bank waiting for him

He's not supposed to accept this money as its conflict of intrest thing, Escpilly when China is the one who gave him most of the money, Yep nearly a million dollers worth from China alone....

But old Slick Willy never had any problems with silly little "ethics" rules

His Divine Shadow wrote:I don't see what was wrong with Kosovo, that was a good time for the US to enter a war, and with the support of pretty much every nation, it also stopped the crimes against humanity being comitted there, alot better than trying to emulate the Prime Directive and it's moral cowardice.

Or do you mean it was badly handled.

Crimes against humanity? You mean the 2,000 people dead on all sides of the conflict, including military casualties, the fight against a bunch of narco-terrorists (State Departments own words) within the borders of a sovereign state, and an alliance going into action spouting rampant lies about hundreds of thousands being murdered?

Kosovo. We went in without a "UN mandate " everything we are being scorned for now. The hypocrisy runs deep..

theski wrote:Kosovo. We went in without a "UN mandate " everything we are being scorned for now. The hypocrisy runs deep..

Whose hypocricy?

How about every ex-Clinton advisor that is running around to every tv camera they can find telling all that the US needs a UN mandate to proceed..

theski wrote:How about every ex-Clinton advisor that is running around to every tv camera they can find telling all that the US needs a UN mandate to proceed..

Ohhhh THAT hypocricy. Got it.

Vympel wrote:Crimes against humanity? You mean the 2,000 people dead on all sides of the conflict, including military casualties, the fight against a bunch of narco-terrorists (State Departments own words) within the borders of a sovereign state, and an alliance going into action spouting rampant lies about hundreds of thousands being murdered?

Oh so you claim there was no attempted eradication of the kosovo albanians perhaps? Those discovered mass-graves are just bullshit? Civilians being evicted and run away from their homes(for being kosovo-albanians)?

I mean, lies, I, what??? I'm stunned, what of those people I know, that came here after the war to escape persecution? Should I tell them they are full of bullshit and they should shut the fuck up with their lies?

Blatantly using "Desert Fox" attacks to make news-- risking American and British troops-- so he could face charges in relative quiet. That's pretty goddamn cynical. Not only is he a rapist and a liar, but even in consensual relationships he treats women like disposal diapers. Fill and toss.

He ignored opportunities to shut down various terrorist networks when he had the chance (both Sudan and Afghanistan once offered Osama bin Laden on silver platters to him) and when he did "do something" against terrorists it was ineffective, poorly planned cruise missile strikes.

Kosovo was actually a good idea but badly handled. Consider Clinton's actions: he sent troops into a foreign country engaged in a civil war where the US had no interests. Troops were sent without a mandate, no plan, no goals, and no timetable for ending the mission and coming home. So what exactly was his problem with the Vietnam war?

He made it clear that he loathed the military, even saying so in one instance I believe, and he sold out a lot of secrets to the Chinese and the N. Koreans in an attempt to buy favor. The Chinese Communist government supplied his campaign fund with hundreds of thousands of dollars, which makes me wonder what they got out of the deal and why they found him so agreeable.

Gun control was high on his agenda as well, and while I have nothing against restricting criminals and mental patients, etc, from obtaining weapons these laws are already in place but unenforced; Clinton basically wanted even the most law-abiding and responsible gun owners to be treated like criminals. Janet Reno and Louis Freeh were alloed to abuse their police powers against anyone who was felt to be more of a political threat than a real one.

And on a personal note, he was just a smarmy, self-righteous prick with an adolescent sense of responsibility. He had a problem I find typical of the Left: he expected the best things from the worst people while simultaneously seeing the worst things in the best people.

*looks around*
There doesn't seem to be any lefties here disagreeing...

Wow, its been a while since I was here.

If I remember correctly, the whole Bosnia thing was a NATO action, not the UN.

France and Germany screamed and yelled that we had to do something, even though we had no evidence that the genocide was actually happening (war crimes were happening on both sides). France and Germany were just worrying about the markets they would be able to dip into with Milosovic out of the way. They went through NATO and not the UN so Russia dn China couldn't use their veto power.

And ChIraq has the balls to get pissy with us?

el blanco wrote:Even though we had no evidence that the genocide was actually happening (war crimes were happening on both sides).

But in retrospect, they where happening, even if on a more limited scale(discovered hidden mass-graves), but most definitly serbian forces where acting like the nazis in early nazi germany, so it's good that fire was put out in time.

Coyote wrote:He ignored opportunities to shut down various terrorist networks when he had the chance (both Sudan and Afghanistan once offered Osama bin Laden on silver platters to him) and when he did "do something" against terrorists it was ineffective, poorly planned cruise missile strikes.

He also never replaced the cruise missiles that he expended. Warstocks took a big hit during the Clinton Administration (funding got to the point where we nearly ran out of 9mm ammunition). He also turned a bunch of remanufactured A-6Es into nice coral reefs.

His Divine Shadow wrote:I keep hearing that Clinton was a bad president who sucked up to the euroshits and made bad decisions for america and stuff like that.

Now, why exactly was he a bad president?

If you support giving money to those who don't earn it, redistribution of wealth from those who earn it to those who won't work, and weakening the US military, then Clinton was a good president.

jegs2 wrote:If you support giving money to those who don't earn it, redistribution of wealth from those who earn it to those who won't work

Just picking up on this one, are you talking about the social security net? The one that is there to help the unemployed?

His Divine Shadow wrote:

jegs2 wrote:If you support giving money to those who don't earn it, redistribution of wealth from those who earn it to those who won't work

Just picking up on this one, are you talking about the social security net? The one that is there to help the unemployed?

Not social security ... welfare. The reforms to welfare while Clinton was in office were due to the Conservative Congress, not Clinton. He was an old tax and spend Democrat masquerading as a "New Democrat."

His Divine Shadow wrote:*looks around*
There doesn't seem to be any lefties here disagreeing...

I consider myself a liberal on many issues, and while I think the blowjob and impeachment thing was just pathetic, I do agree that he was a slime. Mind you, I also think George Bush is a slime, which puts me in opposition to a lot of his defenders here, who seem to think he's a paragon of virtue because he has the "courage" to fight for "America's interests" (as if any other president would have done anything substantially different after 9/11).

I don't think anyone is saying Bush is the best President of Choice, but the topic is Clinton, and why he was a bad President. The fact of the matter is 95% of the politicians out there are Slime. Show me an honest politician and I have some swampland to sell............

Just to clarify, are we discussing legitimate shit Clinton pulled, or the trivial shit that Clinton pulled?