GOP Investigated Pres. Clinton’s Cat But Only Plans ‘Oversight’ on Pres. Bush’s Admitted Illegal Spying What do you call a political party that thinks postage for a Presidential cat's fan club requires a full-on Congressional investigation, but a President who admits on national television to breaking Federal law, repeatedly, only merits some committee "oversight," and spotty oversight at that? Republicans Compare and contrast: 1995: Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), then chair of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, investigated whether taxpayers were footing the cost of stationery and postage for the fan club dedicated to President Clinton’s cat, Socks. (They were not - and it turns out Barbara Bush’s dog Millie had a fan club too.) 2005: Two weeks ago, President Bush admitted he willfully flouted a law that requires him to get warrants before wiretapping U.S. citizens. His justification for ignoring the law appears to be nobless oblige. In reaction, Republicans in charge of the Senate Judiciary Committee announced on Friday that they are planning “oversight” hearings into the matter.
Gee, glad to know our politicians are hard at work.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
Don't think that they were bashing Clinton so badly. Clinton made millions from selling pardons, and he got away with that. Investigating him was a Whitewater Whitewash. He's getting away with a parking ticket, suspended, for mass murder and espionage.
I wish they would have bashed Clinton even more, but to do so about his cat is silly. Clinton was in the same league as the Bush Crime Family. Clinton was the drug kingpin of Mena, Arkansas. They're all corrupt SOBs. Have been since the 60's. - N
But the mere fact that a republican congress had 1,000 subpeonas on Clinton, and only gave out 3(!!!!!!!!)for George Bush. The same George Bush that lied about.. Weapons of Mass Destruction The link beetwen al-qaida and Iraq Stole two elections Planned and executed a mass murder (9/11) The whole debacle of New Orleans And many more...(To drunk to think of more)
That's because if you argue against Bush, you're anti-semitic.. err, unpatriotic. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
There is a fundamental difference between drugs and mass murder. Clinton (so you claim) sold drugs... ok? The person using the drugs in the end has a right to chose to take them or not. The Tens of thousands of people who died as a result of bush ordering attacks on foreign countries is NOT AT ALL comparable to any type of drug bussiness unless they are KILLING TENS OF THOUSANDS of people! If theres a problem, its because of clinton, if theres freedom it must because of George Bush. On fox i heard Sean Hannity say iraqi's should pay Soldiers families who died for liberating them. I also heard another person say it is because of our actions that saudi arabia and lebbanon are "free'r". WoW-!!!!
when i lived in the usa, i watched fox religiously instead of espn. the most amusing programming television has ever put forth, and i still wasnt converted to a "fair and balanced" standpoint... dont think mr o'reilly didnt try though.