a) Bush's current approval rating is higher than Clinton's was at this point in their terms. It's not really fair to take it down to the day, but even at his lowest, Bush's approval rating was only 5-6% off from Clintons at around the same time. Almost all lame duck presidents have low approval ratings at this point in their terms.Originally Posted by TIGERJC
b) There is a GREAT DEAL you can pick on Clinton for, namely 1) Having the most corrupt administration in history (there are nonpartisan think tanks and organizations that tabulate such things, much the same way as standards of living or what constitutes poverty levels, etc), 2) Attempting to pass the Executive order called 'Federalism' (what, never heard of it? probably for the same reason you didn't hear about him ordering the same kind of warrantless surveillance bush did, except he went a step further and authorized infrared surveillance of your home also), and 3) Not getting 'headin the oval office', but commiting PERJURY on the stand in order to keep a woman from taking her due course in a particular legal process that he CHAMPIONED and helped put in PLACE. 4) Smothering us in socialism every time he pissed off his wife and needed to appease her Marxist sensibilities.
So, based on what you're saying, if Bush should 'go to jail, plain and simple', did you call for the same treatment for Clinton? Somehow I doubt it. I'm betting that this is the first you've heard of it in any case.
As far as the wiretaps leading to an arrest, they led to several, as the wiretaps were specifically ordered after 9/11 on known terrorist suspects. It is actually demonstratable that those wiretaps helped foil an attack on the brooklyn bridge. Regardless of whether you agree with it or not, and whether it was legal or not (I'm still gathering information on the actual legality of the action), those facts are true.. so take from them what you will, figure it into your equasion as you like.