That's the question they're asking over at Free Republic
. Apparently he's not, as that would be impossible. Clinton, after all, skull screwed the American Way and actually worked as a drug mule for Al-Quaeda. The fact that they're wondering is pretty good evidence just how impressively Bush is screwing up. Think those guys are regretting those GW Heart tattoos? Word to the wise, demagogues are like girlfriends get their names in congi characters, that way you can deny when things go South.
Anyhoo, my big question, can't we move on from Clinton? It's like complaining about Ike (actually, either Ike, the president or the Tina beater) seems a bit dated. Beyond that, how is, "Bush is bad, but he's not Clinton bad," a position of any import? To paraphrase comedian Doug Stanhope
how does your suck make my suck suck less? No body says, well, Pol Pot was bad, but he wasn't Hitler bad. S.O.L.