Is everything just Clinton's fault no matter what?

Question

If the spoils of Clinton's first term was the result of the previous term (Bush Sr.), then why isn't the downfall of Bush Jr's second term the result of Bush Jr's first term? And why aren't the spoils of Jr's first term the result of Clinton's second term? Also, why aren't the spoils of Clinton's second term the result of Clinton's first term?

It seems like it doesn't matter how many terms go by. The spoils of all terms will be the result of the last Republican term, and the problems with every term will be the result of the last Democratic term.

Republican math doesn't make any sense.

Answer 1

It's just a whole bunch of finger pointing.....................

Answer 2

I thought everything was Bush's fault!

Answer 3

You're right. Your comment exposes the lies of the Right. They want the Lleft painted as the bad guys, without regard for accuracy and truth.

Answer 4

It's pretty silly isn't it?   I'm not sure where they come up with that.  Maybe someone on here will show us how that works.

Answer 5

The Cons blame everything on Clinton....The Libs blame everything on Bush...the truth is somewhere in the middle. (Yes I am generalizing)

Answer 6

everybody knows everything is Dubya's fault.

Clinton, the teflon low life, well, nothing was his fault, was it?  He was never held to account for anything. So if nothing is his fault, then he can't take credit for anything either.

On the other hand, Bush is blamed for everything under the sun and has been vilified for eight years now. So realistically, he should get credit for some things also

Answer 7

Dont be silly most of it can be traced back to FDR, Johnson and Carter