Guildster Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Sorry, ixcuincle, I wasn't aiming at you. But every discussion involving the incompetence of this administration inevitably gets deflected to the "horrible things" Bill Clinton did. I just wish the posters who label Democrats "ignorant liberals" as one did earlier in this thread would grow a spine on the end of their brain and stop using an incident that happened ten years ago to deflect the current facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanRobinson Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 One last note: When one of the key Watergate players (John W. Dean) who spent much time in federal prison for his role in said scandal labels the current administrations' practices as "Worse Than Watergate," well, you know you've got issues. Of course, that book came out in 2004... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_jefe061 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I just found it doubtful that Bush could be the worst president when others arguably did worse. (As someone said before , does the 1 million deaths in Vietnam make Kennedy / LBJ bad presidents?) Excuse me, but Dwight Eisenhower planted the seeds of Vietnam. The first involvement was with Eisenhower, and then Kennedy sent "advisers" to monitor the situation, and then LBJ went in. Actually going into Vietnam was all LBJ. The fact remains that the Bush Presidency has been the most secretive and clandestine Presidency in years. The fact that all of these political scandals and not personal scandals have come out from the Bush administration while considering their secrecy is astounding. From Valerie Plame to the WMD's, there's so many more scandals that are worse than Monica Lewinsky. If anyone wants to try and rag on the character of Bill Clinton, when the Republican Party is home to Tom Delay/Larry Craig/Duke Cunningham and other numerous scumbags, think about this: George W. Bush is the only president to have a criminal record (DUI). I could never understand why all of the "Swift Boat Vets" ragged on John Kerry for his 3 purple (legit) hearts, when George W. Bush had his father skip the list to get him into the Texas National Guard and Dick Cheney had plenty of deferments. I have no problem with not going into Vietnam or draft dodging, Al Gore and Bill Clinton did it, but I have a problem with war mongering and draft dodging. So before you want to talk about the character of the leaders of the Democratic party, look in the mirror. after 9/11, instigated the worst assault on American civil liberties since Lincoln. I'm not disagreeing with you about Bush, but Woodrow Wilson did bring back the Sedition Acts. Worst since Wilson, probably. the point im trying to make is that there have been other wars that have lasted too long and have ended up as a failure. this is just a part of the history of our nation, and although bush has made some bad decisions, he shouldnt be deemed the worst president of the united states. I see the point, but the thing about warfare is that it's relative. The number of casualties on a timeline going from war to war gets lower. We stay in Iraq long enough, we hit 5,000, which is far too many for modern warfare, not to mention the life changing injuries after. These deaths and injuries are preventable and unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friedman Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I was wondering how long it would take for the Clinton bashing to start. When are you right-wing butt corks going to get over it? Is it Clinton you don't like? Or is it blow jobs you don't like? Under the direction or your great leader Newt Gingrich, you succeeded in wasting millions of dollars and three years of a presidency with huge possibilities. That is the crime. And why the hell should Carter be considered the worst president ever? Oh, I know, because he is a Democrat. Remember a president named Nixon? Well, in my book, he is right behind George W. Bush as worst, and most dangerous, president ever. I was wondering the same exact thing. Why doesn't someone explain to me how the hell an affair with an intern has anything to do with a presidency. It was none of our business, and we (as Americans) interferred way too much. We should have just left the man alone, and deal with it like any other person would have. Carter was bad, but was he the worst president? No. There have been bad republican presidents, and bad democratic presidents. There have been good democratic presidents, and good republican presidents. Usually, the best presidents are the ones in the middle, and who aren't extreme. Examples - Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiheat32 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I was wondering the same exact thing. Why doesn't someone explain to me how the hell an affair with an intern has anything to do with a presidency. It was none of our business, and we (as Americans) interferred way too much. We should have just left the man alone, and deal with it like any other person would have. Carter was bad, but was he the worst president? No. There have been bad republican presidents, and bad democratic presidents. There have been good democratic presidents, and good republican presidents. Usually, the best presidents are the ones in the middle, and who aren't extreme. Examples - Clinton, Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln. yeah, i agree with you, but teddy roosevelt wasnt extreme? before his presidency, he fought hard for the spanish american war and during he started the whole progressive movement, he mediated the russo japanese war, and signed many laws related to trustbusting. unlike bush though, most of these actions were very successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guildster Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 Thanks Kraw. The Patrick Graham article is an eye-opening read for anyone who gives a damn about this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 We all know there is a lot of animosity in here towards the war and Bush , but would any of you dare stoop to the level that MoveOn.org has , and call an American general who has served this country well "Betray Us"? I seriously hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanRobinson Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Though I can't speak for anyone else, I'll say of course not. Bear in mind that organizations such as MoveOn.org, while they do have the occasional good point, are there to stir up passion--and thus are really no better than Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and others on the extreme right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_jefe061 Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 I'm pretty sure many conservatives have stooped much lower. Oh, yeah, and there's that whole Swift Boat thing. I'm pretty sure that's just as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abc006 Posted September 24, 2007 Author Share Posted September 24, 2007 A) MoveOn and the like don't LIE - they might emphasize things, but they never just flat-out lie like the Swift Boat scam, there there was serious lies made up solely to make Kerry look bad. Orginizations like MoveOn aren't at least blatantly dishonest. I would not exactly call Patreaus the most perfect person, he's got plenty against him, more than enough to be criticized. Fill in the blanks: Alberto Gonzales is to "I don't recall" as Dave Patreaus is to "__________." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Well it's nice to see the Dems and Reps unite for one thing : denouncing the "Betray Us" ad. To suggest that a general is being told what to say by the White House is outrageous. That's bipartisanship for you. Final tangent : If Bush riles us up , who doesn't rile you up? Who do you want to see as president in 2008? On the democratic side , Obama would get my vote , and for the Republicans , either Romney or Giuliani. The important thing to remember is that any candidate but Hillary winning the presidency is good enough for me! :biglaff: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abc006 Posted September 25, 2007 Author Share Posted September 25, 2007 I'm not saying he's being told by the white house, (then again I'm not saying he's not) but you can't say he doesn't agree with the white house, or he doesn't want to say what he's saying. BTW, the answer to the fill-in-the-blank was "I don't know." Almost worse than I don't recall because at least maybe Gonzales will be hit on the head with a frying pan and miraculously remember it all; Patreaus just doesn't know at all, he's clueless. Well, for president, if not those two on my avatar, preferably Obama, no doubt, he's the kind of president America needs to revitalize us, from the political standpoint and as a united culture. With Hillary, I won't mind if she's president at all, but then again if someone like Obama or even Edwards (or Cucinich, but that's a longshot) can be president instead, I'd prefer it. It's sort of like the "anybody-but-a-republican". If Obama can be president I'd much prefer it, but anybody who's a democrat and can win, I'll take. Except Gravel. McCain is just a creep. Making jokes about wanting to step on cats is not a good way to increase your popularity when you're running an election for president. Neither is just having mixed up politics. Romney seems just like an annoying guy. Guiliani... not going to get into him. Just... yuck. Most everyone else seems OK people as people, but... but all just have awful politics, simply put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean O Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 McCain speaking at my graduation was the only thing that ever spurred me to write an editorial into my school's newspaper. What Rove & Co. did to him during the 2000 primaries is unforgivable, and his toadying to Bush afterwards was even worse. For president, I agree that anyone who doesn't believe anything PNAC says is fine with me. I'm going for Obama. It's an Obama Nation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanRobinson Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 For Petraeus, I think the problem is not that he's been told what to say so much as he's attempting to tell it like it is and the Bush administration is attempting to spin it to make themselves look good. Also NB, I didn't say MoveOn.org is better or worse than groups on the right--I simply said they're on roughly the same level as your O'Reilly's, your Limbaughs, etc. They're nowhere near the SwiftBoaters, which is perhaps the most despicable thing to happen to a presidential election--aside from what Bush and Rove did to McCain in 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_jefe061 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Giuliani would be the worst choice for President, and Romney would be just as bad. Giuliani did absolutely nothing as Mayor of New York City except toss the hookers out of Time Square and clean up the rivers. As for the "morals" that Conservatives preach about (Like Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, and Larry Craig), Rudy cheated on his wife and brought his mistress home to the kids. Also, looking at 9/11, many Giuliani missteps before 9/11 probably cost some lives. Not to mention that everything I've heard about Giuliani behind the scenes suggests he's a scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwinginSoriano Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Giuliani did absolutely nothing as Mayor of New York City And where do you live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abc006 Posted September 25, 2007 Author Share Posted September 25, 2007 For Petraeus, I think the problem is not that he's been told what to say so much as he's attempting to tell it like it is and the Bush administration is attempting to spin it to make themselves look good.Patraeus is not by any means "telling it like it is." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanRobinson Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 All right--I admit that I'm basing this on a news report from a few weeks ago. That report essentially stated that Petraeus' original report attempted to show that things in Iraq were not quite as rosy as Bush et al would like to believe and that Bush et al had indicated intent to re-frame the report in a more favorable light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroEric Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Well it's nice to see the Dems and Reps unite for one thing : denouncing the "Betray Us" ad. To suggest that a general is being told what to say by the White House is outrageous. That's bipartisanship for you. I read this as: Well, it's nice to see the Dems and Reps wasting taxpayer money on a useless motion to poo-poo an organization's right to their second amendment rights. Don't they have better things to spend their ******* time and our ******* money on? Goddamn. I don't want the Senate symbolically voting on MoveOn.org. I don't want them symbolically voting on Ann Coulter. I don't want them symbolically voting on anything. Seriously. Goddamn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guildster Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 To suggest that a general is being told what to say by the White House is outrageous. HaHaHaHaHaHaHa. Jeez...I mean, come on. You really believe that? HaHaHaHaHa. Whew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Well, I can't believe I just read through this whole thread. I have to believe that American politics are as incredibly subjective as who is the best in baseball! Interesting how much we all "think" we know about the state of our government, and the minds of those in offices. I think the advent of the internet has stirred up a hornet's nest of deception, lies, guesses, theories and everything in between. I think common sense and fact have pretty much departed our realm of political discussion, on either side of the fence. Reading my little post here is as big a waste of time as what I just read through. I am so glad I have a higher authority and something greater to believe in than a man made government or media/internet induced histeria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padres67 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I couldn't agree more-Bush, Obama, Hillbill-are all people-only God has the answers to the world problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillerBs Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 What's with all the name calling? Why can't we just have a discussion and present our opinions in a civilized, preferably grammatically correct manner? Also, how did it progress from Bush and the Fourth Amendment to wherever the heck it is now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hory Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I read this as: Well, it's nice to see the Dems and Reps wasting taxpayer money on a useless motion to poo-poo an organization's right to their second amendment rights. Don't they have better things to spend their **** time and our **** money on? Goddamn. I don't want the Senate symbolically voting on MoveOn.org. I don't want them symbolically voting on Ann Coulter. I don't want them symbolically voting on anything. Seriously. Goddamn. Which explains why the Democrat Congress has a higher approval rating amongst Republicans than Democrats... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.