Clinton More Trustworthy Than Bush?

[CrimsonWhite]

published in the NY Times a few days ago, gives George Bush the third lowest approval rating of any president in the past 50 years (only Carter and Nixon scored lower).

Remember two years ago, when I was saying we'll look back on Bush as the worst president in modern history, and everyone laughed at me?

Mariner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/w...4000&en=96f3cf1ade4c373d&ei=5087&nl=ep&emc=ep

Approval ratings in the second term don't mean anything. I am not happy with the things that President Bush has done, but the history are still yet to be written. He could be seen as a phenominal president 50 years from now. Look how Jefferson and Jackson are revered.

 

[Mariner]

Bush's overall legacy will be defined by the success or failure of our enterprise in Iraq, and by the future's view of his stalling on global warming. I'm guessing that on both fronts he'll be judged harshly, but we'll have to wait and see.

Mariner.

 

[T-Bor]

You got that backwards Gunny. If you honestly think Bush is a better president than Clinton was it is quite obvious that "Oblivous to Reality" describes you QUITE well. Wouldnt be surprised if your avatar was directly next to the word "Oblivious" or "Brain Washed" in the dictionary...Peace.

It must be nice to live in your little world. No matter how many times you get shot right out of the sky, you'll turn right around and post such drivel as this.

I believe "oblivious to reality" applies to you quite nicely.

 

[CSM]

You got that backwards Gunny. If you honestly think Bush is a better president than Clinton was it is quite obvious that "Oblivous to Reality" describes you QUITE well. Wouldnt be surprised if your avatar was directly next to the word "Oblivious" or "Brain Washed" in the dictionary...Peace.

Now that is funny...you insult the guy and end with..."Peace"....

 

[T-Bor]

Didnt he insult the previous poster ? Hey, if you cant take it...dont dish it out.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Bush's overall legacy will be defined by the success or failure of our enterprise in Iraq, and by the future's view of his stalling on global warming. I'm guessing that on both fronts he'll be judged harshly, but we'll have to wait and see.

Mariner.

I guess that's why dems obviously want us to fail.

 

[T-Bor]

Yeah and repubs dont want libs to fail.. Puhhlease.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yeah and repubs dont want libs to fail.. Puhhlease.

We want libs to fail, not america. There's a difference.

 

[CSM]

Didnt he insult the previous poster ? Hey, if you cant take it...dont dish it out.

ah, I didn't realize you were the "protector and dispenser of justice" on this board. Guess I didn't get the memo.

 

[jillian]

We want libs to fail, not america. There's a difference.

Perhaps it goes both ways?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Perhaps it goes both ways?

No. Liberals want america to fail. They want us to be "liked" instead of being self determined. It's a form of retardation.

 

[jillian]

No. Liberals want america to fail. They want us to be "liked" instead of being self determined. It's a form of retardation.

Bunch of anti-American, anti-democracy tripe I've ever heard. Go live in the Soviet Union if you want to live in a one-party police state.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Bunch of anti-American, anti-democracy tripe I've ever heard. Go live in the Soviet Union if you want to live in a one-party police state.

A multi party system typically offers multiple solutions, as the parties are BOTH offering constructive policy and work. When one party nakedly agitates for the death of the nation, the populace rightfully consigns them to the bin of political losers. Get a clue and revitalize the system with ONE good idea, mmmkay? Thanks. Buh-bye.

 

[jillian]

A multi party system typically offers multiple solutions, as the parties are BOTH offering constructive policy and work. When one party nakedly agitates for the death of the nation, the populace rightfully consigns them to the bin of political losers. Get a clue and revitalize the system with ONE good idea, mmmkay? Thanks. Buh-bye.

Buh-bye? RAFLMAO! Weren't you the one who just said that messageboards are for discussing things? Guess that only applies to anti-jew rants.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Buh-bye? RAFLMAO! Weren't you the one who just said that messageboards are for discussing things? Guess that only applies to anti-jew rants.

Say whatever you want. Odds are it'll be stupid and I'll label it as such.

 

[T-Bor]

Kind of like your remark right. I officially label the remark below as stupid.

Say whatever you want. Odds are it'll be stupid and I'll label it as such.

 

[T-Bor]

I purposely never sent it to you.

ah, I didn't realize you were the "protector and dispenser of justice" on this board. Guess I didn't get the memo.

 

[Bonnie]

Yeah and repubs dont want libs to fail.. Puhhlease.

Liberalism fails all on it's own

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Kind of like your remark right. I officially label the remark below as stupid.

You

 

[Rico]

published in the NY Times a few days ago, gives George Bush the third lowest approval rating of any president in the past 50 years (only Carter and Nixon scored lower).

Remember two years ago, when I was saying we'll look back on Bush as the worst president in modern history, and everyone laughed at me?

Mariner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/w...4000&en=96f3cf1ade4c373d&ei=5087&nl=ep&emc=ep

I'm still laughing at you. Bush is not going to be looked upon as the worst President in modern history. That will be reserved for Nixon and Carter. Jeeeez Clinton did NOTHING. Name one damn thing of importance Bill Clinton accomplished as President. (And recieving oral gratification in the oval office doesn't count)