NationStates Jolt Archive

Again does not matter if your Democrat or in GOP.

I don't think there is any debating on this one...

George W. Bush

agreed

Are you sure "Jay" is J. Edgar Hoover's first name?

Whoops. It is Herbert Hoover.

LoL.

J. Edgar Hoover was head of FBI and I wasn't sure he was president. Now I know.

That just shows how much I care for republican presidents. lol

Wow, nobody for Hoover?

Bush or Reagan... Bush or Reagan... I think I'll go with George W. Bush.

Wow, nobody for Hoover?
Bush was an option.

Bush Jr.

Who's "George Bush Sr."?

Do you, perhaps, mean George Herbert Walker Bush?

Way to show your ignorance, "Supierors"...now go kill some babies.

John Edgar Hoover and I could actually see including him as unelected de facto president.

Im sorry to say...

Out of the Presidents you have listed...

Statistically, Its Dubya all the way....

I would say if he's not the worst ever....hes the worst President of any party, in the last century.

Im sorry to say...

Out of the Presidents you have listed...

Statistically, Its Dubya all the way....

I would say if he's not the worst ever....hes the worst President of any party, in the last century.

...and what exactly did he do to deserve this title?

*waits for favorite part of liberal bullshit*

...and what exactly did he do to deserve this title?

*waits for favorite part of liberal bullshit*

Umm....since your obviously going to take a snotty tone with whatever I show you....why should I even bother to answer?

Look it up for yourself, Um..I dunno.....maybe actually think for yourself ?

Its all there if you want to find out where he rates among his peers.

im a liberal and i don't think bush is the worst president ever, fat mike and john kerry have gotten to all of you with their lies, now bush is a bad president, but aren't they all?

Um..I dunno.....maybe actually think for yourself ?

Think for myself? My god...it seems that I am. Indeed, I have formed my own opinion. Perhaps you should realize how you're childishly following the now-common thought process of: "hmm...I hate...uh...yeah...bush...cause...um...cause he's evil!"

Here's another question...how am I not thinking for myself?

im a liberal and i don't think bush is the worst president ever, fat mike and john kerry have gotten to all of you with their lies, now bush is a bad president, but aren't they all?

No

Think for myself? My god...it seems that I am. Indeed, I have formed my own opinion. Perhaps you should realize how you're childishly following the now-common thought process of: "hmm...I hate...uh...yeah...bush...cause...um...cause he's evil!"

Here's another question...how am I not thinking for myself?


This is exactly the snotty tone I was talking about.

No matter what evidence I show you that will tell you exactly what George Bush has done, and is doing, your never going to believe a word of it.

Statistically, and historically, George Bush is on his way to becoming the worst president since Jackson, or Grant.
Thats not good.
But, people like you who believe what Bill O Reilly, or Sean Hannity tell you to, or whatever comes directly from Bush's mouth....
...havent heard a word about it.

Heres a touch.

George Bush invaded Iraq under false pretences.
As a result...
Tens of thousands of people from Iraq, are now dead.
About a thousand of our people are too.

This should never have happened, without the full support of the rest of the world.

I am surprised no body mentioned Warren G. Harding. Probably the most corrupt of both parties.

The Shrub? Well I am not sure if he is corrupt or just a puppet.

Now the Shrubs administration will probably surpass Grant's and Hardings administrations.....

This is exactly the snotty tone I was talking about.

No matter what evidence I show you that will tell you exactly what George Bush has done, and is doing, your never going to believe a word of it.

Statistically, and historically, George Bush is on his way to becoming the worst president since Jackson, or Grant.
Thats not good.
But, people like you who believe what Bill O Reilly, or Sean Hannity tell you to, or whatever comes directly from Bush's mouth....
...havent heard a word about it.

Heres a touch.

George Bush invaded Iraq under false pretences.
As a result...
Tens of thousands of people from Iraq, are now dead.
About a thousand of our people are too.

This should never have happened, without the full support of the rest of the world.

Jackson wasn't that bad of a president...how about Carter and Nixon? I'll give you Grant though.

You say statistically and historically, and I say show me the statistics and the quotes from the historians.

...and I don't listen to O'Reilly because it's the same amout of bullshit that Moore gives you liberals. Ok...not the same amount...but almost the same. Once again, I make my own decisions.

Here's a touch for you, the end result justifies the means. That being said, anyone yet convinced that saddam didn't have WMD's in his country is simply being ignorant. It's not just Bush either...why do you think Clinton bombed Iraq? To "destroy chemical, nuclear, and biological weapon facilities."

I hear two "false pretenses" from liberals. 1. Bush got mad cause Saddam tried to kill his father. Well...wouldn't you be pissed if someone tried to kill your father? 2. It was for oil. Well...if it was...(which it wasn't)...who cares? We need oil.

In addition, the fact that Saddam could ever create WMD's gives us enough right to invade. He was a threat to the world, and we both know that the UN wouldn't do anything about it until he actually used them on some unsuspecting nation. This is even after you ignore all the horrible crimes Saddam committed.

Lastly, since when does the constitution say that we must consult the entire world before doing something. That's complete bullshit. If that was the case, nothing would be done. A parent's job isn't to please his or her child. It is to do what's best for them.

Did anyone else read the Labor Department's jobs report?

"Economists expected 235,000 new jobs in the month of July and in actuality the economy added just 32,000."

Great job, Bush.

Again does not matter if your Democrat or in GOP.

I'd like to note that someone is being smart for once and not counting Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as Republicans, who were "Northern Republicans" and not at all conservative ofr their time.

Jackson wasn't that bad of a president...how about Carter and Nixon? I'll give you Grant though.


"The only good Indian is a DEAD one, and Im dedicated to the principal of a lot of dead Indians."
-Andrew Jackson.

I'd say the mass murder of millions of Native Americans makes Jackson's case for me.

Nixon....got us out of Vietnam. (not right away mind you...)

Carter...

Had a republican house and senate that refused to pass most of his ideas.
Also...he later won a Nobel Peace prize.
Carter might not have been an efficient President, but much of that really wasnt his fault.

His greatest acheivements have come after his term.

Jimmy Carter, is the last of the Truly Great Men .

Hey! Why aren't Lincoln or Roosevelt on there?

Dang, now I'm going to have to vote 'other.' Bother.

Did anyone else read the Labor Department's jobs report?

"Economists expected 235,000 new jobs in the month of July and in actuality the economy added just 32,000."

Great job, Bush.


That doesnt even take him out of the HOLE he created.
He is still BEHIND in job growth.

This means there are fewer jobs NOW, then when he was elected.

Oh..thats right..he was never elected.....anyway...

"The only good Indian is a DEAD one, and Im dedicated to the principal of a lot of dead Indians."
-Andrew Jackson.

I'd say the mass murder of millions of Native Americans makes Jackson's case for me.

Nixon....got us out of Vietnam. (not right away mind you...)

Carter...

Had a republican house and senate that refused to pass most of his ideas.
Also...he later won a Nobel Peace prize.
Carter might not have been an efficient President, but much of that really wasnt his fault.

His greatest acheivements have come after his term.

Jimmy Carter, is the last of the Truly Great Men .

Being a racist makes you a bad person...not a bad president. Anyhow...how 'bout you actually argue with me and not nitpick words and change issues? You completely ignored the majority of my reply. Don't be like Michael Moore now...

Where are your statistics? Where are these historians that can already say Bush is one of the worst presidents? Where is your proof? Oh that's right...I just won't listen to it. Try me...I'm all ears.

Oh..thats right..he was never elected.....anyway...

Yeah he was. He won the electoral college. That's the only way to win. You don't win by popular vote. Get over it.

Where are your statistics? Where are these historians that can already say Bush is one of the worst presidents? Where is your proof? Oh that's right...I just won't listen to it. Try me...I'm all ears.

I handed you statistics and you ignored my post.

Nice one.

Lastly, since when does the constitution say that we must consult the entire world before doing something. That's complete bullshit. If that was the case, nothing would be done. A parent's job isn't to please his or her child. It is to do what's best for them.

You elitist xenophobic moron. We aren't parents. This country is about 70% composed of people not fit to be parents. 45% of them don't even acknowledge evolution. The rest are so stupid they think they'll make more money by bearing the brunt on tax day (pardon my aside).
We created the UN to help keep the power in balance, and not have some evil tyrannical nation gung-hoing it in an attempt to acrue more power, resources, or territory, under whatever pretence. And guess who the tyrant is?
We blew off the UN and are now grandstanding; we even removed ourselves from being tried by a war crimes committee, if I recall correctly. The only reason why everyone hasn't pounced on us, is because we were the evil ones behind the cold war, stockpiling our weaponry so noone could take us down.
And now what? Our apathetic public and deluded Christian nutjobs are being led by an idiot who couldn't even get better than a 1270 on his SATs, telling us all sorts of crap that isn't really any of our business.
While we could be working on education and the environment, social reforms and tightening foreign relations, we've done the exact opposite.
Not in the constitution? There are greater things in the world than the USA. And right now, there are quite a few.

So once again, comparing us to parents who "know" best, and the UN as a child, composed of over 50 sovereign nations, is utter tripe.

I'm sorry, in Saipea, we'd have to deport you for being too stupid.

Did anyone else read the Labor Department's jobs report?

"Economists expected 235,000 new jobs in the month of July and in actuality the economy added just 32,000."

Great job, Bush.

So the economists expected way too much...how is that Bush's fault? Also, how many other presidents had people lose jobs while they were in office?

So the economists expected way too much...how is that Bush's fault? Also, how many other presidents had people lose jobs while they were in office?

The economy is in worse shape then anyone had imagined, and you are saying this is in no way related to Bush?

Also what about his comments on how great the economy is in basically every speech he makes?

Yeah he was. He won the electoral college. That's the only way to win. You don't win by popular vote. Get over it.


Oh yes.

Good idea.

I'll just "get over it" then....

I'll just "GET OVER" the fact that George Bush illegally fixed the vote in Florida that GAVE him the electoral vote for the state, and thus the Presidency.

Oh wait.....

He didnt even to that...the Supreme Court gave him the job.
You know..the very same people that Bush's FATHER hired.

Yes.
I'll just "get over" tha fact that this president started off his term in office by breaking the very morals and standards that this country was founded on...



Being a racist makes you a bad person...not a bad president

No..but being a racist who slaughters hundred of thousands of native americans DOES make a bad president.

So the economists expected way too much...how is that Bush's fault? Also, how many other presidents had people lose jobs while they were in office?

Maybe if Bush hadn't taken money away from the companies to pay for a billion dollar a week war (whether over liberty, revenge, protection, or an outdated type of fuel, is no matter) there wouldn't be a problem.

15 million from the after school programs, if I recall. Not that you'd remember.
I'm sure all you can think of is 9/11 and the American flag. Gasp! Such an incredibly meaningful event... which didn't humble any of us in the slightest.

He also never gave the money (9 million?) he promised to the firemen, he just recirculated the money by taking money away from equipment payments.

You elitist xenophobic moron. We aren't parents. This country is about 70% composed of people not fit to be parents. 45% of them don't even acknowledge evolution. The rest are so stupid they think they'll make more money by bearing the brunt on tax day (pardon my aside).
We created the UN to help keep the power in balance, and not have some evil tyrannical nation gung-hoing it in an attempt to acrue more power, resources, or territory, under whatever pretence. And guess who the tyrant is?
We blew off the UN and are now grandstanding; we even removed ourselves from being tried by a war crimes committee, if I recall correctly. The only reason why everyone hasn't pounced on us, is because we were the evil ones behind the cold war, stockpiling our weaponry so noone could take us down.
And now what? Our apathetic public and deluded Christian nutjobs are being led by an idiot who couldn't even get better than a 1270 on his SATs, telling us all sorts of crap that isn't really any of our business.
While we could be working on education and the environment, social reforms and tightening foreign relations, we've done the exact opposite.
Not in the constitution? There are greater things in the world than the USA. And right now, there are quite a few.

So once again, comparing us to parents who "know" best, and the UN as a child, composed of over 50 sovereign nations, is utter tripe.

I'm sorry, in Saipea, we'd have to deport you for being too stupid.

Xenophobic? No. Realistic? Yes.

If we are not, Saipea, tell me who is the most powerful nation on earth?

*crickets chirp*

Ok buddy...you need to drop the hammer and sickle, stop judging people by their religion (you give atheists a bad name), stop the holier than thou approach, and realize that whether you or I like it or not, America has an invisible dominion over the rest of the world. Nations look to us for help, and when we give it, criticize us for it.

Remember what happens when we don't act like parents:

http://www.celebrityhypocrites.com/hitlerinparis.jpg

...and that was before we were the only superpower left.

Here you go Butterfly...

Argue with this.

http://hnn.us/articles/5019.html

The economy is in worse shape then anyone had imagined, and you are saying this is in no way related to Bush?

Also what about his comments on how great the economy is in basically every speech he makes?

God...how is 3 on 1 fair? Not that it's hard...it's simply tiring to post.

Anyhow...

It is in a very small way related to Bush. Take an economics course in school, Eire da, you'll learn a lot. The economy has natural ups and downs...not to mention that the frickin World Trade Center was blown to bits.

I'll just "GET OVER" the fact that George Bush illegally fixed the vote in Florida that GAVE him the electoral vote for the state, and thus the Presidency.




No..but being a racist who slaughters hundred of thousands of native americans DOES make a bad president.

LMAO...where's your proof? Hell...even your initials are BS. I could say that Liberals staged the whole 9/11 thing to kill Bush, but failed because one plane crashed in PA, but am I? No...

How many others slaughtered indians in that time? It wasn't exclusive.

It's not the fact you don't care, it's the fact you are an idiot.

Oh yes.

Good idea.

I'll just "get over it" then....

I'll just "GET OVER" the fact that George Bush illegally fixed the vote in Florida that GAVE him the electoral vote for the state, and thus the Presidency.

Oh wait.....

He didnt even to that...the Supreme Court gave him the job.
You know..the very same people that Bush's FATHER hired.

Yes.
I'll just "get over" tha fact that this president started off his term in office by breaking the very morals and standards that this country was founded on...





No..but being a racist who slaughters hundred of thousands of native americans DOES make a bad president.

He didn't illegally fix it, it was do to elderly Jews being inept, Cubans being the only type of Hispanic that doesnt vote democrat (because Republicans are so vehemently anti-Castro), and improperly labeled accounts of people with prison records, where one person names Jim Murphy who was jailed for stealing negates the votes of everyone else named Jim Murphy who had no past criminal record (I'm obviously talking about the Democrat-black vote here). Also it was the chads. THE CHADS!

Not that I care.

And Bush isn't racist... is he? He is moronically Christian... I can never really quite put it past him to anti-homosexual AND racist.

But I still don't care. Actions speak louder than words.

And the actions of an inept cronie who only cares about money speak loudly enough.

I'd also like to point out that the "Clean Air Act" was an anti-environmental act, which allowed the emission of 3 times as many toxins from companies.

Here you go Butterfly...

Argue with this.

http://hnn.us/articles/5019.html

I cannot believe you found a website....

...and while I have no doubt in my mind that it is run by liberals, the point was the historians CANNOT rate Bush now. A President cannot be rated objectively until years after his term. To think otherwise shows a horrible grasp of history and how it is recorded.

LMAO...where's your proof? Hell...even your initials are BS. I could say that Liberals staged the whole 9/11 thing to kill Bush, but failed because one plane crashed in PA, but am I? No...

How many others slaughtered indians in that time? It wasn't exclusive.


Listen to this...and get it straight.

You are defending Andrew Jackson now?

It is becuase of men like him, that there are now less than six hundred thousand american indians left in this world.

Before them......almost six MILLION existed.

How can you possibly defend a man who help kill all but a TENTH of the Native Americans on this continent?

"The only GOOD indian is a dead one."
-Andrew Jackson.

And Bush isn't racist... is he? He is moronically Christian... I can never really quite put it past him to anti-homosexual AND racist.

For a man who seems so into the "science" point of view in the "science vs. religion" arguement, I'm stunned that you support homosexuality. How does it benefit society? I can name many ways how it is a detriment to society.

You need to get out some more instead of watching so much hentai.

Wow, some of you should just play the game and not discuss politics.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.

And to the Gore-baby-wannabees: Get over the fact you lost the election, if you could of won your OWN state, you would be in office right now.

Listen to this...and get it straight.

You are defending Andrew Jackson now?

It is becuase of men like him, that there are now less than six hundred thousand american indians left in this world.

Before them......almost six MILLION existed.

How can you possibly defend a man who help kill all but a TENTH of the Native Americans on this continent?

"The only GOOD indian is a dead one."
-Andrew Jackson.

How can you possibly think that I don't realize what you're trying to pull? You're losing the argument so you change the subject. It's what (almost) all liberals do.

If you want to debate over Jackson, make your own damn thread. He was a racist bastard, but other things he did as President are more important.

I cannot believe you found a website....

...and while I have no doubt in my mind that it is run by liberals, the point was the historians CANNOT rate Bush now. A President cannot be rated objectively until years after his term. To think otherwise shows a horrible grasp of history and how it is recorded.


Typical Conservative.

Only hearing what you want to.

They were saying that they are measuring his accomplishments THUS far, and comparing them to other Presidents of the past.

The reason you cant get a full accurate comparison is becuase his term isnt done yet.

He has more mistakes to make.


and you prove my point about never believing anything shown to you.

Typical.

Wow, some of you should just play the game and not discuss politics.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.

And to the Gore-baby-wannabees: Get over the fact you lost the election, if you could of won your OWN state, you would be in office right now.

AHAH! Another person who understands the economy. As I said in a previous post, some of you need to take an economics course. Thank you Nautiqeman.

God...how is 3 on 1 fair? Not that it's hard...it's simply tiring to post.

Anyhow...

It is in a very small way related to Bush. Take an economics course in school, Eire da, you'll learn a lot. The economy has natural ups and downs...not to mention that the frickin World Trade Center was blown to bits.

"Natural ups and downs"? I think you schould be the one considering taking an economics course. There's nothing "Natural" about spending Billions on invading a country - oh, i apologize - "liberating" a country that did not want to be liberated.

Now, yes, we are an extremely powerful nation, but don't get any delusions of grandeur about us being a second holy roman empire, because we arn't, and its not likely we ever will be. Its kindof funny, because if you want us to become an Empire, then why do you support a president who has A. Showed the world our military has no clue what its doing (Yes, we went in and tore Iraq down pretty efficiently, but then we had no fucking plans whatsoever on what to do with the country.) and B. Destroyed our economy (Which was in a Surplus, not a Deficit when Bush came to office).

Wow, some of you should just play the game and not discuss politics.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.

And to the Gore-baby-wannabees: Get over the fact you lost the election, if you could of won your OWN state, you would be in office right now.

Hi.

No one cares, or was talking to you.

Thanks.

You secular conservatives never cease to awe me. Perhaps it is that you are truly nihilists and I am not, and maybe I still have hope for mankind and the environment where as you have lost it.

Whatever the case, I will flagrantly bash people who worship a second rate mythology story all they want. It has no basis in this reality, and I leave my religious beliefs out of the realm of how people are to be treated; equally, no matter race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, or place of origin.

Once again, to compare Hitler and Nazis to Sadaam is despicable. Sure, he treated most of his people like crap, but so does Bush.

You go to other countries and they will clearly point that out for you.

When 1 in 5 are irreligious, 1 in 6 are homosexual, 1 in (15) are immagrants, and 1 in 3 aren't getting a "fair and balanced" education, ask me what kind of leader Bush seems to the outside world?

Typical Conservative.

Only hearing what you want to.

They were saying that they are measuring his accomplishments THUS far, and comparing them to other Presidents of the past.

The reason you cant get a full accurate comparison is becuase his term isnt done yet.

He has more mistakes to make.


and you prove my point about never believing anything shown to you.

Typical.

You have yet to bring up any evidence as to why Bush is so terrible that I haven't shot down! If it's there, and its reasonable, I'll listen to it. Damnit, I've been waiting this whole time and all you've shown me is the "false pretenses" bullshit and now some liberal historians predicting how Bush will fare in future history books. For a "liberal", you seem pretty damn stuck in your ways.

Did anyone else read the Labor Department's jobs report?

"Economists expected 235,000 new jobs in the month of July and in actuality the economy added just 32,000."


Read it a bit more closely...


Nonfarm employment was little changed (+32,000) in July, and the unemployment
rate was essentially unchanged at 5.5 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of
the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Employment levels in most of the
major industry sectors were little changed over the month.

Emphasis added. Of course, this next bit would really throw a wrench into the "Bush killed the economy" screed:


Total Employment and the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)

Total employment rose by 629,000 to 139.7 million in July, and the employ-
ment population ratio--the proportion of the population age 16 and over with
jobs--increased to 62.5 percent. The civilian labor force also increased over
the month, rising by 577,000 to 147.9 million, and the labor force participa-
tion rate rose to 66.2 percent. (See table A-1.)

But, hey... why use the real statistics? It's much more fun to omit the good stuff.

How can you possibly think that I don't realize what you're trying to pull? You're losing the argument so you change the subject. It's what (almost) all liberals do.

If you want to debate over Jackson, make your own damn thread. He was a racist bastard, but other things he did as President are more important.


Losing WHAT argument?

THIS one.....the one where Im showing you proof and your not believing a word of it, just like I told you, that you would?

I'd say Im winning.

As far as Jackson goes....whats more important than Genocide?

Hi.

No one cares, or was talking to you.

Thanks.

Once again, how damn close-minded are you? You accuse me of ignoring what I don't want to hear, and then when someone backs up one of my points, you brush him off. I frankly don't care about your two croonies in this debate either, but then again, they're still here.

Whatever the case, I will flagrantly bash people who worship a second rate mythology story all they want. It has no basis in this reality, and I leave my religious beliefs out of the realm of how people are to be treated; equally, no matter race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, or place of origin.

And I'll continue to bash faggots, thanks for talking to me.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.
Well, then a natural conclusion from your own argument then is that the reason that Reagan enjoyed a boom in the economy in the early years of his presidency is because of the policies of Carter, right?

Attacked and took over two countries.
Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.
Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history.
Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history.
In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.
Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.
Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.
Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history.
Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. (http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/)
Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history.
Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice has an Chevron oil tanker named after her).
First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt.
Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world.
First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation.
Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.
First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission.
First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board.
Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
Withdrew from the World Court of Law.
Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections).
All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)
First US president to establish a secret shadow government.
Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years.
First US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'.
Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects.
In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war.
Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.

For a man who seems so into the "science" point of view in the "science vs. religion" arguement, I'm stunned that you support homosexuality. How does it benefit society? I can name many ways how it is a detriment to society.
And I could name many ways that it is beneficial to society.

Losing WHAT argument?

THIS one.....the one where Im showing you proof and your not believing a word of it, just like I told you, that you would?


Hi.

No one cares, or was talking to you.

Thanks.

Once again, your "proof" is bullshit. I've told and shown you this. I've given you actual facts, and I've had others back me up on this facts, and you tell them that no one cares. Well frankly, those who are intelligent would care.

I have no real problems with liberals, I have problems with dumbasses.

Well, then a natural conclusion from your own argument then is that the reason that Reagan enjoyed a boom in the economy in the early years of his presidency is because of the policies of Carter, right?

No, it stretches back farther. The cycle doesn't care who's in office...it doesn't go from one president to the next.

And I could name many ways that it is beneficial to society.

Tell me how being homosexual benefits society? Better fashion sense among males?

Wow, some of you should just play the game and not discuss politics.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.

I agree whole heartedly. Clinton had dot coms that were doing well when he was in office and went bankrupt about the time Bush came in. The economy and jobs have a lot less to do with the president than people want to think.

However, several billion a week is certainly not a good way to help the economy... Sure it will level out, but when it's all said and done, isn't there an irreversable amount of inflation that goes with it?

<- Not an economics major. Not a math major (yet). Simply a libertarian who enjoys antagonizing people.

Wow, some of you should just play the game and not discuss politics.

Any educated person would know the ecomy is a cycle that takes years to revolve. Clinton rode the wave made by Reagan and Bush Sr and now G.W is riding the wave created by Clinton. If you don't believe me, read up about it and educate yourself. This country ins't in as bad of shape as some people like to make it out to be. It could be a lot worse for what we have had to deal with lately.

And to the Gore-baby-wannabees: Get over the fact you lost the election, if you could of won your OWN state, you would be in office right now.

Is it true that the economy has its natural ups and downs? Yes
Does that mean someone can't make it worse? NO

PS. Recounts after the supream court decision to stop the people's vote from counting overwhelmingly showed that GORE, not bush, won the florida election. So, though it is true that Gore lost the supream court's personal election, he won the one that, apparently, doesnt matter anymore

Anyway, in the poll I voted for Reagan, he had two terms to screw things up, whereas Dubya only had one. If Dubya gets re(s)elected, then he'll probably be the worst.

backwood squatches, i think you may be a little bit too heavy into conspiracies and should tone the paranoia down a little. other than that, we have seen many blunders by G.W. Frankly, he lied to the public and over the course of the Iraq, we have found that all his reasons for going into iraq were discounted, therefore his justification for war is gone. it is great that Saddam is captured and his government toppled, but i still do not think Dubya should have alienated all of his allies in one go by, in essence, saying "Fuck the UN". I believe it was Steel Butterfly who said "the end justifies the means", i disagree. Stalin killed millions of his own people to make the Soviet Union a superpower country. as a ruler of a country, it was an admirable goal. It was seen as the "right thing to do" in his eyes but was, obviously, horribly wrong. The end does not justify the means. I also see that steel butterfly believes all lliberal people are stuck in John Kerry's brainwashing. Frankly, so are you, you are spouting as much brainwashed drivel as everyone else, so shut-up about it. Saipea, I noticed you made some comments about Jews and previously made some comments about hypocrisy and racism-and-descrimination-is-bad and then did some yourself. I am not a jew, a democrat, or a republican (hell i'm not even from your country) but still have to say "FUCK YOU!" for those comments. and to steel butterfly, I have to say "FUCK YOU HARDER!" because you are very intolerant of others views, as is each of us in a way, but you are more so. I'll just say that GW and his administration hasn't done a very good job. granted, it sucks that 9/11 happened during the first years of his adminstration and would have been hell do deal with, but he still asn't done well. it doesn't take a historian to know he hasn't done well, its obvious in the way he's conducted himself.

Tell me how being homosexual benefits society? Better fashion sense among males?
Well, let's see. There's that, of course. Then there's the fact that the world is overpopulated, and homosexuals are less likely to have children, and therefore not add to that problem. Also the fact that homosexual couples quite frequently adopt children who otherwise wouldn't have been adopted. I could go on, if you'd like.

Attacked and took over two countries.
Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.
Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history.
Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history.
In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.
Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.
Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.
Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history.
Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. (http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/)
Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history.
Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice has an Chevron oil tanker named after her).
First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt.
Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world.
First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation.
Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.
First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission.
First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board.
Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
Withdrew from the World Court of Law.
Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections).
All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)
First US president to establish a secret shadow government.
Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years.
First US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'.
Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects.
In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war.
Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.

Don't forget all the environmental, educational and social reasons.
Amnesty, WWF, et al have scads of lists which I am too tired to point out.
I'd just like to reiterate that under the things on the government website that say are helping the environment are lies. The Clean Air Act is bad. BAD. And none of you care. Just ignore the tree-hugger and the environment.

Personally, I don't care about security, wars, jobs, etc etc. Those don't exist without social equality, equal and excellent education, and an environment that isn't causing infants to have 5 times the normal amount of mercury levels.

Tell me how being homosexual benefits society? Better fashion sense among males?
Well, let's see. There's that, of course. Then there's the fact that the world is overpopulated, and homosexuals are less likely to have children, and therefore not add to that problem. Also the fact that homosexual couples quite frequently adopt children who otherwise wouldn't have been adopted. I could go on, if you'd like.

Finally, some facts.

I applaud you. You have finally supplied the argument with some facts.

To be honest, I don't think Bush is the greatest man to walk the earth either. He's made his mistakes...we all have. All presidents have. Of course your liberal bias makes him seem more horrible than he actually is, but granted most of your points are probably near correct.

However, I don't have the time or energy to check every one of them out, or to continue this argument much longer.

Historians will look back on the Bush presidency and see one thing standing out - the growing split between liberals and conservatives. This is not brought on by Bush himself, but by the liberals who aren't in office. The 2000 election, which Bush won fair and square, prove this the most. Even our arguement shows it some.

Also, since Saipea said so, I'm a Poli Sci/economics dual major. Don't doubt that I know what I'm talking about.

And I'll continue to bash faggots, thanks for talking to me.

That's entirely different and you know that.
Religion is a consciencious choice, a lack of will to face death and the meaningless of ones existence.

Homosexuality is not a choice, or else I'd be gay [or more likely bi].

Besides, there's nothing wrong with gay people.

There's a world of wrong with grown men praying to invisible dieties, especially diefied crocks.

backwood squatches, i think you may be a little bit too heavy into conspiracies and should tone the paranoia down a little. other than that, we have seen many blunders by G.W. Frankly, he lied to the public and over the course of the Iraq, we have found that all his reasons for going into iraq were discounted, therefore his justification for war is gone.


Actually, for a liberal Im NOT into Conspiracy theories.

A true Liberal Conspiracy nut would probably believe that Bush either planned 9/11, or that he knew about it, and let it happen...

I know thats not true.

But..that doesnt mean he did anything about it , the right way.

No, it stretches back farther. The cycle doesn't care who's in office...it doesn't go from one president to the next.
Does it cycle naturally, or do the policies that are enacted alter it? If the latter, then Carter contributed to it at least a little bit.

and to steel butterfly, I have to say "FUCK YOU HARDER!" because you are very intolerant of others views, as is each of us in a way, but you are more so.

Well, Starkadh, since you opened your mouth, I'd have to say "Fuck you" in return. I am not the racist here, I am not the ignorant one here, and I am not the wrong one here. I'm open to intelligent view points, which BS finally came up with after hours of spewing...well...BS. You'd be amazed how tolerant I can become in a civilized atmosphere. However, I will not be outshouted, nor trampled over in a stampede of liberal nonsense. Being outnumbered, I fared rather well.

PS. Recounts after the supream court decision to stop the people's vote from counting overwhelmingly showed that GORE, not bush, won the florida election. So, though it is true that Gore lost the supream court's personal election, he won the one that, apparently, doesnt matter anymore
No they didn't. The largest post-election recount, done by several major newspapers, found that in 7 out of 9 recount methods, Bush won. Including the method Gore was intending to use when the Supreme Court shut him down.

That's entirely different and you know that.
Religion is a consciencious choice, a lack of will to face death and the meaningless of ones existence.

Homosexuality is not a choice, or else I'd be gay [or more likely bi].

Besides, there's nothing wrong with gay people.

There's a world of wrong with grown men praying to invisible dieties, especially diefied crocks.

Homosexuality is a choice...don't even open that can of worms. Also, like I said, I too am an atheist. Even if I did believe in god, I wouldn't go to organized religion, because I hate them even more. They're all hypocrits, and I know that from personal experience. (18 years of forced catholicsm.) However, I don't go around bashing them at every chance I get, and then going further and creating oppertunities to bash them. Get over yourself.

Homosexuality is NOT a choice.

Dont open that can of worms.

Well, let's see. There's that, of course. Then there's the fact that the world is overpopulated, and homosexuals are less likely to have children, and therefore not add to that problem. Also the fact that homosexual couples quite frequently adopt children who otherwise wouldn't have been adopted. I could go on, if you'd like.

I'll go on. Homosexuality is natural. Geese and dogs are the most common types of animals that may be homosexual, although other animals as well. 1 in 10 people are gay, 1 in 5 people are lesbian (these statistics came from a /Christian/ website, and it is backed up by various civil rights organizations and I believe that national census as well (I need to get an almanac). These statistics were only for those who were openly gay, so one can safely assess that at least 1 in 6 people are homosexual.

Are they more useful or less useful than anyone else? Not at all.
Most are complete idiots, just like the rest of the world. The only reason why it seems like so many are being idiots and giving each other AIDS is because they are the majority of a minority, thereby making the overall group look stupid.

No they didn't. The largest post-election recount, done by several major newspapers, found that in 7 out of 9 recount methods, Bush won. Including the method Gore was intending to use when the Supreme Court shut him down.


Source please?

Homosexuality is NOT a choice.

Dont open that can of worms.

There is no proof. For every doctor that says it's not, there's another one who says is it. Tomorrow, I could chose to hit on a girl, or chose to hit on a guy. It's my choice to hit on girls, and so I do so.

If you want to argue more, wait until tomorrow (i'm going to bed soon), and start a new thread.

Homosexuality is a choice...don't even open that can of worms. Also, like I said, I too am an atheist. Even if I did believe in god, I wouldn't go to organized religion, because I hate them even more. They're all hypocrits, and I know that from personal experience. (18 years of forced catholicsm.) However, I don't go around bashing them at every chance I get, and then going further and creating oppertunities to bash them. Get over yourself.

If homosexuality was a choice, then I would make myself gay or bi.
I can not.

As a hedonist, I find that very saddening. As someone who can use a bit of inductive reasoning, I find that as ample proof that one cannot choose to be homosexual. That, and the testimony of the 25 million or so gay men out there, who I don't think enjoy being persecuted by morons such as yourself and your fellow Catholics.

There is no proof. For every doctor that says it's not, there's another one who says is it. Tomorrow, I could chose to hit on a girl, or chose to hit on a guy. It's my choice to hit on girls, and so I do so.

If you want to argue more, wait until tomorrow (i'm going to bed soon), and start a new thread.

It's not about hitting on them, its about the ability to love them.

Sure, I can have sex with guys and girls (and hopefully I will), but I don't have the capacity to love another man. It just isn't possible for me.

I'll go on. Homosexuality is natural. Geese and dogs are the most common types of animals that may be homosexual, although other animals as well. 1 in 10 people are gay, 1 in 5 people are lesbian (these statistics came from a /Christian/ website, and it is backed up by various civil rights organizations and I believe that national census as well (I need to get an almanac). These statistics were only for those who were openly gay, so one can safely assess that at least 1 in 6 people are homosexual.

Are they more useful or less useful than anyone else? Not at all.
Most are complete idiots, just like the rest of the world. The only reason why it seems like so many are being idiots and giving each other AIDS is because they are the majority of a minority, thereby making the overall group look stupid.

Homosexuality is not natural at all. It serves no purpose in life, and does not benefit society. The whole point of sex, from a scientific standpoint, is to produce offspring. Gays do no such thing. Humans and animals are also different in brain capacity. Dogs hump legs...is that also natural?

Again, though, make a new thread.

[QUOTE=Steel Butterfly]There is no proof. For every doctor that says it's not, there's another one who says is it. Tomorrow, I could chose to hit on a girl, or chose to hit on a guy. It's my choice to hit on girls, and so I do so.[\QUOTE]
Yes, but isn't there some reason that you make that choice? Or are you attracted to both genders equally?

Homosexuality is not natural at all. It serves no purpose in life, and does not benefit society. The whole point of sex, from a scientific standpoint, is to produce offspring. Gays do no such thing. Humans and animals are also different in brain capacity. Dogs hump legs...is that also natural?

Again, though, make a new thread.

The point is to preserve the stability of the biome, something that 1. gays do, by keeping population growth down (malthus, swift anyone?) 2. bush doesn't (by his pro-business anti-environment attitude).

Are you outright calling homosexual degenerate?

Saipea, you must stop limiting yourself. You obviously don't read too well. Am I catholic? Nope...

If you want to love another man, then do it. I can love my pets one way, my mom another, and my girlfriend yet another. Surely the love between a man and a woman and a man and a man is different. Go find out, personally, I don't want to.

[QUOTE=Steel Butterfly]There is no proof. For every doctor that says it's not, there's another one who says is it. Tomorrow, I could chose to hit on a girl, or chose to hit on a guy. It's my choice to hit on girls, and so I do so.[\QUOTE]
Yes, but isn't there some reason that you make that choice? Or are you attracted to both genders equally?

Nope...only girls.

Nope...only girls.
Therefore, it is not a choice. You're confusing sexuality with sexual behavior.

Steel Butterfly, i know you are not a racist and did not say you were so i'm sorry for any misunderstandings on that point. and you have presented your views quite well over a lot of opposition. one thing i'd like to bring to light though, is that usually homosexuality isn't a choice (sometimes in can be). It has been discovered that an over-abundance of estrogen or testosterone in the brain is the main cause for homosexual feelings, and an over-abundance of chemicals in your brain isn't really a choice. All i have to say about homosexuals is that if you don't accept them already, you'd better start to get used to them. Homosexuals have been around since Roman times (it is documented, plus i saw it on a reputable discovery channel show) and only now are they coming out fully. The gays are here, gentleman and ladies, there's no point fighting it. For those more religious people who believe that homosexuality is wrong: Why would gays be here if God didn't want them to be? thats all i have to say about that. Anyway, congratulations on holding out in adversity.

The point is to preserve the stability of the biome, something that 1. gays do, by keeping population growth down (malthus, swift anyone?) 2. bush doesn't (by his pro-business anti-environment attitude).

Are you outright calling homosexual degenerate?

Degenerate - having sunk to a condition below that which is normal to a type

Yeah...that pretty much covers it.

And while we're at it, you mentioned that people didn't have a choice? Ancient Romans, because of a lack of birth control, often had sex with women for children and sex with men or even little boys for pleasure. However, there are no accounts of a Roman marrying another man.

Humans have a choice. Our brains enable us to. If I wanted to, I could go out and fuck some guy. Would I? Of course not...but the option is there. It is the same for gay guys and girls.

Therefore, it is not a choice. You're confusing sexuality with sexual behavior.

sexual behavior is what makes up sexuality

Degenerate - having sunk to a condition below that which is normal to a type

Yeah...that pretty much covers it.

And while we're at it, you mentioned that people didn't have a choice? Ancient Romans, because of a lack of birth control, often had sex with women for children and sex with men or even little boys for pleasure. However, there are no accounts of a Roman marrying another man.

Humans have a choice. Our brains enable us to. If I wanted to, I could go out and fuck some guy. Would I? Of course not...but the option is there. It is the same for gay guys and girls.

You pitiful unromantic conservative. Having sex and making love are different.

You cannot, not matter how hard you try, LOVE another person of the same gender, unless you are homosexual.

Even if you are too insecure to try, I HAVE. OTHERS HAVE. It isn't possible. It is genetic.

Fine then, gentlemen, we'll continue this tomorrow. It's nearly 2:30 in the morning where I'm from and I must be up early tomorrow. Have fun.

sexual behavior is what makes up sexuality
Not entirely, no. In the case of such things as fetishism, yes. But not always. For instance, a man who is attracted exclusively to men but doesn't act on that attraction, and instead picks up women is nonetheless homosexual, just a homosexual living as a heterosexual.

You pitiful unromantic conservative. Having sex and making love are different.

You cannot, not matter how hard you try, LOVE another person of the same gender, unless you are homosexual.

Even if you are too insecure to try, I HAVE. OTHERS HAVE. It isn't possible. It is genetic

For a closing thought...once again, I say to you, stop watching hentai. It's bad stuff.

I also said that there are different kinds of love. Perhaps you are simply limiting yourself.

Do we really have a choice sometimes though? do people suffering from major depressive disorder have a choice ( i know someone with this disorder so i know what i'm talkig about)? the answer is No. anyway, as steel butterfly said, we can continue tommorrow. Goodnight, debators. A cordial and friendly "fuck you" to all.

Saipea, you must stop limiting yourself. You obviously don't read too well. Am I catholic? Nope...

If you want to love another man, then do it. I can love my pets one way, my mom another, and my girlfriend yet another. Surely the love between a man and a woman and a man and a man is different. Go find out, personally, I don't want to.

Don't allude to me being homosexual. I'm probably straighter than you are.

According to the (something something psychologist/scientist apporved gay test) the average straight person is about 22% homosexual.
When I took it, I was considered 12% homosexual.

The love between a man and a man and a woman and a man are the same beautiful force that brings kindred sentient beings together. You call it crap, I call it love, the same love that binds mates, no matter the species, race, gender, etc. etc.


Did I mention that Bush totally got the world pissed at us during the Kyoto steel settlement?

For a closing thought...once again, I say to you, stop watching hentai. It's bad stuff.

I also said that there are different kinds of love. Perhaps you are simply limiting yourself.

bah, catgirls make make me happy. leave me and my dirty little sex slaves alone. >.<

anyone notice how this thread got severely off-topic, and whenever people talk of Bush Jr. the conversation eventually leads to homosexuality?

You call it crap, I call it love, the same love that binds mates, no matter the species, race, gender, etc. etc.

When have I called love crap?

*hugs girlfriend*

Not even close.

anyone notice how this thread got severely off-topic, and whenever people talk of Bush Jr. the conversation eventually leads to homosexuality?


I was fine with the "not opening this can of worms".

lol, damn straight. I liked you list you posted earlier, in fact i saved it to my comp. thanks

lol, damn straight. I liked you list you posted earlier, in fact i saved it to my comp. thanks


De Nada.

I'll assume De Nada means either "you welcome" or "go fuck yourself". both are viable answers

I'd like to note that someone is being smart for once and not counting Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as Republicans, who were "Northern Republicans" and not at all conservative ofr their time.


that's cause the rebpublican party made a switch in ideology somewhere between 1914 and 1942 or so... somewhere around there.

btw. mythbusters. lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. his wife was. he was just very politically smart. the war was about money and he decided to make it about morals to make the south look bad. the cecession was after the north incread import taxes... the south only produced raw goods and had to import all finished products. the north tried to keep any kind of final processing industry out of the south only allowing textiles and such. no shit.

I'll assume De Nada means either "you welcome" or "go fuck yourself". both are viable answers


De Nada....

It means, "Your Welcome".

Or more literally.."Its nothing."

"Think nothing of it.."

That kind of thing..

that's cause the rebpublican party made a switch in ideology somewhere between 1914 and 1942 or so... somewhere around there.

btw. mythbusters. lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. his wife was. he was just very politically smart. the war was about money and he decided to make it about morals to make the south look bad. the cecession was after the north incread import taxes... the south only produced raw goods and had to import all finished products. the north tried to keep any kind of final processing industry out of the south only allowing textiles and such. no shit.

Ya, I remember that. His wife was also cruckin fazy, if I recall correctly.

All the General forum is anymore is political bullshit about the war. If its not it will eventually turn into it. I really pray to god this bullshit stops after the election.

Source please?
The Chicago Tribune. Their past issues require membership. Let's try google...


The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago study was commissioned by eight media companies -- The Associated Press, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, the St. Petersburg Times, The Palm Beach Post, The Washington Post and the Tribune Co., which includes the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, the Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun, as well as other papers.

[...]

Suppose that Gore got what he originally wanted -- a hand recount in heavily Democratic Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade and Volusia counties. The study indicates that Gore would have picked up some additional support but still would have lost the election -- by a 225-vote margin statewide.

Homosexuality is not natural at all. It serves no purpose in life, and does not benefit society. The whole point of sex, from a scientific standpoint, is to produce offspring. Gays do no such thing. Humans and animals are also different in brain capacity. Dogs hump legs...is that also natural?


This sort of comment really, really scares me. Do we now decide what is right or wrong based on it's 'usefullness' (I am referring to the benefit society part of this), especially when it comes to an emotionally-based concept? To me, that reeks of what many spewed forth during Mao's 'Cultural Revolution' (for those not familiar with this, read: irrational destruction of virtually anything non-conformist, or 'beneficial to society')

From a religious point of view, or from your point of view, for whatever reason, the purpose of sex is to reproduce. However, by this logic, sex has no other properties.

Surely this is false- if nothing else, can't sex be a significant act between too consenting partners (and I stress here, of ANY gender) to display emotion? Furthermore, this crap about it being 'unnatural' and 'a choice' appears to be nothing but opinionated garbage. Sexuality is NOT merely sexual acts, according to www.dictionary.com, sexuality is the attraction to a gender. Note 'attraction', not ability to have sex with- everyone can physically do that, but the 'ability to have sex with' does not mean that everybody is exclusively attracted to or not attracted to either gender. Attraction means to be drawn to, and in this context it appears to be on an purely emotional level.

Thus, it seems intrinsically erroneous to label somone's emotions to be 'unnatural' - how can one have an 'unnatural' emotion? The answer to this question inevitably returns to that of religion, as many refer to the (dubious) belief that their religion (typically the bible) forbids it, or it returns to personal bias (for whatever reason, my suspicion is fear of the unusual or an overt reaction to repress a homosexual urge of the individual)

I have a feeling ten, fifteen years down the track, society in general will be looking back on the current banning of gay marriages in a similar fashion to the way we look back on the banning of interracial marriages, etc today. At least, I hope we do.

The Chicago Tribune. They're past issues require membership. Let's try google...


Okay.

Now if we also assume that is true, what about the many signs that told black voters to "have all oustanding warrants taken care of when they go to vote on Nov. 12th?"

See the problem?

I agree whole heartedly. Clinton had dot coms that were doing well when he was in office and went bankrupt about the time Bush came in. The economy and jobs have a lot less to do with the president than people want to think.

However, several billion a week is certainly not a good way to help the economy... Sure it will level out, but when it's all said and done, isn't there an irreversable amount of inflation that goes with it?

<- Not an economics major. Not a math major (yet). Simply a libertarian who enjoys antagonizing people.


it would cost about 3.5 billion dollars to bring maryland public schools up to minimum health and safety code.

bush spent 97 billion on a war that he could have spent less on if he'd waited till the rest of the un was behind him. we really need to fix out own problems. but at the very least he could have at least run the damn war on the humanitarian reasons (which are many... for instance. saddam hired rapists to help control his society. not shit) instead of the damn wmd goose chase.

Ya, I remember that. His wife was also cruckin fazy, if I recall correctly.


yep. absolutely bat-shit.

The obvious problem with this poll is that people can't distinguish between 'a bad presdient' and 'I don't like this president'.

So since Bush is controversial (and recent), many dislike him, and many vote for him as the worst president. But it really means nothing.

yep. absolutely bat-shit.


Actually, that may not be true.

The History Channel was running a documentary about her.
They say that she may not have been crazy at all...just a little weird.
Her son was trying to run for an office, and had a little problem with his mother who was still mourning the death of her husband, even to her death.

In fact, they say that money may have been a factor in the "shes crazy" angle.


Then again...if you had lost a son, and then your husband, who you called "My All" ( she called him this becuase, to her, he was her husband, mentor, freind, lover, etc.....) who was also the president of the united states..you might be a little bugshit too.

Okay.

Now if we also assume that is true, what about the many signs that told black voters to "have all oustanding warrants taken care of when they go to vote on Nov. 12th?"

See the problem?
Well... if you weren't allowed to vote with an outstanding warrent, that would more be a problem of the State's legislature, now wouldn't it?

Well... if you weren't allowed to vote with an outstanding warrent, that would more be a problem of the State's legislature, now wouldn't it?


Thats not the problem.

The problem is this......what day is the election?

Notice the date that was mentioned.

Thats not the problem.

The problem is this......what day is the election?

Notice the date that was mentioned.
Hm. Interesting. And since turn-about it fair play, may I see your source?

Hm. Interesting. And since turn-about it fair play, may I see your source?



*Deep Sigh*....

I am recalling it from memory from Al Frankens book "Liars, and the etc...".

He lists the newspaper articles and dates the event aired on local and major televison networks.

Are you going to say that becuase I read about it from Al Franken, that its all "Liberal nonsense"?

Fox News even reported allegations that polls were closed early in these neighborhoods.

Frankin's a funny comedian, but a hack-job as a "political commentator".

However, if you can pull links, I'll give it a fair shake.

Worst Republican president ever? Bill Clinton, and although he was Democrat, he may have been just as stupid as a Republican. George W is only the worst on the poll because people feel that they have to hate the guy trying to clean up Bill's mess, which, would probably take a few more terms...like that will happen!

Oh, wait, maybe people hate him because of that whole Iraq deal. Come on! Am I the only war monger around here? Somebody had to do it...

Republican, Democrat, potato, potaaattttoooooooo ^_~

Frankin's a funny comedian, but a hack-job as a "political commentator".

However, if you can pull links, I'll give it a fair shake.


Frankens second book "Lies, and the lying liars who tell them." was much less a comic read, like "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot."
It was much more of a political stab at Conservative newscasters like O Reilly, and Hannity, and of course.......Bush.

As for links, I'll see what I can pull up.

Worst Republican president ever? Bill Clinton, and although he was Democrat, he may have been just as stupid as a Republican. George W is only the worst on the poll because people feel that they have to hate the guy trying to clean up Bill's mess, which, would probably take a few more terms...like that will happen!

Oh, wait, maybe people hate him because of that whole Iraq deal. Come on! Am I the only war monger around here? Somebody had to do it...

Republican, Democrat, potato, potaaattttoooooooo ^_~


Actually, Clintons term in office is a statistical success.
In fact, he's rated among the most effective Presidents of the 20th century.

Worst Republican president ever? Bill Clinton, and although he was Democrat, he may have been just as stupid as a Republican. George W is only the worst on the poll because people feel that they have to hate the guy trying to clean up Bill's mess, which, would probably take a few more terms...like that will happen!

Oh, wait, maybe people hate him because of that whole Iraq deal. Come on! Am I the only war monger around here? Somebody had to do it...

Republican, Democrat, potato, potaaattttoooooooo ^_~

let's call the whole thing off.

Heres one from the Washington Post.

While it doesnt mention specifically what I was refering to, it does highlight the problem.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections2000/recount/front.htm

Heres one from the Washington Post.

While it doesnt mention specifically what I was refering to, it does highlight the problem.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections2000/recount/front.htm
Actually, it doesn't mention those signs at all. That's what I was questioning, not if there were undervotes.

Actually, it doesn't mention those signs at all. That's what I was questioning, not if there were undervotes.


Right..still looking, but the only thing I found was a poster on a "Marijuana Now" forum, and thats not the kind of proof you were looking for.

If it helps...that along with many other allegations is why Jesse Jackson called for a Civil Rights investigation, in Florida.

I keep looking and get back to ya tomorrow.

So tired.....

Jackson wasn't that bad of a president...how about Carter and Nixon? I'll give you Grant though.

You say statistically and historically, and I say show me the statistics and the quotes from the historians.

...and I don't listen to O'Reilly because it's the same amout of bullshit that Moore gives you liberals. Ok...not the same amount...but almost the same. Once again, I make my own decisions.

Here's a touch for you, the end result justifies the means. That being said, anyone yet convinced that saddam didn't have WMD's in his country is simply being ignorant. It's not just Bush either...why do you think Clinton bombed Iraq? To "destroy chemical, nuclear, and biological weapon facilities."

I hear two "false pretenses" from liberals. 1. Bush got mad cause Saddam tried to kill his father. Well...wouldn't you be pissed if someone tried to kill your father? 2. It was for oil. Well...if it was...(which it wasn't)...who cares? We need oil.

In addition, the fact that Saddam could ever create WMD's gives us enough right to invade. He was a threat to the world, and we both know that the UN wouldn't do anything about it until he actually used them on some unsuspecting nation. This is even after you ignore all the horrible crimes Saddam committed.

Lastly, since when does the constitution say that we must consult the entire world before doing something. That's complete bullshit. If that was the case, nothing would be done. A parent's job isn't to please his or her child. It is to do what's best for them.


What diarrhoea of words...

You just don't get it don't ya :rolleyes: (It= what 90% of the US citizens know, including the "normal" right)

Right..still looking, but the only thing I found was a poster on a "Marijuana Now" forum, and thats not the kind of proof you were looking for.

If it helps...that along with many other allegations is why Jesse Jackson called for a Civil Rights investigation, in Florida.

I keep looking and get back to ya tomorrow.

So tired.....

Jesse Jackson is ALWAYS calling for some kind of investigation. using him as a reference is actually going to hurt ones credibility. Jackson is a racial blackmailer. Ask how his son managed to get a Toyota dealership...or the Coca-Cola distributorship....all for free.

what about Gerald Ford? he was by far the worst.

Hey! Gerald's one of my favorites!

Hey! Gerald's one of my favorites!

why in earth? :headbang:

Abraham Lincoln...

Tough call. I hate Republicans in general. Would almost have been easier to say, "BEST Republican President" because I can think of a couple worth honorable mention.
Those I would give good marks to are:

Abe Lincoln
Teddy Roosevelt
Dwight Eisenhower
Gerald Ford

Now, in your poll, you list J Edgar Hoover. I assume you meant HERBERT Hoover. Hoover was President who brought about the Great Depression. J EDGAR Hoover was the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation..and rumored to be both gay and a cross-dresser.
Not that this little extra info has any bearing on my assessment of J Edgar Hoover, either regarding his character, or merits of his work. In those regards, I hold him in utter contempt due to his widely-known abuses of power.

I ended up voting W, because, though I generally hold Republicans and conservatives in contempt...there are few that have inspired in me the level of hatred and utter disgust that Dubya has. reagan would be a close second...and Hoover third, just because he was such a miserable failure on an economic level.
In fact, most of what I hate Republicans FOR is their economic policies, which seem designed to hurt poor people. However, both Reagan and Dubya I also hate because of their social agenda, which I find to be exceedly narrow-minded, and mean-spirited.

However, I will give credit where it is due.
Abe Lincoln, though a Republican, was NOT representative of what modern-day Republicans are...in fact, he is far closer to what today's Democrats are. But he did free the slaves, and presided over the bloodiest war in American History, and helped insure that this nation stayed together in the end.

Teddy Roosevelt, aka, the Trustbuster...I love this guy, because he struck out against the almighty-powerful corporate "trusts" of his day, that sought to hurt little people. He truly had the people's best interests at heart, so I can forgive him for belonging to the incorrect political party.

Dwight Eisenhower, well, I can say some good and some bad about him. but more good than bad, really. He got the highway system started in America...warned of the power of the military-industrial complex...and we are today seeing Eisenhower's warnings fast becoming a reality. I could've done without his signing the "Under God" thing into law. He DID get us started, and somewhat competitive in the space race.

Gerry Ford...well, again, he was of the more what I call "Goldwater/Rockefeller" brand of Republicans, or what is more commonly known as blue-bloods. I can deal with those types, who are not arch-conservative, alighned with the Christian Right, whacko redneck yahoos, like today's Republicans are. In fact, Ford's VP WAS Nelson Rockefeller!!

Anyway, outside of the mention of those four, I can find nothing redeeming in Republican Presidents. I DID, once vote for a Republican Senator...i'll admit to having had a Republican experience. I voted, when living in Pennsylvania...for Arlen Specter. But Specter is a moderate, a blue-blood, and probably closer to a modern-day Democrat than a modern-day Republican anyway. Besides, the man earned my respect...when I visited his office in Washington, DC, to speak with him about issues of great concern to me...he took the time to see me personally, to listen to me, to take extensive notes...in the end, he supported my position, along with a handful of his Republican couterparts with whom he held some sway. And so the man earned my vote.

I'd vote for Arlen again, too, if I still lived in Pennsylvania.

I'm voting for the Dem candidate (Hoeffel I think) over Specter.


And the Worst Republican President Ever would be Grant.

Why isn't Lincoln on the list? :eek:

because Lincoln is best republican ever.

Teddy Roosevelt, aka, the Trustbuster...I love this guy, because he struck out against the almighty-powerful corporate "trusts" of his day, that sought to hurt little people. He truly had the people's best interests at heart, so I can forgive him for belonging to the incorrect political party.

Roosevelt wasn't nearly the "trustbuster" that Taft was in their terms. Also, Roosevelt called some trusts "bad trusts" while others were "good trusts". Meaning? He did what he wanted. Trustbusting was PR. TR had his best interests at heart.

I'm voting for the Dem candidate (Hoeffel I think) over Specter.

The fact that Specter even calls himself a Republican is laughable. When you have two democrats, at least vote for the one who admits he's a libby.

these sort of discussions and polls are what make me not want to be president. people always say it'd be cool and so on but think about it for a bit longer and look at stuff like this or the news. Hoover for sure.

What diarrhoea of words...

You just don't get it don't ya :rolleyes: (It= what 90% of the US citizens know, including the "normal" right)

And what exactly is it that I don't get, Mr. Basil? What loop am I out of? What don't I know?

these sort of discussions and polls are what make me not want to be president. people always say it'd be cool and so on but think about it for a bit longer and look at stuff like this or the news. Hoover for sure.

I wouldn't want to be president...of America at least. World Leader is one thing...but...blah...people just generalizing about me and looking into my every move? Don't think so. VP wouldn't be bad though...lol...it'd be a lot easier.

I wouldn't want to be president...of America at least. World Leader is one thing...but...blah...people just generalizing about me and looking into my every move? Don't think so. VP wouldn't be bad though...lol...it'd be a lot easier.
I do believe that Cheney has come under a lot of scrutiny here as well, especially with his ties to Halliburton.

Jay Edgar Hoover was never a President, he was the FBI DIrector. YOu are thinking of Herbert Hoover.

As for worst Republican I must go with Grant. He was a good General, but bad President who ****ed up Reconstruction by not really cracking down on the KKK Dems (yes they were Democrats as the KKK was viciously attacking REpublicans in the South)

because Lincoln is best republican ever.
I'll agree that he was a good President, but I think he should be on the list because wannabee Johnny Reb SOuthern Hicks would vote him down. I just think that's a good way to get a redneck count on this board.

NOTE: I don't think all SOutherners are rednecks or hicks, just ones with Confederate flags on their trucks

Grant also had serious alcohol problems.

Grant also had serious alcohol problems.
true, he was also corrupt and not a good leader of a nation, but he was good on a battlefield. They are too separate things. Washington was a good General but not a great President. Ike was an exception. He got tons of good projects done like the Interstate Highway System

Ike was an extremely mediocre general, though.

Ike was an extremely mediocre general, though.
Not at D-Day. He was in charge of the whole ally army in Western Europe. Although it was really Patton who won it. Imagine if he was President

The only reason Eisenhower advanced so far in the military was through political connections (exactly like George Marshall and Colin Powell).

Roach thats the biggest bull i have ever heard i cant stop laughing. In my opinion i think Grant was a terrible president.

you guys are pussies, this is a dumb issue, the conservatives are too ignorant to see anything bad bush has done, and the liberals are too ignorant to see any good bush has done, and both sides back it up with statistics funded by special interest political groups who skew the data to prove their point, this endless wave of political bullshit has got to stop. just admit on Nov. 2nd we are gonna have to choose which lie we want to hear, and im done listening

The fact that Specter even calls himself a Republican is laughable. When you have two democrats, at least vote for the one who admits he's a libby.

No shit! Why do you think I was willing to...and voted for...Specter? BECAUSE he isn't one of those neo-con bastards that I can't stand! Unlike the other Senator from Pennsylvania...a guy named PRICK SANTORUM....

Jay Edgar Hoover was never a President, he was the FBI DIrector. YOu are thinking of Herbert Hoover.

thank you, I already made that point way further back in the thread...try READING some of the thread before posting.

Lincoln was the worst. He took the first steps in making the US a centrist government.

Got to be Nixon, hands down. He literally gave us a constitutional crisis, and argued that the President is as absolute a monarch as Louis XIV or any of the Roman emperors--argued that before the Supreme Court. A lot of the current arguments that Dubya's administration uses to justify their actions have their roots in Nixon's administration.

Got to be Nixon, hands down. He literally gave us a constitutional crisis, and argued that the President is as absolute a monarch as Louis XIV or any of the Roman emperors--argued that before the Supreme Court. A lot of the current arguments that Dubya's administration uses to justify their actions have their roots in Nixon's administration.


that seems like an exaggeration.

I would vote for Grant if the author of the poll had included it.

Did the author learn their history from a NEA teacher? what a goob. Jay Edgar Hoover? Reagon? laughable

I know it sounds outlandish, and had I not seen several documentaries on the subject complete with interviews of people on both sides--the prosecutors and the Nixon administration--I wouldn't have believed it myself.

Basically, Nixon's argument was that because he was President, it was impossible for him to do anything illegal. That's utter crap, of course, but it underlines just how powerful NIxon felt the executive branch should be, and it's a sentiment that was recently reraised in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal when the administration was looking for ways to make torture legal.