Bill Clinton - Favorability Rating

[SpeedoGuy]

If a Democrat avoids the Vietnam war by taking a scholarship overseas, he's a coward and a traitor. If a Republican avoids the war by taking a scholarship overseas, he's Dick Cheney.

Fixed that one for ya, rob.

 

[D_Martin van Burden]

I'm still waiting on people to acknowledge that Bush was lying -- no, fuck that bullshit about the "intelligence" was wrong -- about his motivation to go to war in Iraq. I say a blowjob is certainly a lesser of two evils.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

I give him a C and the current one a F. The added money we had could have been used to prop up Social Security. Instead, Congress spent it and he was all for it. The so called boom years we had economically were fueled by the Technological Revolution and funny money. The fed lowered interest rates to a destructive level. People spent huge amounts of money they did not have. They drove the stock market to unsustainable levels, spent widely on credit, and built McMansions. We are going to pay for this in the not too far off future.
Don't forget he did send us to Bosnia.
We are pretty well screwed and nobody can stop it now. I just suggest peeps don't buy much on credit and save what they can.

 

[SteveHd]

Normally they wouldn't have to. There were Bears based in Cuba.

I knew that Tu-95s were based in Cuba but I thought it was at a later time. Anyway, I still think it's unlikely GWB encountered one.

 

[rob_just_rob]

I'm still waiting on people to acknowledge that Bush was lying -- no, fuck that bullshit about the "intelligence" was wrong -- about his motivation to go to war in Iraq. I say a blowjob is certainly a lesser of two evils.

Apparently for the Republogists, it's not how important the lie is, it's who the lie is told to that matters.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

One of the largest problems we have in this country is an electorate that doesn't hold the government fully accountable. The Congress continues spending as usual, the executive branch continues to put us in wars without a declaration of war, and the judicial branch has usurped the powers of both the legislative and executive branches.
People go vote, don't do anything else but bitch for the next 2 years, and wonder why the country is so screwed up. Not even half the eligible voters turn out to vote for president.

The same idiots that supplied intelligence to this fool are the ones that gave lyndon johnson his info on Vietnam. We all know how that turned out.

And for everyone who hasn't read her bio, Hillary was head of the republican student org at Wellesley. Her youth minister at Wellesley took them to hear Saul D. Alinsky. He was a well known leftist who used his intellect and charisma to persuade rising young adults to get involved in making radical changes by upsetting the current system. She wrote a large part of her thesis on him. She even elevated him to equal status with Martin Luther King. The Clinton White House called Wellesley and got it sealed for 8 years. Now, you can see it but you can't copy all of it.

For those of you in favor of socialized medicine, I have a friend in Scotland who is now crippled because it takes so long to get the care you need. He needed an mri and immediate surgery on his neck. It took over a year for the government to approve the mri. When they did his surgery, 2 years had passed, and the damage had been done. A lady in her 70s badly needed shoulder surgery and 7 months later, she still hadn't had it. It's just too cost prohibitive. The new senior drug program this F pres got, is costing the United States so much money it threatens to bankrupt the country.

I say put them all out of business and vote new peeps into office.

Pecker for President! Naughty, you can be the new speaker of the house.

 

[madame_zora]

I draw the line at perjury. It isn't clear in my mind whether or not Clinton knew his testimony was false. If I knew it, it's perjury.

I just have to come out and say this- BULLSHIT!!

"Perjury"? How can someone be said to commit "perjury" about something they really shouldn't be asked about, since it had NOTHING whatsoever to do with the case being tried in the frst place? How can ANYONE not understand that there's this little thing called a goddamned sense of proportion? I'm sorry, no one's really allowed to be that stupid, honestly. I understand that he lied, and I understand that lying is bad- what he should have said was "none of your goddamned busness!", but he's guilty of poor judgement about what to say when confronted about his personal business. Of all the criminal things politicians do regularly, that's a crime I can live with.

DON'T accuse me of saying that it's okay to lie if it's Clinton- I'm saying that the subject being lied about is an important part of the equation, and it's not okay to make flat rules which are unevenly applied. People need to start accepting responsibility for actually weighing evidence and judging its importance as measured against societal standards. Duh.
If you really think blowjobs and war are of equal importance, you need to be electrocuted post haste. I'll be getting a blowjob.

There really are big and little "sins", really. Murder is worse than stealing bubblegum, even though they're both wrong. People really need to stop letting dunces off the hook for saying something as retarded as "he lied under oath" as if that has some merit behind it at all. Yes motherfucker, about WHAT? Lying about a blowjob makes him a creep. Lying about national security issues and reasons for going to WAR makes bush a felon and a traitor. I assume you know the difference between felonies and misdemeanors? Hmmm?

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

I don't care that Clinton got a blowjob from an intern and I'm not aghast that he lied about it, though that he did so deliberately and repeatedly on national television doesn't sit well with me. But I'm not aghast. Still, when does committing or not committing perjury have anything at all to do with whether or not you think the quetsion should have been asked? It's been proven Clinton was a liar, and did so under oath, which means perjury Zora whether you like it or not. The defintion has absolutely nothing at all to do with what is being lied about. Bush is probably a liar. I don't think it's really been proven at this point, though the evidence is quite substantial. Were his lies more egregious and damaging to the country? Without question. Does that mean Clinton isn't a liar or that he failed to commit perjury? No.

 

[madame_zora]

Yes NIC, clearly he did lie under oath, regardless what it was about. I knew as I was watching that that was the nail in his proverbial coffin. Starr really didn't have anything on him until he lied. As I have said at least a billion times, he should have refused to answer, based on the fact that it was nobody's business. He should have vehemently and repeatedly refused to answer questions about his personal life, regardless of how many times asked. He didn't do that, because like any centrist, he's a weasel. Well, the impeachment was set aside, because nobody really cared that he lied, even under oath, BECAUSE it was about a blowjob.
Since this is in the past, everyone already knows about it, so why does it still come up as if it were a new and challenging debate? Yeah, he lied- yeah, he was under oath, his impeachment was set aside because no legal mind could sleep at night impeaching a president over something so absurd. Next.

Personally, I don't find putting one's hand on the Bible and swearing an oath to be the measure of when one should tell the truth. Interestingly enough, the Bible itself says not to take oaths! It says to just let your yea be yea and your nay be nay. Stupid court system never cracked the thing open apparently. ANY time someone lies, it's wrong. Having sworn an oath first is irrelevant to ME, but I do understand its legal implications. Still, I'd love to know what that line of questioning had to do with tax evasion.

Gingrich was also having a affair WHILE he was helping to prosecute Clinton, but he wasn't under oath. I guess that's okay. Here's my real beef- the wimpering cunts who will use any angle imaginable to claim that Clinton's lies are somehow more inexcusable than any of the tons of repugs who have been caught doing much worse in these last six years. I'm saying that the impact on our nation is actually THE most relevant consideration, not whether their hand had passed over a certain book of stories or not. I guess the repugs had their fingers crossed behind their backs, so even though the lies were about things that actually affect people's lives and deaths, it's really okay- they didn't really mean it.

Frankly, I'm not interested in hearing about ANY public figure's sex life, I'm just thoroughly disgusted with the hypocrisy of people counting details more than impact. Bullshit.

I wish one of those cunts would actually point to some harm he did to the country through policy rather than just the boring and stupid blowjob argument, it's unbelievable. No, they cashed their checks just like I did, and didn't appreciate a damned thing he did. I hope this site is still around twenty years from now, when the incredible stupidity of the American people is finally documented historically. This argument will be way up near the top- this was the lead-in to the bush admin which killed America as a superpower.

edit- you don't really need me to compile a list of bush's lies, do you? I mean, I will if you can't recall any, but I assumed it was common knowledge. He hasn't testified about any of his wrongdoings, so he hasn't had the opportunity to commit perjury, but you have to be kidding if you're saying he's not a proven liar! Um, anytime someone says one thing, then changes their story when that one thing is proven to be false is a liar, does that jog your memory a bit?

 

[Pirate Wench]

Not all size queens are Democrats.

But I will say I think George has gone " 'round the bend" lately......
He has gone crazy.
A lot of Republicans are Not happy with George for many reasons.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

edit- you don't really need me to compile a list of bush's lies, do you? I mean, I will if you can't recall any, but I assumed it was common knowledge. He hasn't testified about any of his wrongdoings, so he hasn't had the opportunity to commit perjury, but you have to be kidding if you're saying he's not a proven liar! Um, anytime someone says one thing, then changes their story when that one thing is proven to be false is a liar, does that jog your memory a bit?

I was thinking more of specific lies that have been discussed here. Though to be honest I can't off the top of my head think of a time when Bush was caught in an outright lie. I can think of many instances that are pretty close to that... but nothing quite as specific as him being asked a direct question, responding in a clear and unambiguous way, and then having that answer proven absolutely false later along with proof that he knew the answer was false at the time he gave it. I'm not saying he hasn't done that, and I don't doubt that he has, but I can't think of anything so cut-and-dry. If you can think of one thing feel free to mention it. Please don't compile a list, though. :biggrin1:

 

[madame_zora]

Too easy NIC, how about bush claiming after 9/11 that he had not heard anything about a brief informing him that al-qaeda was planning to use planes to blow up the twin towers, then we saw video footage of it being read to him, prior to the attacks? There are literally tons of them caught on film.

But you were right about the perjury. I shouldn't have objected to it being called that when my objection is really that people don't know how to assign value.

 

[SteveHd]

MZ, you misread what I wrote. I didn't say Clinton committed perjury. I'll repeat a sentence I wrote earlier: "It isn't clear in my mind whether or not Clinton knew his testimony was false."

In order to be perjury, Clinton would have to know it was false when he testified. There's little doubt in my mind that it was false. There is some doubt in my mind that it knew at that time. If he were an "ordinary" citizen I don't think a jury could be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. But it's a close call that bothers me to this day.

DON'T accuse me of saying that it's okay to lie if it's Clinton-

I didn't. Are you suggesting I did?

I'm sorry, no one's really allowed to be that stupid, honestly.

Are you implying that I'm stupid? Since I'm not a liberal I guess I'm eligible.

I assume you know the difference between felonies and misdemeanors?

I'm not a lawyer but I realize they are different magnitudes. I do know that knowingly giving a false statement to a Grand Jury can be a felony.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Too easy NIC, how about bush claiming after 9/11 that he had not heard anything about a brief informing him that al-qaeda was planning to use planes to blow up the twin towers, then we saw video footage of it being read to him, prior to the attacks? There are literally tons of them caught on film.

But you were right about the perjury. I shouldn't have objected to it being called that when my objection is really that people don't know how to assign value.

I believe that Bush could have forgotten about the brief. He gets read those things every single day. I don't expect him to have a perfect memory. I have a harder time believing Clinton forgot about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. I still don't think this counts as proof. Have you got something else? :biggrin1: Seriously, I'm not trying to be contentious, just curious if we can come up with something concrete.

 

[kewger]

I'm not old enough to remember the Bay of Pigs incident.. I calculate that GWB would have been ~15 in 1961. He wouldn't have been in the ANG then.

I had an excellent history teacher in high school. I went to a private school, not a liberal dominated public school that specializes in twisting the truth to serve the socialist agenda.

 

[amiegrrl]

I had an excellent history teacher in high school. I went to a private school, not a liberal dominated public school that specializes in twisting the truth to serve the socialist agenda.

First of all, that was pretentious and dickish. Most families don't have the disposable income necessary to send their children to private school.

:tool:

And... the ridiculousness of your statement strikes me as amusing since around here the public-school history twisting is all done by "conservative" Creationist redneck fucktards who only care what the White Man has done throughout time. Which, comparatively... isn't much.

 

[zgrog2000]

The US political commentary on this forum never ceases to make me laugh.

 

[rob_just_rob]

First of all, that was pretentious and dickish. Most families don't have the disposable income necessary to send their children to private school.

:tool:

And... the ridiculousness of your statement strikes me as amusing since around here the public-school history twisting is all done by "conservative" Creationist redneck fucktards who only care what the White Man has done throughout time. Which, comparatively... isn't much.

Amazing how, for some people, anything to the left of Barry Goldwater is socialist, idin'it? It's almost as if America has come to the point where there are only two acceptable political positions: right, and far-right.

 

[SteveHd]

I went to public schools and I don't recall a "socialist agenda". Moreover, I recall a high school history teacher who would criticize and denigrate socialism quite a bit. College was different: very left leaning.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

fucktards who only care what the White Man has done throughout time. Which, comparatively... isn't much.

Are you joking or are we thinking of different white men?