Countdown

Chin up, Minisue. It's only a matter of time till we have to deal with Jeb.
 
thebullet said:
Chin up, Minisue. It's only a matter of time till we have to deal with Jeb.

I'm thinkin' the country as a whole is still racist enough to keep that from happening. Kinda like Arizona electing a butch, single, female democrat as governor because her republican opponent was morman. I'm always so torn when the right thing happens for the wrong reason.
 
thebullet said:
Chin up, Minisue. It's only a matter of time till we have to deal with Jeb.

Don't be such a cynic. Jeb's state visit to tour the tsunami damage had nothing to do with any presidential aspirations. He just happened to be the best president's brother for the job. Who would you have sent? Neil?
 
Shereads said:
He just happened to be the best president's brother for the job. Who would you have sent? Neil?

How about Billy Carter?
 
thebullet said:
How about Billy Carter?

Good ol' Billy. Remember Libya? And airport peeing? And Billy Beer?

Billy Carter and Roger Clinton could have kept their fame alive indefinitely if fundraising for the Museum of Slacker Brothers hadn't ground to a halt as soon as Geraldo Rivera stopped taking their phone calls.
 
LadyJeanne said:
Ugh. How awful to imagine the damage he's going to do in the time he has left. :mad:


Like Clinton was any better? Everyone felt the same way about Regan when he was in office and look at how he was treated at his passing. When he was gone everyone treated him like the best president ever. Suggestions were even made to put his face on Mt. Rushmore and on currency. I feel it is the same way now with Bush.
 
rikaaim said:
Like Clinton was any better? Everyone felt the same way about Regan when he was in office and look at how he was treated at his passing. When he was gone everyone treated him like the best president ever. Suggestions were even made to put his face on Mt. Rushmore and on currency. I feel it is the same way now with Bush.

It's true we get all sentimental when Presidents die, but there are plenty of us who continue to loathe Reagan's trickle-down economics theories and who have not forgotten the Iran/contra fuck up. Clinton couldn't stop behaving like a horny schoolboy in the Oval Office, and he didn't do as much as he could have/should have/said he would (ex. 'don't ask, don't tell), but he didn't start a war that looks more and more like Vietnam every day. Bush's legacy will be untold years of deaths and disgrace in the desert.
 
LadyJeanne said:
It's true we get all sentimental when Presidents die, but there are plenty of us who continue to loathe Reagan's trickle-down economics theories and who have not forgotten the Iran/contra fuck up. Clinton couldn't stop behaving like a horny schoolboy in the Oval Office, and he didn't do as much as he could have/should have/said he would (ex. 'don't ask, don't tell), but he didn't start a war that looks more and more like Vietnam every day. Bush's legacy will be untold years of deaths and disgrace in the desert.



I truly hate to argue politics, but how many young people die due to street crime every year? How many soliders have died in Iraq? Less than the average amount of death due to street crime. I honestly won't argue this point with you because I wish not to offend you, and my opinions shall remain my own. I will simply say that I believe the right president is in office right now. I also believe that no matter which president is in office, someone somewhere will always be pointing out the flaws and never the positives. I don't give much credit to the media for portraying this war. It's all propaganda to me. All I know is that when all of the stations point out only negative aspects and not a single positive thing is mentioned then something is fishy.
 
For me, for an argument to be fair, all of the facts have to be told. Once all of the pros and cons are listed and presented in a logical and structual format then let the reader/viewer/interested party decide for themselves what's right and wrong. How can we as a single person know for a fact what's right? We don't know all of the information. The government keeps most of it secret any way and half of the time they don't even know what's going on. So, how can we decide based on half truths and misinfromation? In fact it was the UN, from my understanding, that stated that weapons of mass destruction were being manufactured. I do admit that we should have never stopped chasing Osama when we were so close, but it's all in the past. Let's stop arguing whose right and wrong and instead send our love, prayers, and whatever support we can to our troops serving, volunteering, to protect us from what they believe to be a threat to our safety. :rose:
 
rikaaim said:
I truly hate to argue politics, but how many young people die due to street crime every year? How many soliders have died in Iraq? Less than the average amount of death due to street crime. I honestly won't argue this point with you because I wish not to offend you, and my opinions shall remain my own. I will simply say that I believe the right president is in office right now. I also believe that no matter which president is in office, someone somewhere will always be pointing out the flaws and never the positives. I don't give much credit to the media for portraying this war. It's all propaganda to me. All I know is that when all of the stations point out only negative aspects and not a single positive thing is mentioned then something is fishy.

I don't wish to argue about this either. But I do wish to point out that my reference to the deaths in Iraq includes the deaths of Iraqui civilians and non-American troops, not just American soldiers. I lay their deaths at Bush's feet as well.
 
rikaaim said:
Like Clinton was any better?

Well, yeah. Duh. If you count 8 years of relative peace and record-breaking economic prosperity, progress on social issues like homelessness and hunger, safer air and water, a renewal of respect for wilderness and the national parks, a budget surplus that would have saved social security, a military intervention in Eastern Europe that actually worked, to the disgruntlement of Donald Rumsfeld who first complained that Clinton should have allowed more time for negotiations with Milosovitch; and later criticized the strategy as being weakened by "too much caution, not enough shock and awe." We had friends around the world. Even among our enemies, we weren't thought to be stupid or particularly disingenuous. On the terrorism front, Clinton's people had stopped a disaster at the Los Angeles Olympics that would have killed more people than died at the World Trade Center. They hadn't caught Bin Laden but were at least aware of the threat. All in all, not a bad record.

I don't know how old you were when you began paying close attention to the news, but I personally am grateful for those years when a typical news day had, as its most upsetting story, something to do with the president's prick. As opposed to his brain.

Don't make me come over there.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top