criddic3 wrote:Duh! I know he wasn't referring to what people want to hear. I was saying that I prefer this "boorish" president than one that acts the part only to be popular in the polls. Maybe you need better reading comprehension.
Why would I count those guys as people who aren't doing what is popular when THEY keep referring to their actions as the ones people say they voted for them on? They think their actions are going to, in the words of Harry Reid "win them lots of seats" in coming elections. So no, they are not my heroes, especially since I still support the war and the reasoning behind it. I was never "gung ho," though. While some were gushing about how we'd somehow get the oil from Iraq, i was quoting the President, who made a point of saying it was the Iraqis' oil and not ours. But I agreed with the President that Saddam had to go and that it was an ideal place to fight terrorism since it is in the heart of the region. I think Pelosi and co. are fools and political opportunists, although I do give her some points for calling off the "impeachment" hounds.
So you're that some unnamed politicans "act" in a boorish manner in order to curry favor with the public, whereas Worst President Ever's boorishness is simply him doingn what comes naturally? Your writing ability is as putrid as your reading comprehension.
And if you had any reading comprehension skills you would have understood that I was referring to the positions Feingold, Pelosi et al had taken back in 2002, when the thought of war was supported by a majority of duped Americans. So if you truly meant what you wrote about people who took umpopular stances, you would consider these people heroes. But you didn't mean that at all, because as everyone on the board knows, you are a liar. You don't admire people who have integrity, you just have your Jones for Worst President Ever.
Actually I don't think President Bush is boorish, but I'd rather have someone as president who you guys think IS boorish and unsophisticated than a phony. He is who he is, in public and out of public, as we can see from candid moments that no one presumably would have seen.
Yes, i realize that you were talking about their 2002 votes, but my reply holds because they are not trying to "stand up" against the odds either now or then. Back then they some of them took the opinion that somehow given what they knew then, we should not have gone to Iraq. Most of these people would not have voted for force under just about any circumstances, and I believe they were foolish to do that. They were basically saying that EVEN if Saddam Hussein had WMD and EVEN if he posed an immediate threat or a looming threat on our interests, EVEN if terrorists found a safe-haven there, they still would vote no. Remember, this is before we ever went there. Most everyone believed all those things were true, including the President. He wasn't taking chances risking national security, but they were.
So they were not people of integrity. It isn't just about standing up for what you believe, but standing up for what is right. If you think that they were right, you'll view me as a liar. As I've stated, you can say what you want. Doesn't make it true.
And as I stated before, I give Pelosi points for taking impeachment of the table.
Senator Joseph Biden not too long ago said that President Bush is a "nice guy." Of course he doesn't think Bush is right about Iraq, but at least isn't saying that the President is evil.
President Bush, in my view is far from the worst we've ever had. I don't think he'll go down as the greatest either, but he had vision and the courage to be the one to begin the fight against terrorism in earnest. No fiddling around, saying, "let's wait for another attack before we make our next move." He's been wrong about some things, and some of the strategy used in Iraq was badly executed and some of it not thought-through, but I still believe in my heart he made the right decision regarding Iraq. And I still believe he's done some things right domestically, too.
For all the hatred towards this man that you all have, I have not found so much hatred for Presidents I've disliked. I don't really hate anyone, but while some Presidents are better than others, I feel that even the worst ones did what they felt was correct. In Bush's case, I believe he HAS been correct most of the time and that his convictions are real. So call me a liar, I will continue to believe this. At least I know I'm being truthful.
"Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand." -- President Joe Biden, 01/20/2021
criddic3 wrote:Duh! I know he wasn't referring to what people want to hear. I was saying that I prefer this "boorish" president than one that acts the part only to be popular in the polls. Maybe you need better reading comprehension.
Why would I count those guys as people who aren't doing what is popular when THEY keep referring to their actions as the ones people say they voted for them on? They think their actions are going to, in the words of Harry Reid "win them lots of seats" in coming elections. So no, they are not my heroes, especially since I still support the war and the reasoning behind it. I was never "gung ho," though. While some were gushing about how we'd somehow get the oil from Iraq, i was quoting the President, who made a point of saying it was the Iraqis' oil and not ours. But I agreed with the President that Saddam had to go and that it was an ideal place to fight terrorism since it is in the heart of the region. I think Pelosi and co. are fools and political opportunists, although I do give her some points for calling off the "impeachment" hounds.
So you're that some unnamed politicans "act" in a boorish manner in order to curry favor with the public, whereas Worst President Ever's boorishness is simply him doingn what comes naturally? Your writing ability is as putrid as your reading comprehension.
And if you had any reading comprehension skills you would have understood that I was referring to the positions Feingold, Pelosi et al had taken back in 2002, when the thought of war was supported by a majority of duped Americans. So if you truly meant what you wrote about people who took umpopular stances, you would consider these people heroes. But you didn't mean that at all, because as everyone on the board knows, you are a liar. You don't admire people who have integrity, you just have your Jones for Worst President Ever.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
criddic3 wrote:I'd rather have him than some "sophisticated" phony who just tries to please everyone by quoting what people what to hear in the polls.
criddic, what is wrong with your reading comprehension abilities? The Sonic post you quoted has NOTHING to do with saying things what people want to hear. It's entirely about Worst President Ever's boorishness and (despite the family money) lack of class.
By the way, since you admire people who don't just parrot whatever's in fashion at the time, I assume you count Russ Feingold, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Lincoln Chaffee, Barbara Boxer and Charlie Rangel, among others, as personal heroes. since they had the courage to stand up against Worst President Ever's insane Iraqi adventure when most American were gung ho for kicking some Iraqi ass.
Duh! I know he wasn't referring to what people want to hear. I was saying that I prefer this "boorish" president than one that acts the part only to be popular in the polls. Maybe you need better reading comprehension.
Why would I count those guys as people who aren't doing what is popular when THEY keep referring to their actions as the ones people say they voted for them on? They think their actions are going to, in the words of Harry Reid "win them lots of seats" in coming elections. So no, they are not my heroes, especially since I still support the war and the reasoning behind it. I was never "gung ho," though. While some were gushing about how we'd somehow get the oil from Iraq, i was quoting the President, who made a point of saying it was the Iraqis' oil and not ours. But I agreed with the President that Saddam had to go and that it was an ideal place to fight terrorism since it is in the heart of the region. I think Pelosi and co. are fools and political opportunists, although I do give her some points for calling off the "impeachment" hounds.
"Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand." -- President Joe Biden, 01/20/2021
criddic3 wrote:I'd rather have him than some "sophisticated" phony who just tries to please everyone by quoting what people what to hear in the polls.
criddic, what is wrong with your reading comprehension abilities? The Sonic post you quoted has NOTHING to do with saying things what people want to hear. It's entirely about Worst President Ever's boorishness and (despite the family money) lack of class.
By the way, since you admire people who don't just parrot whatever's in fashion at the time, I assume you count Russ Feingold, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Lincoln Chaffee, Barbara Boxer and Charlie Rangel, among others, as personal heroes. since they had the courage to stand up against Worst President Ever's insane Iraqi adventure when most American were gung ho for kicking some Iraqi ass.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Damien wrote:I can't believe that Worst President Ever actually winked at H.R.M. when he misspoke yesterday morning. Certainly protocol must say you don't wink at the Queen.
Why are we surprised? He's the same guy who reached over to give the German chancellor a massage, and held a discussion with Tony Blair while chewing his food. Remember? He is a classless, unsophisticated, gross, uncouth, discourteous, boor. And anyone who can't see how uncivilized his behavior is must have been raised by farm animals themselves.
At least when daddy Bush puked into the Japanese Prime Minister's lap, it was an accident.
I'd rather have him than some "sophisticated" phony who just tries to please everyone by quoting what people what to hear in the polls.
"When I first started in politics, I wanted to please everyone," Blair said during a tour of the Middle East in December. "After a time I learned that you can't please everyone, and you learn that the best thing is to do what you think is right and everyone can make their judgment." From an article written after Bliar's announcement he is stepping down in late July.
"Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand." -- President Joe Biden, 01/20/2021
Damien wrote:I can't believe that Worst President Ever actually winked at H.R.M. when he misspoke yesterday morning. Certainly protocol must say you don't wink at the Queen.
Why are we surprised? He's the same guy who reached over to give the German chancellor a massage, and held a discussion with Tony Blair while chewing his food. Remember? He is a classless, unsophisticated, gross, uncouth, discourteous, boor. And anyone who can't see how uncivilized his behavior is must have been raised by farm animals themselves.
At least when daddy Bush puked into the Japanese Prime Minister's lap, it was an accident.
I feel as if I just read an article in Newsday. Quite whining. I'm sure it isn't as bad to the Queen as you suggest. He misspoke and made light of it. Not the worst he could do. It is more human than any of you hypocrites.
"Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand." -- President Joe Biden, 01/20/2021
No, we are not, especially the Queen. I happened to catch a little bit of The View while enjoying a late breakfast. The co-host was former daughter-in-law Fergie who intimated that she was still in awe of the Queen. Regular Elizabeth Hasselbeck happened to be one the 134 invited guests. She posed for a picture with her husband, the Bushies, the Queen and Prince Philip. All smiled nicley for the camera except Her Majesty who looked positively ashen faced.
I can't believe that Worst President Ever actually winked at H.R.M. when he misspoke yesterday morning. Certainly protocol must say you don't wink at the Queen.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Any of the rest of you feeling a little schadenfreude after hearing of Bush being forced by Laura and Condi to wear a white tie to meet the Queen? Would love to have been a fly on the wall to hear his whining.
It is no wonder that E2R has not been to the White House since Daddy's reign. The two of them together are ludicrous: The proper and much-beloved Queen Of England and the stumblebum hick from Texas, tripping over his tongue.
Class will out. WE are not amused.
