Could America Survive Bush? (#2 in the 'Step Aside' series)
Trebor
Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
could survive your presidency? I'm not talking here about the fact
you have no foreign policy experience, and probably couldn't even find
the continent of Africa on a map. Nor am I refering to how you've
already sold out to wealthy interests, and would likley end up doing
everything short of handing out royal titles.
But Mr. Bush - can I call you George? George - let's cut to the chase
here - you simply don't have the integrity or background required to
be president of the greatest country in the world - not even remotely.
Why do I say this?
First, because you dodged the draft rather than fight a war that you
supported - so how in the world can our military have any confidence
in such a cowardly commander-in-chief? How could you, in good
concience, ever send others to do what you lacked the courage to do
when you had the chance to prove it?
You're an alcoholic, and would always be just one drink shy of
becoming America's Boris Yeltsin. So what happens to America's
security and prestige when our drunkard president decides to go on a
toot? Do we have to give you a breath test before letting you have
the launch codes?
Apparently you also used (still use?) marijuana and cocaine. So what
exactly do we tell our children at this point - that now you have to
be rich and influential like our druggie president, or else you might
get caught?
And what about your long history of womanizing? What happens when one
of *your* past conquests files a suit against *you*? What happens
when *your* bastard son is discovered in some Austin trailer park? Do
we have to drag your private life through the courts and through
Congress, simply to find out all that *you're* not telling us now?
Does our country have to go through another year or more just like the
last? Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
Then there's your inability to even speak coherently. Something is
obviously wrong with your brain - even my three year old nephew speaks
with a greater command of the English language than you. Is it drugs
Booze? The long-term effect of too much drugs and booze? Whatevever
your problem is, you sound about as presidential as a skid row bum.
George, you may have the cash alright - but you clearly don't have the
character to be president. Nor can our nation afford to see Caligula
succeeding Augustus. Quite frankly, the most irresponsible action
you've taken to date isn't your draft dodging, your boozing or drug
use or whoring about or incoherence - it's the very fact you're now
running for president, and putting America at such risk of calamity
and shame.
George, for once in your life - do the right thing. For once in your
pathetic, silver-spoon existance - do something for others rather than
always for yourself and your own ego. Show to us you're not just
another spoiled rich kid trying to prove something to his dad, or some
upper-class dink who thinks the presidency is a hereditary office .
Prove to us that you really can be the man you want us to think you
are. Prove to us that you *really* love your country.
How?
Just step aside, Mr. Bush. Step aside for the better man.
cheers,
Trebor
Marksman
"Trebor fascist whore" <Tre...@my-deja.com> was corrected in message
news:39feff77...@news.earthlink.net...
>
> Mr. Gore, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> could survive your presidency? I'm not talking here about the fact
> you have no foreign policy experience, and probably couldn't even find
> already sold out to wealthy interests, and would likely end up doing
> everything short of handing out royal titles.
>
> here - you simply don't have the integrity or background required to
> be president of the greatest country in the world - not even remotely.
> Why do I say this?
>
> First, because you dodged the draft rather than fight a war that you
> supported - so how in the world can our military have any confidence
> in such a cowardly commander-in-chief? How could you, in good
> when you had the chance to prove it?
>
> You're an alcoholic, and would always be just one drink shy of
> becoming America's Boris Yeltsin. So what happens to America's
> security and prestige when our drunkard president decides to go on a
> toot? Do we have to give you a breath test before letting you have
> the launch codes?
>
> Apparently you also used (still use?) marijuana and cocaine. So what
> exactly do we tell our children at this point - that now you have to
> be rich and influential like our druggie president, or else you might
> get caught?
>
> And what about your long history of womanizing? What happens when one
> of *your* past conquests files a suit against *you*? What happens
> when *your* bastard son is discovered in some Austin trailer park? Do
> we have to drag your private life through the courts and through
> Congress, simply to find out all that *you're* not telling us now?
> Does our country have to go through another year or more just like the
> last? Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
> want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
> even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
>
> Then there's your inability to even speak coherently. Something is
> obviously wrong with your brain - even my three year old nephew speaks
> with a greater command of the English language than you. Is it drugs
> your problem is, you sound about as presidential as a skid row bum.
>
> character to be president. Nor can our nation afford to see Caligula
> succeeding Augustus. Quite frankly, the most irresponsible action
> you've taken to date isn't your draft dodging, your boozing or drug
> use or whoring about or incoherence - it's the very fact you're now
> running for president, and putting America at such risk of calamity
> and shame.
>
> pathetic, silver-spoon existence - do something for others rather than
> always for yourself and your own ego. Show to us you're not just
> another spoiled rich kid trying to prove something to his dad, or some
> upper-class dink who thinks the presidency is a hereditary office .
> Prove to us that you really can be the man you want us to think you
> are. Prove to us that you *really* love your country.
>
> How?
>
>
> cheers,
> Trebor
>
Lynette Warren
: Mr. Clinton, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
: could survive your presidency? I'm not talking here about the fact
: you have no foreign policy experience, and probably couldn't even find
: the continent of Africa on a map. Nor am I refering to how you've
: already sold out to wealthy interests, and would likley end up doing
: everything short of handing out favors and military technology to drug
: runners and the PSRC Army.
: But Mr. Clinton- can I call you Bill? Bill - let's cut to the chase
: here - you simply don't have the integrity or background required to
: be president of the greatest country in the world - not even remotely.
: Why do I say this?
: First, because you dodged the draft rather than fight a war that you
: supported - so how in the world can our military have any confidence
: in such a cowardly commander-in-chief? How could you, in good
: concience, ever send others to do what you lacked the courage to do
: when you had the chance to prove it?
: You're a degenerate, and would always be just one tryst shy of
: becoming America's Rasputin. So what happens to America's
: security and prestige when our degenerate president decides to go on a
: toot? Do we have to give you a drug test before letting you have
: the launch codes?
: Apparently you also used (still use?) marijuana and cocaine. So what
: exactly do we tell our children at this point - that now you have to
: be rich and influential like our druggie president, or else you might
: get caught?
: And what about your long history of womanizing? What happens when one
: of *your* past conquests files a suit against *you*? What happens
: when *your* bastard son is discovered in some Little Rock trailer park?
: Do we have to drag your private life through the courts and through
: Congress, simply to find out all that *you're* not telling us now?
: Does our country have to go through another year or more just like the
: last? Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
: want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
: even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
: Then there's your inability to ever tell the truth. Something is
: obviously wrong with your brain - even my three year old nephew speaks
: with a greater command of the English language than you. Is it drugs
: Booze? The long-term effect of too much drugs and booze? Whatevever
: your problem is, you act about as presidential as a skid row pimp.
: Bill, you may have the cash alright - but you clearly don't have the
: character to be president. Nor can our nation afford to see Caligula
: succeeding Augustus. Quite frankly, the most irresponsible action
: you've taken to date isn't your draft dodging, your boozing or drug
: use or whoring about or ingenuousness - it's the very fact you're now
: running for president, and putting America at such risk of calamity
: and shame.
: Bill, for once in your life - do the right thing. For once in your
: pathetic, coke-spoon existance - do something for others rather than
: always for yourself and your own ego. Show to us you're not just
: another lying bastard kid trying to prove something to his abusive
: stepdad, or some low-life dink who thinks the presidency is his
: private fund generating office .
: Prove to us that you really can be the man you want us to think you
: are. Prove to us that you *really* love your country.
: How?
: Just step aside, Mr. Clinton.
: cheers,
: Trebor, 1992
There you go, Trebby. Corrected it for you.
Lynette
King Pineapple
Trebor <Tre...@my-deja.com> made it as easy as shooting fish in a barrel in
message news:39feff77...@news.earthlink.net...
>
> Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> could survive your presidency? I'm not talking here about the fact
> you have no foreign policy experience, and probably couldn't even find
> the continent of Africa on a map.
Yet YOU elected a man with NO foreign policy experience in 1992. I guess
it's OK to vote for such a person, as long as they belong to the "correct"
party, right? LOL
> But Mr. Bush - can I call you George? George - let's cut to the chase
> here - you simply don't have the integrity or background required to
> be president of the greatest country in the world - not even remotely.
> Why do I say this?
This should be GOOD.
> First, because you dodged the draft rather than fight a war that you
> supported - so how in the world can our military have any confidence
> in such a cowardly commander-in-chief?
Why not ask THEM? After all, the current CIC ALSO dodged the draft, that
doesn't seem to have been a problem.
BTW, the military people *I* have talked to, under condition of anonymity,
have been less than supportive of Clinton. Morale in the military is at an
all time low. Yet things seem to be in good hands (knock on wood).
>How could you, in good
> concience, ever send others to do what you lacked the courage to do
> when you had the chance to prove it?
Clinton has done it. SEVERAL times, as a matter of fact. Can you say
"Belgrade"?
> You're an alcoholic, and would always be just one drink shy of
> becoming America's Boris Yeltsin.
At least he ADMITS it. Boris never did.
>So what happens to America's
> security and prestige when our drunkard president decides to go on a
> toot?
You show an alarming lack of compassion for people with a problem with the
grape. Of ocurse, this is to be expected from a poor imitation of a
"liberal" like yourself.
>Do we have to give you a breath test before letting you have
> the launch codes?
Gee, the current CIC REFUSES to release HIS medical history. How come you
don't have a problem with THAT? Oh, that's right. He's a DEMOCRAT and
doesn't have to be held accountable for his actions. LOL
> Apparently you also used (still use?) marijuana and cocaine. So what
> exactly do we tell our children at this point - that now you have to
> be rich and influential like our druggie president, or else you might
> get caught?
See above. WHAT is Clinton HIDING?
"My brother has a nose like a vacuum cleaner"-Roger Clinton
> And what about your long history of womanizing? What happens when one
> of *your* past conquests files a suit against *you*? What happens
> when *your* bastard son is discovered in some Austin trailer park? Do
> we have to drag your private life through the courts and through
> Congress, simply to find out all that *you're* not telling us now?
LOL. You CAN'T be this stupid, can you? Actually, Gore has over 80 percent
of the high school dropout vote, according to Gallup, while GW has a *double
digit* lead over Al in the college grads and those with some college. I
guess you CAN be this stupid.
> Does our country have to go through another year or more just like the
> last?
Hey, NOBODY held a gun to Slick's head and told him to unzip. OR to lie
under oath. OR to waste a full quarter of his second term LYING about "just
ablowjob".
> Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
> want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
> even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
Sure it could.
> Then there's your inability to even speak coherently. Something is
> obviously wrong with your brain - even my three year old nephew speaks
> with a greater command of the English language than you.
As a former speech student, I find that statement at the least ludicrous.
And at the most, perjury.
Definitely hallucinogenic.
> Is it drugs
> Booze? The long-term effect of too much drugs and booze? Whatevever
> your problem is, you sound about as presidential as a skid row bum.
Gee, I saw Jesse Jackson on Meet the Press last week. I couldn't understand
HIM, either. The man MUMBLES. Yet Jesse is idolized by you Bubba Butt
Brothers.
Anyway, most of the leaders President Bush will be dealing with can't
understand much English anyway. He'll do OK. I'm sure many of those leaders
would rather deal with Secretary of State Colin Powell, anyway.
> George, you may have the cash alright - but you clearly don't have the
> character to be president.
Gee, you people have been telling us for the past 18 months that "character"
DOESN'T MATTER.
Now you're changing your tune? Gee, I guess desperation will do that to you.
>Nor can our nation afford to see Caligula
> succeeding Augustus.
You have it backwards. Damn that public education.
>Quite frankly, the most irresponsible action
> you've taken to date isn't your
ALLEGED
>draft dodging
> your
SELF-ADMITTED
>boozing
>or
ALLEGED
>drug
> use or whoring about or incoherence - it's the very fact you're now
> running for president, and putting America at such risk of calamity
> and shame.
Get some sleep, man. Even at mid-day you still sound like you're about 8
hours short.
> George, for once in your life - do the right thing. For once in your
> pathetic, silver-spoon existance
Spelling error. If you aren't intelligent enough to spell correctly, why
should we believe anything you say?
>do something for others rather than
> always for yourself and your own ego.
WHY should he? Clinton never did...
>Show to us you're not just
> another spoiled rich kid trying to prove something to his dad, or some
> upper-class dink who thinks the presidency is a hereditary office .
Gee, the name "Kennedy" comes to mind here...
> Prove to us that you really can be the man you want us to think you
> are. Prove to us that you *really* love your country.
He will.
> How?
How?
> Just step aside, Mr. Bush.
Just think, Trebby, if Slick had the balls to "step aside" for the good of
the country and his political party, Gore would be finishing his second year
right now, and would be well on his way to re-election.
>Step aside for the better man.
And WHO would this "better man" be? Oh, that's right. The WORLD CLASS,
KICK-ASS DEBATER. Bwahahahahahahaha. Good Halloween joke.
Harold
>
>Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
>could survive your presidency?
It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
President.
Regards, Harold (Certified Meanie)
-----
"Why should we believe that you [AlGore] will tell the truth if
you are president when you don't when you are a candidate?"
-----Bill Bradley
Jeffrey Davis
>
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
>
> >
> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> >could survive your presidency?
>
> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
> President.
Clinton's an intelligent, canny politician. And remarkably lucky in his
enemies. Plus, his 4 years have seen relative peace and stability in the
world. His sexual peccadilloes and "nimbleness" in testimony are pretty
tangential to his abilities. W (and us) may not prove as lucky.
W strength is his alleged charm, but his past is not bereft of
skeletons. His financial record is scary. His alcoholism isn't
reassuring. His lack of curiosity about issues is legendary even among
his inner circle. Almost certainly, his casual performance of his
National Guard duties required friends in high places to have him avoid
a dishonorable discharge. And, almost certainly, the Texans he
leapfrogged into the National Guard in the first place have a legitimate
grudge against him. We'll pass over Mr. Flynt's scandal as depressing if
true, but, absent evidence, give W the benefit of the doubt. W is
unabashedly hypocritical -- "Do what I say, not what I do" [his words]
-- about his failings with alcohol and sexual activities before
marriage. He has a depressing, Dickensian flintiness about drug users.
If a tiny bit of the cocaine use attributed to W is true, Seth Pecksniff
gets demoted to 2nd chair in the all-hypocrite team. W has been cavalier
about accepting credit for programs he opposed or had no part in. And he
doesn't appear to understand the programs he advances: meaning that
we'll have another presidency-by-cabinet. In short, Clinton may lead the
league, but his record is depressingly NOT out of reach and soon. It's
like watching Jordan shoot warm-up baskets during Dr. J's farewell tour.
--
Jeffrey Davis <jeffk...@earthlink.net>
The John Dortmunder of Lexington, Ky
mwrig...@my-deja.com
Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
You best just go to sleep for the next four years because Al can't be
elected.
> Just step aside, Mr. Bush. Step aside for the better man.
>
> cheers,
> Trebor
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Old Tiger
This semi-literate, uneducated, orthodox leftist parrot is now getting the
Night Terrors.
The fact that life will go on (AND WELL!) after Inauguration Day, and a huge
number of private purses will be made immune to his theft and self entitled
attitude.
But, in reality, he should be very happy.
Think of all the years he's going to get to be a self-righteous victim!
TOT
"Trebor" <Tre...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:39feff77...@news.earthlink.net...
Steven D. Litvintchouk
>
> Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
> want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
> even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
Thanx to you folks, I'm sure we'll find out. I fully expect that 30
seconds after Bush takes the oath of office in January, you guys will be
demanding that he be impeached. Heck, I fully expect some of you to
demand Bush be impeached even BEFORE he takes the oath of office. Come
to think of it, I fully expect a few of you to start demanding on
November 8th that Bush be impeached.
I suggest you save your personal attacks on Bush to support such
activities. Don't waste such good material so early in the game.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email: s...@mitre.org
Disclaimer: As far as I am aware, the opinions expressed
herein
are not those of my employer.
Jeffrey Davis
>
> Trebor wrote:
> >
> > Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
> > want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
> > even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
>
> Thanx to you folks, I'm sure we'll find out. I fully expect that 30
> seconds after Bush takes the oath of office in January, you guys will be
> demanding that he be impeached. Heck, I fully expect some of you to
> demand Bush be impeached even BEFORE he takes the oath of office. Come
> to think of it, I fully expect a few of you to start demanding on
> November 8th that Bush be impeached.
>
> I suggest you save your personal attacks on Bush to support such
> activities. Don't waste such good material so early in the game.
Bush's impeachment hearings will be about going AWOL, graft, cocaine,
abortions, and funeral homes! (Hooray! A novelty!) No cigars, though.
(Boo!)
Sam Barber
> cheers,
> Trebor
What an angry, confused and desperate person you are,
Trebor.
Jewish World Review Oct. 27, 2000 / 28 Tishrei, 5761
Thomas Sowell
Desperate and ugly
http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- AS ELECTION DAY
approaches, look for Al Gore's campaign to get both
desperate and ugly. Desperate not only because Gore's lead
has vanished and Bush has edged ahead, but desperate also
because this is the end of the line for Gore and everything
he has worked for all his life, if he loses this election.
Political parties can turn savagely against candidates who
have led them to defeat. With the Gephardt-Bonior wing of
the Democratic Party already chafing so long under the
Clinton-Gore administration, do not expect them to forgive
and forget, much less give Al Gore a second chance in the
presidential elections of 2004. It is now or never for
Gore.
And ugly? Because only an ugly appeal to fear, envy and
lies gives the vice president any hope of scaring enough
people away from Governor Bush and into his column on
election day.
The race card is one of those ugly scares. Blacks must be
told that racism threatens them if Bush and Cheney win.
Already hints and charges of racism have appeared whenever
some liberal judge has failed to get confirmed by the
Senate, when that judge happened to be a member of some
minority group.
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton have already embraced racial
demagogue and riot inciter Al Sharpton. Senator Lieberman
has even said that he would meet with Louis Farrakhan. When
the Gore-Liberman ticket is trying to appeal to both Jews
and antisemites, you know that "inclusiveness" has been
carried to the point of desperation.
With the black vote already solidly in the Democrats'
column, why such extremes? Because it is not just a
question of who blacks will vote for, but how many will
bother to vote at all. If blacks become comfortable with
Governor Bush, many may not see enough reason to vote for
Gore, or at all. Not only is Bush in step with blacks on
vouchers, black kids in Texas score higher on tests than
black kids in states with liberal governors.
The best that the Gore campaign has come up with so far is
that Bush does not go along with "hate crimes" legislation.
The murderers of the black man who was dragged to death in
Jasper, Texas, are already under a death sentence and a
"hate crimes" law couldn't do any more than that.
What a "hate crimes" law would do, aside from serving as an
election-year gimmick to play the race card, is tie up the
courts in innumerable appeals over whether a convicted
criminal really was motivated by hate or by something else.
Nor should it matter whether a murderer killed because of
hate or because he wanted to collect the insurance money.
Ironically, a hate crimes law could provide yet another way
for murderers to escape the punishment they deserve with
frivolous appeals over whether hate was proved.
It is Gore, whose total opposition to vouchers makes him a
threat to the future of a whole generation of young blacks,
who are not getting educated in many ghetto public schools,
even though a number of charter schools and private schools
have achieved remarkable academic success with these same
ghetto kids. Gore's opposition is not based on racism, but
on the clout of the teachers' unions in the Democratic
Party, which needs both their millions of dollars in
campaign contributions and the manpower they can turn out
to walk the precincts on election night.
Another group that Gore will have to try to scare are
senior citizens. Somehow he must make Governor Bush's plan
to let younger workers invest some of their own Social
Security money seem like a threat to retired people. It
isn't, but the truth has never stopped Gore before.
Gore will also have to try to scare women with the notion
that Bush would appoint Supreme Court justices who would
overturn Roe v. Wade -- and supposedly ban abortions. The
fallacy in this is that there was no national ban on
abortions before Roe v. Wade. It was never a federal issue
in the first place, until the High Court decided to settle
the issue, once and for all -- and made it more unsettled
and divisive than ever.
Then there are the scares about a polluted environment if
Bush gets in, including lies about pollution levels in
Houston, which were refuted by Houston's mayor, a Democrat.
This was all part of Gore's campaign to scare up votes --
literally.
At the heart of all these tactics is the cold fact that
Gore's political success depends on pitting groups of
Americans against other Americans. If he succeeds, you can
look for more such divisive tactics in future elections,
despite how much it tears apart the fabric of American
society.
Marksman
"Old Tiger" <TheOl...@Patriot.Net> wrote in message
news:h0FL5.1289$pq3....@news.flash.net...
> And it is music!!
>
> This semi-literate, uneducated, orthodox leftist parrot is now getting the
> Night Terrors.
>
> The fact that life will go on (AND WELL!) after Inauguration Day, and a
huge
> number of private purses will be made immune to his theft and self
entitled
> attitude.
>
> But, in reality, he should be very happy.
>
> Think of all the years he's going to get to be a self-righteous victim!
>
> TOT
Trebor thinks he is "owed" everything in life to make and keep him
comfortable.
I'd say he's never worked a real job in his life and he'll be on welfare
just like his mother before him.
mahab...@my-deja.com
Harold <haroldb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
>
> >
> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> >could survive your presidency?
>
> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
> President.
My nomination for presidents who were much worse:
Andrew Johnson, the All Time Worse Drunken Ignorant Piece of Shit
President.
Richard Nixon, who is better than Johnson only because he stayed sober.
I believe he is the only president who plotted to illegally subvert the
democratic process.
Warren Harding, who messed around with more women in the White House
than Clinton did, although perhaps not as many as JFK did. JFK did some
good things, whereas Harding was mostly window dressing.
James Buchanan, who helped bring on the Civil War by sheer incompetence.
Honorable mention: Franklin Pierce (an ancestor of Dubya's) whose
policies also helped bring on the Civil War, although he was drunk a
lot too.
B.
SilverBullet
"Old Tiger" wrote ...
> And it is music!!
>
> This semi-literate, uneducated, orthodox leftist parrot is now getting the
> Night Terrors.
>
> The fact that life will go on (AND WELL!) after Inauguration Day, and a huge
> number of private purses will be made immune to his theft and self entitled
> attitude.
>
> But, in reality, he should be very happy.
>
> Think of all the years he's going to get to be a self-righteous victim!
>
> TOT
Is it time to change his cross to something bigger?
David Lentz
mahab...@my-deja.com wrote:
<snip>
> My nomination for presidents who were much worse:
>
> Andrew Johnson, the All Time Worse Drunken Ignorant Piece of Shit
> President.
>
> Richard Nixon, who is better than Johnson only because he stayed sober.
> I believe he is the only president who plotted to illegally subvert the
> democratic process.
>
> Warren Harding, who messed around with more women in the White House
> than Clinton did, although perhaps not as many as JFK did. JFK did some
> good things, whereas Harding was mostly window dressing.
>
> James Buchanan, who helped bring on the Civil War by sheer incompetence.
>
> Honorable mention: Franklin Pierce (an ancestor of Dubya's) whose
> policies also helped bring on the Civil War, although he was drunk a
> lot too.
Actually, Barbara you got close. You just misspelled President
Johnson's first name. It is Lyndon, and Lyndon Baines Johnson
the biggest disaster of a President this century.
On the foreign front, Johnson greatly increased the size of of
our military involvement in Vietnam, but refused to fight the war
to win. Johnson would neither fight to win nor quit. As result
we lost fifty thousand American Fighting Men to an incompetent
President.
On the domestic front, Johnson launched massive government wealth
transfer programs. designed to eliminate poverty. Yet thirty
years later, we have spent trillions of dollars yet made no
progress on poverty.
Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
David Lentz
Trebor wrote:
>
> Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> could survive your presidency? I'm not talking here about the fact
> you have no foreign policy experience, and probably couldn't even find
> the continent of Africa on a map. Nor am I refering to how you've
> already sold out to wealthy interests, and would likley end up doing
> everything short of handing out royal titles.
George W. Bush foriegn policy can hardly be worse than B.J.
Clinton's was or what Al Gore's looks to be. For one, Bush would
have a competent Secretary of State.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
mahab...@my-deja.com
David Lentz <Ro...@signfile.net> wrote:
>
>
> mahab...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > My nomination for presidents who were much worse:
> >
> > Andrew Johnson, the All Time Worse Drunken Ignorant Piece of Shit
> > President.
> >
> > Richard Nixon, who is better than Johnson only because he stayed
sober.
> > I believe he is the only president who plotted to illegally subvert
the
> > democratic process.
> >
> > Warren Harding, who messed around with more women in the White House
> > than Clinton did, although perhaps not as many as JFK did. JFK did
some
> > good things, whereas Harding was mostly window dressing.
> >
> > James Buchanan, who helped bring on the Civil War by sheer
incompetence.
> >
> > Honorable mention: Franklin Pierce (an ancestor of Dubya's) whose
> > policies also helped bring on the Civil War, although he was drunk a
> > lot too.
>
> Actually, Barbara you got close. You just misspelled President
> Johnson's first name. It is Lyndon, and Lyndon Baines Johnson
> the biggest disaster of a President this century.
No, I meant Andrew, as in the guy who took over when Abraham Lincoln
was shot. We are still living with the damage he did in that sensitive
time. He was the all-time worst president. He makes Lyndon Johnson look
like, well, Abraham Lincoln.
I thought about putting LBJ on the list also. If I had to come up with
a list of ten worst presidents I'd probably put him on it, yes.
>
> On the foreign front, Johnson greatly increased the size of of
> our military involvement in Vietnam, but refused to fight the war
> to win. Johnson would neither fight to win nor quit. As result
> we lost fifty thousand American Fighting Men to an incompetent
> President.
I agree.
>
> On the domestic front, Johnson launched massive government wealth
> transfer programs. designed to eliminate poverty. Yet thirty
> years later, we have spent trillions of dollars yet made no
> progress on poverty.
He had good intentions, as in "the road to hell is paved with ..."
Still, we did make some progress in the area of Civil Rights.
>
> Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
Andrew Johnson was worse.
Harold
<jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Harold wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
>> >could survive your presidency?
>>
>> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
>> President.
>
>Clinton's an intelligent, canny politician. And remarkably lucky in his
>enemies. Plus, his 4 years have seen relative peace and stability in the
>world. His sexual peccadilloes and "nimbleness" in testimony are pretty
>tangential to his abilities. W (and us) may not prove as lucky.
>
On the contrary, I think Clinton's easy facility with twisting the
truth is absolutely central to his success. Nobody would elect that
scum if he did not lie so readily.
Further, I think that this dishonorable character poisons the honor of
the whole country.
[deleted]
Regards, Harold
-----
"I am opposed to abortions and to government funding of abortions."
- Bill Clinton, Sept 26, 1986
Will Griffin
debt and other factors. Nixon would be next. Per Lincoln, the first
Republican president, if he were alive today, he would deck Dubya for some
of his outrageous and contra-indicated proposals and their conflict to the
interest of the country and founding principles of the party.
mahab...@my-deja.com
Will Griffin <grif...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------7420B37B6AA87AE4370029D6
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Bush has to be the nadir on the list of worse presidents, because of
the
> debt and other factors. Nixon would be next. Per Lincoln, the first
> Republican president, if he were alive today, he would deck Dubya for
some
> of his outrageous and contra-indicated proposals and their conflict
to the
> interest of the country and founding principles of the party.
If you are interested in some historians' lists of best and worst
presidents, I found some at this URL:
http://www.hssc.ucsb.edu/~woolley/courses/157/greats_chart.html
One group of historians put Poppy Bush on the "low average" list:
Madison
J.Q. Adams
Van Buren
Hayes
Arthur
B. Harrison
Taft
Ford
Carter
Reagan
Bush
Clinton
Even worse than Poppy and Bill, according to this group, were:
Below Average
Tyler
Taylor
Fillmore
Coolidge
Failure
Pierce
Buchanan
A. Johnson
Grant
Harding
Hoover
Nixon
This list is pretty close to my list, except I would have put Hoover
and Grant in "below average" instead of "failure," and I put Andrew
Johnson as being the all-time worst, which he was.
B.
> --------------7420B37B6AA87AE4370029D6
> Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
> name="griffgrp.vcf"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description: Card for Will Griffin
> Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="griffgrp.vcf"
>
> begin:vcard
> n:Griffin;Will
> tel;cell:615-419-7256
> tel;home:931-670-3199
> tel;work:615-371-2967
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> url:http://www.willgriffin.com
> org:Griffin Group
> adr:;;P. O. Box 148722;Nashville;Tennessee;37214;USA
> version:2.1
> email;internet:will.g...@willgriffin.com
> title:Owner
> note;quoted-printable:Administrative & Computer Consulting,=0D=0AFull
Life Cycle Projects,=0D=0AProject Management, Staffing,=0D=0APublic
Policy & Consumer Protection,=0D=0AResearch & Lobbying
> x-mozilla-cpt:;-16928
> fn:Griffin Group
> end:vcard
>
> --------------7420B37B6AA87AE4370029D6--
Will Griffin
last presidents, starting with Ford are ranked lower than average. Do we
need to let time and history take a step back to see the broader picture to
determine how history will rank these presidents?
mahab...@my-deja.com
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
that the
> last presidents, starting with Ford are ranked lower than average.
Do we
> need to let time and history take a step back to see the broader
picture to
> determine how history will rank these presidents?
Oh, these rankings are all subjective and always changing. For example,
a number of historians recently have been trying to upgrade U.S. Grant
as president and get him out of the basement, at least. But there are a
few guys on EVERYBODY'S top ten (e.g., Lincoln, Washington) and
EVERYBODY'S bottom ten (e.g., Andrew Johnson, Nixon).
B.
> --------------0BAB83BBF5B0AABBC82CE0AC
> Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
> name="griffgrp.vcf"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description: Card for Will Griffin
> Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="griffgrp.vcf"
>
> begin:vcard
> n:Griffin;Will
> tel;cell:615-419-7256
> tel;home:931-670-3199
> tel;work:615-371-2967
> x-mozilla-html:FALSE
> url:http://www.willgriffin.com
> org:Griffin Group
> adr:;;P. O. Box 148722;Nashville;Tennessee;37214;USA
> version:2.1
> email;internet:will.g...@willgriffin.com
> title:Owner
> note;quoted-printable:Administrative & Computer Consulting,=0D=0AFull
Life Cycle Projects,=0D=0AProject Management, Staffing,=0D=0APublic
Policy & Consumer Protection,=0D=0AResearch & Lobbying
> x-mozilla-cpt:;-16928
> fn:Griffin Group
> end:vcard
>
> --------------0BAB83BBF5B0AABBC82CE0AC--
Jeffrey Davis
>
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:06:14 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Harold wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> >> >could survive your presidency?
> >>
> >> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
> >> President.
> >
> >Clinton's an intelligent, canny politician. And remarkably lucky in his
> >enemies. Plus, his 4 years have seen relative peace and stability in the
> >world. His sexual peccadilloes and "nimbleness" in testimony are pretty
> >tangential to his abilities. W (and us) may not prove as lucky.
> >
> On the contrary, I think Clinton's easy facility with twisting the
> truth is absolutely central to his success. Nobody would elect that
> scum if he did not lie so readily.
But nobody believes him. Really. Think of that. Nobody believes him.
From inhaling pot to having sex with Monica. It's not like his lies are
not completely transparent. The secret of his success lies elsewhere.
Maybe it will be obvious in 100 years what that is. If there are
historians who want to spend time on a minor, wildly villified American
president.
>
> Further, I think that this dishonorable character poisons the honor of
> the whole country.
>
> [deleted]
You may be right. Unfortunately it raises the question about whether
"honor" is an archaic attribute. And an irrelevant one.
Tarver Engineering
<mahab...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8tp896$sd6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <3A0017B8...@signfile.net>,
<snip >
> > Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
>
> Andrew Johnson was worse.
Blocking the enforcement of the thirteenth ammendment is a crime the
Democrat Andrew Johnson should never be forgiven for.
John
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
mahab...@my-deja.com
"Tarver Engineering" <john_...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> <mahab...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8tp896$sd6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <3A0017B8...@signfile.net>,
>
> <snip >
>
> > > Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
> >
> > Andrew Johnson was worse.
>
> Blocking the enforcement of the thirteenth ammendment is a crime the
> Democrat Andrew Johnson should never be forgiven for.
Wow, we agree on something.
David Lentz
mahab...@my-deja.com wrote:
<snip>
> > Actually, Barbara you got close. You just misspelled President
> > Johnson's first name. It is Lyndon, and Lyndon Baines Johnson
> > the biggest disaster of a President this century.
>
> No, I meant Andrew, as in the guy who took over when Abraham Lincoln
> was shot. We are still living with the damage he did in that sensitive
> time. He was the all-time worst president. He makes Lyndon Johnson look
> like, well, Abraham Lincoln.
>
> I thought about putting LBJ on the list also. If I had to come up with
> a list of ten worst presidents I'd probably put him on it, yes.
>
> >
> > On the foreign front, Johnson greatly increased the size of of
> > our military involvement in Vietnam, but refused to fight the war
> > to win. Johnson would neither fight to win nor quit. As result
> > we lost fifty thousand American Fighting Men to an incompetent
> > President.
>
> I agree.
>
> >
> > On the domestic front, Johnson launched massive government wealth
> > transfer programs. designed to eliminate poverty. Yet thirty
> > years later, we have spent trillions of dollars yet made no
> > progress on poverty.
>
> He had good intentions, as in "the road to hell is paved with ..."
> Still, we did make some progress in the area of Civil Rights.
>
> >
> > Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
Ok Barbara, we don't agree on everything, However we seem to
have general agreement on some ideas. I like it, and will leave
it there.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
David Lentz
Will Griffin wrote:
>
> Bush has to be the nadir on the list of worse presidents, because of the
> debt and other factors. Nixon would be next. Per Lincoln, the first
> Republican president, if he were alive today, he would deck Dubya for some
> of his outrageous and contra-indicated proposals and their conflict to the
> interest of the country and founding principles of the party.
The all time worst President is James Buchanan, and it isn't even
close. Buchanan was simply willing to stand idle while nation
dissolved. That was inexcusable.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
Tarver Engineering
<mahab...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8tpne0$aid$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <3a003...@binarykiller.newsfeeds.com>,
> "Tarver Engineering" <john_...@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > <mahab...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > news:8tp896$sd6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > In article <3A0017B8...@signfile.net>,
> >
> > <snip >
> >
> > > > Johnson was total failure in both domestic and foreign policy.
> > >
> > > Andrew Johnson was worse.
> >
> > Blocking the enforcement of the thirteenth ammendment is a crime the
> > Democrat Andrew Johnson should never be forgiven for.
>
> Wow, we agree on something.
We agree on a lot of things, but there is no point in me responding me too;
to your posts.
--
Is Al Gore some sort of policy idiot savant?
Admitting that the IMF's money went to "foreigners and Russian Speculators",
the former chairman of Russia's Securities Commission said: "I cannot
explain why Western governments didn't pay serious attention". And Anatoly
Chubais, Mr. Chernomyrdin's deputy, said "we conned them out of $20 billion"
.
mahab...@my-deja.com
Although I still say the worst was Andrew Johnson, J. Buchanan does
show up on a lot of "worst" lists also, so I can't really argue with
the choice. He was indeed a disaster.
See several best and worst Presidents lists at this URL:
http://www.hssc.ucsb.edu/~woolley/courses/157/greats_chart.html
>
> David
>
> --
> qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
Zepp: Weasel While You Work!
wrote:
He was ineffectual, but the nation didn't begin to dissolve until
Lincoln (who was less sympathetic to those wishing to dissolve the
nation) was elected.
>
>David
**********************************************************
"The problem is the U.N. The United States is getting kicked around by a
bunch of goddamned Africans and cannibals and horrible people and the rest."
-- Richard Nixon, the GOP's shining jewel in foreign policy
May 15, 1972, and Oct. 1,1973. -- Where was George W?
For political commentary by Zepp, visit
http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
For links to all things Liberal/Leftist, go to
http:/www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Warning: Contains ideas
************************************************************
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
mahab...@my-deja.com
ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 19:15:09 GMT, David Lentz <Ro...@signfile.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Will Griffin wrote:
> >>
> >> Bush has to be the nadir on the list of worse presidents, because
of the
> >> debt and other factors. Nixon would be next. Per Lincoln, the
first
> >> Republican president, if he were alive today, he would deck Dubya
for some
> >> of his outrageous and contra-indicated proposals and their
conflict to the
> >> interest of the country and founding principles of the party.
> >
> >The all time worst President is James Buchanan, and it isn't even
> >close. Buchanan was simply willing to stand idle while nation
> >dissolved. That was inexcusable.
>
> He was ineffectual, but the nation didn't begin to dissolve until
> Lincoln (who was less sympathetic to those wishing to dissolve the
> nation) was elected.
Although this may cause a rip in the time-space continuum, I am going
to back up David on this one. Buchanan allowed matters to come to such
a state that it reduced Lincoln's options to avoid war. For example,
although formal secession didn't take place until after Lincoln was
elected, even before the election several Southern states had seized
federal arsenals in those states in preparation for war. Buchanan
allowed seizure of federal properties (including customs houses and
military reservations) without opposition, which made Lincoln's
determination to keep Fort Sumter much more untenable.
Harold
<jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Harold wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:06:14 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
>> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Harold wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
>> >> >could survive your presidency?
>> >>
>> >> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
>> >> President.
>> >
>> >Clinton's an intelligent, canny politician. And remarkably lucky in his
>> >enemies. Plus, his 4 years have seen relative peace and stability in the
>> >world. His sexual peccadilloes and "nimbleness" in testimony are pretty
>> >tangential to his abilities. W (and us) may not prove as lucky.
>> >
>> On the contrary, I think Clinton's easy facility with twisting the
>> truth is absolutely central to his success. Nobody would elect that
>> scum if he did not lie so readily.
>
>But nobody believes him. Really. Think of that. Nobody believes him.
>From inhaling pot to having sex with Monica. It's not like his lies are
>not completely transparent.
Isn't that wonderful. A president no one can believe. What has
become of the party of Hubert Humphrey, John Kennedy and Adlai
Stevenson.
It is a sad, sad world.
>The secret of his success lies elsewhere.
>Maybe it will be obvious in 100 years what that is. If there are
>historians who want to spend time on a minor, wildly villified American
>president.
>
>>
>> Further, I think that this dishonorable character poisons the honor of
>> the whole country.
>You may be right. Unfortunately it raises the question about whether
>"honor" is an archaic attribute. And an irrelevant one.
ANd what, pray tell, would make honor among people or nations
irrelevant?
Regards, Harold
----
"Those who survived the San Francisco earthquake said, 'Thank God
I'm still alive.' But, of course, those who died, their lives will
never be the same again."
-----U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer
David Lentz
mahab...@my-deja.com wrote:
<snip>
> Although I still say the worst was Andrew Johnson, J. Buchanan does
> show up on a lot of "worst" lists also, so I can't really argue with
> the choice. He was indeed a disaster.
>
> See several best and worst Presidents lists at this URL:
>
> http://www.hssc.ucsb.edu/~woolley/courses/157/greats_chart.html
Good list. I bookmarks it.
What the hay, my list but first a definition. Most influencial
President. the one having the most lasting effect on the course
of the nation and every day life. However not a measure of good
or bad, but just permanent change.
My list:
George Washington: Set the initial course for the nation.
Abraham Lincoln: Saved the Union. If not for Lincoln, there
would be no United States, which would have major effect on World
History.
Franklin Roosevelt: Changed the exception of government.
Before Roosevelt the government didn't do much for you but it
didn't impede you much either. For proof, open your wallet and
look at your Social Security Card.
There others, but who have not fully sorted out.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
Jeffrey Davis
Harold wrote:
On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:58:26 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >You may be right. Unfortunately it raises the question about whether
> >"honor" is an archaic attribute. And an irrelevant one.
>
> ANd what, pray tell, would make honor among people or nations
> irrelevant?
We were talking about what it would take to be an effective president. Clinton
has been, for all of his faults, an amazingly effective president.
JRStern
At best, Gore would push the U.S. into all sorts of ridiculous
socialist social and economic policies.
J.
Richard Brewer
Jeffrey Davis wrote:
> Harold wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:06:14 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
> > <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Harold wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:31:17 GMT, Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >Mr. Bush, why are you doing this? How can you even think our nation
> > >> >could survive your presidency?
> > >>
> > >> It survived Clinton, didn't it? The most dishonorable man to ever be
> > >> President.
> > >
> > >Clinton's an intelligent, canny politician. And remarkably lucky in his
> > >enemies. Plus, his 4 years have seen relative peace and stability in the
> > >world. His sexual peccadilloes and "nimbleness" in testimony are pretty
> > >tangential to his abilities. W (and us) may not prove as lucky.
> > >
> > On the contrary, I think Clinton's easy facility with twisting the
> > truth is absolutely central to his success. Nobody would elect that
> > scum if he did not lie so readily.
>
> But nobody believes him. Really. Think of that. Nobody believes him.
> From inhaling pot to having sex with Monica. It's not like his lies are
> not completely transparent. The secret of his success lies elsewhere.
> Maybe it will be obvious in 100 years what that is. If there are
> historians who want to spend time on a minor, wildly villified American
> president.
>
The right wing slander of Clinton is much like the right wing slander of FDR.
Both are extremely heated, loud and full of lies. They are also completely
irrelevant to the job that the man being slandered has done.
I always used to wonder in the 60's why a few men would get so angry and
bothered as they talked about FDR. Now I have seen exactly the same political
mindset in people complaining about Clinton, and it is more clear. Clinton
frustrates the right wing just by being so successful.
There will be a number of historians spending time to explain Clinton. Count on
it.
Michael Ejercito
>In article <39feff77...@news.earthlink.net>,
> Tre...@my-deja.com (Trebor) wrote:
>
>
>You best just go to sleep for the next four years because Al can't be
>elected.
Better put up a kangaside watch.
Michael
Bush/Cheney 2000
Zepp, Weasel Sea Shells by the Sea Shore
>At worst, Bush would be a mediocre president.
At best, he would be totally ineffectual.
>J.
**********************************
"We already have a hate crimes law in Texas"
--GW Bush, shouting incoherant lies when confronted with
his administration's dismal human rights record.
For commentary on all things liberal/leftist: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
Links to hundreds of left wing areas: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
****************************************
Ranger One Five
> But Mr. Bush - can I call you George? George - let's cut to the chase
> here - you simply don't have the integrity or background required to
> be president of the greatest country in the world - not even remotely.
> Why do I say this?
Because no POTUS during your lifetime has had the integrity to lead the
greatest country in the world. But they have freely squandered
resources of the wealthiest.
>
> First, because you dodged the draft rather than fight a war that you
> supported - so how in the world can our military have any confidence
> in such a cowardly commander-in-chief? How could you, in good
> concience, ever send others to do what you lacked the courage to do
> when you had the chance to prove it?
Most citizens of the U.S. haven't the guts to serve in military. That
is why the next POTUS will have an "all volunteer" armed force, with
most of the volunteers of his own type.
>
> You're an alcoholic, and would always be just one drink shy of
> becoming America's Boris Yeltsin. So what happens to America's
> security and prestige when our drunkard president decides to go on a
> toot? Do we have to give you a breath test before letting you have
> the launch codes?
>
> Apparently you also used (still use?) marijuana and cocaine. So what
> exactly do we tell our children at this point - that now you have to
> be rich and influential like our druggie president, or else you might
> get caught?
>
Most of the voters are substance abusers. That is representative
democracy. Your next POTUS has already been caught. The sorry bastards
who will elect him simply do not care.
> And what about your long history of womanizing? What happens when one
> of *your* past conquests files a suit against *you*? What happens
> when *your* bastard son is discovered in some Austin trailer park? Do
> we have to drag your private life through the courts and through
> Congress, simply to find out all that *you're* not telling us now?
> Does our country have to go through another year or more just like the
> last? Do we once again have to find out everything we really didn't
> want to know about our president's seedy history? Could our democracy
> even survive another impeachment crisis like the last?
>
In case you haven't noticed, most of the citizens of the U.S. are, in
the old literal legal sense, bastards. The election is representative
democracy in action, but the voters don't know for sure whether their
next POTUS is only a self-made bastard.
> Then there's your inability to even speak coherently. Something is
> obviously wrong with your brain - even my three year old nephew speaks
> with a greater command of the English language than you. Is it drugs
> Booze? The long-term effect of too much drugs and booze? Whatevever
> your problem is, you sound about as presidential as a skid row bum.
>
If anyone could make sense of what any of the candidates say they would
not go to the polls. Forget it.
> George, you may have the cash alright - but you clearly don't have the
> character to be president. Nor can our nation afford to see Caligula
> succeeding Augustus. Quite frankly, the most irresponsible action
> you've taken to date isn't your draft dodging, your boozing or drug
> use or whoring about or incoherence - it's the very fact you're now
> running for president, and putting America at such risk of calamity
> and shame.
>
Again - representative democracy is why you are being shown to be so
shameful.
> George, for once in your life - do the right thing. For once in your
> pathetic, silver-spoon existance - do something for others rather than
> always for yourself and your own ego. Show to us you're not just
> another spoiled rich kid trying to prove something to his dad, or some
> upper-class dink who thinks the presidency is a hereditary office .
> Prove to us that you really can be the man you want us to think you
> are. Prove to us that you *really* love your country.
>
> How?
>
> Just step aside, Mr. Bush. Step aside for the better man.
>
> cheers,
> Trebor
>
Don't worry, the Secretary of State will probably succeed to Presidency
within four years. The Cole was sunk because the 106th Congress has
refused to repudiate the "authority" to sanction assassinations as in
Chapter Sixteen of "The Gold of Exodus" when POTUS bothers with them for
the funding.
--
Harry Miller 312-787-0565
150 West Maple St., Apt. 513
Chicago IL 60610
Harold
He has lowered the level of expectations for president to the point
where Gore and Bush are the candidates.
Regards, Harold (Certified Meanie)
-----
"Why should we believe that you [AlGore] will tell the truth if
you are president when you don't when you are a candidate?"
-----Bill Bradley
Jeffrey Davis
Harold wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000 00:29:16 GMT, Jeffrey Davis
> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Harold wrote:
> >
> >On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:58:26 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
> >
> >> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >You may be right. Unfortunately it raises the question about whether
> >> >"honor" is an archaic attribute. And an irrelevant one.
> >>
> >> ANd what, pray tell, would make honor among people or nations
> >> irrelevant?
> >
> >We were talking about what it would take to be an effective president. Clinton
> >has been, for all of his faults, an amazingly effective president.
>
> He has lowered the level of expectations for president to the point
> where Gore and Bush are the candidates.
I read one thesis that the modern post-FDR presidency started to come undone with
Nixon's impeachment. For example, it's doubtful that a man like Gerald Ford would
have ever been president on his own but he came remarkably close to beating Carter
for all that. He was a non-Nixon.
I don't think the blame for GoreBush can be laid solely on Clinton. Bush is a
triumph of modern marketing. Gore is simply what's left of the liberal wing of the
Democratic party. I can't imagine the culture that will produce our Next Great
President, as if the existence of such a thing were a given. Asian-Americans
certainly have maintained high standards for achievement, but I don't know if they
feel accepted enough to produce someone with the amount of ambition to lead.
Everyone has been waiting for the first national Hispanic-American leader for
awhile. (Poor Henry Cisneros.) We're still waiting.
mahab...@my-deja.com
Jeffrey Davis <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Harold wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 02 Nov 2000 00:29:16 GMT, Jeffrey Davis
> > <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Harold wrote:
> > >
> > >On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:58:26 -0500, Jeffrey Davis
> > >
> > >> <jeffk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >You may be right. Unfortunately it raises the question about
whether
> > >> >"honor" is an archaic attribute. And an irrelevant one.
> > >>
> > >> ANd what, pray tell, would make honor among people or nations
> > >> irrelevant?
> > >
> > >We were talking about what it would take to be an effective
president. Clinton
> > >has been, for all of his faults, an amazingly effective president.
> >
> > He has lowered the level of expectations for president to the point
> > where Gore and Bush are the candidates.
>
> I read one thesis that the modern post-FDR presidency started to come
undone with
> Nixon's impeachment. For example, it's doubtful that a man like
Gerald Ford would
> have ever been president on his own but he came remarkably close to
beating Carter
> for all that. He was a non-Nixon.
Sometimes I think we were all a little hard on Gerald Ford. He's a very
decent fellow, and he inherited a hell of a mess when Nixon resigned.
He helped us all calm down and Get Over It, and that was worth
something.
I agree that the stature of the office of the presidency has seemed
diminished after Nixon. We'd had a string of strong presidents -- FDR,
Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy. Johnson was more or less hooted out of
public life because of Vietnam. Then there was Nixon. IMO no one since
has been of the same stature as FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, or Kennedy.
(Reagan acted the part, but to me it never seemed real.)
A lot of people blame the lack of quality candidates on the primaries
(as opposed to picking the candidates in smoke-filled rooms at
conventions, which at least made for much better "reality television").
Maybe there's something to that, I don't know. The old system didn't do
much better. Read up on Chester Arthur and how he got to be President
sometime.
The presidency does seem to rise to great occasions. If he had served
an ordinary peacetime administration, would we remember Abraham Lincoln
the way we do? Who knows?
> I don't think the blame for GoreBush can be laid solely on Clinton.
Bush is a
> triumph of modern marketing. Gore is simply what's left of the
liberal wing of the
> Democratic party.
Yep, that's pretty much it.
I can't imagine the culture that will produce our Next Great
> President, as if the existence of such a thing were a given. Asian-
Americans
> certainly have maintained high standards for achievement, but I don't
know if they
> feel accepted enough to produce someone with the amount of ambition
to lead.
> Everyone has been waiting for the first national Hispanic-American
leader for
> awhile. (Poor Henry Cisneros.) We're still waiting.
Not to mention an African American or a woman!
B., who says if nominated she will not run, if elected she will not
serve, but she might move into the White House anyway
Mark William Hopkins
>We were talking about what it would take to be an effective president. Clinton
>has been, for all of his faults, an amazingly effective president.
Clinton has been an amazingly effective president precisely because of his
dishonesty, duplicity, infidelity, lack of integrity, and feel-the-direction-
of-the-prevailing-winds opportunism.
I am proud of the legacy he has left behind for the Presidency. It's
everything you want and expect to see in a politician! Pure adultered
textbook Machiavelli, the likes of which I had not even dreamed to see
in my lifetime.
And what a statement of youthful vigor and virility to not only be
caught in the act, but to even be DEFENDED and ADORED by no less than
the very Man-Hating Feminists who put him up on that pedestal to begin
with!
There can be no doubt now where the Gender Gap ACTUALLY came from. That's
100,000,000 women. Wilt Chamberlin, eat your heart out.
I want some of that action, dammit! Where's MY 20 year old female intern?
Listen to some of the popular testimony out there:
"I am repelled by his unconscionable acts!" -- anonymous 40 year old
pot-bellied husband of 23 year marriage with 2 teenage kids
Translation:
"If that sunnavabitch can get him some 20 year old young stuff, then
goddammit, there IS hope for me too!"
"He objectifies women and treats them like sex objects" -- anonymous
stiffed former female sex-interest "In fact, so much so, that I think
I'm going to show the rest of the damn world The Body That Seduced The
Most Powerful Man On Earth. Naked. 100% skin-baring naked. Look at
me now, Billie Jeff!"
"I detest his acts!" -- Hyde on Clinton -- "err..." (after being Drudged)
"... I mean that he LIED about his acts. Yeah. That's right. I meant
the lying about the acts. Um..." (blushing) "... I'm voting my
conscience!"
"I think he's the most despicable President" -- Livingston on Clinton -- "that
has been visited upon any nation or empire in the 6000-plus years humans have
been on this blessed Earth. His infidelity was morally repugnant!" -- (and
after being Drudged) -- "um... I uh ... I meant the LYING about the acts.
Yeah! That's right." (blushing) "oh hell, who am I kidding. I can't
go on any longer. I resign."
"I think my opponent is quite an attractive young man" -- soon to be
former lifelong accquaintance with roving eye -- "... er I mean, I am pissed
off about what he did to me!"