Stoid, my boyfriend and I often sigh when we see Bill on television and wish aloud that he was in office right now. We did it just yesterday. I think that, the next time voting comes along, we’re both going to do everything we can to get everyone we know and everyone they know not to vote for Bush. By then, hopefully, our efforts will not be necessary. Bush is becoming more and more transparent as time goes on.
That sounds about as reasonable as “Remember when Bush had several thousand Afghani citizens killed by smart bombs?” Context is everything…
Yeah, KismetRose, that’s striking fear in the hearts of Republicans everywhere.
We don’t ever win LA County, and hardly ever win California, yet our guy is in the White House.
We’ll win it next time without California, too. Bush is mighty popular here in the red states.
Hes in my city today.
I’ll tell him you said hi Stoid!
Is it possible to dislike both Clinton and Shrub? Sorry, but I really fail to get how Stoid and Elucidator can miss a man who did so little during his term in office? and don’t give me “he was distracted by the GOP Whitewater witch hunt.” While I agree that Ken Starr’s Inquisition manque drew off some resources and attention, that still does not excuse clinton signing DOMA and that execrable welfare reform bill. Clinton screwed up health care reform in his first term and then abandoned it. Clinton betrayed everything progressives stand for, and when you say that you “miss him,” I can only conclude that you are easily fooled by a sexy smile and a sharp suit.
Of course, I voted for him twice, so I’m a sucker, too, but against Bush, Sr. and Dole, was there a choice?
If you guys want to idolize a progressive leader, how about Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota (Elucidator’s senator). According to his Web site:
Moreover, he has engineered real bipartisan efforts to reform campaign finance. Wellsotne has the ideals and honor that Clinton lacks.
Re. Monicagate–I don’t much care about a sloppy blowjob itself, but that he lied about it to his wife and friends and the public; that he did it at all when he knew his conduct was under scrutiny; that he did it with an intern half his age; and, worst of all, tried to blame the lies and the presents on his secretary, Betty Currie, makes him unworthy of respect.
All true about Senator Wellstone (Paul!), mostly true about Free Willy, and so what? In case you’ve failed to notice, Gobear, no virgin ever gets elected Queen of the Harlots. You takes the best choice you can, and you take the one with the least obvious running sores. My first vote, I got to choose between Nixon and McGovern.
And Moto, tis true you don’t need California. Not as long as you got Scalia.
** gobear, ** I agree with you about the welfare bill and DOMA. I have never, ever said that Clinton was everything I ever dreamed of in a president. But he’s the closest I’ve seen in my lifetime. (Okay, so in my lifetime we’ve also had JFK, Johnson and Carter, all of whom had aspects about them or things they actually did which ranked high, but I’m talking about since I became an aware adult. )
In any case, the OP specifically left out discussion of policies and politics…long before we ever get to that, I expect a president to have certain qualities that facilitate making intelligent decisions that effect the entire planet. Clinton has perhaps more than his fair share of such qualities. Koko has virtually none.
Boris may disown me for saying this, but of the presidents I’ve lived through, the list of ones who had what it takes to lead the most powerful nation on earth has to include Nixon, a man who could have been great within the context of his party and his politics, but was brought low by his own petty weaknesses, just like Clinton. Perhaps it is part of the package, and it has been our good fortune in the past to have been spared the spotlight on our leaders’ foibles. [note to Boris: you know I’m not saying that Nixon’s crimes and Clinton’s are comparable, it’s the big picture I’m going for]
Doesn’t mean you gotta be nostalgic for the clap. Clinton was a bad leader who betrayed the progressives who voted for him. I’d vote for Wellstone for president in a New York second.
Sure, Clinton looks statesmanesque compared to Dubya, but hell, so would Harold Stassen.
During the fuss over W’s alleged dumbness, someone released his SAT scores. They were respectably good, though not as good as Gore’s. Time Magazine also managed to get SAT scores from some other Washington figures. Paul Wellstone’s SAT’s were under 800 combined. http://www.time.com/time/2001/education/sat_test2.html
But that’s why I’m so pissed at Clinton. Anything positive Bush does I’m prepared to cheer, because I expect nothing positive from him. He’s unintelligent, uninformed, and easily led by his advisers.
But Clinton had it all: sharp intelligence, education, experience in government and public policy. He had such great potential and he squandered it.
To paraphrase C.S, Lewis, a bad angel falls farther and harder than a bad ant.
I’d just like to note for everyone who didn’t read the fine print, because you’re not likely to see this sort of thing very often, but Stoid just praised a Republican president.
Thank you. Carry on.
And if we were discussing which man was the better high school student, that would be relevant; but we aren’t and it isn’t. And SAT scores are not marks of innate intelligence (class of 79, 710 verbal, 650 math, he said immodestly). I would think that the ability to learn, to adapt and to take in and assimilate information would be more accurate gauges of intelligence, and by that scale Wellstone and Clinton beat Dubya by a considerable margin.
GOPers need to stop pretending that Bush is anything other than a weak man riding on his father’s name. You also ought to apologize to the rest of us for letting Bush beat McCain in the primaries. I don’t agree with his politics, but McCain is an intelligent, hardworking man who has more ability than Dubya in any given capacity. Not to mention that McCain served his nation honorably in Vietnam while Dubya shirked his cushy National Guard obligation.
An evil Republican president to boot.
McCain graduated fifth from the bottom of his class. It’s true that W rode his father’s name, but so did McCain. His father and grandfather were navy admirals.
Yeah, I’ll bet that came in real handy during McCain’s years as a POW. I’ve read his book, too.
What is the basis of the popular opinion that Clinton has such a staggering intellect?
I see no way around the fact that risking his marriage, his credibility, his presidency, and his integrity, for a blowjob is stupidity on an almost cosmic scale.
I think the way he went whacko with his executive orders is also just plain stupid.
What did he get on his Sats?
How did he do in school?
What feats of intellectual prowess has he accomplished?
I never doubted that Clinton was intelligent. He was a Rhodes Scholar and he graduated from Yale Law School.
OTOH there’s some amusing evidence the other way.
You mean people actually watch Letterman? :eek::eek::eek:
It’s my daughter’s primary news source, except for Buffy.