Seems per the polls his friends are jumping off the ride. I can't remember so many polls even Fox that show him in such bad light. Even a poll on his handling of the terrorist threat he failing there for first time. A poll on his honesty. Bad news fails it to. Guess folks are getting fed up with that little grin that just does not hide the BS.
Bush And His Friends.
- Thread starter djv
- Start date
Hate to inform you but doubt if he runs again 
--and come next election it will be same issue--the people will consider the alternative.
Consider if Kerry had won---how would his love affair with France and Germany played out?--what if he got his 50 cent gas tax through--What would Iraq'i attitudes be not knowing from which day to the next if they'd have our support--what would be attitude of our troops having commander and chief that once call out troops baby killers and barbarians.
Its quite easy to sit back and blame someone for everything from Hurricanes to gas prices--but quite another to have solutions to anything.Easy to get wrapped up in years of liberal press negative projection but you need to remember this is same person that was voted a 2nd term and has NOT flopped on any of issues he ran on.
Whiles polls tell you one side they don't tell you the other--if you think the people's attitude has changed on assault on religion-morals-taxes- defence ect I think you might be once again surprised next election.
also would make note of whose doing polling and what questions they ask.
Here is poll from LA Times on Clintons integrety on Sept 98--now bear in mind this is after finger shaking ordeal--multi felony concivtions-whitewater-travelgate-- chinagate gate-cigar stuffing--multi abuse allegations ect---
"Americans continue to be divided over whether Clinton has the honesty and integrity to serve as president, with 50% believing he does and 44% believing he does not"
Wonder where they polled-San Fran or DC ??????
--and come next election it will be same issue--the people will consider the alternative.Consider if Kerry had won---how would his love affair with France and Germany played out?--what if he got his 50 cent gas tax through--What would Iraq'i attitudes be not knowing from which day to the next if they'd have our support--what would be attitude of our troops having commander and chief that once call out troops baby killers and barbarians.
Its quite easy to sit back and blame someone for everything from Hurricanes to gas prices--but quite another to have solutions to anything.Easy to get wrapped up in years of liberal press negative projection but you need to remember this is same person that was voted a 2nd term and has NOT flopped on any of issues he ran on.
Whiles polls tell you one side they don't tell you the other--if you think the people's attitude has changed on assault on religion-morals-taxes- defence ect I think you might be once again surprised next election.
also would make note of whose doing polling and what questions they ask.
Here is poll from LA Times on Clintons integrety on Sept 98--now bear in mind this is after finger shaking ordeal--multi felony concivtions-whitewater-travelgate-- chinagate gate-cigar stuffing--multi abuse allegations ect---
"Americans continue to be divided over whether Clinton has the honesty and integrity to serve as president, with 50% believing he does and 44% believing he does not"
Wonder where they polled-San Fran or DC ??????
Last edited:
I think the reason his friends are jumping ship is 06 election are getting closer. But when he has numbers even lower then Clinton.
His problem to many is his selection of folks around him has come to be poor. He should do like Regan did clean a little house. He needs some new thinking.
His problem to many is his selection of folks around him has come to be poor. He should do like Regan did clean a little house. He needs some new thinking.
Someone explain to me why liberals in congress and others are screaming for people that have never even been indicted for anything to resign-- yet when theirs was found quilty of multiple felonies they did not want him to resign--could this qualify for more--liberal logic?
Ok, let's get down to it, DTB. First of all..it is uncanny how often you go to the Clinton card when the current administration is being called to task - pretty much for any reason. I know you like to come across as someone with their finger on the pulse...but unfortunately much of the time it is on a former President who does not currently run the country (even though even Dubbya is smart enough to use him when asking for support for the US, both here and abroad).
Again, you are Presented with a factual reference to Bush. You immediately cry, "But what about Clinton?!?" You never just deal with the current situation. After a while, that really just becomes weak. Of course, when you have nothing to really say, it's a usual political trick to try to deflect and change the subject.
You take this to a new level here. Now, I guess you are running out of Clinton material and now you are crying, "But what about Kerry?!?" You don't know where we'd be with Kerry right now. You don't know what we would have done with him in office. But you somehow cast away from the current administrations obvious, actual problems to play an imaginary game. That's fine...it just doesn't mean anything, nor does it deal with real issues.
You said Bush was elected for a second term. Yes, and he is responsible for what he has done, or hasn't done. He was not elected by more than half the voters, but he was elected by our system. That's fine. He won that way, now DEAL with what he has going on.
As for people screaming for unindicted people to resign...and why they didn't care about Clinton doing the same...the issues are COMPLETELY different, and the current issues are far more important ones for everyone to learn more about and understand. The fact that there was perjury and obstruction of justice in play with the current administration certainly does not eliminate them from common sense calls for truth.
Americans overall are unhappy with the current administration. How could they not be? The only people that are happy are the ones that squawked the most against his competitors and are still hoping against hope.
What felonies are you referring to in your post? I need to know that before I go on...
Again, you are Presented with a factual reference to Bush. You immediately cry, "But what about Clinton?!?" You never just deal with the current situation. After a while, that really just becomes weak. Of course, when you have nothing to really say, it's a usual political trick to try to deflect and change the subject.
You take this to a new level here. Now, I guess you are running out of Clinton material and now you are crying, "But what about Kerry?!?" You don't know where we'd be with Kerry right now. You don't know what we would have done with him in office. But you somehow cast away from the current administrations obvious, actual problems to play an imaginary game. That's fine...it just doesn't mean anything, nor does it deal with real issues.
You said Bush was elected for a second term. Yes, and he is responsible for what he has done, or hasn't done. He was not elected by more than half the voters, but he was elected by our system. That's fine. He won that way, now DEAL with what he has going on.
As for people screaming for unindicted people to resign...and why they didn't care about Clinton doing the same...the issues are COMPLETELY different, and the current issues are far more important ones for everyone to learn more about and understand. The fact that there was perjury and obstruction of justice in play with the current administration certainly does not eliminate them from common sense calls for truth.
Americans overall are unhappy with the current administration. How could they not be? The only people that are happy are the ones that squawked the most against his competitors and are still hoping against hope.
What felonies are you referring to in your post? I need to know that before I go on...
Felonies were pergury and obstruction of justice.
Clinton was the prior admin and Kerry the last to run for same party--hence the reference.In addition easy target for liberal logic
Now I could include the most probable next Dem candidate Hilliary.
Maybe all should follow her example on avoiding pergury and
obstruction of justice---how about the ole "I don't recall" 50 TIMES-in 42 paragraphs before senate commitee--they refer to that as "The Arkansas Alzeihmers Defence"
Clinton was the prior admin and Kerry the last to run for same party--hence the reference.In addition easy target for liberal logic
Now I could include the most probable next Dem candidate Hilliary.
Maybe all should follow her example on avoiding pergury and
obstruction of justice---how about the ole "I don't recall" 50 TIMES-in 42 paragraphs before senate commitee--they refer to that as "The Arkansas Alzeihmers Defence"
Whats the difference even if Scooter has to pay for his ling. Bush would pardon him. Seems thats how it works in D C. Look at Oli North. He got his pardon. As so many more have from both parties.
Point I was making. When someones polls are so bad. You would think they may want to try some new ideas. They might even start by saying I was wrong. The public understands some one who is willing to eat a little crow. To just keep saying stay the course. Well it don't seem to be doing any good.
Point I was making. When someones polls are so bad. You would think they may want to try some new ideas. They might even start by saying I was wrong. The public understands some one who is willing to eat a little crow. To just keep saying stay the course. Well it don't seem to be doing any good.
Congrats DTB, you almost made it through your first post of this thread that is not about Clinton without saying "CLinton".
Seriously dude - Why are you such an apologist for Bush? It's like you are unable to admit any of his failings. He has many failings - even many on the right can see that now. You don't have to drag Clinton and Kerry into this.
Here's a challenge for you: Just say something RELEVANT that you are unhappy about with Bush. ...It's OK - you will not be accused of being a liberal or anything like that for it. There are many here who make concessions about the sides they defend - you see Kosar do it all the time - but he's not about to be mistaken as a neocon. I think it will be good for you - before you start sounding like a Limbaugh full of hot air guy - just vent a couple things about Bush that gets you angry or dissappointed.
Ready - Go.....
Seriously dude - Why are you such an apologist for Bush? It's like you are unable to admit any of his failings. He has many failings - even many on the right can see that now. You don't have to drag Clinton and Kerry into this.
Here's a challenge for you: Just say something RELEVANT that you are unhappy about with Bush. ...It's OK - you will not be accused of being a liberal or anything like that for it. There are many here who make concessions about the sides they defend - you see Kosar do it all the time - but he's not about to be mistaken as a neocon. I think it will be good for you - before you start sounding like a Limbaugh full of hot air guy - just vent a couple things about Bush that gets you angry or dissappointed.
Ready - Go.....
Smurph I have adamantly bitched about his medicare package of being a very bad hit on our budget and not just a one time expense but the worst possible--an ongoing escalating expense.
Horrendous blunder in my view.
Have stated previously--I liked the tax cut but didn't think timing was good considering war expense--however many claim it was what got us out of recession and record tax revenue (exceeding anything in the 90's) might prove those correct--however I am of opinion a pres or admin does not have that much to do with state of our economy--and best thing they can do is get out of the way and let it function on its own.
Campaign promises NOT fulfilled.
1st Border situation--was promise he knew he could not fulfill without compromising votes for reb party in future.
2nd and not talked about much was his promise to resolve (or improve) issues in south america. Granted he ran into 911 which was somewhat of diversion--however has not done sqaut and if anything relations have worsened.Would have thought that be prime area with all the oil Just joking on that part.
Horrendous blunder in my view.
Have stated previously--I liked the tax cut but didn't think timing was good considering war expense--however many claim it was what got us out of recession and record tax revenue (exceeding anything in the 90's) might prove those correct--however I am of opinion a pres or admin does not have that much to do with state of our economy--and best thing they can do is get out of the way and let it function on its own.
Campaign promises NOT fulfilled.
1st Border situation--was promise he knew he could not fulfill without compromising votes for reb party in future.
2nd and not talked about much was his promise to resolve (or improve) issues in south america. Granted he ran into 911 which was somewhat of diversion--however has not done sqaut and if anything relations have worsened.Would have thought that be prime area with all the oil
Just joking on that part.BUT WHAT ABOUT SYDNEY FIELDS
BUT WHAT ABOUT SYDNEY FIELDS
NONNE on earth is worse than SEAN " Costello" HANNITY. Hey Abbot!
He is another one always bringing up BUBBA while Bush is going below 34 %.
IT IS THE BUSH BACKERS CREDO- and that is,
" In the overwhelming evidence of Bush's failures,they seek to deflect rather than defect " :s4:
BUSH KNEW/CHENEY FLEW
TURK 182
.
.
:mj07:
BUT WHAT ABOUT SYDNEY FIELDS
NONNE on earth is worse than SEAN " Costello" HANNITY. Hey Abbot!
He is another one always bringing up BUBBA while Bush is going below 34 %.
IT IS THE BUSH BACKERS CREDO- and that is,
" In the overwhelming evidence of Bush's failures,they seek to deflect rather than defect " :s4:
BUSH KNEW/CHENEY FLEW
TURK 182
.
.
:mj07:
DOGS THAT BARK said:
Please stop with this. You did this in the run-up to the election over and over about this 50 cent tax. It's extremely misleading, as was pointed out before many times. You act as if Kerry was proposing this during the 2004 campaign. Let's try to stick to the facts, Wayne, or at least present the whole story and not misleading soundbites.
I assume factcheck.org passes your media test, since you quote from there as well.
"A Bush ad released March 30 attacked Kerry for once supporting the "wacky" idea of raising the gasoline tax by 50 cents per gallon. That was a decade ago. More recently, the man who later became Bush's own chief economist said higher gasoline taxes would lead to "less traffic congestion, safer roads, and reduced risk of global warming" and that raising gasoline taxes 50 cents to pay for a cut in income-tax rates "may be the closest thing to a free lunch that economics has to offer." How "wacky" is that?
Analysis
As we've noted before , Kerry's support for a 50-cent-a-gallon increase in the gasoline tax happened a decade ago, back when regular was selling for a national average of $1.01 per gallon. Kerry's support was so fleeting that the only evidence of it to surface so far are two old newspaper clips in which Kerry complains that he deserved more credit as a deficit-cutter. He never voted for, or sponsored, legislation to impose such a tax, and he doesn't support one now, when the price is just under $1.76."
I think I made note of your point in "no praise' thread Matt when asked about tax.
in addition the point of him supporting 50 cent tax when gas was $1 a gal makes it worse than now. It would have made taxes on gas( state and fed) equate to over half the cost of gas--
With your being a small business owner I am surprised at your stance on taxes in general.
in addition the point of him supporting 50 cent tax when gas was $1 a gal makes it worse than now. It would have made taxes on gas( state and fed) equate to over half the cost of gas--
With your being a small business owner I am surprised at your stance on taxes in general.
DOGS THAT BARK said:
I'm not saying I support any 50 cent gas tax increase, or any increase at all for that matter. My point is that you are misleading when you imply that Kerry was running on this 50 cent increase platform in 2004 and that that would be what we'd be dealing with if he was elected.
You know that this is totally false. Not only did he not support any such thing in 2004, even if he did, it would never fly.
On another note, do you have any problem with Bush's chief economist strongly supporting a 50 cent increase in 1999, or are you just focused on a couple stray comments from Kerry in 1994?
Another 'funny' thing. Bush's camp called Kerry a flip-flopper because he once threw out a 50 cent tax idea in 1994, but did not support it in 2004. So they knew that he did not support it in 2004, yet they ran ads slamming him, acting like he was on the stump in 2004 advocating this tax. Kinda like you are doing.
DOGS THAT BARK said:
I didn't say anything about taxes in that thread. I just said that a decrease from 3.09 to 2.39 doesn't really excite me. I didn't blame Bush for the increase and I don't praise him for the reduction.
I do blame him for giving huge tax breaks to some of the most profitable companies in the world.
I'm against anyone for increase taxes period and doubly against anyone wanting 50 cent gas tax increase whoevers side they are on.
If it sounded like I was projecting Kerry ran on gas tax in 04 that was not my intent. Sorry
If it sounded like I was projecting Kerry ran on gas tax in 04 that was not my intent. Sorry
DOGS THAT BARK said:
I got that impression from this:
'His' 50 cent gas tax?? That's what i'm talking about. He did not support any such thing in 2004. The most recent support of this tax was Bush's chief economist. We went through this 5 times last october/november, yet you still throw out this 50 cent tax nonsense.
