Best president ever?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I don't like affirmative action, we just got rid of it here in Michigan
biggrin.gif
 
you can point out good small sh*t for every president...doesn't make them one of the best, and the only reason black people like him is because hes democrat and got his dick sucked...nuff said.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Memphis Fan @ Jan 5 2007, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you can point out good small sh*t for every president...doesn't make them one of the best, and the only reason black people like him is because hes democrat and got his dick sucked...nuff said.</div>That's part of the reason, yeah.
rolleyes.gif
Or the fact republicans could care less about black people, yeah.
 
lmao, youve been brainwashed by Kanye West, so one of the things you HAVE to do to be republcan is dont give a sh*t about black people, im outve this conversation...idiotic sh*t...try to say something but cant prove it.New Orleans was unexpected, NOBODY, not f*cking Malcom X could do sh*t about it...
 
New Orleans wasn't totally unexpected, it gets hit by a bad hurricane about every 25 years or so. but that SNAFU is more to blame on FEMA than the president. Also, the city of New Orleans and mayor Ray Nagin need to take some blame too, they didn't prepare for aHurrican. the levis were built by PTG Beuriguard(sp?) before the civil war. If you live in an area which is prone to something, you have to be prepared. Califronia is prepared for Earthquakes, Florida for Hurricans, and New York for terrorist attacks.a lot of people blame the president for stuff beyond his control, people forget that the funding for most this stuff comes from Congress, and congress is more worthless than 10 William Henry Harrisons(the most worthless US president ever) but at the same time the president gets credit for good things. like Clinton and the economy, he didn't have anything to do with the economy, the internet did. thus once the internet went bust so did the economy.
 
I would like to point out too, experts lay more blame on Clinton than Bush about 9/11, Bush was only in office a few months before it happened. The terrorist attacks take hella lot longer than a few months to plan, the terrorists have lived here longer than Bush even being thought as a candidate of presidency. When the Twin Towers were attacked in '93, Clinton did very little, he chunked a couple missiles which didnt do sh*t to the terrorists as a whole and it resulted in them attacking us again in 2001.Im not a Bush fan either, but he gets too much sh*t he and his administration isnt fully responsible for.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Memphis Fan @ Jan 5 2007, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I would like to point out too, experts lay more blame on Clinton than Bush about 9/11, Bush was only in office a few months before it happened. The terrorist attacks take hella lot longer than a few months to plan, the terrorists have lived here longer than Bush even being thought as a candidate of presidency. When the Twin Towers were attacked in '93, Clinton did very little, he chunked a couple missiles which didnt do sh*t to the terrorists as a whole and it resulted in them attacking us again in 2001.Im not a Bush fan either, but he gets too much sh*t he and his administration isnt fully responsible for.</div>Bush still had those 'few months'. Your right that Clinton did have more time, but still that does not grant Bush a full-pardon. I'm sure after your elected president you get briefed on everything...
 
well, clinton obviously didnt do sh*t about terrorists in the middle east, so Bush probably wasnt briefed.
 
Bush had 8 months from the time of his innaguration until the attacks, in those 8 months there was that incident where China shot down and captured a US spy plane, North Korea and Kim Jong Mentaly-ill was acting up, and Saddam kept going into the no fly zone. all those things took presidence. Clinton had actually delt with Al Quida for years, and he mishandled it bad. he did nothing after the first WTC attack, he bombed Iraq after something else they did which was unrelated to Iraq.(see both Bush and Clinton have something in common), he bombed Afghanistan a little bit after the Embassy bombings, he did nothing after the bombing of the USS Cole. I'm not saying it is his fault either though, because its documented that his administration had a detailed account of a prossed attack, and some aid failed to give the information to Clinton, the Pentigon, or the congress.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jan 5 2007, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>"Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which required large employers to allow their employees to take unpaid leave because of pregnancy or serious medical condition." <--This has been huge."Clinton's attempt to fulfill another campaign promise of allowing openly gay men and lesbians serving in the armed forces was the subject of criticism." <--This is all based on your political views. I think this is a good thing, while others don't like it. Simply opinion."Clinton signed the Brady Bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases. He also expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, which benefits working class families with dependent children." <--Trying to reduce violence and help middle class famlies."It raised taxes on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers, while cutting taxes on 15 million low-income families and making tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses.[12] Additionally, it mandated that the budget be balanced over a number of years, and the implementation of spending restraints." <--Going back to your political views. I believe we should increase taxes on the rich, while lowering on middle class famlies."In addition to his political skills, Clinton also benefited from a boom of the US economy. Under Clinton, the United States had a projected federal budget surplus for the first time since 1969."<--Great for the country.I also believe he increased minimum wage, and and I also think he introduced affirmative action</div>Helping pregnant women is good, but certainly not worthy of making him one of the greatest presidents of all time. That's ridiculous.Helping gays be allowed to be in the military is fine, but once again not that important in my book. Gays are not a very large group in this country like people act. It's mostly hype. Anyway, unless you have "GAY" stamped on your forehead or you tell them you are gay, how would they know anyway? You couldn't say you were before Clinton, you couldn't say you were after him. Very meaningless to me.Those two bills are fine with me, but not really America changing in my opinion. You can still get a gun if you want one. I guarantee you if someone wants to murder someone, they can.Okay, fine.Yeah, I said myself that he benefitted from a great economy. So what. No one cares that he benefitted from it. He didn't do anything to cause it, and anyone should be able to tell that.Minimum wage is actually bad for a lot of people. When the minimum wage gets raised, prices get raised on all products/services in America (unless somehow your business doesn't hire anybody at or just above minimum wage). Many people get fired/laid off because they can't afford to hire everyone at the new wage. Minimum wage can be good for some people, but it has its negatives.I found that Clinton did a review on affirmative action, which basically had the purpose of knowing what was going on in America with affirmative action. Otherwise, I know of nothing that he did involving that. Affirmative action is racist and downright idiotic. I can't understand why any black person would want it. It implies that black people are somehow less than worthy of doing what a white man can. Black people have today and have had for decades tons of opportunity to do what they want. All it does is give jobs to people less qualified based on the color of their skin. I don't see how that helps America. You tell me.My brother told me recently that there was a case where a white person who was of African descent was denied a scholarship after they found out he was white. He sued and won. Props to him for defeating a racist group giving out scholarships.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jan 5 2007, 09:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Or the fact republicans could care less about black people, yeah.</div>So, if Republicans could care less, then that implies that they do care, right?Anyway, Clinton didn't do that much for black people. Most of the rights they have today were earned long before he came along. To say that Clinton is one of the best presidents based on that is a travesty. Lincoln easily did more for black rights than Clinton did (see: Emancipation Proclamation). I'd really like to know why people think Kennedy is so great, too.
 
9/11 happened under BUSH...NOT CLINTON. CLINTON COULDN'T DO ANYTHING, HE WASN'T IN OFFICE.NOW THAT'S ENOUGH SAID WITH THAT. WHAT EXPERTS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SOME CONSERVATIVE FOX NEWS CHANNEL EXPERT?
 
Man I'd have to go with George W Bush. Our ecomony is doing awesome, nothing has happened bad while he's been in office, and he is the best talking president we've ever had in the history of the United States. :thumbdn1:
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jan 6 2007, 12:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>9/11 happened under BUSH...NOT CLINTON. CLINTON COULDN'T DO ANYTHING, HE WASN'T IN OFFICE.NOW THAT'S ENOUGH SAID WITH THAT. WHAT EXPERTS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SOME CONSERVATIVE FOX NEWS CHANNEL EXPERT?</div>ABC had a big, very contraversial, special which focused a lot of blame on Clinton. also, many counter-terrorism experts have said he is more at fault than Bush. but like I said, I don't see either of them having much culpibility. they have people inside their administration who are suppost to deal with this stuff, and than report to the president or the pentigon. the guy under the Clinton administration who was suppost to do this, failed to do his job.
 
It's just completely and untterly stupid to blame Clinton when the guy wasn't in office during the attacks. The ONLY person you can really blame is Bush...and although I hate Bush, it's hard to put a TON of blame on him as well...No one really saw this coming, I know theres alot of theories out there, and I HATE BUSH and I'm even saying it was tough for him to do much...but don't sit here and blame Clinton, that's B.S.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (redneck @ Jan 6 2007, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>ABC had a big, very contraversial, special which focused a lot of blame on Clinton. also, many counter-terrorism experts have said he is more at fault than Bush. but like I said, I don't see either of them having much culpibility. they have people inside their administration who are suppost to deal with this stuff, and than report to the president or the pentigon. the guy under the Clinton administration who was suppost to do this, failed to do his job.</div> That ABC 9/11 special was a load of crap, it was not all fact and was almost taken off the air, it had a warning before it showed saying that not all things in it were 100% correct...
 
okay, the guy who was in office 8 yrs, and majority of the time they had been planning this, AND while he was in office the same people attacked the SAME building shouldnt be blamed more than Bush?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Memphis Fan @ Jan 6 2007, 05:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>okay, the guy who was in office 8 yrs, and majority of the time they had been planning this, AND while he was in office the same people attacked the SAME building shouldnt be blamed more than Bush?</div>So, If Clinton is so bad, why couldn't Bush do anything about this when he came in office? Since, ya know, Clinton knew about this for 8 years...
rolleyes.gif
 
Clinton didnt know sh*t about it, and the reason why is because he and his administration didnt do muh after the Twin Tower attacks in '93. If he wouldve done some real action and try to take care of the situation in full, 9/11 probably wouldnt have happened.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jan 6 2007, 10:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>9/11 happened under BUSH...NOT CLINTON. CLINTON COULDN'T DO ANYTHING, HE WASN'T IN OFFICE.NOW THAT'S ENOUGH SAID WITH THAT. WHAT EXPERTS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? SOME CONSERVATIVE FOX NEWS CHANNEL EXPERT?</div>HELLO I AM MaRdYC26 AND I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THE USS COLEWATCH ME BLINDLY WALK INTO THIS ARGUMENT
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Memphis Fan @ Jan 6 2007, 07:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Clinton didnt know sh*t about it, and the reason why is because he and his administration didnt do muh after the Twin Tower attacks in '93. If he wouldve done some real action and try to take care of the situation in full, 9/11 probably wouldnt have happened.</div> What would you have wanted Clinton to do after the failed WTC attack? Go on the warpath? If I remember correctly the Republican leadership in the Senate didn't want to do much either.
 
see, I htink I got caught up trying to defend Bush to prove that Clinton was NOT a good president. I really dont like either, and the Republicans didnt do much either.But Clinton couldve alot more to stop, or to take control of the situation which was given right in his face. He did little to the terrorists, and they planned on and resulted in 9/11. Clinton is just popular for some reason...*coughblowjobcough*. And its stupid to think he was a top 3 president...what life changing accomplishments did he do that Lincoln, FDR did?
 
I don't think Clinton really could do much from the first WTC attack, because at the time some thought it was done by only a few people and didn't have any backing from any terrorist organization. also, at the time no body knew who Al-Quida was. what Clinton should take sh*t from is his handeling of the embassy bombings in Africa. He did absolutly nothing except blow up a 50 year old abondoned factory. after those bombings the Clinton administration should have take precautions to safeguard this nation. because, right after those bombings Bin Ladin said he planed to attack the US on its home soil.
 
I am going to say Lincoln. The guy was the president while all of America was being torn apart, how much of a harder time can you pick to be president than that one? And yet, people say he was a great president. So my opinion is, if everyone thought he was a great president, and he was a president during a time when it would have been extremely tough to be president (hard to win the people over if the country is torn in two), then he must have been one of the best.The thing is though, it is hard to label one president as the all out best and I don't know much about what was going on before my time, let alone way back then. So it is unfair for me to judge presidents when I don't know everything they had to go through.
 
The reason Clinton was a popular president because he focused on the problems at home. Bush is focusing more about the problems with Iraq, then he is on his own people. There's so many people that go without health insuarance, it's so ridiculous.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Memphis Fan @ Jan 6 2007, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>it doesn't make him a top 3 president....nuff said.</div>It does In My Opinion. Focusing on your own people is huge. Giving them health insurance, more job oppurtunites, better econonmy, and lowering taxes for the middle class. Sounds like a good president to me. Like I've stated soo many times in this topic, it's opinon. Obviously if your a republican, you may not agree with some of his values...
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jan 6 2007, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It does In My Opinion. Focusing on your own people is huge. Giving them health insurance, more job oppurtunites, better econonmy, and lowering taxes for the middle class. Sounds like a good president to me. Like I've stated soo many times in this topic, it's opinon. Obviously if your a republican, you may not agree with some of his values...</div>So logically you are saying that health insurance, more job opportunities (which by the way, he didn't really cause), better economy (once again, not his doing), and lowering taxes for the middle class is more important than freeing black slaves and keeping the nation from falling apart. Okay, right.
 
so you think republicans dont care about the country of America..just war pursuers? So why the hell does Bush try to keepp illegal immigrants out, why does he put 2 CIA agents on every plane now, why does he spend billions on American issues amongst oursleves? Im not even republican, and you can never convince me that Clinton is a top 3 president...hes nowhere near FDR, Lincoln or even Woodrow Wilson.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jan 6 2007, 07:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So logically you are saying that health insurance, more job opportunities (which by the way, he didn't really cause), better economy (once again, not his doing), and lowering taxes for the middle class is more important than freeing black slaves and keeping the nation from falling apart. Okay, right.</div>Missed my post. My top three presidents are from the 1920's and on. What Lincoln did with freeing slaves was great, but I'm talking about recent presidents. And I ranked Clinton 3rd, when FDR was clearly first on my list. So STFU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top