Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would not call any President "stupid." Just the fact that they got elected President demonstrates that they are anything but stupid. However, that does not mean they cannot be incompetent, inept, amateurish, bungling, ineffective, or leaving much to be desired, like the last three Democrat Presidents.
You left out petty. Closing the White House Tours, only to go and blow $1M for a day with Tiger showed how petty he is.
I wouldn't say Clinton is any of those. He was quite adept at adopting new positions, and coming to the middle is what made him a good president. His first 4 sucked, because he tried to do exactly what this president is doing. He even played the race card calling himself the first black president. Funny how blacks had no problem with slick willy calling himself black.
Obama... he's just as white as any politician, he just hides behind his black half; and the media helps him along.
ANYONE who disagrees with Obama, Michelle, Holder, Rice, or anyone he has appointed is a racist, instantly.
It is called "projection." Since liberal freaks elected Obama solely based upon his skin color, then those who voted against Obama must be "racist." We know who the real bigots are, and it is not conservatives.
Really? We elected Obama based solely on his skin color? Sorry but I wasn't going to vote for a old 'geezer" who would croak in the White House like McCain and then have to deal with a whack job from Alaska like Palin who thinks shooting Moose from a helicopter is normal.
I wouldn't say Clinton is any of those. He was quite adept at adopting new positions, and coming to the middle is what made him a good president. His first 4 sucked, because he tried to do exactly what this president is doing. He even played the race card calling himself the first black president. Funny how blacks had no problem with slick willy calling himself black.
Obama... he's just as white as any politician, he just hides behind his black half; and the media helps him along.
So I guess that makes Obama the first gay president, right.
Originally Posted by steven_h I wouldn't say Clinton is any of those. He was quite adept at adopting new positions, and coming to the middle is what made him a good president. His first 4 sucked, because he tried to do exactly what this president is doing. He even played the race card calling himself the first black president. Funny how blacks had no problem with slick willy calling himself black.
Obama... he's just as white as any politician, he just hides behind his black half; and the media helps him along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon
So I guess that makes Obama the first gay president.
I'm sure the LGBT crowd would love to have him.
The only person that I can respect on that list is Juan Williams. He's one of the few black liberals that still see's most things with some level of moderacy.
You left out petty. Closing the White House Tours, only to go and blow $1M for a day with Tiger showed how petty he is.
I wouldn't say Clinton is any of those. He was quite adept at adopting new positions, and coming to the middle is what made him a good president. His first 4 sucked, because he tried to do exactly what this president is doing. He even played the race card calling himself the first black president. Funny how blacks had no problem with slick willy calling himself black.
Obama... he's just as white as any politician, he just hides behind his black half; and the media helps him along.
ANYONE who disagrees with Obama, Michelle, Holder, Rice, or anyone he has appointed is a racist, instantly.
You are grossly mistaken about Clinton. He was never a moderate or a centrist. He only appeared that way because of a Republican controlled Congress. Clinton had absolutely no control over the legislation enacted by the GOP controlled Congress, and he often vetoed them or was forced into accepting a law due to a veto-proof majority. Such as the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, for example, which Clinton vetoed in January 1996, and threatened to veto again in June 1996, until the bill passed with a veto-proof majority. Then suddenly Clinton claimed credit for a bill which he absolutely abhorred.
Really? We elected Obama based solely on his skin color? Sorry but I wasn't going to vote for a old 'geezer" who would croak in the White House like McCain and then have to deal with a whack job from Alaska like Palin who thinks shooting Moose from a helicopter is normal.
So how do you feel now that McCain is still alive and well since that was the only reason you voted for the worst POTUS of all time? Of course if Hillary runs you'll have the same concerns regarding her age- right?
Yes, nice rhetoric, you have those lies down pat, good job.
You mean like those in Red states that lost their voice long ago, how about dumping the Congressional Congress and let The People vote, what ya afraid of? Pssst, no States are going anywhere, no matter how much some want the USA to Fail.
Lies?
The goal of the democrat party is to make more impoverished, dependent citizens, thus assuring thier power. Do you really not understand this? Tell me ONE liberal policy in the last 50 years that has been designed to increase the incomes and prosperity of US citizens- just one.
1. Tell me why those on welfare and foodstamps have increased under every democrat administration, with the exception of Clinton (given that the Gingrich congress prevented him from implementing many liberal policies- too bad they could not kill NAFTA and China most favored nation trade status.
2. Why is it that cities controlled by liberals have, on the average, lower incomes and more people in poverty? Why have the ten poorest cities in the US been run by liberals for 30 years?
Psst- When red states with all the energy, water, nukes, and most of the ag get tired of being milked by an urban, dependent population, you bet they will break away. It is simply human nature- no one will work for the pleasure of another for long. If you do not believe this, then you do not understand how and why the concept of slavery collapsed and why the USSR collapsed.
You should educate yourself (but of course, you will not, as it would require a questioning of liberal policy, which is forbidden).
the problem is the right has no candidate worth voting in. They have old fashion ideas, are usually anti-immigration, want to push religious education, are anti-women, make laws to make it more difficult for the average person to vote, don't want to deal with the economy (only what will benefit them in the end)
Once the Republicans put up someone that is worthy, then they'll have a shot winning the Presidency. currently the field of supposed candidates by the Republicans are the same looney types that lost them the election in 2012.
And the problem with the incredibly low IQ left is they believe what you wrote.
Here...let me help: Conservatives/Republicans aren't against any of the things you mention. What they ARE against is taxpayers paying for that crap!
Get it now?
I doubt it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
