Why are Democrat Presidents scrutinized so much more? (McCain, party affiliation, Congress)
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.
Clinton went through impeachment for a legal act that had nothing to do with presidency.
Bush justified a war with lies and ended up with 20% rating approval, both directly related to the presidency, and yet was not impeached.
Obama gets into office and the first day is criticized for not being uptight about jackets in the oval office, for not receiving a medal, for his wife's dresses...
Before the election Obama was criticized for every single association he had in his life, but I don't remember hearing much about things like Ted Haggard calling in to give Bush spiritual guidance every week. And the funny stuff you heard from the audience at McCain's rallies....
So what does this say about "lefts" and "rights" when they decide to attack the other side? Does this reflect the general tendencies and personalities of "leftwingers" vs "rightwingers"?
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,053,243 times
Reputation: 3936
IMO the GOP are crybabies and as long as they have people like Newt around to witch hunt(while being a total hypocrit no less) then the Dems are going to have problems.
Are you kidding me? What filter are you looking through? There's an Obama lovefest going on. The left leaning press is only interested in reporting on what Michelle wears, and how the Bush-appointed judge screwed up the oath.
Just stay tuned as Obama attempts to implement all his campaign promises, and as he finds out there ain't no "easy button". I really had to laugh during the inaugeral speech at what the Bush's must have been thinking..as if one only needed to recognize a need in order to fix it.
Are you kidding me? What filter are you looking through? There's an Obama lovefest going on. The left leaning press is only interested in reporting on what Michelle wears, and how the Bush-appointed judge screwed up the oath.
Just stay tuned as Obama attempts to implement all his campaign promises, and as he finds out there ain't no "easy button". I really had to laugh during the inaugeral speech at what the Bush's must have been thinking..as if one only needed to recognize a need in order to fix it.
I guess I should have been more clear. I'm talking about the style of criticism. The criticism against lefts is often more petty and irrelevant, yet gets taken to extremes, while the criticism against rights is more relevant but doesn't go as far.
I guess I should have been more clear. I'm talking about the style of criticism. The criticism against lefts is often more petty and irrelevant, yet gets taken to extremes, while the criticism against rights is more relevant but doesn't go as far.
I still think you clarification is way off base. The left and the media will jump over a non-lefty for anything they see as a minor transgression while giving a free pass to their cronies.
Clinton went through impeachment for a legal act that had nothing to do with presidency.
Bush justified a war with lies and ended up with 20% rating approval, both directly related to the presidency, and yet was not impeached.
Obama gets into office and the first day is criticized for not being uptight about jackets in the oval office, for not receiving a medal, for his wife's dresses...
Before the election Obama was criticized for every single association he had in his life, but I don't remember hearing much about things like Ted Haggard calling in to give Bush spiritual guidance every week. And the funny stuff you heard from the audience at McCain's rallies....
So what does this say about "lefts" and "rights" when they decide to attack the other side? Does this reflect the general tendencies and personalities of "leftwingers" vs "rightwingers"?
It's the Democrats turn to take a beating. It happens to every president no matter the party affiliation. We are nation of passionate people - take a look at the political forum, how often do you see mature/intellectual conversations about anything? It's all about how we are feeling - raw, jubilant, disappointed - and has very little to do with logic.
btw, Clinton deserved an a$$ whoopin' - the man lied to his country and sat back and got a bj from an airhead Democrat. Bush needed an a$$whoopin' too, don't get me started on that...
We should always call out mistakes when our Presidents fall out of line. I admit that Republicans have not represented our country very well at all (especially when they cater to the fringes which is what Obama may do also). If Obama governs from the fringes then he's no better than Bush (which, remains to be seen). Anyway, my two cents.
Clinton went through impeachment for a legal act that had nothing to do with presidency.
Bush justified a war with lies and ended up with 20% rating approval, both directly related to the presidency, and yet was not impeached.
Obama gets into office and the first day is criticized for not being uptight about jackets in the oval office, for not receiving a medal, for his wife's dresses...
Before the election Obama was criticized for every single association he had in his life, but I don't remember hearing much about things like Ted Haggard calling in to give Bush spiritual guidance every week. And the funny stuff you heard from the audience at McCain's rallies....
So what does this say about "lefts" and "rights" when they decide to attack the other side? Does this reflect the general tendencies and personalities of "leftwingers" vs "rightwingers"?
Maybe because the democrats in congress have pop culture and the media to fight their battles for them?
Acrually, most conservatives appear to not be really capable of any kind of rational scrutiny! Certainly (with a couple of notable acceptions) the ones on this board are "push the hot button", "rely on 2 second sound byte" kind of thinkers. So. . . they may scream louder than the liberals, but that is because screaming is all they've got. . . sad. . . .
Clinton went through impeachment for a legal act that had nothing to do with presidency.
Bush justified a war with lies and ended up with 20% rating approval, both directly related to the presidency, and yet was not impeached.
Obama gets into office and the first day is criticized for not being uptight about jackets in the oval office, for not receiving a medal, for his wife's dresses...
Before the election Obama was criticized for every single association he had in his life, but I don't remember hearing much about things like Ted Haggard calling in to give Bush spiritual guidance every week. And the funny stuff you heard from the audience at McCain's rallies....
So what does this say about "lefts" and "rights" when they decide to attack the other side? Does this reflect the general tendencies and personalities of "leftwingers" vs "rightwingers"?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice and perjury not because he he had a little fun with Monica. Not that I care what he did but facts is facts
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.