Bring back Carter!

[Mike AI]

Anyone else watching convention?? Jimmy Carter is an idiot, the man did nothing right as President, and has not had a better record since leaving.

Carter is the guy who went to N. Korea and told Clinton military action is not needed, threat is not there, and now makes a speach saying Bush should have focused on N. Korea!!

HAHAHAHAHA

Only Carter could make Gore look good!!

I am waiting for the Clinton's they are the only ones that count.

[PornoDoggy]

Not watching it, but listening on C-span - have you had a stroke yet?

[Hell Puppy]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jul 26 2004, 09:56 PM
Not watching it, but listening on C-span - have you had a stroke yet?
I hope whatever hotel is hosting this put the rubber sheets on the beds...

[Almighty Colin]

I missed Carter but Clinton's delivery was amazing.

[RawAlex]

Colin, Clinton didn't hold a candle to Reagan, but still he is a truly gifted speaker. It shows how he got elected (twice) to the top job - by saying the things people want to say while managing not to piss off the other side.

This is really turning into a love fest.... no dissenting voices to be found.

Alex

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Colin@Jul 27 2004, 06:00 AM
HAHAHA The world misses Carter.

Clinton gives great speaches, always had, always will.


What do you miss abuyo

[Sharpie]

I also thought Clintons speech was very smart.... and well written. it was damned near perfect for the job he was assigned. He was able to take his negatives and turn them around.... The bit about being in the top 1% and not going to war, were masterful.

I disagree with Alex. I think that Clinton is basically a better orator than Reagan. But Reagan, came over as the grandfather that you were comfortable with and wanted to trust. He stuttered in all the right places... and made you feel at ease.

[SykkBoy]

I've never hid my admiration for Jimmy Carter, but his speech was a bit on the weak side....

Clinton was just amazing. He just has this amazing gift of speaking. This is what gets people elected to office...If GW were able to get up and knock 'em dead on the microphone, his approval ratings would be much higher. Most of the people in my circles (a combination of republicans, democrats, socialists, non-politcal people) always complain they just don't trust him. He seems like a used car salesman who's try to sell you that shitty pinto that you know you don't want and keeps trying to hide the oil leak and 4 bald tires.

[dig420]

If Reagan hadn't made a deal with the Iranian terrorists to hold the American hostages until after the election, Carter probably would have gotten another term.

[dig420]

Mike do you admire the fact that Reagan treasonously subverted the American government with the Iran-Contra affair and then left his subordinates to hang for it? Or is it the short term high-interest loans he committed us to prop up the economy while he was in office you like? Maybe the huge homeless problem he created by turning mentally ill people out of institutions and onto the street?

Reagan wasn't that damned popular while he was in office. He should have been impeaced for Iran-Contra but he hid behind a shield of senility, absolving himself of all blame for the actions of his administration. This 'Reagan was a great man' shit is just historical revisionism by the modern day masters of propaganda, the Republican Party.

I'm waiting for them to try to rename Mt. Rushmore in his honor. It'll happen.

[Mike AI]

Dig it will be a proud day when Reagan gets on Mt. Rushmore.

The only revisionist history is from liberals who are trying to make Reagan out to be a guy who was bipartisan and worked with Deomocrats. Which was not the case, Reagan destroyed democrats.

Clinton is a better orator then Reagan, but Reagan had credibility that Clinton NEVER had , and never will.


Dig, I still want to do some exit traffic trades. shoot me an e-mail when you can. michael at hirise dot com

[dig420]

Reagan was a bad President, but he's the best thing the Republicans can find to memorialize.

Reagan was better than FDR. Saddam planned 9-11. Clinton is a murderer. Etc and so on. blah blah blah

I haven't been doing many exit trades, such a pain in the ass. We need to redo the exit consoles pretty soon though so I'll get you up there with your IR site. Are you buying one-clicks or selling x-sells?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Jul 27 2004, 09:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Jul 27 2004, 09:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Colin@Jul 27 2004, 06:00 AM
HAHAHA The world misses Carter.

Clinton gives great speaches, always had, always will.


What do you miss abuyo [/b][/quote]
hey, i didn't say that. :unsure:

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by dig420@Jul 27 2004, 03:37 PM
Reagan was a bad President, but he's the best thing the Republicans can find to memorialize.

Reagan was better than FDR. Saddam planned 9-11. Clinton is a murderer. Etc and so on. blah blah blah

I haven't been doing many exit trades, such a pain in the ass. We need to redo the exit consoles pretty soon though so I'll get you up there with your IR site. Are you buying one-clicks or selling x-sells?


I have no problem with FDR, I do not like a lot of his policies, but he was the perfect war time leader for the US!

Clinton was a waste. A caretaker President. He squandered his amazing abilities, and skills because he was selfish. Clinton has no legacy. He did not do anything to change the country. He has no major policy that he authored, got past congress, and changed the country. Clinton will go down a poor leader, who had HUGE potential, but threw it all away. 100 years from now, historians will not even discuss him.

I notice you pay $35 per $19.95 signups. Do you offer trials at all? How are your conversions? Our IR site is doing very well, so I figured you site must be off the hook.

[dig420]

we ran the site with trials for a couple of weeks and noticed NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever in the join ratio. It seems that if people are going to join they're just going to join no matter what. There was a sizable difference in the number of joins between the price points of 29.95 and 19.95 though so we kept the price down and make our money on the rebills, which are outstanding.

DC has people doing from 1/1500 to 1/48 this period, TGP traffic on the high end, amateur IR traffic on the low end. Where you're sending the traffic from makes a big difference in such a specialized niche.

DC is doing very well, sometimes I think I'd be better off closing down the other paysites and just working DC like blacksonblondes. Instead I'm trying to do both lol

Clinton brought peace to Northern Ireland and east central Europe, signed several historic treaties and damn near brought peace to the Middle East. He balanced the budget and left a HUGE surplus which of course has since been wasted. He created something like 22 million new jobs. The United States has rarely in our history been held in higher esteem internationally than when he was our President. The only aspect of his Presidency that will be considered disgraceful by the historians is his bogus impeachment by a right-wing cabal that cares far more about their own power than the welfare of this country.

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by dig420@Jul 27 2004, 04:30 PM
we ran the site with trials for a couple of weeks and noticed NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever in the join ratio. It seems that if people are going to join they're just going to join no matter what. There was a sizable difference in the number of joins between the price points of 29.95 and 19.95 though so we kept the price down and make our money on the rebills, which are outstanding.

DC has people doing from 1/1500 to 1/48 this period, TGP traffic on the high end, amateur IR traffic on the low end. Where you're sending the traffic from makes a big difference in such a specialized niche.

DC is doing very well, sometimes I think I'd be better off closing down the other paysites and just working DC like blacksonblondes. Instead I'm trying to do both lol

Clinton brought peace to Northern Ireland and east central Europe, signed several historic treaties and damn near brought peace to the Middle East. He balanced the budget and left a HUGE surplus which of course has since been wasted. He created something like 22 million new jobs. The United States has rarely in our history been held in higher esteem internationally than when he was our President. The only aspect of his Presidency that will be considered disgraceful by the historians is his bogus impeachment by a right-wing cabal that cares far more about their own power than the welfare of this country.

Dig I will Clinton some credit, but those are not major accomplishments. He will never be a top President as judged by historians.

I also agree about the impeachment, it was a joke, the Lewinsky affair was a red herring that trapped the Republican party. It was shameful.

[dig420]

He already IS considered a top President in the judgement of any historian who's taken seriously by academicians, but I'm damn glad to see you say that about the impeachment. It was a heinous episode in our national history.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by dig420@Jul 27 2004, 04:48 PM
He already IS considered a top President in the judgement of any historian who's taken seriously by academicians
I don't know about that, Dig. The surveys of historians I've seen so far since his presidency have him ranked somewhere in the middle. I think he was a fine president but to be in the top 25% one has to be better than a list something like the following; Washington, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Jefferson, Truman, Madison, Kennedy, Jackson, and Wilson. I think that makes him an average president.

I think Reagan and Clinton were the best presidents post-Kennedy but I doubt that either is going to be that highly regarded in 100 years. Their presidencies were too uneventful.

[PornoDoggy]

Probably negotiated with the Iranians even before the election.

Contravened the will of Congress by both supplying weapons to prohibited countries and funding terrorists.

Got 250+ Marines blown up in Lebanon and did - NOTHING.

Made an one-time bombing of Lybia that scared Khadafi's government so badly that they ... they ... oh, yeah, they blew up an airliner over Scotland a couple of years later.

Ran up record deficits. Facilitated the exportation of jobs with tax credits for sending jobs overseas. Probably supplied the necessary precursors for Chemical and Biological weapons to Saddam Hussein.

He should go on Mt Rushmore right after Millard Fillmore.

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 10:49 AM
Probably negotiated with the Iranians even before the election.

Contravened the will of Congress by both supplying weapons to prohibited countries and funding terrorists.

Got 250+ Marines blown up in Lebanon and did - NOTHING.

Made an one-time bombing of Lybia that scared Khadafi's government so badly that they ... they ... oh, yeah, they blew up an airliner over Scotland a couple of years later.

Ran up record deficits. Facilitated the exportatiuon of jobs with tax credits for sending jobs overseas. Probably supplied the necessary precursors for Chemical and Biological weapons to Saddam Hussein.

He should go on Mt Rushmore right after Millard Fillmore.
My memories of Reagan in office:
my friends losing their homes and family farms, farms that had been in the families for years and years
blackmailing the states into changing the drinking age to 21 (especially Wyoming)
cutting mental health funding (ironic that he ended up wtih alzheimers, eh?)
ignoring the AIDS threat when it was "just a gay disease"
shipping off production to Japan, fucking US Steel and forcing a lot o hardworking people out of jobs
allowing corporations to rape land and natural resources, pollute water and fuck up the environment with no penalties
The Meese Commission

[RawAlex]

Too bad you can't judge presidents by what the DIDN'T fuck up... Clinton would be the champ - he stayed out of the way and let business do business, let Americans enjoy the single largest run up of personal wealth, and didn't turn around and pad his rich buddies pockets with a middle class tax cut that doesn't give money back to the middle class.

Republicans bitch about the tax and spend liberals... that ain't nothing compared to the tax cut and still spend conservatives that keep leaving the US buried in debt.

Reagan, Bush, Bush... same tune, same results... toss them out.

Alex

[PornoDoggy]

The only revisionist history is from liberals who are trying to make Reagan out to be a guy who was bipartisan and worked with Deomocrats. Which was not the case, Reagan destroyed democrats.

You would have made a good historian under Stalin, Mikey.

'Splain sumthin to me ... if Reagan didn't work with Democrats, how exactly did he do anything? Seems to me that during much of his term the Democrats controlled one or both houses of Congress.

[Mike AI]

Reagan was not perfect. The war on terror started back then, and Reagan did not do much - but at the time there was a bigger more important war going on - the Cold War.

Ronald Reagan's policies and leadership brought on the destruction of the Soviet Union, and brought freedom to milliosn of people through out Eastern Europe.

His economic policies brought us from stagnation, and set the table for the unprecidented growth we have had since 1980.

You saw Reagan's funeral. Even his former enemies, who lost their empire came to pay respects!! His approval ratings even after death are HUGE!!!

Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.

Most importantly Reagan brought back the Country's confidence, swagger and standing in the world.

I would not expect different posts from you flaming libs. I know you guys miss the days of the Soviet Union, 20%+ interest rates, gas shortages....



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Nickatilynx]

Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.



errr

I believe there is only 43 currently.

When I was at school if I finished 15th out of 43 that would have been pretty mediocre.My Dad would have had a shit fit!!! LOL

Where would you rate GW Bush?

30th?

Or pretty damn poor?


;-))

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 11:55 AM
Reagan was not perfect. The war on terror started back then, and Reagan did not do much - but at the time there was a bigger more important war going on - the Cold War.

Ronald Reagan's policies and leadership brought on the destruction of the Soviet Union, and brought freedom to milliosn of people through out Eastern Europe.

His economic policies brought us from stagnation, and set the table for the unprecidented growth we have had since 1980.

You saw Reagan's funeral. Even his former enemies, who lost their empire came to pay respects!! His approval ratings even after death are HUGE!!!

Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.

Most importantly Reagan brought back the Country's confidence, swagger and standing in the world.

I would not expect different posts from you flaming libs. I know you guys miss the days of the Soviet Union, 20%+ interest rates, gas shortages....



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mike ... put down the crack pipe. Ronald Reagan did not destroy the Soviet Union. HST, DWE, JFK, LBJ, RMN, GF, and JC before him had every fucking bit as much to do with it as did Reagan. HST, DWE, JFK, and RMN actuall deserve a hell of a lot more credit than bonzo's co-star. You have to be a fucking idiot not to know that.

You are right ... the war on terror wasn't what it has become since 9/11 during the Reagan era. Doesn't mean a mother fucking thing - what Reagan did CONTRIBUTED to 9/11. When U.S. Marines (or any other U.S. Servicemen) are killed, the culprits need to die. Have you read the 9/11 Commission report? The fact Ronnie Ray-gunz didn't follow through with his tough act with actions emboldened terrorists everywhere.

BTW ... I hold Clinton in the same contempt for Somalia, although he did inheret that mess from Bush.

This criminal cock-sucker negotiated with the Iraninans to manipulate the election. He traded arms for hostages and funded Central American terrorists in direct contravention of the laws of the United States. He should have fucking gone to jail.

Ronald Reagan was admired upon death - whoopty fucking doo. So was Nixon. So will Ford and Carter be. You are grasping at straws, and unable to admit that the Emperor's clothing is just plain off-the-rack Walmart shit (made in China by an American company that got a tax break to move there, no doubt).

And as usual ... when confronted with a flat-out factual inaccuracy - you resort to the tired "liberal-this, liberal-that" bullshit.

How did Reagan accomplish what little he did without Tip O'Neil and the Democrats?

[Nickatilynx]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy+Jul 30 2004, 09:14 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (PornoDoggy @ Jul 30 2004, 09:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 11:55 AM
Reagan was not perfect. The war on terror started back then, and Reagan did not do much - but at the time there was a bigger more important war going on - the Cold War.

Ronald Reagan's policies and leadership brought on the destruction of the Soviet Union, and brought freedom to milliosn of people through out Eastern Europe.

His economic policies brought us from stagnation, and set the table for the unprecidented growth we have had since 1980.

You saw Reagan's funeral. Even his former enemies, who lost their empire came to pay respects!! His approval ratings even after death are HUGE!!!

Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.

Most importantly Reagan brought back the Country's confidence, swagger and standing in the world.

I would not expect different posts from you flaming libs. I know you guys miss the days of the Soviet Union, 20%+ interest rates, gas shortages....



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mike ... put down the crack pipe. Ronald Reagan did not destroy the Soviet Union. HST, DWE, JFK, LBJ, RMN, GF, and JC before him had every fucking bit as much to do with it as did Reagan. HST, DWE, JFK, and RMN actuall deserve a hell of a lot more credit than bonzo's co-star. You have to be a fucking idiot not to know that.

You are right ... the war on terror wasn't what it has become since 9/11 during the Reagan era. Doesn't mean a mother fucking thing - what Reagan did CONTRIBUTED to 9/11. When U.S. Marines (or any other U.S. Servicemen) are killed, the culprits need to die. Have you read the 9/11 Commission report? The fact Ronnie Ray-gunz didn't follow through with his tough act with actions emboldened terrorists everywhere.

BTW ... I hold Clinton in the same contempt for Somalia, although he did inheret that mess from Bush.

This criminal cock-sucker negotiated with the Iraninans to manipulate the election. He traded arms for hostages and funded Central American terrorists in direct contravention of the laws of the United States. He should have fucking gone to jail.

Ronald Reagan was admired upon death - whoopty fucking doo. So was Nixon. So will Ford and Carter be. You are grasping at straws, and unable to admit that the Emperor's clothing is just plain off-the-rack Walmart shit (made in China by an American company that got a tax break to move there, no doubt).

And as usual ... when confronted with a flat-out factual inaccuracy - you resort to the tired "liberal-this, liberal-that" bullshit.

How did Reagan accomplish what little he did without Tip O'Neil and the Democrats? [/b][/quote]
Woke up with some sand in your vagina today , did we ,PD ?


;-))))

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@Jul 30 2004, 12:08 PM
Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.



errr

I believe there is only 43 currently.

When I was at school if I finished 15th out of 43 that would have been pretty mediocre.My Dad would have had a shit fit!!! LOL

Where would you rate GW Bush?

30th?

Or pretty damn poor?


;-))


Nick read a little closers, I said "go down as" meaning for the next 200 years, after another 40 Presidents, Reagan will still be in top 10! He has some tough competition with those early guys.

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx+Jul 30 2004, 12:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Nickatilynx @ Jul 30 2004, 12:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 09:14 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 11:55 AM
Reagan was not perfect. The war on terror started back then, and Reagan did not do much - but at the time there was a bigger more important war going on - the Cold War.

Ronald Reagan's policies and leadership brought on the destruction of the Soviet Union, and brought freedom to milliosn of people through out Eastern Europe.

His economic policies brought us from stagnation, and set the table for the unprecidented growth we have had since 1980.

You saw Reagan's funeral. Even his former enemies, who lost their empire came to pay respects!! His approval ratings even after death are HUGE!!!

Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.

Most importantly Reagan brought back the Country's confidence, swagger and standing in the world.

I would not expect different posts from you flaming libs. I know you guys miss the days of the Soviet Union, 20%+ interest rates, gas shortages....



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mike ... put down the crack pipe. Ronald Reagan did not destroy the Soviet Union. HST, DWE, JFK, LBJ, RMN, GF, and JC before him had every fucking bit as much to do with it as did Reagan. HST, DWE, JFK, and RMN actuall deserve a hell of a lot more credit than bonzo's co-star. You have to be a fucking idiot not to know that.

You are right ... the war on terror wasn't what it has become since 9/11 during the Reagan era. Doesn't mean a mother fucking thing - what Reagan did CONTRIBUTED to 9/11. When U.S. Marines (or any other U.S. Servicemen) are killed, the culprits need to die. Have you read the 9/11 Commission report? The fact Ronnie Ray-gunz didn't follow through with his tough act with actions emboldened terrorists everywhere.

BTW ... I hold Clinton in the same contempt for Somalia, although he did inheret that mess from Bush.

This criminal cock-sucker negotiated with the Iraninans to manipulate the election. He traded arms for hostages and funded Central American terrorists in direct contravention of the laws of the United States. He should have fucking gone to jail.

Ronald Reagan was admired upon death - whoopty fucking doo. So was Nixon. So will Ford and Carter be. You are grasping at straws, and unable to admit that the Emperor's clothing is just plain off-the-rack Walmart shit (made in China by an American company that got a tax break to move there, no doubt).

And as usual ... when confronted with a flat-out factual inaccuracy - you resort to the tired "liberal-this, liberal-that" bullshit.

How did Reagan accomplish what little he did without Tip O'Neil and the Democrats?
Woke up with some sand in your vagina today , did we ,PD ?


;-)))) [/b][/quote]


Time to break out the Vagisil!

I liked Tip O'Neil, but he gets no credit for turning coutnry around - he is the guy who worked with Carter to get us in the mess. Reagan won election in 2 landslides, and used this to get what he wanted from congress. Tip was wise enough to get on the Reagan bandwagon....

Reagan won the cold war by putting pressure on the Soviet Union rather then coddling them - there was not Detante with Reagan - only Victory.

Mr. Porndoggy, tear down this wall.... tear down the wall in your head that won't give credit where credit is due. THE WORLD, including the defeated enemies give Reagan more credit then you do.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Nickatilynx]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Jul 30 2004, 09:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Jul 30 2004, 09:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Nickatilynx@Jul 30 2004, 12:08 PM
Reagan changed history. He will go down as one of top 10-15 Presidents of all time. One of the greatest leaders of the 20th Century.



errr

I believe there is only 43 currently.

When I was at school if I finished 15th out of 43 that would have been pretty mediocre.My Dad would have had a shit fit!!! LOL

Where would you rate GW Bush?

30th?

Or pretty damn poor?


;-))


Nick read a little closers, I said "go down as" meaning for the next 200 years, after another 40 Presidents, Reagan will still be in top 10! He has some tough competition with those early guys. [/b][/quote]
I think with with dead presidents , the longer they have been dead , the better they were ;-))))

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@Jul 30 2004, 12:17 PM
Woke up with some sand in your vagina today , did we ,PD ?


;-))))
I'm afraid my first three cups of coffee had 50% of the caffine removed ... makes me testy. I get particularly cranky when Mormons talk about Joseph Smith, Christian Scientists talk about Mary Baker Eddy, or Republicans talk about Ronald Reagan.

False idols and all that rot, don'cha know ...

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 12:24 PM
I liked Tip O'Neil, but he gets no credit for turning coutnry around - he is the guy who worked with Carter to get us in the mess. Reagan won election in 2 landslides, and used this to get what he wanted from congress. Tip was wise enough to get on the Reagan bandwagon....

Reagan won the cold war by putting pressure on the Soviet Union rather then coddling them - there was not Detante with Reagan - only Victory.

Mr. Porndoggy, tear down this wall.... tear down the wall in your head that won't give credit where credit is due. THE WORLD, including the defeated enemies give Reagan more credit then you do.

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Mike ... you are confusing Ronald Reagan's talk with Ronald Reagan's actions. By your logic, George (Bush) the First should take credit for tearing down the wall, not Reagan. He was in office when it came down.

IMHO, Ronald Reagan accelerated the demise of the Soviet Union by five to ten years - if that much. Didn't cost me much ... of course, my kids and grandkids will have to pay for it. Quite frankly, of far more value than the enormous (and greatly mis-spent) military buildup was the aid given the Afghani rebels ...

Ronald Reagan's failure to act as tough as he talked has cost us dearly. It played a role in the death of 3000 Americans on 9/11, and contributed to the idea that we could be run out of town.

Ronald Reagan's actions in Iran Contra were criminal.

You may deify him if you wish. I chose not to share your hallucinations.

At one point, much of THE WORLD (except the U.S. Republicans) held Woodrow Wilson in high regard for his role in the peace treaty that ended WWI; said peace treaty being the framework for WWII.

It is way too soon to judge Ronald Reagan's presidency. I don't share your opinion of his role in history. What this reminds me of, however, is conversations with traditional liberals in the late 70s and early 80s, in their attempts to deify Kennedy. Same shit, different day.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@Jul 30 2004, 12:08 PM
Where would you rate GW Bush?

30th?
Probably about that.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 12:41 PM
Ronald Reagan's failure to act as tough as he talked has cost us dearly. It played a role in the death of 3000 Americans on 9/11, and contributed to the idea that we could be run out of town.
Wow. This is new. First it was Bush's fault, then Clinton's and now it's been pushed back to Reagan? Where does the buck stop? Truman?

I blame THEM, not US.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally posted by Colin+Jul 30 2004, 11:55 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jul 30 2004, 11:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 12:41 PM
Ronald Reagan's failure to act as tough as he talked has cost us dearly. It played a role in the death of 3000 Americans on 9/11, and contributed to the idea that we could be run out of town.
Wow. This is new. First it was Bush's fault, then Clinton's and now it's been pushed back to Reagan? Where does the buck stop? Truman?

I blame THEM, not US. [/b][/quote]
Fucking Lincoln!!!!

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Colin+Jul 30 2004, 02:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jul 30 2004, 02:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 12:41 PM
Ronald Reagan's failure to act as tough as he talked has cost us dearly. It played a role in the death of 3000 Americans on 9/11, and contributed to the idea that we could be run out of town.
Wow. This is new. First it was Bush's fault, then Clinton's and now it's been pushed back to Reagan? Where does the buck stop? Truman?

I blame THEM, not US. [/b][/quote]
Look - I'm not saying that 9/11 was the fault of Reagan (or Clinton).

But think about it ... twice inside of 15 years the U.S. response was to tuck our tail between our legs and wimper home in response to a terrorist attack. Folks like Usama bin Laden took notice.

Yes, the attack was made by terrorists - but they were lead to believe that the attacks could be an effective method of changing America's behavior by the complete failure to respond appropriately (that's what Marines are for, not walking the beat in downtown Beruit).

I put primary blame for these failures on Reagan and Clinton - they were the CinC, so it happened on "their watch."

However, both Presidents were subjected to a hell of a lot of political pressure by their opponents to do what they did. Without identifying the source of the quotes, the rhetoric from the Democrats about Reagan (after Lebanon) and the Republicans about Clinton (after Somolia) would be extremely hard to distinguish.

And I repeat again, for those bobbleheads that can't get past their own blatant partisanship to think that others aren't quite as partisan ..

I hold Reagan and Clinton equally quilty in this regard

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 03:18 PM
Without identifying the source of the quotes, the rhetoric from the Democrats about Reagan (after Lebanon) and the Republicans about Clinton (after Somolia) would be extremely hard to distinguish.
I agree with that. I'm not sure either was wrong though. So far, we haven't seen ANY approach that works. Wonder why? Because they want to kill us no matter what we do? There's a good bet.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jul 30 2004, 11:29 AM
Too bad you can't judge presidents by what the DIDN'T fuck up... Clinton would be the champ
Mike must be takin' a nap up there in Tampa to let that one past.

[XXXPhoto]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 08:55 AM
You saw Reagan's funeral. Even his former enemies, who lost their empire came to pay respects!! His approval ratings even after death are HUGE!!!
Mike,

If Bush up and died I'm sure his approval ratings would rise too... I'd love him for it... Anyone want to chip in for a bag of pretzels?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 30 2004, 12:21 PM
He has some tough competition with those early guys.
This has happened in science too. What has happened to our Einsteins and our Newtons or our Jeffersons and Washingtons? The answer, I think, is that greatness is decided by influence and impact and that the opportunities for those things decrease the longer a system has existed. Without the Louisiana Purchase the US wouldn't be anything like it is today. That makes Thomas Jefferson a great president especially given that he faced strong opposition by those who thought the purchase was unconstitutional.

The US Constitution is the oldest still-in-effect document of its kind. The opportunities for greatness are decreasing.

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by Colin+Jul 30 2004, 03:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jul 30 2004, 03:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 03:18 PM
Without identifying the source of the quotes, the rhetoric from the Democrats about Reagan (after Lebanon) and the Republicans about Clinton (after Somolia) would be extremely hard to distinguish.
I agree with that. I'm not sure either was wrong though. So far, we haven't seen ANY approach that works. Wonder why? Because they want to kill us no matter what we do? There's a good bet. [/b][/quote]
They also don't have the distractions of the Internet, PlayStations, 500 cable tv stations, etc. Their only focus and purpose is to die for their cause and take as many people out with them as they can.

That's their sole reason for waking up each morning...it's one day closer to their ultimate goal of death to the infidels.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by SykkBoy+Jul 31 2004, 11:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SykkBoy @ Jul 31 2004, 11:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Colin@Jul 30 2004, 03:21 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 03:18 PM
Without identifying the source of the quotes, the rhetoric from the Democrats about Reagan (after Lebanon) and the Republicans about Clinton (after Somolia) would be extremely hard to distinguish.
I agree with that. I'm not sure either was wrong though. So far, we haven't seen ANY approach that works. Wonder why? Because they want to kill us no matter what we do? There's a good bet.
They also don't have the distractions of the Internet, PlayStations, 500 cable tv stations, etc. Their only focus and purpose is to die for their cause and take as many people out with them as they can.

That's their sole reason for waking up each morning...it's one day closer to their ultimate goal of death to the infidels. [/b][/quote]
I'm going to start a nonprofit. PlayStations for Peace.

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by Colin+Jul 31 2004, 11:54 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin @ Jul 31 2004, 11:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by SykkBoy@Jul 31 2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Colin@Jul 30 2004, 03:21 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Jul 30 2004, 03:18 PM
Without identifying the source of the quotes, the rhetoric from the Democrats about Reagan (after Lebanon) and the Republicans about Clinton (after Somolia) would be extremely hard to distinguish.
I agree with that. I'm not sure either was wrong though. So far, we haven't seen ANY approach that works. Wonder why? Because they want to kill us no matter what we do? There's a good bet.
They also don't have the distractions of the Internet, PlayStations, 500 cable tv stations, etc. Their only focus and purpose is to die for their cause and take as many people out with them as they can.

That's their sole reason for waking up each morning...it's one day closer to their ultimate goal of death to the infidels.
I'm going to start a nonprofit. PlayStations for Peace. [/b][/quote]
hahaha

I joked with my wife that all they needed for peace in the middle east was a shitload of satellite dishes and playstations...maybe they wouldn't be so cranky...they could frag infidels in the upcoming Doom 3 rather than taking it out on someone else...

or maybe they all just need one big group hug...

"c'mere Adbul, who's been a bad boy? that's ok, shhhh, it's ok, the big bad great satan won't get you...."