Helen Thomas -- ya gotta love her.

[quade 4]

http://dailybreeze.copleypress.org/content/bog/thomas19.html

Quote

“This is the worst president ever,” she said. “He is the worst president in all of American history.”

Wow, she's old, but I didn't know she was -that- old. I mean, did she cover ALL the Presidents?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Guest]

She obviously overlooked Carter, and hell, I thought Nixon was to blame for every bad thing that happened in the last half of the 20th Century! And what about Reagan?! Geez, some people...

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[quade 4]

If you read the entire article, she has opinions on all of the ones she's personally covered. She just happens to think that 43 is the worst of ANY of them.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[AggieDave 6]

What did Clinton actually do for our country besides drag its name through the mud with his scandles? Not much, the good economy was because of anything he did. We got into the severe political termoil with the rest of the world because of stuff he was doing. Our military became weak and barely functioning under his watch...

And she thinks Bush is the worst? Damn, she's got some seriously liberal blinders on!

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[quade 4]

Now, now, let's keep focus here.

I personally think William Henry Harrison was the best President because he had so little time in which to screw with things.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[BoobieCootie 0]

Too much sex does make one blind, and she must have OD-ed on the Clinton sausage or something I dunno

[billvon 3,118]

A president who stays out of the way and just keeps the country running is the best kind, I think. Charismatic and forceful leaders get us in wars.

>We got into the severe political termoil with the rest of the world
> because of stuff he was doing.

Hmm, he tried to get a pretty strong anti-terrorism bill passed; Trent Lott, I believe, was instrumental in getting it watered down:
------------------------------------------
"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.

But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, doubted that the Senate would rush to action before they recess this weekend. The Senate needs to study all the options, he said, and trying to get it done in the next three days would be tough.

One key GOP senator was more critical, calling a proposed study of chemical markers in explosives "a phony issue."
. . .
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said it is a mistake if Congress leaves town without addressing anti-terrorism legislation. Daschle is expected to hold a special meeting on the matter Wednesday with Congressional leaders.

(CNN, 1996)
------------------

[billvon 3,118]

I disagree with her view of the "worst president in history" but I think she made a good point with one of her comments:
------------------
We are operating on fear, a "fear of looking unpatriotic, fear of asking questions, just fear. “We have,” she said, “lost our way.”

Thomas believes we have chosen to promote democracy with bombs instead of largess while Congress “defaults,” Democrats cower and a president controls all three branches of government in the name of corporations and the religious right.
----------------

It is something new; we're giving our president instead of our congress unconditional authority to declare and wage war. We are making decisions based primarily on fear. When anyone questions a war against Iraq, the instant conservative rebuttal is "do you want your children to die in the next terrorist attack?" We use fear as a political tool now, as a replacement for deliberation and foresight. I don't think that's a good plan.

In addition, I am getting pretty disgusted with the democrats. They alternate being yes-men to the president and attacking what he does. They don't seem to have a single original idea of their own. They offer only criticism or strained silence, and that's too bad - for any two-party system to work you have to have two effective parties. We've gone from three branches of government controlled by two parties to one branch of government controlled by one.

[AggieDave 6]

BillVon,

Do you know why the Republican Congress were fighting that bill? They were to try to protect our civil rights, since the original draft of that bill contained some very scary liberties that the government could take against its own citizens. If you would actually research it, instead of just listening to the liberal media, then you would understand.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[billvon 3,118]

>Do you know why the Republican Congress were fighting that bill?
>They were to try to protect our civil rights . . .

Yet when we OK a bill that allows widespread wiretapping without many of the original protections, why, that's protecting the good ol USA. What, don't you want to protect the USA? And if someone complains that we now have secret military prisons that we send people to without benefit of legal representation, that's not a civil rights issue. There's a war on terror going on, son! Remember, republicans protect our civil rights when they block anti-terror laws; democrats just want to let the terrorists win when they try the same thing.

>If you would actually research it, instead of just listening to the
>liberal media, then you would understand.

I would respond in kind, but I won't. It's too bad that so many people take sides so easily. I can't count the number of times I've seen a criticism of Bush, to which a republican replies "Yeah, well, Clinton got blowjobs in the oval office!" as if saying another president did dumb stuff as well 'evened the score.' I look forward to the day that the general public doesn't put up with foolish behavior from _any_ politician no matter what team they're on.

[AggieDave 6]

I wrote my Congressman about the bill that was finally past, before it was past, in horror of it actually passing. The fact that it did pass is a sad milestone in the fight for the maintaining of our civil liberties. The Republicans were not the only ones who voted for that bill, many Democrats were on board for it too.

Quote

It's too bad that so many people take sides so easily

Its not that I like to quickly take sides, I just hate it when what I believe in is under-represented or misrepresented by those who quite decidedly stand on the opposite side of the view point from me.

I totally agree with you that the American Public shouldn't have to endure and should most definately NOT allow the kind of foolish behavior that we have had to endure since the first dawning of the Continental republic.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."