Bush or Clinton

[Lights]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
I think most people are mad about bush, the sex scandle had nothing to do with him being a good president or not, bush would lie too, were argueing about who was the better president, not how many lies each one told.

Clinton should have never let himself be put into that position, he made a mistake and suffered from it.

How many lies someone says does have to do with how good a president they are, integrity is a big part of it. Before you say it, Bush did not lie about WMD, he only went off of what he was told.

He shouldn't of got into yale at all. His dad has been pulling strings for him all his life, im getting sick of it.

Perhaps, just perhaps, Bush is smarter than you think? It just might be so...

The sad fact is, that bush was planning to invade iraq all along, if saddam was in rule or not.

Was he? Would you supply some proof to back that up, its a pretty powerful statement.

I really dont care if it was fair or not, all i agree with is that he is a bad president but if the votes were sealed he could of gone to the court as a sort of a alibi (sp?). Anyhow bush was expected to defend himself.

Could?! Who cares about could, you cant take away from him something he could or could not have done, it doesnt matter if it doesnt happen.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

How many lies someone says does have to do with how good a president they are, integrity is a big part of it. Before you say it, Bush did not lie about WMD, he only went off of what he was told.

Yeah, yeah. People don't make such big mistakes like that by accident .

Perhaps, just perhaps, Bush is smarter than you think? It just might be so...

Oh believe me, even fidel castro laughs at his stupidity. http://users.pandora.be/redhattack/nowar.html Heres a quote mocking bush from a thread in the asylum
"Asking to the president of Brazil if there were black men in his country...

Affirming that most of the importantions are from outside...

And speaking that he'll base his foreigner politics on the rest of the world..."

Was he? Would you supply some proof to back that up, its a pretty powerful statement.

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735 If you don't believe me, believe this.

Could?! Who cares about could, you cant take away from him something he could or could not have done, it doesnt matter if it doesnt happen.

No, he did do it, the could was questioning his motive.

 

[Lights]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
Yeah, yeah. People don't make such big mistakes like that by accident .

Says who? That doesnt even make sense. So the huge oil tanker spills were not accidents because they were "big" mistakes? I dont think so.

Oh believe me, even fidel castro laughs at his stupidity. http://users.pandora.be/redhattack/nowar.html Heres a quote mocking bush from a thread in the asylum
"Asking to the president of Brazil if there were black men in his country...

Affirming that most of the importantions are from outside...

And speaking that he'll base his foreigner politics on the rest of the world..."

What Castro says mean about nothing to me, he has not my confidence. Also, if we were to point out every time a speaker misquotes himself, it would be a sad world. Public speaking is very hard and misquotes are often made.

You must also take those phrases out of context, many things do not make sense by themselves.

http://www.sundayherald.com/27735 If you don't believe me, believe this.

That information is old and outdated.

No, he did do it, the could was questioning his motive.

Not really. He could have done many things, but didnt.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Says who? That doesnt even make sense. So the huge oil tanker spills were not accidents because they were "big" mistakes? I dont think so.

I said like 'that'. Its not like they saw some water pistols and came back saying they were WMD's.

What Castro says mean about nothing to me, he has not my confidence. Also, if we were to point out every time a speaker misquotes himself, it would be a sad world. Public speaking is very hard and misquotes are often made.

How could you be dumn enough to ask brazil if they had blacks in thier country? Bush is a complete moron, period.

That information is old and outdated

Ok everybody, According to lights WW2 never happened because the information that supported it's existence is more than a couple of years old. Information is one of the few things that don't become outdated. I forgot i was talking to a wall here, you won't even look at any information that 'attacks' bush. I supported my bold statement, you support yours.

Not really. He could have done many things, but didnt.

I could of done a lot of things but didn't, saddam could of done a lot of things but didn't. What exactly do you think you're talking about? I basically said that he reason for going to court could of been for a alibi.

 

[ST]

Originally posted by Forged
Bush is terrible with foreign affairs, in his three years he has started 2 cold wars...

I voted they were both moronic, clinton put on a pretty face and was a shitty president behuind ou back, and bush is write out in the open with his stupidity

You took the words right out of my mouth.I voted they were both moronic as well.And that in my opinion is lightly.Bush likes to attack anyone who he feels is threating anything in any way.And Clinton thought he was some kind of a pimp.I think they both should have been kicked out of office.

 

[Lights]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
Ok everybody, According to lights WW2 never happened because the information that supported it's existence is more than a couple of years old. Information is one of the few things that don't become outdated. I forgot i was talking to a wall here, you won't even look at any information that 'attacks' bush. I supported my bold statement, you support yours.

The WWII analogy doesnt hold up. WWII is over, nothing new is happening. Whereas, here, Im quite sure there have been much more recent studies and finds since 2002. Much has happened in the past year and a half and theroys have been proven and disproven.

The link you provided is about some super secret document that is not even shown?! How can I believe that. Dont say I wont look at what you show me, I have read everything, but you havent shown me anything of real substance. And yes, information becomes outdated as new information comes in, which is what I am saying.

I havent said anything that I have not defended as best as I am able, some of which was wrong; I can admit that. I have no problem admitting that I am wrong if it can be countered with something solid enough to hold up under close scrutiny. Dont insult my character.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Originally posted by Lights
The WWII analogy doesnt hold up. WWII is over, nothing new is happening. Whereas, here, Im quite sure there have been much more recent studies and finds since 2002. Much has happened in the past year and a half and theroys have been proven and disproven. So, many theroys about WW2 have been disproven. We are finding more and more things about WW2 every year. People didn't stop studying WW2 all of a sudden.

The link you provided is about some super secret document that is not even shown?! How can I believe that. Dont say I wont look at what you show me, I have read everything, but you havent shown me anything of real substance. And yes, information becomes outdated as new information comes in, which is what I am saying. Why would a secret document be shown? Untill you show some information that makes this 'outdated' i will continue to believe what i have read.

I havent said anything that I have not defended as best as I am able, some of which was wrong; I can admit that. I have no problem admitting that I am wrong if it can be countered with something solid enough to hold up under close scrutiny. Dont insult my character.

I think i might be wrong but i haven't seen anything that is 'solid' to disprove it.

I voted they were both moronic as well.And that in my opinion is lightly.Bush likes to attack anyone who he feels is threating anything in any way.And Clinton thought he was some kind of a pimp.I think they both should have been kicked out of office.

Clinton didn't think he was a pimp, look up the meaning of pimp before you start babbling on. Anyway his betrayel to his wife has nothing to do with how good a president he was and why would that mean he was a moron.

 

[Qwerty_99]

Originally posted by raDixGhost
albert einstien had a iq of 160, i highly doubt that clinton was smarter than him.

he hated socks and couldnt tie his shoes... strange how he was a mathematical genius

 

[bmovies]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
I saw this on a IQ test website and thought this was worth quoting "The six lastest republic presidents over the last 50 years have a average IQ of 115,5. President Nixon had the highest IQ (155) of them all. President G. W. Bush has the lowest of all the republics with an IQ of 91. The six democratic Presidents had an average IQ of 156, President Clinton has the highest IQ: 182. President Lyndon B. Johnson had the lowest IQ of all the democrats with an IQ of 126." Btw the highest mark you could get was was 200, and the average was 100. There is a guerilla called koko with a IQ of 85-95. say, isnt 95 (koko) better than 91? (bush)

EDIT: oh yeah demo's had a higher average of IQ than the republics so "i like bush because hes a republican" argument is sorta invalid

Those IQ numbers are a hoax:

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/lovenstein.html
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.htm

 

[killer900]

clinton was so cool! hey if your the president you should be able to screw whoever you want right?
j/king

i've heard far better things about clinton than bush...

 

[Kuzmich]

Please remove your avatar, dont be gay.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Originally posted by bmovies
Those IQ numbers are a hoax:

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/lovenstein.html
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.htm

Yah I've seen them quite recently.There not fake its just that the basis of number is believed to be flawed. It isn't doubted that he is the dumnest president in the last 50 years. If bush and clinton both took a random IQ test I wouldn't put it past bush to get half.

 

[N[U]TS]

Originally posted by Otmorosok
You see there is Russia and then there is US, as not being allies kind of reminded me of the good old communist times. Now Putin ruined it for me, but forget it, its just a common opinion here that life was better before we were born, during communist times it was better then now, during Empirial times it was better then during communist times and during the rule of Kiev and the early rule of Moscow Russia was a heaven on earth. Thats just what everyone likes to think but doesnt believe, exept for communist part of it.

i dont think communism is a good way to go..... i dont like how you dont have a say so in what happens + total gov. control over everthing... thats fed up


i think bush was a better president by far.....

 

[Kuzmich]

Well you see, sometimes you happy not knowing. You leave your life, you get your pay, you have a family, thats how it was after Stalin, Hrushiev, and Cuban Crisis, we were just about to start caring for our people and then it all fell apart.

 

[bmovies]

"There not fake its just that the basis of number is believed to be flawed."

Huh? They're not fake, but the basis of the number is believed to be flawed? Again, huh? How can they be flawed, but not fake?

This is like John Kerry's statement: "I voted for it before I voted against it."

The flawed numbers are fake. Read: wrong.


"It isn't doubted that he is the dumnest president in the last 50 years. If bush and clinton both took a random IQ test I wouldn't put it past bush to get half."

And the only places where it isn't doubted about his "dumbness" is in liberal left circles.

PS: the correct spelling is "dumbness" and "They're", as in "They're not fake...". You're in absolutely no position to call the President dumb.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

You bump this thread to question my spelling and grammar.

Huh? They're not fake, but the basis of the number is believed to be flawed? Again, huh? How can they be flawed, but not fake?

The key word is believed, the people that judged their IQ based them on their speeches and books they wrote. A lot of people think judging like that isn't accurate.

PS: the correct spelling is "dumbness" and "They're", as in "They're not fake...". You're in absolutely no position to call the President dumb.

1) I'm a 13 yr old boy. 2) Mr. I screwed America is what, 40 years older than me and he would most likely make more mistakes than I did. How long ago did I write this?

This is like John Kerry's statement: The flawed numbers are fake. Read: wrong

Who cares about John Kerry? You vote for Bush because you are the lucky few that actually get tax-cuts and you hate Kerry.

You bump this thread to support a dolt. You have no reason and have displayed no argument why you support a person with half the average vocabulary, and most likely below average IQ. I can correct my spelling easily but the daddies-boy-draft-dodger mistakes will take years to correct. He screws your reputation; he adds trillions on to debt and proposes to add even more. He isn't no tree hugger that’s for sure, and it's obvious why people wonder how he graduated from Yale. He is possibly the worse president your country has had to cope with, his administration is just, horrible. He proposes ideas like spending millions on a “healthy marriage†scheme; he’ll never run out of stupid ideas. I’m not even a yank and I know about how much he is screwing your country; he lowers the standards with his “clean Air actâ€, ignoring 1000’s of premature deaths.