- #1
Loren Booda
- 3,125
- 4
Whom do you respect more as President - Bill Clinton or George W. Bush?
russ_watters said:I respect Bush more, by which I mean I respect him very little.
Rach3 said:Bush is a nice, religious guy who just gets his priorities confused sometimes.
trajan22 said:heh, I meant to put neither...I think both arent the greatest but I guess only time will tell. Alot of presidents weren't popular by any means but history generally paints a much different picture.
Bush has beliefs and he sticks to them regardless of whether or not they are popular. Clinton does not.cyrusabdollahi said:Really, Bush more than Clinton? Why do you say that?
russ_watters said:Bush has beliefs and he sticks to them regardless of whether or not they are popular.
What? You respect him more because he GOES AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE HE SERVES? Is this a Democracy or not? He is not King George, for the love of god!russ_watters said:Bush has beliefs and he sticks to them regardless of whether or not they are popular. Clinton does not.
trajan22 said:I also don't disagree with Sadam being deposed, the man was a tyrant. (whether or not he was working on wmd's)
russ_watters said:Bush has beliefs and he sticks to them regardless of whether or not they are popular.
russ_watters said:Bush has beliefs and he sticks to them regardless of whether or not they are popular. Clinton does not.
Rach3 said:You mean regardless of whether they work?
cyrusabdollahi said:Really, Bush more than Clinton? Why do you say that?
Sure, that too. But at least he believes they work (or are right, which isn't necessarily the same thing).Rach3 said:You mean regardless of whether they work?
You soooooooooooo miss the point of our system of government. He was elected, wasn't he? If you actually think he stole both elections, fine, but if you accept that he was elected, that's all there is for the country's input (until the next election). The entire point of a representative system is that you elect someone who will make his/her own decisions.SticksandStones said:What? You respect him more because he GOES AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE HE SERVES? Is this a Democracy or not? He is not King George, for the love of god!
I agree, but that isn't what the OP asked.Kurdt said:I also think Bush's beliefs kind of threaten the notion of the separation between church and state.
See two sections above - I think Bush is more interested in what he thinks is best for the country than Clinton is/was (yeah - still is).SpaceTiger said:I think we should reflect on their beliefs before we blindly give people respect for this quality. The same could be said for any number of criminals, dictators, and schizophrenics.
Presidents are elected to serve the people, not themselves.
If that's how you saw Clinton, you're entitled to your opinion, but that isn't how I saw him. Flexible becomes spineless if the only thing that motivates him is his next election. Don't you see that someone like that will purposely make bad decisions if he thinks people will like them? Don't you see that just because a decision is popular, that doesn't automatically make it right?Schrodinger's Dog said:You mean one person is a political animal who can acknowledge that he needs to be flexible in his approach...
Well, that's a failing shared by both men and a very common problem among a great many people - especially politicians. Both, with a few notable exceptions, surrounded themselves with cronies, yes-men, personal favor appointees, etc., which then makes taking the advice of your advisors redundant, doesn't it?...the other sticks to his guns, despite people telling him he's going to shoot himself in the foot, then when he does he seems surprised...
Bush has a singular vision, the problem is no one else but his cronies share it, and it's plainly clear it has failed.
Me or Bush?Integral said:Cause he can't bring himself to admit how wrong he was 4yrs ago.
Yeah, I just quoted myself. I do that...russ_watters said:But at least he believes they work (or are right, which isn't necessarily the same thing).
Kurdt said:I also think Bush's beliefs kind of threaten the notion of the separation between church and state.
Dr Transport said:The first amendment doesn't separate church and state, that was implemented by a liberal supreme court.
Huh, so then apparently you think Thomas Jefferson was off his rocker when he referred to the Establishment Clause as a "wall of separation between church and state"?Dr Transport said:The first amendment doesn't separate church and state, that was implemented by a liberal supreme court.
russ_watters said:Seriously, guys - all of you - how is it possible to have any respect for someone who you think won't act how he/she thinks is in the best interest of the country if he/she thinks making the wrong decision will be best for his poll ratings? Isn't this the entire problem with Congress? Isn't this the primary flaw in our system of government?
You soooooooooooo miss the point of our system of government. He was elected, wasn't he? If you actually think he stole both elections, fine, but if you accept that he was elected, that's all there is for the country's input (until the next election). The entire point of a representative system is that you elect someone who will make his/her own decisions.
This comparison sounds ludicrous to me!russ_watters said:Both, with a few notable exceptions, surrounded themselves with cronies, yes-men, personal favor appointees, etc., which then makes taking the advice of your advisors redundant, doesn't it?