Dubya couldn't speak from his mouth let alone his heart.

 

Once again, attack a person's character.  Not surprising from someone like you.  Obama is such an elegant speaker when he has his teleprompter telling him what to say.  With the absence of the teleprompter, not so much.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Regarding the part in bold.  Bill Clinton wasn't necessarily a bad president in my opinion, but I certainly wouldn't put him at the same level as Ronald Reagan.  One thing that is interesting regarding Clinton's presidency is remember, he had a Congress led by republicans.  I like to do a lot of reading, and one book that I found interesting is called The Pact by Steven M. Gillon  .  It talks about the contrasts and the relationship between President Clinton, and then Speaker of The House Newt Gingrich.  It's a pretty good read.

 

Regarding Bernie Sanders, I used Hitler as an example of his speaking style.  Most of his speeches seem very "angry", "authoritarian" and "demanding".  I am in no way comparing Bernie Sanders and Hitler regarding political points of view, and I am not comparing socialism to nazism.  Regarding some of his political views, there are a couple of things that I actually agree with him on when it comes to identifying the issues.  I just don't like his solutions.

 

Regarding Jeb Bush - In all honesty, I haven't listen to him as much as some of the other candidates, and I don't have a "concrete" opinion of him just yet.  That being said though, I view him as an establishment candidate which is a huge red flag to me.  Establishment means "more of the same" whether it's a democrat or republican candidate.  I must say though, I think he did a very good job as Governor of Florida, and I think that he could do a good job as President.

 

Regarding Marco Rubio, at this point he is still my first choice, though I'm starting to perhaps reconsider him as my first choice.  I like that he seems to speak from the heart and really wants to do good.  That being said, I look at his history and read his autobiography and one thing that comes to mind regarding him, he has always had political aspirations (read career politician).  He is still not a member of the establishment, but I wonder if he could eventually go that way.

I'll have to check that book out. It's hard to place anyone on the same level as Reagan; the man did save the economy and hasten the end of the Soviet Union, after all. Clinton's not too far off, though, especially when you consider that his only real late-20th century competition were Presidents who either dragged the country into or perpetuated a catastrophic war, proved themselves clueless in economic policy or got themselves impeached.

 

I know you weren't comparing Sanders to Hitler philosophically, no worries there. As much as one side loves to demonize the other, comparing any modern US political figure in any branch of the federal government to Hitler isn't just stupid, it's an insult. I also have a few points that I agree with Sanders on, but he's so far to the left that I could never vote for him. Again, my highest hopes for him are that he drags votes away from Hillary and allows O'Malley to slide into the Democratic nomination. He's the only Democrat I'd consider voting for in the general election.

 

Maybe I'm selling Jeb short here, but I think that if one wants to see a general outline of what his policies would look like, they'd need to look no further back than his brother's Presidency. Despite the general contempt for G. W. Bush among the left, I actually don't think he was that bad a President. He was leaps and bounds better than his father, that's for sure. The interesting thing to watch with G. W. Bush was how many of his decisions were actually his. When he was pushing policies written by Dick Cheney and delivering canned speeches prepared by Cheney's staff, he appeared almost robotic at times. When he was cut free from the teleprompter, he was actually a pretty dynamic guy to watch, grammatical errors notwithstanding. The six months following 9/11 were maybe the greatest display of leadership from an American President since FDR, and Bush felt like a completely different person than he did when he was under Cheney's thumb.

 

I hate to drag up the immigration thing with Rubio again, because it does get blown out of proportion (as all things political do), but I think he became an establishment politician when he changed his public sentiments on it. That struck me as little more than him realizing that his views didn't fit the party line, and if he wanted to advance, he'd have to reshape his image a bit.

---

First off, I hate answering posts like this, but I feel that it's the closest thing to a one-on-one discussion or debate.  Though I don't always agree with you, I respect your point of view.  My answers regarding your points are highlighted below.

 

 

I'll have to check that book out. It's hard to place anyone on the same level as Reagan; the man did save the economy and hasten the end of the Soviet Union, after all. Clinton's not too far off, though, especially when you consider that his only real late-20th century competition were Presidents who either dragged the country into or perpetuated a catastrophic war, proved themselves clueless in economic policy or got themselves impeached.

 

If you are unable to check the book out, I do have the Kindle edition that I would loan to you.  I encourage people to read, and have a pretty good library of books that I have been collecting.

 

As far as Clinton being close to "saving the economy", you have to remember that during his Presidency, the economy pretty much was on "auto pilot" and eventually led to the "dot-com bubble".  One other notable policy that he signed into law was welfare reform.  This was not done solely because he was The President, it was because the bills that went to his desk came from a republican congress.

 

I know you weren't comparing Sanders to Hitler philosophically, no worries there. As much as one side loves to demonize the other, comparing any modern US political figure in any branch of the federal government to Hitler isn't just stupid, it's an insult. I also have a few points that I agree with Sanders on, but he's so far to the left that I could never vote for him. Again, my highest hopes for him are that he drags votes away from Hillary and allows O'Malley to slide into the Democratic nomination. He's the only Democrat I'd consider voting for in the general election.

 

For the most part, I think that we are in agreement on this issue, though I would not really consider voting for O'Malley just yet.  The reason that I say that is that I don't know enough about him to consider him as a choice for my vote.  I kind of think more and more it's looking like Joe Biden might enter the race.  He would be the biggest threat to Hillary in my opinion.


 

Maybe I'm selling Jeb short here, but I think that if one wants to see a general outline of what his policies would look like, they'd need to look no further back than his brother's Presidency. Despite the general contempt for G. W. Bush among the left, I actually don't think he was that bad a President. He was leaps and bounds better than his father, that's for sure. The interesting thing to watch with G. W. Bush was how many of his decisions were actually his. When he was pushing policies written by Dick Cheney and delivering canned speeches prepared by Cheney's staff, he appeared almost robotic at times. When he was cut free from the teleprompter, he was actually a pretty dynamic guy to watch, grammatical errors notwithstanding. The six months following 9/11 were maybe the greatest display of leadership from an American President since FDR, and Bush felt like a completely different person than he did when he was under Cheney's thumb.

 

Here is where you and I disagree.  From what I know and have seen, Jeb is not the same as George.  I would say that one needs to look at Jeb's track record here in the State of Florida, rather than associate him with either his brother or his father.


 

As far as his brother, I think he did the job well during his first term as President, but he faltered during his second term.  I disagree that he was "under the thumb" of Dick Cheney, and speeches that he made were not "prepared by Cheney's staff".  I do think that he was overwhelmed during his first term when he had to deal with not only foreign policy (9/11 terrorist attacks and Iraq), but also the economic bubble that had just burst (the dot-com bubble).  He was also faced with the next impending bubble that was far worse, that being the "housing-bubble" and the financial crisis that led to the bank bailouts.  His term was by no means "easy", and I do think that he did his best.


 

I hate to drag up the immigration thing with Rubio again, because it does get blown out of proportion (as all things political do), but I think he became an establishment politician when he changed his public sentiments on it. That struck me as little more than him realizing that his views didn't fit the party line, and if he wanted to advance, he'd have to reshape his image a bit.

 

I wouldn't call that becoming an "establishment politician", I would call that "coming to realize how things really get done" in Washington.  He was fighting not only the opposing party, but also his own party.  He is hardly someone that the establishment republicans back.

 

If you want to discuss our opinions regarding these issues, feel free to do so.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

All I know is Scott Walker is in now and he's got my vote

---

Once again, attack a person's character. Not surprising from someone like you. Obama is such an elegant speaker when he has his teleprompter telling him what to say. With the absence of the teleprompter, not so much.

Yea that's it

---

Obama is trash.. That is all..

---

Yea that's it

 

If it's not, then explain your comment.  Please try to do so with actual facts.  I know that it's difficult for liberals like you, because those "pesky facts" seem to get in your way when trying to debate.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

If it's not, then explain your comment. Please try to do so with actual facts. I know that it's difficult for liberals like you, because those "pesky facts" seem to get in your way when trying to debate.

Exhibit A:

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=4KqyLi8UFxw'>https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=4KqyLi8UFxw</a>

---

Exhibit A:

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=4KqyLi8UFxw'>https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=4KqyLi8UFxw</a>

 

So a video of quotes, some taken out of context isn't an attack on a man's character or intelligence.  Is that what you are trying to say?  Do I really need to spend the few seconds of my life to do a google search of President Obama muttering and stuttering when he doesn't have his teleprompter?

 

What exactly are you trying to prove?

 

I would argue that President Bush spoke from the heart and had a firm belief that he was doing the right thing with every decision in the best interests of the country, especially during his first term.  Was he an "elegant speaker"?  No.  But he wasn't stupid like you and your ilk try to portray him.

 

I could post links to videos that show President Obama making "speech blunders" and looking equally if not more "stupid" or "dumb" than your apparent view of President Bush, but I don't really feel like playing those juvenile games this evening.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

So a video of quotes, some taken out of context isn't an attack on a man's character or intelligence. Is that what you are trying to say? Do I really need to spend the few seconds of my life to do a google search of President Obama muttering and stuttering when he doesn't have his teleprompter?


What exactly are you trying to prove?


I would argue that President Bush spoke from the heart and had a firm belief that he was doing the right thing with every decision in the best interests of the country, especially during his first term. Was he an "elegant speaker"? No. But he wasn't stupid like you and your ilk try to portray him.


I could post links to videos that show President Obama making "speech blunders" and looking equally if not more "stupid" or "dumb" than your apparent view of President Bush, but I don't really feel like playing those juvenile games this evening.

Yea the idea that Obama and dubya's ability to communicate are on par is not something anyone on earth of sound and unbiased mind could ever even dream of. It's not even close--with or without a TelePrompTer.

---

Yea the idea that Obama and dubya's ability to communicate are on par is not something anyone on earth of sound and unbiased mind could ever even dream of. It's not even close--with or without a TelePrompTer.

 

And that's true in all 57 states
.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Remember when this nonsense was contained to the climate change thread?

 

Pepperidge Farms remembers. 

---

Yea the idea that Obama and dubya's ability to communicate are on par is not something anyone on earth of sound and unbiased mind could ever even dream of. It's not even close--with or without a TelePrompTer.

 

You still don't get it (not surprising).  I believe that President Bush was able to communicate a more positive message to the American people.  What has President Obama told us?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Remember when this nonsense was contained to the climate change thread?


Pepperidge Farms remembers.

Well, excuse me. Ill let y'all have your fun.

---

You still don't get it (not surprising). I believe that President Bush was able to communicate a more positive message to the American people. What has President Obama told us?

You are absolutely correct as usual.

---

You still don't get it (not surprising). I believe that President Bush was able to communicate a more positive message to the American people. What has President Obama told us?

Oh man, you have a short memory then. Bush continuously derided any one against his policies as unpatriotic.


I think you are miss remembering the complete upheaval that Bush rendered onto this nation.

---

Oh man, you have a short memory then. Bush continuously derided any one against his policies as unpatriotic.


I think you are miss remembering the complete upheaval that Bush rendered onto this nation.

 

I do miss fear mongering and orange alerts.

---

As I've stated, I don't think George Bush is a dumb man. However, this still makes me chuckle. Before anyone takes umbrage, be assured I'd laugh at anything similar from Obama.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdimK1onR4o

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

Cherish those 15 seconds. They are clearly tantamount to 8 years of gag reel bushisms and bloopers.

---