Stupid stupid stupid VOTERS!
What were they thinking?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...av=rss_politics

Stupid stupid stupid POSTER!
What was he thinking?

This conversation makes my heart sad.

Uncompassionate (conservative) voices on George W. Bush - more comments on Bush's lies:

http://www.compassiongate.com/voices_media/cc610.htm

http://www.compassiongate.com/moralclarity/index.htm#IRAQ

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington...nce/7132720.htm

Presidential Approval Ratings

Spin or not to Spin; Reality and or otherwise; Normal and or abnormal?

Headline - The Increasingly Unpopular President
Bush approval rating hits lowest point
Gallup: Bush Approval Rating Lowest Ever for 2nd-Term.
Spin - Poll: Bush approval mark nears low
Date
6/4 –8/05 Approve- 43% Disaprove-55% Unsure 2%

Contradiction in polls

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm




RR Bush Job Approval
Approve Disapprove
Today 50 48
June 10 51 48
June 9 50 50
June 8 49 50
June 7 49 51
June 6 47 52
June 5 51 48
June 4 50 49
June 3 53 46
June 2 51 48
June 1 50 48


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm

End-of Presidency Job Approval Ratings

President Rating (%) Election Results
Bill Clinton (2 terms, D, 2001) --65%
Ronald Reagan (2 terms, R, 1989) --64%
Dwight Eisenhower (2 terms, R, 1961) --59%
John F. Kennedy(partial term, D, 1963) --63%
George Bush(1 term, R, 1993) --56%
Gerald Ford (partial term, R, 1977) --53%
Lyndon Johnson(1+ terms, D, 1969) --49%
Jimmy Carter(1 term, D, 1981) --34%
Richard Nixon(partial term, R, 1974) --24%


Sources:
· ABC Historical Data
· USA Today/Gallup Poll

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/bl_his...al_approval.htm

President Highest
Bush (G.W.) 92% ----10/08-09/01, ABC Poll
Clinton 73% ----1/28/98 CBS/NYTimes Poll
Bush (G.H.W.) 89% ----2/28/-3/3/91, Gallup Poll l
Reagan 68%-----5 /11/81, Gallup Poll and5/16-19/86, Gallup Poll
Carter 75%----- 3/18-21/77, Gallup Poll
Ford 74%----- 8/16-19/74, Gallup Poll
Nixon 67%------ 11/12-17/69, Gallup Poll and1/26-29/73, Gallup
Johnson 80%---- 2/28-3/5/64, Gallup Poll
Kennedy 80%----- 3/8-13/62, Gallup Poll
Eisenhower 79%----- 12/14-19/56, Gallup Poll
Truman 87%---- 6/1-5/45, Gallup Poll
Roosevelt 84%----- 1/8-13/42, Gallup Poll
*Only Gallup data cited for all presidents except Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/cgi-bin/h...;start=HS_index

President Lowest
Bush (G.W.) 41%--- 7/30-8/2/04, Marist
Clinton 36%---- 5/26-27/93, Yank/Time/CNN Poll
Bush (G.H.W 29%---- 7/31-8/2/92, Gallup Poll
Reagan 35%---- 1/28-31/83, Gallup Poll
Carter 28%--- 6/29-7/2/79, Gallup Poll
Ford 37%--- 1/10-13/75, Gallup Poll and3/28-31/75, Gallup Poll
Nixon 23%--- 1/4-7/74, Gallup Poll
Johnson 35%--- 8/7-12/68, Gallup Poll
Kennedy 56%--- 9/12-17/63, Gallup Poll
Eisenhower 48%--- 3/27-4/1/58, Gallup Poll
Truman -- 22%--- 2/9-14/52, Gallup Poll
Roosevelt--- 48%--- 8/18-24/39, Gallup Poll
*Only Gallup data cited for all presidents except Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/cgi-bin/h...;start=HS_index



Highs and Lows of Presidential Public Approval Ratings*

President Tenure Low
Bush 1989-1992 High -- 83%--Low--32%
Reagan 1981-1988 High -- 68% Low--35%
Carter 1977-1980 High -- 75% Low--21%
Ford 1974-1976 High -- 71% Low--37%
Nixon 1969-1974 High -- 68% Low--24%
Johnson 1963-1968 High -- 80% Low--35%
Kennedy 1961-1963 High -- 83% Low--57%
Eisenhower 1953-1960 High -- 79% Low --49%
Public Approval Ratings*



President Average Approval----
Bush 61%---
Reagan 52%---
Carter 47%---
Ford 47%---
Nixon 48%---
Johnson 56%---
Kennedy 71%---
Eisenhower 65%---
Truman 41% ---
Roosevelt 75%---

http://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/approv3.html


http://www.presidentsusa.net/presidentialrankings.html

President At End of Term----
Bush 56%--- -
Reagan 63%
Carter 34%
Ford 53%
Nixon 24%
Johnson 49%
Kennedy 58 %
Eisenhower 59%
Truman 31%
Roosevelt 66%

http://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/approv3.html


http://www.presidentsusa.net/presidentialrankings.html

President 1990 Approval
Bush N/A---
Reagan 48%
Carter 50%
Ford 55%
Nixon 32%
Johnson 40%
Kennedy 84%
Eisenhower 70%
Truman 68%
Roosevelt 75%

http://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/approv3.html


http://www.presidentsusa.net/presidentialrankings.html

Rating Washington to Clinton
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...chlesinger.html


T HA T
IS
A LL!

I didn't wish to start a new topic on this, but here is the latest news analysis of George Bush and the rough road that he is traveling



NY Times

That he is the right man for the right job at the right time.
What were you thinking? Stupid Stupid thai queen. Kerry was more handsome?
MARK

Interesting.
However, bush 2 is NOT doing what he advertised and ran on.
Thus he a is BIG STINKING LIAR!
Good for you that you are satisfied with such a low standard.
The majority of Americans now know they were TAKEN FOR A RIDE.

I wonder if anything happened during Bush's presidency that might have changed his outlook on things...OH YEAH!

That is no excuse for a failed presidency and running on one thing and acting completely differently once elected.
Most people realize that.

Oh lookee there a controlled demolition!

So you think the Bush presidency should be a popularity contest the way Clinton's presidency was?

When in the campaign did bush even MENTION social security private accounts?
Then it becomes his number one priority.
LIES and DECEPTION.
No surprise of course coming from the man who lied to get us to war in Iraq.

TQ this really is a broken record playing the same tune over and over and over and over and over and over......




There still is no evidence Bush lied. No semen stains my friend!
Though I think Clinton should have been impeached if he hadn't unzipped his pants!

Along with the 10 points of undisputable rational that we did it to ourselves in our wickedness to lie and deceive!

LIES AND DECEPTIONS

When you have no basis for argument, abuse the plaintiff.-Cicero

Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow. Aesop-

The man who fears no truths has nothing to fear from lies.-Sir Francis Bacon

Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress- Nepoleon


T HA T
IS
A LL!

???? Uuuuh...repeatedly in campaign speeches, debates and news sound bites. Written into the Republican party platform as a central part of his "ownership society". You really should crawl out into the world with the rest of us occassionaly. MARK

Revisionist history, you ###### liar.
Everyone knows he did NOT run on that issue.
People were snookered and now they are rebelling.
Too late, the fools.

I take it you don't like George W. Bush very much!

A 2 term president who makes that turnip seed Billy Clinton look like the boob he really is.

And you think Hillary is going to be elected! What kind of drugs are you on?
I want some. I wanna get really ######ed up!

There, fixed your post for you.

Now they are rebelling? Interesting. I've yet to see the Vietnam scale protests.

They have protests? Whoa.

hahahah good one./

???? Your pathetically uninformed. Read the Republican party platform for 2004 read a transcript of Bush's speech at the Republican conventon. Read about Newsweek Bizitching about it a week later.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5916005/site/newsweek/
MARK

Ben-T, long time no see at AI-Jane, whats crackin'?

At any rate. The poster is from Vietnam eh? Do they allow voting in Vietnam? If they don't, I have to laugh all the more at people from nations with no real political freedom criticizing us over ours.

Vietnam cracks me up. See, millions were lost in the cause for marxism then it turns out they actually like capitalism there. OOOPS, their mistake?

Stupid Stupid Stupid People.

The Vietnam was was about way more than Marxism for the Vietnamese. It was about kicking out the imperialist agressors, something the Vietnamese have been doing for several hundred years, and they always win, because they are amazingly patient and determined.
They deserve great credit for winning that war and they are to be congratulated now for moving towards free market reforms.

Nah, thats just the idea they sold the people to gain support for the North Vietnam. They only need to look at South Korea to see that they were sold a phony bill of goods. And South Korea shows them that the only thing they accomplished was delaying their growth into a developed nation for 40 more years. MARK

The histories of those two countries are totally different.
They may look like slanty eyes to the likes of you, but trust me on that.

Yes if it wasn't for the waked commies in Vietnam they would be looking more like Caulifornia
about now. Way past the Koreans.
The only ones selling the Vietnamese short are their own ignorant corrupt marxist boobs.

I was refering to their glaring similarities in that they both had communist invasions from the North, financed and armed by China, in which America interviened. And a glaring difference is now seen in the different outcomes.
You can see the similarities between North Korea and all of vietnam, as well the glaring differnce of South Korea. MARK

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Eart...img=learth.evif

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...k/dprk-dark.htm

or here if the photo of N Korea on globalsecurity doesnt load
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Eart...img=learth.evif

I just realize the satellite photos from
http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/cities.html
are updated throughout the day. If you look at them in the early morning US time, you can see the relative darkness of Vietnam and North Korea compared to the bright lights of South Korea. During daytime hours they all look the same.

The history of Vietnam, which was only recently divided in the last century, is different between the North and the South? Both are the same people, both share a common culture, difference? Where is your proof?

What are you implying by the slanty eyed remark? That I am some simple racist?

Anyhoo -



Filibuster Cartoons - LINK - Good Canadian Cartoonist.

The North fought a war b/c they felt that all Vietnemese had to live under Communism, a positition they would NOT compromise as authored by the gentlemen who is the cartoonist. OOPS, they founf out capitalism is better!

By the way, choke on this economist article.

The Economist - American Lost, Capitalism Won - LINK

Having a little experience and expertise in this area, I would note a few things about the above comments if I may.

TQ, as you are correct, the two cultures, peoples and histories have little in common and are indeed much divergent from on another.

However as to the topic of American involvement and how that impacted these divergent cultures subsequent to our initial involvement in their histories. I would add that, in one culture, South Korea, we stood the course and did not cut and run and the other, we abandon them out of an unwillingness to win and stay the course by not only our leadership of that era but as well our people of that era.

Which is my point to Bob. As he is correct, it was this ideology of Uncle Ho and friends who sold them short no doubt about that.

But we, the American people of that era, did as well. Maybe even more so, as we knew or should have known, the fate to which we left them. A fate easily discernable for which so many of our own paid dearly to avoid.

We , as well, of that generation, stand equally short in dominion, as that person who would watch a rape knowing he should do something but being unwilling to do so as they just watch it happen because we think “what is in it for me” if I do.

A view of life inside and outside of our world of plenty that I fear is still growing even today.

Likewise, One can not underestimate how impacting an event our divergent responses to these two countries has impacted their subsequent futures since our initial involvement in their histories. To do so would show a failure to understand what has happened in those two countries subsequent our involvement and why we where there to begin with.

In one, South Korea, where we stayed the course giving them opportunity to recover and prosper beyond their wildest dreams from their own industrialized and freedom based efforts. The other, in opposition to these positive results, as in Korea, we left to languish under object authoritarianism, in poverty, at the bottom 1 % of all humanity. While they in their nationalistic fervor either invaded and or fought several conflicts with their neighbors subsequent to out disengagement. All the while to an ever relentless drum beat of hundreds thousands risking everything to flee this so called winner’s dominion.

If results count for anything, we must not ignore the divergent impacts Americans can have once involved. Where in one, Korea, we stayed to win, we see a economic power beyond anything it could have imagine. While the other , we abandoned, still, today, languish in authoritarian object poverty and despair comparatively to many similar nations like Thailand and others in the region.

My two dollar on the subject.

T HA T
IS
A LL!



.