Bush at 36%, how low can he go?

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Hmmm....fornicating in the white house?? I think every president that has ever lived there did that one. Most of them with their wives, and most of them not. And you want an honest politician?? Read a novel There are not many of them that tell the truth 100% of the time. And having a grand jury because a man had sex with a women that wasn't his wife was such a WASTE of the taxpayers money. It was a disgrace...and not on our former Presidents part. His fornication was/is his wifes problem, not ours. All I know is when our former president was in office, the economy was doing well...and jobs were plentiful. Jobs have been hard to come by and hold onto since our current president was in office. And I also don't remember gas prices being this high during our former president's adminsitration. And ya know what...every president before our current one has aged and looked very tired during their adminstrations... don't notice it with this one. Guess he is getting alot of rest while someone else is running our country.

Sex with one's wife is not fornication. And the old "everyone did it" defense

What did Clinton (or any president for that matter) have to do with a booming economy?

You think the President determines gas prices?? Maybe in some leftist social utopia.

Yes, I think President Bush has aged noticably during his Presidency. He does work very hard. Probably a lot harder than us keyboard jockeys.

 

[FreshTressa]

I'm a republican/libertarian sort and I don't approve!

It is not him necessarily that I disapprove of, but his administration. They spend too much and don't understand global development issues.

It was naive to think democracy would be the cure to Iraq's ails.

 

[What the Heck]

I'm a republican/libertarian sort and I don't approve!

It is not him necessarily that I disapprove of, but his administration. They spend too much and don't understand global development issues.

It was naive to think democracy would be the cure to Iraq's ails.

I agree as well. I think they have caved on some issues they should have stood strong on, that made us appear weaker in the world. I didn't like Clinton, but he was a very good politician, even if he only was for his own best interests.

Rich, what I find interesting about your chart is that one of those presidents committed at least one crime in office - yet his is the one those polled think should not have been impeached. He wasn't impeached because he had sex with Monica, he wasn't impeached because he lied about it, he was impeached because of where he lied about it. He was under oath at the time, it's called perjury. I don't care if he lied about getting a manicure or anything else as minor as that, if it's done under oath, it's a crime. When I was working at a bank, a perjury charge would have ended my career, no matter what it was about. Yet it enhanced his. And the Democrats call Republicans "ditto heads" and accuse us of "such a WASTE of the taxpayers money. It was a disgrace...and not on our former Presidents part." Please. He is a lawyer, his wife is a lawyer, he has access to the Attorney General of the United States, and all of the lawyers on their staff, and he willingly and willfully committed a crime.

What was the disgrace was the way the blue "ditto heads" did and still come to his defense. I even saw one Congresswoman from California (can't remember her name, not Pelosi, but she was a Democrat) get on the floor of the House and proclaim to the world that it was unconstitutional - with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court right there. Hmmmm. That was a disgrace.

Yet Bush has not committed any crime, yet people scream for his head. As for Katrina, where is the screaming for the mayors head, or the governors head? Oh thats right, it was all Bush's fault, even the part where if he had acted he would have been committing a crime. Funny thing, Katrina (as well as many more hurricanes) went through Florida last year - yet they didn't fail the people like the Governor did in Louisiana. That was a Bush's fault, Jeb - because it was in his power to act and he did. Because he did what every governor was supposed to do - take care of his people. President Bush is blamed because he didn't take dictorial actions. Give me a break.

 

[maddhatir]

2 words for the next president......

Bill Maher!

 

[Viking]

Yet Bush has not committed any crime, yet people scream for his head. As for Katrina, where is the screaming for the mayors head, or the governors head? Oh thats right, it was all Bush's fault, even the part where if he had acted he would have been committing a crime. Funny thing, Katrina (as well as many more hurricanes) went through Florida last year - yet they didn't fail the people like the Governor did in Louisiana. That was a Bush's fault, Jeb - because it was in his power to act and he did. Because he did what every governor was supposed to do - take care of his people. President Bush is blamed because he didn't take dictorial actions. Give me a break.

Raiding a foreign country using fabricated proof is not a crime? Condoning torture is not a crime? Holding people in prison without a proper trial for more than five years is not a crime?

 

[boomhauer]

He doesn't care about polls, he cares about the American people.

 

[kydisneyfans]

He only cares about the American people with over a million dollars in hand and those that line his party's pockets. He doesn't give a rat's behind about you and I.

 

[CheshireVal]

If you want to change the course of government give close consideration to the person you'll be voting for in November!!!

I am NOT saying vote Democratic, that would be the kind of knee jerk response that got us where we are to day. But DO vote for the person who:

Gives you a rational long term plan for getting the economy on solid footing. Has a multi-prong plan of attack to reduce our consumption of petroleum. Has a plan you can live with when it comes to Iraq.
Actually believes something has to be done about illegal immigration.
Recognizes that there is a looming problem with private pension plans.
Believes in the rights of individuals.

And please DONT vote for somebody based upon amorphous, unlikely moral grounds like gay marriage.

There are plenty of people in both parties who will do the job right for you in congress. Before you vote for your incumbent check out his (or her) track record on the problems that we have today. Bush is a lame duck...your congressman is the one with the power now...and he/she is the one you have the power to change come November. Sad to say a big chunk of that 60% wont vote and the ones that do will vote for the incumbent without checking them out.

I think this is a terrific post. Too many people stubbornly vote straight down party lines without even bothering to find out about the actual candidates.

While I definitely lean left, I have been known to vote for a republican or two when their platform and track record are more appealing and/or responsible than the democratic opposition.

 

[LuvDuke]

Considering that Ronald Reagan's approval ratings were at 35% at one point, Clinton's at 37%, I say, "so what"? Considering the fact that he takes an undeserved and unprecedented pounding from the press on an hourly basis, I think he is doing well at 36%. He doesn't care about polls, he cares about the American people.

Bush cares so little about polls, he's on his 4th or 5th round, in 3 years, of canned speeches to explain his war in Iraq.

Maybe Bush ought to try this stunt:

He starts off on the deck of an aircraft carrier wearing a rented flight suit. But instead of landing on the deck, he gets into the plane and departs. It'll be wonderful with that big banner in the background "Mission unAccomplished"

Btw, Bush is no Ronald Reagan. Hell, he's not even a Warren Harding.

 

[LuvDuke]

Again, the operative word is "reality". Were you that disturbed when Clinton employed Echelon to eaves drop on everybody and not just terrorists?

Well then Clinton should've been impeached!

Oops, my bad, the Republicans tried that.

 

[LuvDuke]

If you want to change the course of government give close consideration to the person you'll be voting for in November!!!

I am NOT saying vote Democratic, that would be the kind of knee jerk response that got us where we are to day. But DO vote for the person who:

Gives you a rational long term plan for getting the economy on solid footing. Has a multi-prong plan of attack to reduce our consumption of petroleum. Has a plan you can live with when it comes to Iraq.
Actually believes something has to be done about illegal immigration.
Recognizes that there is a looming problem with private pension plans.
Believes in the rights of individuals.

And please DONT vote for somebody based upon amorphous, unlikely moral grounds like gay marriage.

There are plenty of people in both parties who will do the job right for you in congress. Before you vote for your incumbent check out his (or her) track record on the problems that we have today. Bush is a lame duck...your congressman is the one with the power now...and he/she is the one you have the power to change come November. Sad to say a big chunk of that 60% wont vote and the ones that do will vote for the incumbent without checking them out.

Here's the reality of "voting for the person instead of the party". If you vote for the Republicans, you are voting for more of the same. I don't give a crap what gyrations the Congressional Republicans go through to distance themselves from Bush. Once they're re-elected, it's business as usual.

There are no Republicans who will do the "job right". Once elected, their "profiles in courage" facade will sink faster than Bush's poll numbers. Why the hell would anyone believe they'll see Republians tackling border issues, trade issues, pension issues, etc. when they haven't done a damned thing about them while they hold all the power?

If you want change, you don't vote for the "same old/same old" party and expect a different outcome. People got exactly what they voted for in 2004 and now wonder how it all went so wrong.

 

[LuvDuke]

And having a grand jury because a man had sex with a women that wasn't his wife was such a WASTE of the taxpayers money. It was a disgrace...and not on our former Presidents part. His fornication was/is his wifes problem, not ours.

And then the Republicans have the cajones to complain about Echalon and security issues during the Clinton years. If there was an issue, you would think the Republicans would've mentioned it 1995-2000.

Here's the new Republican mantra: We could've investigated Clinton over security issues, but instead we focused on Lewinski's "flute playing".

 

[jocon]

Considering that Ronald Reagan's approval ratings were at 35% at one point, Clinton's at 37%, I say, "so what"? Considering the fact that he takes an undeserved and unprecedented pounding from the press on an hourly basis, I think he is doing well at 36%. He doesn't care about polls, he cares about the American people.

This message brought to you by the Republican National Committee.

 

[TCPluto]

I agree as well. I think they have caved on some issues they should have stood strong on, that made us appear weaker in the world. I didn't like Clinton, but he was a very good politician, even if he only was for his own best interests.

Rich, what I find interesting about your chart is that one of those presidents committed at least one crime in office - yet his is the one those polled think should not have been impeached. He wasn't impeached because he had sex with Monica, he wasn't impeached because he lied about it, he was impeached because of where he lied about it. He was under oath at the time, it's called perjury. I don't care if he lied about getting a manicure or anything else as minor as that, if it's done under oath, it's a crime. When I was working at a bank, a perjury charge would have ended my career, no matter what it was about. Yet it enhanced his. And the Democrats call Republicans "ditto heads" and accuse us of "such a WASTE of the taxpayers money. It was a disgrace...and not on our former Presidents part." Please. He is a lawyer, his wife is a lawyer, he has access to the Attorney General of the United States, and all of the lawyers on their staff, and he willingly and willfully committed a crime.

What was the disgrace was the way the blue "ditto heads" did and still come to his defense. I even saw one Congresswoman from California (can't remember her name, not Pelosi, but she was a Democrat) get on the floor of the House and proclaim to the world that it was unconstitutional - with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court right there. Hmmmm. That was a disgrace.

Yet Bush has not committed any crime, yet people scream for his head. As for Katrina, where is the screaming for the mayors head, or the governors head? Oh thats right, it was all Bush's fault, even the part where if he had acted he would have been committing a crime. Funny thing, Katrina (as well as many more hurricanes) went through Florida last year - yet they didn't fail the people like the Governor did in Louisiana. That was a Bush's fault, Jeb - because it was in his power to act and he did. Because he did what every governor was supposed to do - take care of his people. President Bush is blamed because he didn't take dictorial actions. Give me a break.

Very well said, all of it.

 

[jocon]

Bill Clinton may have lied, but I don't think it was "high crime" as required by the constitution. President Bush shouldn't be impeached either. The tool should not be abused. If the Dems take the House and impeach Bush, the next Democrat President would then be impeached by his Republican House....

I think the GOP started this impeachment mess, I hope for the sake of our
republic, that it is not continued....

 

[escape]

Ya know... I don't thnk Bush cares if his so-called approval rating drops to 10%. And I say "good for him". You know what the hilarious thing is? The Dems will still never win a majority in either house of congress, and no way Hilary will be elected in 2008. So all the rumbling about poll numbers amount to nothing. JMO

I think it matters a lot to those running in the next election and to the American people as well.

 

[DawnCt1]

Raiding a foreign country using fabricated proof is not a crime? Condoning torture is not a crime? Holding people in prison without a proper trial for more than five years is not a crime?

You really got to find a new mantra. Even Saddam's generals were sure he had WMD's.

 

[DawnCt1]

He only cares about the American people with over a million dollars in hand and those that line his party's pockets. He doesn't give a rat's behind about you and I.

You need to find some new material. Everyone who pays taxes got a tax cut under President Bush. Some people who previously paid income tax no longer pay taxes. That is the reality. If you want a "daddy" get yourself adopted.

 

[Viking]

You really got to find a new mantra. Even Saddam's generals were sure he had WMD's.

Interesting to see, that you didn't even try to say something against the issue of torture and the unlawful imprisonement
And it's really pathetic to use Saddam's generals as sources

 

[tworkit]

Here's the reality of "voting for the person instead of the party". If you vote for the Republicans, you are voting for more of the same. I don't give a crap what gyrations the Congressional Republicans go through to distance themselves from Bush. Once they're re-elected, it's business as usual.

There are no Republicans who will do the "job right". Once elected, their "profiles in courage" facade will sink faster than Bush's poll numbers. Why the hell would anyone believe they'll see Republians tackling border issues, trade issues, pension issues, etc. when they haven't done a damned thing about them while they hold all the power?

If you want change, you don't vote for the "same old/same old" party and expect a different outcome. People got exactly what they voted for in 2004 and now wonder how it all went so wrong.

Knock, knock this is reality calling, we would like you to come back!