-Bush- Worst president in the history of America?

theKing:

Welcome idiot!

Now.. who the fuck ask you to respond??? Your opinion, either on a President or fuck all else is "of no import... zero.. zilch... nada... just as your very life is of no import".

BTW.. I can't say I "hate" "the duly elected President" - I don't actually "hate" anyone. It is more like I despise the piece of shit. I look forward to his payback time and "real justice" - it won't be too long and well overdue!

Now.. and don't waste your time trying to defend the indefensible in your blind faith!

BTW.. That pathetic sig says a lot!

Ahh...but my opinion does count...I have the power of the vote...you do not. I have a say in who is President...you do not.

He may or...may not be re-elected...that is the only payback/justice he will ever see...but do not let me interfere with your fantasies.

What do you think it is that I "am trying to defend" and what "blind faith" are you referring to? On the other hand...do not respond to the question...as I do not have an interest in your BS.

My signature means exactly what it says...and that is to say...if you attempted to spew the garbage that you frequently spew...in my presence...I would make every effort to terminate your "right to free speech" with prejudice.

I thought you told me in that other thread you had no interest US politics on either side. "Boring", I believe was the word you used. Back so soon? Or did you just say that because I made you look like an ass, hmmm?

theking:

Are you STILL trying to defend the indefensible??

Oh.. go away and pluck more chickens!!

No... If I can be bothered, I'll pull this thread out when the "payback" happens!! It has already started months back - but you are too dumb to know..

Well it was not the latter...as he does a good job of that by himself. His venom for America and its policies...past and present...seems to be endless. He has called for the assassination of President Bush multiple times...and has even volunteered to do it himself. This has made him an enemy of America...thus a personal enemy.

trouserrat:

DUH??? I did say that exactly. And what is your point???

Is it some attempt to say that I am, in fact, interested in US politics??? If so, no, this has not changed.

What is in the Whitehouse has little to do with politics from my side - it's more to do with criminal behavior and fraud. I am not interested in "political parties" - I am interested in seeing the day any rogue leader faces justice and is held accountable.

Same with the other few "leaders" around the world who make up rules as they go and violate treaties. They usually end up in a jail cell...

You have a very good list .

theKing:

What a total fucking idiot you are king!!!!!

As stated..."with prejudice".

Sorry... but you are just too stupid and fanatical with some "power fetish" and "superiority" (read arrogance!).

You are the piece of shit that "supposed" to have served as a "balanced" military officer. I know of no military officers that would even remotely reach your blind banal dogma. Read that to mean the one's I know could pass a shrink test and have common sense.

How many people were you going to have wiped out because they were your "enemies"??? 2 million?? Welcome back the Third Reich!

You are NUTS!!

I got no time to waste on ya!!! Piss off!

Listen Clueless, don't mistake me for the other trained apes that frequent this board. If you spout your nonsensical and contradictory rhetoric, I'm going to be around to call you on it.

You might want to take a look at your 5th post in this thread:
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=307264 and then ask yourself why you seem to feel so empassioned about and insist on discussing a subject that you find so booooring. If, by your own admission, you find US poiltics so uninteresting, then please STFU about it.

trouserrat:

Excuse me Clueless for mistaking you "for the other trained apes that frequent this board" Modesty with arrogance?

That message still stands and here it is again to keep it clear in your peabrain:

Wow, you're clever with that quote function and using my own words to respond to me. You *are* a tricky devil! Anyhow, here's the one I was referring to...sorry you got confused you little rascal

Now come on and get back to me with one of your witicisms like
"Idiot! " or "Dumbass . " so you can look completely pathetic as usual. Christ, you never learn.

trouserrat:

Sheesh!

You are clearly extremely backward and totally determined to proove *something* - tho I'm too backward to know what the hell you are trying to prove!

It "appears" to be that you may be claiming I am "discussing" US politics???? DUH??

You read it the first time... and here it is again ape:

If this is the sum total of your "contribution" - ie feebly trying to prove *something* and trying hard to make some "political comment" ... ah hell.. just

Boy.. this is "special"!!!!! Talk about retards!!!

And... if you insist, since it is totally appropriate!

Idiot!!!

Dumbass!!

Now.. go and behave!

All this male testosterone and fighting makes me horny !

Honeyslut:

Is THAT what it is???

Hell.. I thought the world was breeding 100% total fools!

Kinda daunts your faith in human nature - thanks for saying it just the "male disease"! :-)

You are one slow bastard aren't you. I have repeatedly stated...that I was an E-7...(which is a Non Commissioned Officer)...PLT SGT.

What ever the number required...to end attacks against US assets and/or the CONUS.

Your use...and others use...of the "Third Reich" and "Hitler" are not comparative...and is BS rehtoric.

Thank you! I was waiting for that. Now I can go catch a movie. Talking to you is like trying to teach physics to a dog. No matter how good the teacher, the dog sadly doesn't have the capacity to understand. Now hit me with another insult and I'll catch ya next time, Rover!

(Last word to you again...my, you're getting good at this!)

theKing:

Sorry for being slow king! I really did not give a shit about what you were - just that you seemed oddly "proud" about it!

So.. what we have is a second rate damned platoon sgt spouting his views on how the military should nuke millions of people...

Go away you sad man!! You were clearly trained well.

hahahaha





I breed smart children. Thank you !

trouserrat:

Take care!!

Ahh quit it...the thought of you being horny...has made me horny. How are things with you? Replace the horse yet?

Yes...I am proud to have served my country for 12 years in four different operations...and reqret that my military career was cut short.

I have never stated that "the military should nuke millions of people"...but I have stated that if another attack takes place...of the magnitude of the last attack...nukes may very well come into play. As I have pointed out before...the US has used nukes before...nukes were considered for use in the Korean conflict. Nukes were considered for use in the Vietnam conflict. Nukes were considered for use in the 1st Gulf conflict and I am satisfied that nukes were considered for use in the current conflict. Nukes are considered by the US military to be viable weapons...and I am an advocate of this position...if the circumstances call for it...and I do not apologize for my advocacy.

I would enjoy nuking your sorry ass with my size 11 combat boot.

trouserrat--
Sure nice debate and it would be nice to chat, but as I said there are just certain choices that can't be justified given what we know now. In order to pick some of the choices you had, the rubric you had couldn't really be consistent. When it appears partasin, as yours and a few other do I had to call it out, especially to give a more detailed non-partasin analysis of how history might view the GW Bush presidency.

Webby - get real, put a list down or get out of the thread.

FlyingIguana- wtf is up with my posts is that I know shit. I can choose without the influence of partisan games to dictate my selections on the basis of what history shows as good for America. (My country which I love, and therefore have a duty to be critical of _all_ seeking political office, as well as objectively evaluate their performance after serving).

Honeyslut - I hope you aren't in agreence with that list, as it is probably the worst one in the responses. It was essentially a partisan post-Eisenhower list (who ironically enough was one of the best modern republican presidents but was skipped. The dismissal of Eisenhower lost quite a bit of consistency from the rubric he created. Eisenhower is perhaps the best choice to embody that guys rubirc.)

He sorted chose two famous fathers and Lincoln (all who are standard choices), then sorted all post Eisenhower presidents into democrat and republican. Then left off Ford and Bush.

So, even choosing the best republican canidates he was off. Reagan could be considered, but he is more of a revisionist partisan choice as folks who have studied the cold war realize...he is simply given too much credit for the end of the Cold War. That credit will gradually shift to Gorbachev and to internal forces of the Soviet Union's reliance on oil money to fuel spending, as it filters from the academy down to the masses. But, you can bet conservatives will still try (like the have with Bush), to act as though the capability of the President is not as important as his cabinet.

Part of the time Reagan could not discern fact from fiction, and plenty of transcripts prove this...he confused his movie biography with his real life all the time, not to mention let Nancy use astrology to dictate public policy.

So, if you want to choose republicans choose the good ones, same for democrats.

I'm basically done with thread as I have real work to do.

Enjoy your weekend.

Clinton was in office for 8yrs moron

DUH!

First four years: time it took for the economy to improve...

Second four years: heading toward the shitter

I see math isn't your strong point.

You can thank Bush for the bad economy, lost jobs and the bill of the war is still to come