0
   

The Worst President in History?

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 03:48 pm
See what I mean, ci. The fact that they were selected, nominated, and endorsed by every conservative lap dog does not matter. Unless they vote the straight conservative knee-jerk agenda...they are liberals.

C'mon. Get with it.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 03:58 pm
From Wikipedia (definition for republican):

Republican Party (United States)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the modern United States Republican Party. For more detailed history and bibliography see History of the United States Republican Party. For the earlier Republican Party which flourished 1790s-1820s, see Democratic-Republican Party (United States).


Republican Party



Party Chairman Ken Mehlman
Senate Leader Bill Frist
House Leader Dennis Hastert
John Boehner

Founded February 28, 1854
Headquarters 310 First Street SE
Washington, D.C.
20003

http://www.gop.com

1Red was assigned as party's color in the 2000 U.S. Presidential election by the U.S. media [1] Previously, there was no color used universally to represent the Republican party, although blue was used occasionally.
The Republican Party (also known as the "GOP", for "Grand Old Party") is one of the two major political parties in the United States' two-party system next to the Democratic Party. Presently, it is regarded as the more conservative of the two parties. The current president of the USA, George W. Bush, was nominated by the Republican Party. Although Bush has the most influence on the political course of the party, Ken Mehlman, not Bush, is the chairman of the Republican National Committee (since January 2005). Since 2002, the Republicans control the legislature at the federal level with a majority in the Senate and in the House of Representatives. Their symbol is the elephant, and the popular color is red.

The Republican Party was established in 1854 by a coalition of former Whigs, Northern Democrats, and Free-Soilers who opposed the expansion of slavery and held a Hamiltonian vision for modernizing the United States. The party initially had its base in the Northeast and northern Midwest, but that has shifted to the inland West, and since 1980, the South. In the modern political era, the Republican Party has been the more socially conservative and economically libertarian of the two major parties. Eighteen of the twenty-seven U.S. Presidents since 1861 have been Republicans, including President George W. Bush. It holds 28 out of 50 governorships (including the four largest states), and is tied with Democrats in the number of state legislatures it controls.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 04:07 pm
Frank wrote:
See what I mean, ci. The fact that they were selected, nominated, and endorsed by every conservative lap dog does not matter. Unless they vote the straight conservative knee-jerk agenda...they are liberals.


Gotta disagree with you; Bush and the republican congress spends money like it's going out of style, and have created the largest national debt in the history of our country. They also approved a social program called the "drug plan" for seniors - that was so screwed up, many seniors couldn't figure out what they were signing up for. Nothing like self-sufficiency promulgated by the republicans.

Wasn't republicanism supposed to mean "small government?" Well, our current government is the biggest in our history, and they now intrude into so many aspect of our lives, it's a wonder they're still labeled republicans. Seems "gestapo" is more apropos.

As the middle class losses ground with the highest per capita debt in this country, who's paying for the war and rebuilding in Iraq?

I believe "republicans/conservatives" are more consfused than everybody else! They don't even understand what "republicanism" means.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 04:32 pm
Ohio Poll: Bush most unpopular ever
BY HOWARD WILKINSON | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER
President Bush's approval rating of 35 percent among Ohioans is the lowest of his presidency - and the lowest for any president in the 25-year history of the University of Cincinnati's Ohio Poll.

The president's falling job approval rating in Ohio mirrors his performance in national polls. Since the last Ohio Poll measuring presidential job approval in April 2005, President Bush's rating has dropped 14 percentage points


Bush's high-water mark among Ohioans was in Nov. 2001, two months after terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, when 87 percent of Ohioans polled said they approved of the job he was doing.

The latest poll was conducted between May 9 and May 21 among a random sample of 841 Ohio adults interviewed by telephone. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.4 percent.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 04:35 pm
Poll: Bush's approval rating hits new low in California

Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO - President Bush's approval ratings among Californians continue to drop, hitting another new low in a statewide poll released Sunday.

The Field Poll showed only 28 percent of voters approve of Bush's job performance - the lowest rating any president has received in the state in three decades. Sixty-five percent of voters disapprove of the job he's doing, while 7 percent have no opinion.

The majority of state Republicans still support Bush, with 59 percent approving of his job performance. Only 10 percent of Democrats and 16 percent of nonpartisan voters approve.

Bush has never been overly popular in California, a state he lost twice in presidential elections, except in the months immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The lowest approval rating a president has received since the Field Poll began measuring it in the 1970s was Richard Nixon's 24 percent approval in August 1974, shortly before his resignation.

The poll also showed that 64 percent of voters believe the country is seriously off on the wrong track; 28 percent say it's generally going in the right direction, and 8 percent have no opinion.

California voters also hold a negative view of Congress, with only 23 percent approving of its performance and 64 percent disapproving, researchers found.

Despite criticism of Congress overall, Sen. Dianne Feinstein still has strong support in the state. In a simulated matchup against former Republican state Sen. Richard Mountjoy, whom she's expected to face in the November election, Feinstein dominates, 54 percent to 28 percent.

Researchers interviewed 986 likely voters - only 702 likely voters for the Senate race questions - by telephone in English and Spanish from May 23-31. The overall poll has a sampling error rate of 3.2 percentage points, while the Senate race poll has a sampling error rate of 3.8 percentage points.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 05:03 pm
What You Now Need To Believe To Be A Republican:


Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals, Arabs, and Hillary Clinton.


Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney and Rumsfeld did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush couldn't find Bin Laden.


Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is Communist, but trade with Vietnam and China is vital to a spirit of international harmony.


A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.


The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches, while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.


If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.


A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle and antagonize our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.


Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy, but providing healthcare to all Americans is socialism.


Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.


A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense, but a president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.


Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet, private e-mails and phone calls, and examining library records of publications read and prohibiting librarians to tell the reader that the FBI was snooping.


The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's and Dick Cheney's driving records are none of our business.


Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.


Supporting "Executive Privilege" is imperative for every Republican ever born, who will be born or who might be born in perpetuity.


What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.


There's nothing wrong with supporting drunken hunters who shoot their friends and blaming the friends for looking too much like quail.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:06 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
See what I mean, ci. The fact that they were selected, nominated, and endorsed by every conservative lap dog does not matter. Unless they vote the straight conservative knee-jerk agenda...they are liberals.

C'mon. Get with it.


You don't seem to be paying attention, Frank. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer -- the four most liberal Supremes on the Court -- combined with Kennedy to form the majority opinion in Kelo. Thus, the decision was made by the most liberal justices on the Court ... which is what okie said.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:09 pm
They're still registered republicans. Go cry in your bedpan.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:11 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
See what I mean, ci. The fact that they were selected, nominated, and endorsed by every conservative lap dog does not matter. Unless they vote the straight conservative knee-jerk agenda...they are liberals.

C'mon. Get with it.


You don't seem to be paying attention, Frank. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer -- the four most liberal Supremes on the Court -- combined with Kennedy to form the majority opinion in Kelo. Thus, the decision was made by the most liberal justices on the Court ... which is what okie said.

Not forgetting that the decision was that the issue was a matter of local (state jurisdiction) and did not rule otherwise, the "conservatives" voted to take away states rights and invest them in federal jurisdiction.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:11 pm
In case you haven't kept up with the news, the republican congress is also defying the wishes of Bush on immigration; they ain't close to being "liberals" by any stretch of anybody's imagination - except yours and your ilk.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:41 pm
and in the view of some Congressional aides probably killing
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:42 pm
All them damn liberals....
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:45 pm
Bush Job Approval
Feb 2005 - Current
Approve Disapprove
Jun 23 44 55
Jun 22 43 55
Jun 21 42 56
Jun 20 41 58
Jun 19 40 59
Jun 18 40 59
Jun 17 40 58
Jun 16 41 58
Jun 15 41 57
Jun 14 41 58

May 40 59
Apr 40 59
Mar 41 57
Feb 45 54
Jan 44 54
Dec 05 45 54
Nov 43 56
Oct 43 56
Sept 46 53
Aug 46 53
Jul 49 50
Jun 48 50
May 48 51
Apr 48 51
Mar 50 49
Feb 51 48
Dates are release dates. Surveys conducted on preceding three nights.

RasmussenReports.com





President Bush Job Approval
June 23, 2006

Photo Courtesy of The Department of Defense Forty-four percent (44%) of Americans approve of the way that George W. Bush is performing his role as President. That's the highest rating he has received since April 14. This update is based upon nightly telephone interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 09:54 pm
What's the matter, BernardR? Can't even be honest about polls?

Here's the major polling results for June 2006:

Survey

Dates % % % Disapprove
...............................Appr. Disap...Uns...minus .

Pew 6/14-19/06...... 36... 54..... 10.... -18
.

CNN 6/14-15/06 .....37.... 53.... 10.... -16
.

FOX/Opinion Dynamics RV 6/13-14/06
................................40.... 52..... 8.... -12
.

NBC/Wall Street Journal 6/9-12/06
................................37.... 58..... 5.... -21
.

CBS 6/10-11/06..... 33.... 60.... 7..... -27
.

USA Today/Gallup 6/9-11/06
................................38..... 56.... 6..... -18
.

AP-Ipsos * 6/5-7/06. 35... 63.... X... -28
.

Cook/RT Strategies RV 6/1-4/06
................................37..... 57..... 6.... -20
.

USA Today/Gallup 6/1-4/06
................................36..... 57..... 6.... -21

By this reckoning, there's only one "40" and its from FOX. yeah.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 10:18 pm
I am very much afraid that you did not read my post.

The Report I gave was from Rasmussen Reports NOT from any other poll. The Rasmussen Reports is the MOST RECENT poll Report.

If you had read my post you would have noticed that the MOST RECENT Rasmussen Reports poll was taken on JUNE 23RD.

The most recent Poll in your survey was June 19th(Ipsos)

We will see whether the numbers in the polls you listed rise when they are listed again in the last week of June.

May I respectfully request that you read the posts more thoroughly???
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 10:21 pm
No mistake on my part; you're trying to mislead others who read your post. You have no shame.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jun, 2006 10:24 pm
People who read my posts can make up their own minds as to whether I am posting truth or falsity. I suggest you let them make up their own minds.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jun, 2006 12:29 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
They're still registered republicans. Go cry in your bedpan.


Lets see now:
John Paul Stevens was nominated by Ford in 1974.
Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Reagan in 1988.
David Souter was nominated by Bush I in 1988.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated to the court by Clinton in 1993.
Stephen Breyer was nominated by Clinton in 1994 to the court.

All Republicans? I seriously doubt it.

Ginsburg is a flaming liberal for sure, and Breyer isn't much better. Both were appointed by Clinton. Souter has turned out to be a big flop, basically a liberal. My take is Bush appointed him to avoid a fight with a Democratic Congress over picking a more conservative justice. Bush I was a compromiser and tried to get along with the Democrats. Remember, he caved in to the Democrats to raise taxes, then got the blame, not Congress. Stevens was picked by Ford, who was certainly no big time conservative, he was a blue blood Republican. As to why Kennedy voted with those four, I don't know. One thing I know for sure, the 3 of the dissenters are solidly conservative, those being Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas. O'Conner also dissented, showing her independent streak and her tendency to cross over from one side to the other on opinions.

As to what party affiliation the 5 justices are, I don't know, and they may not be registered with parties now, but surely they were not all Republican, and certainly not solidly conservative, you can count on that.

So imposter, if you can provide any proof the 5 are all registered republicans, according to your above claim, I would be mighty surprised indeed. Imposter, you are full of hot air.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jun, 2006 12:36 am
Okie- You may be aware that Ginsburg's last job before joining the USSC was as the chief counsel for the ACLU.

The ironic parallel to that would be if the Senate lefties( Kennedy, Biden, Reid, Lahey,) would allow a past president of the Federalist Society to be considered!!!
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jun, 2006 12:50 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
All them damn liberals....


Indeed.

What the hell are we going to do about them?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/23/2025 at 12:23:32