Democrats Legacy: DISRESPECT?

[KCConservative]

Keep on trolling KC.

Keep on avoiding the question.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Once again it looks as though your right wingers are confusing nationalism with patriotism.


It is your patriotic duty to have a level of distrust of your government leaders and to question your government. Period the end. In a time of war, you should only question their motives that much more as war has been the excuse for nearly every rulers misdeeds in the history of civilization.

That is not to say that I don’t think it gets carried to far. Every time I hear someone refer to our President as a war criminal, it really pisses me off. Then again, the Republicans have not one leg to stand on when it comes to this issue. Anyone remember the Clinton years? Anyone remember what Republicans said about Clinton and Kosovo?

Let me remind you guys with a few examples:

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."

-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"You can support the troops but not the president"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"Once the bombing commenced, I think then Milosevic unleashed his forces, and then that's when the slaughtering and the massive ethnic cleansing really started"

-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"
Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R)


"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."

-Michael Savage


"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals."

-Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)


"It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation."

-Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R )


"By the order to launch air strikes against Serbia, NATO and President Clinton have entered uncharted territory in mankind's history. Not even Hitler's grab of the Sudetenland in the 1930s, which eventually led to WW II, ranks as a comparable travesty. For, there are no American interests whatsoever that the NATO bombing will
either help, or protect; only needless risks to which it exposes the American soldiers and assets, not to mention the victims on the ground in Serbia."

-Bob Djurdjevic, founder of Truth in Media

You guys on the radical right are literally some of the biggest bunch of opportunistic hypocrites that have ever walked the face of the earth.

 

[cnredd]

Once again it looks as though your right wingers are confusing nationalism with patriotism.


It is your patriotic duty to have a level of distrust of your government leaders and to question your government. Period the end. In a time of war, you should only question their motives that much more as war has been the excuse for nearly every rulers misdeeds in the history of civilization.

That is not to say that I don’t think it gets carried to far. Every time I hear someone refer to our President as a war criminal, it really pisses me off. Then again, the Republicans have not one leg to stand on when it comes to this issue. Anyone remember the Clinton years? Anyone remember what Republicans said about Clinton and Kosovo?

Let me remind you guys with a few examples:

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."

-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"You can support the troops but not the president"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"Once the bombing commenced, I think then Milosevic unleashed his forces, and then that's when the slaughtering and the massive ethnic cleansing really started"

-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"
Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode"

-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R)


"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."

-Michael Savage


"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals."

-Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)


"It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation."

-Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)


"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country"

-Pat Buchanan (R )


"By the order to launch air strikes against Serbia, NATO and President Clinton have entered uncharted territory in mankind's history. Not even Hitler's grab of the Sudetenland in the 1930s, which eventually led to WW II, ranks as a comparable travesty. For, there are no American interests whatsoever that the NATO bombing will
either help, or protect; only needless risks to which it exposes the American soldiers and assets, not to mention the victims on the ground in Serbia."

-Bob Djurdjevic, founder of Truth in Media

You guys on the radical right are literally some of the biggest bunch of opportunistic hypocrites that have ever walked the face of the earth.

Quite wrong...

YOU are under the assumption that because they said it then, all Conservatives must've believed it then, but all Conservatives disagree now...You couldn't be further from the truth...

What they said was dumb...Just like the Liberals now, they were said based purely for political reasons and in reality, couldn't give a rat's *** about anybody in Kosovo...

YOU are the one that has to make the distinction yourself...

A) Did YOU agree with the Conservatives THEN?...Cause you've obviously shown yourself to agree with those very same sentiments NOW made by the Liberals...

If so, please show me where you've publicly made your denouncement of President "He Whom Shall Nor Be Blamed" for the war in Bosnia...

If you can't, then I'll just believe that you'd rather tow the party line than show an admission when you believe your own party FUBARed...

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Quite wrong...

YOU are under the assumption that because they said it then, all Conservatives must've believed it then, but all Conservatives disagree now...You couldn't be further from the truth...

What are you talking about??

I did not say that all conservatives believed the claims those prominent conservatives made. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy in opportunistic Conservatives attacking liberals as unpatriotic and treasonous because “they attack our president in a time of war”.

Personally, I have never called our President a war criminal or compared him to a Nazi. I think that people who do are hatemongers or just nut jobs. However, I certainly question many of the Bush Administrations foreign policy decisions.

Moreover, I don’t think there was anyone prominent on the left calling conservatives unpatriotic and treasonous because they attacked then President Clinton in a time of war.

Therefore, I think it is perfectly justified to call those right wingers who are attacking liberals today as traitors, nothing but opportunistic hypocrites and I merely posted glairing examples of their hypocrisy.

 

[easyt65]

So I suppose that you support Bush being "taken down/impeached" as he has done far worse.

Clinton was Impeached for committing and being convicted on 2 Felonies, perjury and witness tampering! You show me a conviction, and I will be at the head of your parade calling for Bush's Impeachment!

He betrayed the country (too many numerous times - taking his eye off Bin Laden, leading us into a war on lies of WMD, lying time and again the Iraq was involved in 9/11, etc etc.)

To my recollection, Buh hasn't given any enemy the technology to fry millions of our people with their nukes! As I recall, Bin Laden declared war on us in 1990 - Able Danger warned Willey about him but he never even put his 'eye' on Bin laden, not even after Bin Laden had killed Americans in the Kobar Towers, the Cole, and 2 African Embassy bombings! You want to talk to me about betrayal, dereliction of duty, etc...start HERE 1st!

Delinquent in his leadership ( on vacation for a large part of his first term, reading "My pet goat" to elementary children while the country was under attack, failing to protect our country from national disasters even though warned that the levees would break, etc etc etc).

1. We had pilots in cockpits waiting to strike Bin Laden and they were waiting for Willey's authorization. He told them not to bother him because he was at some celebrity Pro Golf Tourney. So, don't lecture me about 'vacations' - if Clinton would have acted, 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened! As far as Bush reading to kids at the start of 9/11, I guess you would have preferred him to jump up and start screaming, "We're under attack!", scaring the he!! out of the kids and the country! (Its real MACHO saying what YOU would have done in hindsite, BTW!)
2. Bush didn't save the country from Natural Disasters? When did Bush get elevated from President to God? We knew for years that a city below sea level on the coast would be devastated if hit head-on by a hurricane. Top it off that the corrupt local and state goverments had been stealing millions ear-marked for the levies, and you have a major problem. The Army corp of Engineers found that the state/NO failed to finish building the levies properly, taking short cuts in order to save/steal cash. The structures were built, but the local goverment was receiving cash to pay local contractors to finish filling the levies up with concrete. When the Army went in afterwards, they found the insides filled with crushed seashells and sand that quickly began flowing out after the 'shell'/levy was broken! Add on the hundreds of buses parked in sea water where the local govt was too stupid to try to get any of its people out. Throw in the fact that the mayor and governor waited too long to declare a natural disaster, which is required before the Federal govt can mobilize! WHERE is the witch hunt/the call to tar and feather the corrupt goverment officials in NO and La?! To finish it, once the ball starts rolling, it does take the federal govt time to mobilize - anyone who thinks it is the goverment's job to swoop in immediately and save the day is stupid/sadly mistaken! Blaming Bush for NO is like blaming him for not saving the people killed in Washington state when Mt. St. Helens exploded! They call it a NATURAL disaster for a reason!

he has....morally bankrupted this country).

Dude, Clinton was a pathelogical liar who preyed on women, had adulterous affairs, sold out American National Security to the Chinese for a few million in campaign dollars, avoided tough decisions like trying to protect Americans from Bin Laden, and sought to protect his own @$$, as shown by his collecting illegal FBI files to use against his opponents and in his felonious conviction of perjury and witness tampering which led to his Impeachment.

And you STILL can not even address each....or even ONE...of the things Clinton did. You just keep changing the subject and coming up with this :spin: ! "Bush didn't stop the hurricane!" :roll: Dude, we can keep going round and round like this all day.

Let's make it easy. Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering, thereby betraying his oath of office, his duty to defend and protect the Constitution and the American people. Get a conviction on Bush, then come back and talk to me about 'worst President' and 'Impeach Bush'.

Until then, Clinton beats Bush in one main category - Clinton is in the elite group of 3 men EVER to be Impeached as President of the U.S. It must be just coincidental that they are all Democrats!

 

[easyt65]

Flaming is a forum violation. If what you are saying is true, why haven't I been warned for it? You can keep "asserting" that it is spin or you could answer the question. Your choice.

KC, don't hold your breath waiting for jfuh to ever answer/address facts or provide any links to back up what he says. His MO is to try to discredit whatever you say by claiming you're lying or making things up because HE says so! Not worth your time, bro.

 

[Iriemon]

Clinton was Impeached for committing and being convicted on 2 Felonies, perjury and witness tampering! You show me a conviction, and I will be at the head of your parade calling for Bush's Impeachment!




To my recollection, Buh hasn't given any enemy the technology to fry millions of our people with their nukes! As I recall, Bin Laden declared war on us in 1990 - Able Danger warned Willey about him but he never even put his 'eye' on Bin laden, not even after Bin Laden had killed Americans in the Kobar Towers, the Cole, and 2 African Embassy bombings! You want to talk to me about betrayal, dereliction of duty, etc...start HERE 1st!


1. We had pilots in cockpits waiting to strike Bin Laden and they were waiting for Willey's authorization. He told them not to bother him because he was at some celebrity Pro Golf Tourney. So, don't lecture me about 'vacations' - if Clinton would have acted, 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened! As far as Bush reading to kids at the start of 9/11, I guess you would have preferred him to jump up and start screaming, "We're under attack!", scaring the he!! out of the kids and the country! (Its real MACHO saying what YOU would have done in hindsite, BTW!)
2. Bush didn't save the country from Natural Disasters? When did Bush get elevated from President to God? We knew for years that a city below sea level on the coast would be devastated if hit head-on by a hurricane. Top it off that the corrupt local and state goverments had been stealing millions ear-marked for the levies, and you have a major problem. The Army corp of Engineers found that the state/NO failed to finish building the levies properly, taking short cuts in order to save/steal cash. The structures were built, but the local goverment was receiving cash to pay local contractors to finish filling the levies up with concrete. When the Army went in afterwards, they found the insides filled with crushed seashells and sand that quickly began flowing out after the 'shell'/levy was broken! Add on the hundreds of buses parked in sea water where the local govt was too stupid to try to get any of its people out. Throw in the fact that the mayor and governor waited too long to declare a natural disaster, which is required before the Federal govt can mobilize! WHERE is the witch hunt/the call to tar and feather the corrupt goverment officials in NO and La?! To finish it, once the ball starts rolling, it does take the federal govt time to mobilize - anyone who thinks it is the goverment's job to swoop in immediately and save the day is stupid/sadly mistaken! Blaming Bush for NO is like blaming him for not saving the people killed in Washington state when Mt. St. Helens exploded! They call it a NATURAL disaster for a reason!



Dude, Clinton was a pathelogical liar who preyed on women, had adulterous affairs, sold out American National Security to the Chinese for a few million in campaign dollars, avoided tough decisions like trying to protect Americans from Bin Laden, and sought to protect his own @$$, as shown by his collecting illegal FBI files to use against his opponents and in his felonious conviction of perjury and witness tampering which led to his Impeachment.

And you STILL can not even address each....or even ONE...of the things Clinton did. You just keep changing the subject and coming up with this :spin: ! "Bush didn't stop the hurricane!" :roll: Dude, we can keep going round and round like this all day.

Let's make it easy. Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering, thereby betraying his oath of office, his duty to defend and protect the Constitution and the American people. Get a conviction on Bush, then come back and talk to me about 'worst President' and 'Impeach Bush'.

Until then, Clinton beats Bush in one main category - Clinton is in the elite group of 3 men EVER to be Impeached as President of the U.S. It must be just coincidental that they are all Democrats!

Can you give us a source cite please for your statement that Clinton was convicted of perjury and witness tampering? Or any felony? And something a little more trustworthy and Mr. Limbaugh. Thanks.

 

[easyt65]

Can you give us a source cite please for your statement that Clinton was convicted of perjury and witness tampering? Or any felony? And something a little more trustworthy and Mr. Limbaugh. Thanks.

:shock: Are you kidding me? Are you guys gonna now try to deny the man committed PERJURY?!

Clinton Crime/Sentence:
http://helios.insnet.com/~tjl1886/p42.htm

Clinton Dis-barred For Perjury:
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/usd.htm

Clinton Legacy:
http://prorev.com/legacy.htm


Technically you are right - the Court had Clinton's testicles in a vice and was going to charge him with multiple felony charges of Perjury and witness tampering. He was offered the deal of dropping any criminal or civil charges against him in exchange for President Clinton agreeing to a five year suspension of his Arkansas law license, the payment of a $25,000 fine, and an agreed that he would not seek government reimbursement of his legal expenses.

He agreed to the deal to escape prosecution of multiple felony charges - would never have agreed to deal if he had thought he did nothing wrong and/or would win! In his acceptance of the deal, he acknowledged/admitted his crime! No one can be punished without a crime being committed, and Clinton took the deal to avoid the FELONY prosecution!

The country had had ENOUGH humiliation and embarrassment without having to go through a criminal trial in which the pathologically lying President of the United States was put on trial for committing 2 felonies! The deal was for this country NOT BILL CLINTON!

 

[Iriemon]

Technically you are right - ...

And technically, your statement that "Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering," was false.

I'm glad we got that technically cleared up.

 

[easyt65]

And technically, your statement that "Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering," was false.

I'm glad we got that technically cleared up.

Wrong - Clinton was Impeached for Perjury, for betraying the Oath of Office. read the Articles of impeachment - they say nothing about sex with an Intern! Clinton accepted the deal that made him guilty of lesser crimes, allowing him to escape the real, TRUE crime of felonious perjury and felonious witness tampering. The deal was struck to protect this country from any further humiliation of having a President convicted and sentenced for felonies! To argue that his sentencing to lesser crimes, which he was still punished for, is like Clinton's own argument of 'it depends what the definition of 'Is' is'!

Bottom line, Clinton was granted an 'OUT' only because he was the President of the United States and continuing the criminal case would hurt America, which had been hurt enough by this loser! He was still Impeached for the perjury he committed and for which he was punished! He is still, also, in the 'Elite Group of 3'!
(-- Of course even the punishment was freakin' LAME! If you or i would have committed felonious perjury and/or witness tampering, we would STILL be in jail. Since Wiley was the President, he got off with a slap of the wrist and a small fine!)



(I find it anmusing how Dems still respond by coming to defense of Clinton without ever really acknowledging what he DID. :lol: )

 

[Iriemon]

Wrong - Clinton was Impeached for Perjury, for betraying the Oath of Office. read the Articles of impeachment - they say nothing about sex with an Intern! Clinton accepted the deal that made him guilty of lesser crimes, allowing him to escape the real, TRUE crime of felonious perjury and felonious witness tampering. The deal was struck to protect this country from any further humiliation of having a President convicted and sentenced for felonies! To argue that his sentencing to lesser crimes, which he was still punished for, is like Clinton's own argument of 'it depends what the definition of 'Is' is'!

Bottom line, Clinton was granted an 'OUT' only because he was the President of the United States and continuing the criminal case would hurt America, which had been hurt enough by this loser! He was still Impeached for the perjury he committed and for which he was punished! He is still, also, in the 'Elite Group of 3'!
(-- Of course even the punishment was freakin' LAME! If you or i would have committed felonious perjury and/or witness tampering, we would STILL be in jail. Since Wiley was the President, he got off with a slap of the wrist and a small fine!)

(I find it anmusing how Dems still respond by coming to defense of Clinton without ever really acknowledging what he DID. :lol: )

My apologies. When I read your statement "Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering," I misunderstood you to be staying that Clinton was impeached for being convicted of 2 felonies. My bad.

 

[Gibberish]

My apologies. When I read your statement "Clinton was Impeached for being CONVICTED of 2 FELONIES - perjury and witness tampering," I misunderstood you to be staying that Clinton was impeached for being convicted of 2 felonies. My bad.

geez Iriemon how could you make that mistake? :mrgreen:

 

[easyt65]

geez Iriemon how could you make that mistake? :mrgreen:

Glad you guys find it amusing....almost as amusing as I keep finding your refusing to acknowledge/talk about what Clinton actually did. You will try to belittle any remarks pointing to the facts of how Clinton betrayed his oath of office and this country, yet you will still try to convice us (asn yourselves) that Bush is somehow worse than Clinton!

Meanwhile, this remains the legacy of the Clinton Administration;

Clinton Legacy:
http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

 

[Iriemon]

Glad you guys find it amusing....almost as amusing as I keep finding your refusing to acknowledge/talk about what Clinton actually did. You will try to belittle any remarks pointing to the facts of how Clinton betrayed his oath of office and this country, yet you will still try to convice us (asn yourselves) that Bush is somehow worse than Clinton!

Meanwhile, this remains the legacy of the Clinton Administration;

Clinton Legacy:
http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

Don't those red lenses give you a headache after a while?

 

[easyt65]

Don't those red lenses give you a headache after a while?

Nice childish response, but you just keep on proving my point! Deny, divert, and claim anything is false based on your opinion! If you ginore and deny the real Clinton legacy long enough, maybe people will forget and believe you!:rofl

 

[disneydude]

Nice childish response, but you just keep on proving my point! Deny, divert, and claim anything is false based on your opinion! If you ginore and deny the real Clinton legacy long enough, maybe people will forget and believe you!:rofl

Seems like the majority of Americans have.....or maybe they are not buying into your radical right-wing spin.

 

[KCConservative]

Seems like the majority of Americans have.....or maybe they are not buying into your radical right-wing spin.

I'd be interested in knowing how you arrived at that comment. After impeaching Clinton and rejecting the democrat ideology and nominees ever since, it looks as if the majority of Americans are buying it.

 

[disneydude]

I'd be interested in knowing how you arrived at that comment. After impeaching Clinton and rejecting the democrat ideology and nominees ever since, it looks as if the majority of Americans are buying it.

To name a few:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Clinton: Favorability Ratings


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Polls listed chronologically. All data are from nationwide surveys of Americans 18 & older.


.

.

.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. Oct. 12-24, 2005. N=1,003 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.
RV = registered voters

.

"Now I'd like your views on some people and things in the news. . . . Would you say your overall opinion of Bill Clinton is very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly unfavorable, or very unfavorable?"
.

Very
Favorable
Mostly
Favorable
Mostly
Unfav-
orable
Very
Unfav-
orable
Can't Rate
(vol.)

%
%
%
%
%

10/12-24/05 26 36 16 18 4
3/17-27/05 24 40 19 13 4
12/02 17 29 22 27 5
7/01 20 30 19 27 4
1/01 23 41 17 17 2
5/00 17 31 19 28 5
3/24-30/99 21 34 19 23 3
12/9-13/98 23 32 19 24 2
10/98 RV 15 37 20 24 4
8/27 - 9/8/98 18 39 18 23 2
8/21-24/98 18 36 20 24 2
3/25-29/98 22
40
19
16
3

11/97 19
44
21
14
2

9/97 18
44
21
14
3

8/97 16
45
21
17
1

4/97 17
44
21
16
2

1/97 17
49
18
14
2


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll
.

"I'm going to read the names of some people. Please tell me whether you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion of each one. If you've never heard of one, please just say so. Bill Clinton."

.

Favorable Unfav-
orable Can't Say
(vol.)
% % % N
4/25-26/05 53 40 6 900RV
6/8-9/04 52 40 8 900RV
1/21-22/04 47 47 6 900RV
6/17-18/03 41 52 7 900RV
3/11-12/03 47 46 7 900RV
12/3-4/02 42 50 8 900RV
2/12-13/02 45 47 7 900RV
12/12-13/01 42 50 8 900RV
7/25-26/01 42 51 7 900RV
4/18-19/01 40 54 6 904RV
3/28-29/01 41 52 7 905RV
3/14-15/01 40 54 6 904RV
2/21-22/01 40 54 6 906RV
1/10-11/01 48 46 6 900RV
11/29-30/00 43 51 6 900RV
11/1-2/00 45 50 5 1,000LV
10/18-19/00 48 49 3 900LV
9/20-21/00 45 49 6 900LV
9/6-7/00 46 48 6 900LV
8/23-24/00 47 48 5 900RV
8/9-10/00 43 52 5 900RV
7/26-27/00 48 47 5 900RV
7/12-13/00 41 54 5 900RV
6/28-29/00 48 47 5 900RV
6/7-8/00 42 51 7 900RV
5/24-25/00 41 54 5 900RV
5/10-11/00 43 50 7 900RV
4/26-27/00 48 46 6 903RV
4/5-6/00 43 50 7 900RV
3/22-23/00 43 51 6 900RV
3/8-9/00 42 54 4 900RV
2/23-24/00 41 53 6 900RV
2/9-10/00 42 51 7 900RV
1/26-27/00 43 50 7 900RV
1/12-13/00 42 51 7 902RV
12/6-7/99 41 53 6 902RV
11/17-18/99 42 52 6 900RV
11/3-4/99 41 52 7 900RV
10/20-21/99 43 51 6 904RV
9/22-23/99 41 51 8 900RV
9/8-9/99 38 55 7 904RV
8/25-26/99 42 51 7 902RV
8/11-12/99 37 56 7 903RV
7/28-29/99 43 49 8 905RV
7/14-15/99 41 53 6 900RV
6/23-24/99 40 55 5 908RV
6/2-3/99 41 54 5 924RV
5/19-20/99 42 52 6 912RV
5/5-6/99 43 49 8 901RV
4/21-22/99 42 51 7 942RV
4/7-8/99 42 52 6 921RV
3/24-25/99 44 50 6 900RV
3/10-11/99 35 58 7 900RV
2/24-25/99 40 53 7 924RV
2/12-13/99 41 52 7 938RV
1/27-28/99 44 48 8 911RV
1/13-14/99 45 48 7 902RV
12/17/98 44 49 7 613RV
12/2-3/98 41 50 9 517RV
11/11-12/98 43 50 7 904RV
10/28-29/98 46 48 6 900RV
10/7-8/98 42 52 6 900RV
9/16-17/98 42 50 8 901RV
9/9-10/98 44 50 6 900RV
8/18/98 46 40 14 600RV
8/12-13/98 50 44 6 900RV
7/29-30/98 48 44 8 899RV
7/15-16/98 52 41 7 900RV
6/30 - 7/1/98 49 43 8 900RV
6/17-18/98 55 38 7 902RV
6/3-4/98 53 40 7 907RV
5/20-21/98 54 41 5 914RV
5/6-7/98 50 42 8 900RV
4/22-23/98 54 39 7 906RV
4/7-8/98 54 40 6 902RV
3/25-26/98 55 38 7 908RV
3/10-11/98 52 40 8 901RV
2/25-26/98 59 34 7 900RV
2/11-12/98 53 40 7 903RV
1/28/98 56 36 7 702RV
1/21-22/98 49 42 9 906RV
1/7-8/98 59 35 6 904RV
LV = likely voters
RV = registered voters

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Feb. 4-6, 2005. N=1,010 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

.

"Next, I'd like to get your overall opinion of some people in the news. As I read each name, please say if you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of this person -- or if you have never heard of him or her. What is your overall opinion of Bill Clinton?"
.

Favorable
Unfav-
orable
No
Opinion

%
%
%

2/4-6/05
56 41 3
7/19-21/04
54 43 3
6/21-23/04
53 44 3
6/9-10/03 54 45 1
3/14-15/03 46 51 3
9/23-26/02 47 49 4
11/26-27/02 48 47 5
8/3-5/01 49 48 3
4/20-22/01 48 50 2
3/5-7/01 39 59 2
2/19-21/01 42 55 3
2/1-4/01 51 48 1
12/2-4/00 57 41 2
11/13-15/00 57 41 2
10/25-28/00 54 44 2
8/18-19/00 48 48 4
8/4-5/00 42 54 4
4/28-30/00 47 51 2
12/9-12/99 45 53 2
9/23-26/99 54 45 1
8/3-4/99 52 46 2
7/22-25/99 57 41 2
6/25-27/99 48 50 2
4/30 - 5/2/99 53 45 2
4/13-14/99 51 47 2
3/5-8/99 54 43 3
2/19-21/99 55 43 2
2/4-8/99 55 44 1
1/8-10/99 58 40 2
12/28-29/98 56 42 2
12/4-6/98 56 40 4
11/20-22/98 57 40 3
11/19/98 52 46 2
10/9-12/98 54 43 3
9/14-15/98 51 47 2
8/21-23/98 55 43 2
8/20/98 53 43 4
8/18/98 55 42 3
8/10-12/98 60 38 2
8/7-8/98 58 40 2
6/5-7/98 61 36 3
3/20-22/98 60 35 5
3/16/98 60 37 3
2/20-22/98 64 34 2
2/13-15/98 58 39 3
1/30 - 2/1/98 65 34 1
1/28/98 63 32 5
1/25-26/98 53 43 4
1/24-25/98 58 39 3
1/23-24/98 57 40 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




CBS News Poll and, where noted, CBS News/New York Times Poll
.

"Is your opinion of Bill Clinton favorable, not favorable, undecided, or haven't you heard enough about Bill Clinton yet to have an opinion?"
Favorable
Not
Favorable
Undec-
ided
Haven't Heard Enough Refused
%
%
%
% % N
10/28-30/04 * 48 38 10 3 1 824RV
7/04 49 42 9 0 0 RV
1/15-17/01 57 35 6 1 1 1,086
11/00 44 45 9 1 1 RV
7/20-23/00 * 43 40 13 2 2 953
5/10-13/00 * 44 41 12 2 1 947
2/00 43 39 11 4 3
8/1-3/99 42 43 12 2 1 1,165
7/13-14/99 42 44 11 1 2 722
6/5-6/99 46 41 10 2 1 1,003
3/24/99 44 35 18 1 2 527
2/7/99 44 40 12 3 1 631
1/30 - 2/1/99 * 45 42 11 1 1 1,058
1/10-11/99 47 39 12 2 0 1,182
1/3-4/99 48 38 11 2 1 1,175
12/19-20/98 *^ 52 38 9 0 1 1,341
12/18/98 42 42 12 2 2 548
12/13-14/98 * 43 41 13 1 2 1,180
11/19/98 53 36 10 1 1 584
11/16-17/98 50 37 10 2 1 1,118
10/26-28/98 * 44 36 15 3 2 1,118
10/12-13/98 * 42 42 13 2 1 926
10/7-8/98 40 40 14 4 2 997
10/3-4/98 39 40 15 4 2 902
9/22-23/98 45 38 11 3 3 960
9/21/98 ^ 44 43 10 2 1 696
9/19-20/98 37 51 9 2 1
9/12-14/98 * 39 45 12 2 1 1,813
9/8-10/98 43 41 15 1 0 1,132
8/19-20/98 48 40 10 1 1 944
8/11-13/98 50 33 15 2 0 1,579
7/28-29/98 43 35 17 4 1 988
7/19-21/98 50 33 15 2 0 979
6/7-9/98 * 45 37 13 4 1 1,126
5/19-21/98 45 32 16 5 2 1,080
5/6-7/98 44 31 17 6 2 823
4/20-22/98 42 33 19 5 1 825
3/30 - 4/1/98 44 35 17 3 1 994
3/1-2/98 44 33 16 4 3 782
2/19-21/98 * 57 29 12 2 0 1,153
2/8/98 44 32 17 6 1 786
2/1/98 51 26 16 5 2 620
1/26/98 34 36 21 8 1 609
.

RV = registered voters

* Conducted with The New York Times
^ Respondents who had first been polled by CBS 9/19-20/98
*^ Conducted with The New York Times; respondents who had first been polled by CBS and The New York Times 12/13-15 & 17/98

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[KCConservative]

To name a few:

-----

Hey, disney, remember the other day when you told us how polls don't mean anything? :lol:

Let's say all your numerical mumbo jombo were accurate, why then did America opt for the opposite in the last two elections?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Am I the only one who finds it ridiculously ironic that the original author of this thread starts this thread out with on the absurd premise that Democrats are treasonous just because they attack the president and his policies, yet then the individual starts a tirade of personal attacks on one of our former presidents.

Certainly the hypocrisy in his or her actions is not lost upon most reasoned individuals. Then again, I suppose that this individual has invested a considerable amount of time studying for the Right Wing Nut Job Certification Exam. (Those of you on the radical left can attend the Michael Moore College of Left Wing Nut Jobs to obtain your certification of course). It is my understanding that in order to become a Right Wing Nut Job, they have to take the following courses that I will list below so that the rest of us can empathize with this individual’s point of view:

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 120: Liberals Hate America Fundamentals

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 85: Liberals Hate America Intermediate

2 hours RWNJC Course Number 231: Supply Side Jesus Fundamentals

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 330: Combating the Gay and Lesbian Agenda

2 hours RWNJC Course Number 57: Fundamentals of Faith Based Science – How to reject all mainstream science

2 hours RWNJC Course Number 58: Communist History of the ACLU and The Liberal War against Supply Side Jesus

12 hours RWNJC Course Number 1: The Rapist / Murderous History of Bill Clinton and his mission to destroy America Fundamentals

12 hours RWNJC Course Number 2: The Rapist / Murderous History of Bill Clinton and his mission to destroy America Intermediate

12 hours RWNJC Course Number 3: The Rapist / Murderous History of Bill Clinton and his mission to destroy America Advanced

And then of course, at least one of the following electives:

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 276: A Charge To Keep, why President Bush is God’s Chosen One.

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 321: The Life and Teachings of His Holiness President Ronald Reagan.

4 hours RWNJC Course Number 280: Pray Out the Gay. If Jerry Falwell can then so can you.

 

[Iriemon]

Am I the only one who finds it ridiculously ironic that the original author of this thread starts this thread out with on the absurd premise that Democrats are treasonous just because they attack the president and his policies, yet then the individual starts a tirade of personal attacks on one of our former presidents.

...

[/I]

Heh heh. It's about as silly as trying to provoke a debate as to which president deserves the most disrespect.

Nice list.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Heh heh. It's about as silly as trying to provoke a debate as to which president deserves the most disrespect.

Nice list.

It is just so absurd. I mean honestly, hate on the level that these guys have has got to be a personality disorder of some kind.

Honestly, there ought to be some studies done on what are the causative factors in ones life that results in them hating those who would disagree with them to the extent that that some on far right (and far left but I don’t think it is quite as prevalent) do. It is literally a pathological hate of liberals or even moderates that they possess. Its very unfortunate and I would suspect that in many cases it stems from some form of an inferiority complex. Really, when one thinks about it, many right wing pundits like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and especially Bill O’Reilly are text book narcissists.

It truly is unfortunate anytime that one operates from the premise that their side is always right and the other side is always wrong and such a point of view is certainly not a sign of intelligence and thoughtfulness.

 

[disneydude]

Hey, disney, remember the other day when you told us how polls don't mean anything? :lol:

Let's say all your numerical mumbo jombo were accurate, why then did America opt for the opposite in the last two elections?

Where have I ever said polls don't mean anything?
You are either misquoting me or more likely you failed to accurately read the post like you do so many times.
In almost all cases polls are extremely accurate. Which, is why in the post that you are likely referring to, I mentioned that it seems a little strange that all the polls leading up to Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 had Bush losing.....so I was not doubting the polling, I was doubting the legitimacy of the so called won elections that you are referring to in your most recent post.

As for the mumbo jumbo....yes, I know that it didn't post very well, but if you look at the numbers and take it in context of the post: The question was how the majority of Americans view Bill Clinton's presidency and if you could read accurately you would have read that the previous poster indicated that the majority of Americans do not have a positive view of the Clinton era. The polls show just the opposite.

Again KCC: Please READ the entire post in context before responding. Time and again you misquote and take things out of context because you don't read.

 

[jfuh]

It is just so absurd. I mean honestly, hate on the level that these guys have has got to be a personality disorder of some kind.

Honestly, there ought to be some studies done on what are the causative factors in ones life that results in them hating those who would disagree with them to the extent that that some on far right (and far left but I don’t think it is quite as prevalent) do. It is literally a pathological hate of liberals or even moderates that they possess. Its very unfortunate and I would suspect that in many cases it stems from some form of an inferiority complex. Really, when one thinks about it, many right wing pundits like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and especially Bill O’Reilly are text book narcissists.

It truly is unfortunate anytime that one operates from the premise that their side is always right and the other side is always wrong and such a point of view is certainly not a sign of intelligence and thoughtfulness.

It's the exact mentality that the leaders of thier ideology and popularist figures instill on them. You can't blame them, they're very much sheep, following blindly to whatever thier shepard tells them to do. Even if they are wrong, they are still right. It doesn't matter of any evidence presented to counter.
The left is always going to be wrong to them. After all it was out of the "left" the communism sprang to life. It was out of the "left" that defense attorney's came to be. Everything that you see f'd up with society today is because the left made it so. SS and Social welfare programs spend all thier money on "loosers", forget that it is the ultra rich that are now exploiting these leftist programs (Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection).

 

[KCConservative]

.... it seems a little strange that all the polls leading up to Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 had Bush losing.....so I was not doubting the polling, I was doubting the legitimacy of the so called won elections that you are referring to in your most recent post.

In 200, Bush lost the popular vote and won the electoral vote. It's not the first time in history that it's happened. With regard to Ohio in 2004, make your case. I can wait to shred it.