how could so many of the Clintons asso. die of suiside

reply to post by Conspiracy Theorist


No sir, we told much more than that. Some people including the Pres. focused on the WMD reason. I supported the "legal" and "justified" invation of Iraq for two reasons. The first was because I saw this national leader hold up a check for payment "we call this contract killing" to any one who would kill innosent people in Israel and they did! They killed hundreds of people, Americans included. Many Americans were murdered during this time in the mideast also. Doctors,nurses and missionaries. Secondly. Iraqy people were crying out to the world for help, they were being slaughtered. saddam "the shoe shine boy" even used chemicle weapons to wipe out an intire town! I know many people like to minimize that and ignore it, just as they ignored the crys of millions of iraqies. We didn't ignore that and I am proud of that fact!!! And would support doing it all over again in the same cercumstances.

Clever gets you so far, but tricky gets you in

Originally posted by orangetom1999
The current president is not looked upon for particular smarts. Also the previous president if I recall correctly is a Rhodes Scholar but couldnt keep his private life private. This shoots holes in the concept that particlar smarts are required for the office of President of the United States.

'Smarts' are not a requirement for election. The US president is elected by majority. Most people aren't very bright, and are inclined to look with suspicion on the few who are. This being the case, superior intelligence isn't likely to win many votes. The clever men who did make president did so by downplaying their intelligence and adopting a man-of-the-people air, as Bill Clinton did. Hillary has rather burnt her boats in this regard, unfortunately; everyone knows she's a high-grade bluestocking.

As a qualification for discharging the responsibilities of office, however, the value of intelligence cannot be overstated. Bill Clinton, whatever you might think of his private life (and I, for one, think he was entitled to it, just as you are to yours), left the United States in wonderful shape, both internally and in terms of its reputation abroad. His oafish successor - as one might expect of such a dullard - has squandered all that precious capital, unfortunately.

In my mind (a particular requirement) would be more along the line of the ability to follow orders.

Ho-hum... gosh, is that the time? Must be going, must be going...

reply to post by Astyanax


the smart not smart is just par for the coarse. bill clinton was a smart guy who did some pretty stupid things. bush is no dummy himself. He has ran rings around the democrats for years! Thats a fact. he is always a step or two ahead of them! The Old Dinosour Media always trys to paint any Republican Pres. as stupid. They do this every election. It almost never works and really only shows the american people the liberal bias in their reporting. Remember democrats have only had 1 election since 1968 that a democrat got a majority of the votes.

Originally posted by rockets red glare
reply to post by Conspiracy Theorist

 

They killed hundreds of people, Americans included. Many Americans were murdered during this time in the mideast also. Doctors,nurses and missionaries.

Link?

The President of the United States is elected by the Electoral College, comprised of representatives selected before the election to vote for the states for this purpose. It is both possible for a president to be elected with a minority of popular votes such as the case with Bush in 2000, or Clinton with only 43% in a three-way race in '92.