posted on Jan, 19 2003 @ 11:45 AM
Bless your heart, John, you see FDR as a good leader?
Interesting, all the greivances you listed against the Shrub are the things I like
1) Tarrifs are fine if levied against the U.S. (I'm speaking at Europe) but not by the U.S.
2) Why were the diplomats expelled?
3) That was not a spy plane, but a recon plane, and it wasn't in China's airspace. It was severly damaged when a Chinese hotdog struck it, also
killing himself in the process. The plane and its crew was held captive by the chinese. And you side with the Chinese. I hope you are British and
4) When countries agreed to impose restrictions on those who are already doing more while producing more. Hipocricy.
5) Where the liberal elites drank white wine and ate lobster literally yards from those in abject poverty. You should be ashamed at even
6) What? For not helping the middle east use "Palestinians" steal land that was never theirs? Palestine? What Rome called Israel in an attempt
to erase the name from history? Hipocracy? I see it everywhere, but not where you are pointing.
7) Get real. In order to make that statement, you had to ignore many facts and a whole ton of evidence.
8) What, pray tell, is the president to do with the accounting scandal? Are you one of those big-government types that think the government is
suppose to regulate everything? I see why you adore a FDR now. Gee, John, you swallow the liberal garbage without reading counter-info. You might
find out that the inferences and accusations made by the left against people like Dick Cheney are baseless and aren't meant for close scrutiny. Most
people who believe the garbage don't look closely at much, anyway, and the left-wing spin machine is aware of that.
9) John, I really can't believe you'd write something as stupid and ignorant as that. I have no desire to detract from Guilianni, but he was not
responsible for the entire nation. Bush and Cheney both had jobs to do, as well as did the Secret Service. For you to sit in front of the computer
and type such nonsense, well, I'm not believing it is you. I'll assume someone has hijacked your computer.
The last statement is baseless on its own lack of merit.
The rest of the world may have enjoyed the last politicician that was in the oval office. You remember the one, the guy that could be bought, the guy
that "led" by checking polls every 30 minutes, the guy who brought crassness and immaturity to the White House, the moron that made a joke of the
oval office and cigars, the idiot that is responsible for children learning about oral sex before they learned their ABC's to any profficient
degree...this man we have in there now is heads above what was in there. This one is a leader, not a politician that follows polls, but a leader.
While I may be getting ill with him quite often lately, he is still far better than what we've had since Mr. Reagan.