GALLUP: Bush Finally Tops Nixon -- In Unpopularity -- As Call for Iraq Pullout Hits New Peak

By E&P Staff

Published: November 06, 2007 2:50 PM ET

NEW YORK For almost two years, President Bush has been threatening to unseat Richard M. Nixon as the most unpopular president in the history of the Gallup poll, and it finally happened this week.

The latest USA TODAY/Gallup survey finds Bush with a 31% approval rating -- and for the first time ever in the polling history, 50% say they "strongly disapprove" of a president.

The previous high (or low?) was a 48% strong disapproval rating for Nixon at the worst moments of Watergate in 1974.

The telephone survey of 1,024 adults was conducted last Friday through Sunday.

Meanwhile, ABC News relates today, "Recent reports of fewer casualties in Iraq haven't altered most Americans' perceptions of the war: Fifty-nine percent still don't think the United States is making significant progress restoring civil order there, and a record six in 10 want the level of U.S. forces reduced.

"Those results in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll seem to reflect a continued hardening of attitudes on Iraq. Views on progress are unchanged from early September, and they haven't been positive since December 2005, shortly after the Iraqi elections."


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_di...ontent_id=1003668731
Original Post
Horray for PBA!!!! What a wonderful day this must be for you. I know you have been on the edge of your seat waiting on the next Gallup.

Who (including my W) gives a rats about polls at this point. I think seeing the bigger picture and doing the right thing is more important than a popularity contest.

Its easy to be popular, we had several very popular cheerleaders in school, I wouldnt want them making decisions for me though.
Well thats not exactly the whole story: Bush's Financial wizard "Al Hubbard joined an ever growing list of DUD'S Bush picked to head our Nation, who have now have decided To GET OUT rather then being thrown out.

Now if only Bush would do it himself (if for nothing else but to save our Nation and rid us of him.

Semper Fi,( Carry on Citizen's!)
quote:
Originally posted by skymaster:
PBA you never told us your number one reason for being a socalist. Are your lost for words?



skymaster,If you were as good at debating as you are at name calling and labels, I would not mine to answer you.
NEWS FLASH: President George W. Bush doesn't give a rat's rear about popularity polls. He has a nation to run and people to protect from terrorist attacks. When he retires from the presidency with eight years, two terms, under his belt, he will take a fairly reasonable retirement back to his Crawford ranch and watch while congress, led by the dimmy-krats, try to dig their way out of the hole they are in...or if you prefer percentage terms as a measure of popularity, that would be hovering around 11 % for the dismal dims.
quote:
Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
NEWS FLASH: President George W. Bush doesn't give a rat's rear about popularity polls. He has a nation to run and people to protect from terrorist attacks. When he retires from the presidency with eight years, two terms, under his belt, he will take a fairly reasonable retirement back to his Crawford ranch and watch while congress, led by the dimmy-krats, try to dig their way out of the hole they are in...or if you prefer percentage terms as a measure of popularity, that would be hovering around 11 % for the dismal dims.


Yeah, you're right. I'm sure he doesn't give a crap about approval ratings, especially when his are so far gone that nothing could ever ressurect them. As for running the country and protecting the country from terrorists, that statement made me laugh so hard I almost shot coffee out of my nose. That dim-witted munchkin, little Georgie, couldn't run a country or protect citizens on his best day. But, one more point that you are correct on, we will be digging out of this abyss (hole) this very dillusioned little man (GWB) has put us in. I hope one day our children or grandchildren can find a way out of so they have a chance at prosperity. He certainly will never do anything to help us get out.
Our planes and u.s servicemen were in the no fly zone,or did you guys forget about that.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
We were never attacked by Iraq.

We were only attacked by Bin Laden and his Sleeper Cells. That is something that people really need to think more about.
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Our planes and u.s servicemen were in the no fly zone,or did you guys forget about that.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
We were never attacked by Iraq.

We were only attacked by Bin Laden and his Sleeper Cells. That is something that people really need to think more about.


Elaborate please
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".
Do you not realize that Alqueda was in Iraq.Al Zaquari went to Iraq when he was wounded in AFganistan.He recieved medical help and refuge.Why would he go there unless Al Queda and Saddam had a working relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".
quote:
Originally posted by Jobe:
No such thing as a conservative democrat. A person calls themselves a democrat to keep from being called a liberal.


You are very wrong. I am a democrat and I am not a liberal. Please keep quiet about something you obviously know nothing about. There are 2 main political parties (Democrat and Republican) and aside from that there are 2 schools of political thought (conservative and liberal). Saying that there is no such thing as a liberal democrat is just uniformed and moronic. There are liberal republicans out there as well, remember Nelson Rockefeller.
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Do you not realize that Alqueda was in Iraq.Al Zaquari went to Iraq when he was wounded in AFganistan.He recieved medical help and refuge.Why would he go there unless Al Queda and Saddam had a working relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".


He went there AFTER the war in Iraq started. I never said that none of Al Quaeda went to Iraq. I said when we went to war with Iraq, the terrorists that did 9/11 was in Afganistan. We had absolutely no reason to attack Iraq when we did. Little Georgie the Shrub was hollering about weapons of mass destruction, how did that pan out? Yeah I know, you'll say, "they moved them to Syria". Well that is very unlikely, since we supposedly had intelligence officers all over the region. A mass exodus of arms, such as what would have had to happen, just might have been noticed. Just admit you're wrong and go away from this discussion.
It`s weird that the REST OF THE WORLD thought he had the weapons too.So was the rest of the world in on "Bush`s lie".
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Do you not realize that Alqueda was in Iraq.Al Zaquari went to Iraq when he was wounded in AFganistan.He recieved medical help and refuge.Why would he go there unless Al Queda and Saddam had a working relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".


He went there AFTER the war in Iraq started. I never said that none of Al Quaeda went to Iraq. I said when we went to war with Iraq, the terrorists that did 9/11 was in Afganistan. We had absolutely no reason to attack Iraq when we did. Little Georgie the Shrub was hollering about weapons of mass destruction, how did that pan out? Yeah I know, you'll say, "they moved them to Syria". Well that is very unlikely, since we supposedly had intelligence officers all over the region. A mass exodus of arms, such as what would have had to happen, just might have been noticed. Just admit you're wrong and go away from this discussion.
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
It`s weird that the REST OF THE WORLD thought he had the weapons too.So was the rest of the world in on "Bush`s lie".
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Do you not realize that Alqueda was in Iraq.Al Zaquari went to Iraq when he was wounded in AFganistan.He recieved medical help and refuge.Why would he go there unless Al Queda and Saddam had a working relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".


He went there AFTER the war in Iraq started. I never said that none of Al Quaeda went to Iraq. I said when we went to war with Iraq, the terrorists that did 9/11 was in Afganistan. We had absolutely no reason to attack Iraq when we did. Little Georgie the Shrub was hollering about weapons of mass destruction, how did that pan out? Yeah I know, you'll say, "they moved them to Syria". Well that is very unlikely, since we supposedly had intelligence officers all over the region. A mass exodus of arms, such as what would have had to happen, just might have been noticed. Just admit you're wrong and go away from this discussion.


Where did they go? They rest of the world thought that? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Whew! That was funny! I suppose that's why everyone jumped in to help?
Ask the French,egyptians,British,Russians,Israelies,Jordanians,Pakistanies,turks inteeligence agencies.would you like to hear more or is Rage still turned up.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
It`s weird that the REST OF THE WORLD thought he had the weapons too.So was the rest of the world in on "Bush`s lie".
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Do you not realize that Alqueda was in Iraq.Al Zaquari went to Iraq when he was wounded in AFganistan.He recieved medical help and refuge.Why would he go there unless Al Queda and Saddam had a working relationship.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Iraq fired on our planes patrolling the no-fly zone.If you ask me thats an act of war.You libs seem to forget this.



First off I'm not a "lib". You don't know me or anything about me so don't call me a "lib". I am a Democrat and very proud of that fact. You see, I've always had to work for a living. I am a conservative democrat, what was once called a "Southern Democrat". So, get your facts straight before you go regurgitating your inuendo.

As for the war, Bush keeps using 9/11 as an excuse, but we have seemed to concentrate on Iraq from the beginning. We knew Bin Laden was not in Iraq, he was in Afganistan. They hijackers weren't Iraqi, they were mostly if not all Saudi Arabian. And, besides all of that, Saddam would not have had the capabilities he had if not for Bush and Reagan in the 80's. Iraq never posed any significant threat to the U.S. It was just a way to finish what his father couldn't and divert attention from the real issue, Al Quaeda. By entering into a war, that he believed would be easily won, and continuously spouting off about "The War on Terror, he could keep the American people afraid and dependent on his administration. He's nothing more than an insecure little brat with a bad case of "little man syndrome".


He went there AFTER the war in Iraq started. I never said that none of Al Quaeda went to Iraq. I said when we went to war with Iraq, the terrorists that did 9/11 was in Afganistan. We had absolutely no reason to attack Iraq when we did. Little Georgie the Shrub was hollering about weapons of mass destruction, how did that pan out? Yeah I know, you'll say, "they moved them to Syria". Well that is very unlikely, since we supposedly had intelligence officers all over the region. A mass exodus of arms, such as what would have had to happen, just might have been noticed. Just admit you're wrong and go away from this discussion.


Where did they go? They rest of the world thought that? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Whew! That was funny! I suppose that's why everyone jumped in to help?
DHS-86,

As to where the WMD went, you haven't been keeping up with events, have you?

On Sunday's "NBC Nightly News," correspondent Pete Williams previewed details of a new book, The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack, by Ronald Kessler, in which Kessler revealed information obtained by the an FBI agent who extensively interviewed Saddam Hussein and found, among other things, that the former Iraqi leader had deliberately tried to "fool the U.S." into believing he had weapons of mass destruction because "he wanted Iranian leaders to believe that he had nuclear and biological weapons." The FBI agent, named George Piro, also reported that Saddam Hussein "hoped the post-Gulf War sanctions on Iraq would dissolve, allowing him to pursue a nuclear capability."

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/11/...tart-nuclear-program
I think this may be a futile request your making of him.
quote:
Originally posted by Howard Roark:
DHS-86,

As to where the WMD went, you haven't been keeping up with events, have you?

On Sunday's "NBC Nightly News," correspondent Pete Williams previewed details of a new book, The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack, by Ronald Kessler, in which Kessler revealed information obtained by the an FBI agent who extensively interviewed Saddam Hussein and found, among other things, that the former Iraqi leader had deliberately tried to "fool the U.S." into believing he had weapons of mass destruction because "he wanted Iranian leaders to believe that he had nuclear and biological weapons." The FBI agent, named George Piro, also reported that Saddam Hussein "hoped the post-Gulf War sanctions on Iraq would dissolve, allowing him to pursue a nuclear capability."

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/11/...tart-nuclear-program
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
I think this may be a futile request your making of him.
quote:
Originally posted by Howard Roark:
DHS-86,

As to where the WMD went, you haven't been keeping up with events, have you?

On Sunday's "NBC Nightly News," correspondent Pete Williams previewed details of a new book, The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack, by Ronald Kessler, in which Kessler revealed information obtained by the an FBI agent who extensively interviewed Saddam Hussein and found, among other things, that the former Iraqi leader had deliberately tried to "fool the U.S." into believing he had weapons of mass destruction because "he wanted Iranian leaders to believe that he had nuclear and biological weapons." The FBI agent, named George Piro, also reported that Saddam Hussein "hoped the post-Gulf War sanctions on Iraq would dissolve, allowing him to pursue a nuclear capability."

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2007/11/...tart-nuclear-program


Futility is thinking that maybe eventually you will say something remotely knowledgeable or intelligent.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
Did he?Did he really?Or are you one of lifes losers who wants to blame all republicans for thier sorrows.
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
Did he?Did he really?Or are you one of lifes losers who wants to blame all republicans for thier sorrows.


I'll match lives, checks, bank accounts, jobs, whatever with you whenever your ready. I have no sorrows, I simply stated what that miserable jerk taught me. He was terrible for the USA and that is all there is to it. No, I'm not a loser and I'd be happy to show you anytime. At which McDonald's do you work?
Sad,sad little man.Did you get your feelings hurt?Are you upset because there are people on this forum who wont let you get by with your nonsensical rantings.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
Did he?Did he really?Or are you one of lifes losers who wants to blame all republicans for thier sorrows.


I'll match lives, checks, bank accounts, jobs, whatever with you whenever your ready. I have no sorrows, I simply stated what that miserable jerk taught me. He was terrible for the USA and that is all there is to it. No, I'm not a loser and I'd be happy to show you anytime. At which McDonald's do you work?
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Sad,sad little man.Did you get your feelings hurt?Are you upset because there are people on this forum who wont let you get by with your nonsensical rantings.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
Did he?Did he really?Or are you one of lifes losers who wants to blame all republicans for thier sorrows.


I'll match lives, checks, bank accounts, jobs, whatever with you whenever your ready. I have no sorrows, I simply stated what that miserable jerk taught me. He was terrible for the USA and that is all there is to it. No, I'm not a loser and I'd be happy to show you anytime. At which McDonald's do you work?


What bothers me is you making accusations about me and no absolutely nothing about me. Like I said, there is nothing sad about me. I'm successful, make a good living and have a wonderful family. The only thing I see that is sad is you. You keep trying to compensate for your lack of knowledge, success, respect, comprehension of the English language, etc.by all the on-liners and jabs you keep making. It is obvious that you have no ability to debate or even respond intelligently, so go away and leave the grown-ups to talk.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
Sad,sad little man.Did you get your feelings hurt?Are you upset because there are people on this forum who wont let you get by with your nonsensical rantings.
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
quote:
Originally posted by DHS-86:
quote:
Originally posted by geddon97:
He was a smart man. by the way he was socially liberal.
quote:
Originally posted by Kindred:
I LIKED Nixon. Wink


NO WAY!!!! According to your logic, he could not be both liberal AND a republican.
There are plenty of republicans that have liberal leanings.Rudy Giuliani,Chuck Hagel,John McCain,Arlen Specter to name a few.That is one reason why Bush`s approval rating has went down the way it has.Because early in his first admin. he sided with the dems.He turned his back on the lessons that REAGAN taught us.You guys say I`m closed-minded.I think you guys need to open your mind and stop thinking like a lemming the way the dems want you to.


And there are conservative Democrats, I am proof. All Reagan taught me was to vehemently oppose Republicans.
Did he?Did he really?Or are you one of lifes losers who wants to blame all republicans for thier sorrows.


I'll match lives, checks, bank accounts, jobs, whatever with you whenever your ready. I have no sorrows, I simply stated what that miserable jerk taught me. He was terrible for the USA and that is all there is to it. No, I'm not a loser and I'd be happy to show you anytime. At which McDonald's do you work?


What bothers me is you making accusations about me and no absolutely nothing about me. Like I said, there is nothing sad about me. I'm successful, make a good living and have a wonderful family. The only thing I see that is sad is you. You keep trying to compensate for your lack of knowledge, success, respect, comprehension of the English language, etc.by all the on-liners and jabs you keep making. It is obvious that you have no ability to debate or even respond intelligently, so go away and leave the grown-ups to talk.
I take it that this is your way of giving up.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×