Let's ask KooKoo Bananas. He says the most reprehensible, irresponsible things about our President. He has really crossed the line lately.
2006-06-29 10:35:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Bill Clinton violated a moral issue. Not a valid reason for name calling . GWB has caused such dissension in this country that people have resorted to name calling, not nice. That said you can respect the office and not the office holder. Name calling doesn't solve things but it may make people feel better. And if the "left" as you seem to call all Democrats said we should respect the office(no one listened anyway) the same holds for what history will record as one of the, no maybe the worst President this country has ever had. If when he is done and gone we still can repair the damage and have a country left. And GWB is by far the better Liar. And he gets the respect he deserves because of it!!!
2006-06-29 10:40:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by olderandwiser 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
EthanM, Are you going to add some details to some of the concise and succint answers above mine?
Unfortunately, the 'selection' of Bush has brought the office of president (note lack of capitals) into disrepute. The Seal was once respected not only at home but abroad. It is now a sign of ridicule and mistrust. Can you imagine what damage has been done to it. It will takes years and someone incisive, clever and stately to restore it to its former glory.
Bungiebabe, Where have been living during the past 6 years. People supported the 'winner' in the past, not the 'thief.' People just do not respect Thieves and Murderers. All that nostalgic claptrap.
2006-06-30 02:16:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You can respect the office, but still resent the chimp who occupies it. All presidents get treated badly by the opposition.....even good ol' sainted Ronnie Ray-gun. Go do some research.....the current occupant hasn't even been touched compared to what others have gone through. Lincoln was called a baboon, and much worse by the opposition in the NORTH. Jackson was called a blood thirsty tyrant, Van Buren was a either "dandy", or a rat, and so on and on.
If you thank "god" for dubya because you haven't been blown up yet, then you should also thank the same deity for the other presidents in your lifetime, even the ones you don't care for, who have also prevented you from being blown up.
Who ignored the PDB "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US"?
Who was reading "My Pet Goat" while he knew the Trade Center was under attack?
Who STILL hasn't gotten those responsible?
Who invaded a country based on "faulty intelligence"?
Who still hasn't secured the ports or borders?
Why do you feel safer?
2006-06-29 10:37:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by BarronVonUnderbeiht 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nixon become the reason behind the coining of the time period 'Imperial Presidency' and it has stuck ever provided that. Politicians are turning out to be more advantageous at playing the 'sport' too. The extra you run any gadget (or sport) with regulations, the added effectively the aspects (or gamers) commence to operate. in case you adjust the regulations, the gadget takes time to regulate, yet finally anybody turns into an expert at playing lower back. at the same time as the game is expertly performed through all the gamers, it ceases to be a sport which regularly contains some semblence of probability, and turns right into a gadget that operates the way it become equipped to operate each and every time you play (or turn it on). Likewise, politics has change right into a gadget, no longer a sport. It operates as effectively as its regulations enable for, anybody maximizing their prevailing skill. What we favor to do as people, is call for the regulations get replaced which will get some good many years of politicians fumbling to determine out the thanks to play lower back.
2016-11-15 10:42:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is a question I have been pondering myself. These days, nobody has respect for any thing. The president is who he is because we put him there as a nation. And for those who did not vote have no right to spead at all. I don't mean to be a jerk, but that is the plain and simple truth. The title its self (President of the United States), should be respected by all that were born in this country.
2006-06-29 10:40:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Johnny S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The respect for the office was killed by Clinton having sex in the oval office and then lying about it. So naturally Bush has no chance of getting respect.
2006-06-29 10:34:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think Clinton got a little more respect because we actually know he got **** ****. With Bush we don't know much and his social persona unscripted is so hard to process. I saw a bumper sticker I like "would someone please give him a **** *** so we can impeach him". As for criticism if you recall they being rebulicans and relgious conservatives tried impeaching B. Clinton. What they did instead was opened a pandora's box in middle schools regarding **** sex. Are you famaliar with the term "Rainbow Party" ? They also made us look like a bunch of in other people's bedroom buffoons to the international community. I think Clinton's social persona was more natural and less forced and nervous. When Mr. Bush speaks you get this sense he's hiding something unless his responses are scripted. I think respect for the office means working to ensure that the premises of all three branches of goverment are upheld. I don't think it means idely or blindly accepting all the policies and facts a President offers up. Let's be honest any thinking person has to question this Adminstrations intentions. They talk of staying the course while cutting benefits to military personal and veterns. When we are told pre the war in Iraq that Saddam is a threat and has weapons and then were told he doesn't but it's still a good and godly idea to envade, one must question intent. The situation with Katrina, Dick Cheney shooting his fowling partner in the face, C. Rice implying weapons to be found only to have it debunked later, warrentless wiretapping, secret wiretapping for fincial records, tolerating Ann Colter's attack fo the 9/11 widows, the Pat Tillman spin, the Jessica Lynch spin, attacking the New York Times and adding to the ambigious "threat to national security" scare. Cutting Homeland Security spending to New York by 40% and sending it to places like Utah, North Dakato and Wyoming. This while considering a Port deal one of those ports in New York with a company based in the United Arab Emerites who have been suspected of supporting terrorists. I suppose since the Twin Towers are now gone it could be argued that New York's terrorist appeal has lessoned ? We need better tools then those affored through warrents so we impliment a secret program but the UAE isn't a threat ? The New York Times threatens national security but were only going to complain about about it before the domestic community and do nothing ? The double speak is fustrating. The respect for the office of President is found in those who exercise there right to challenge and question Mr. Bush. The Jersey widows, the Dixie Chicks, Cindy Sheehan and John Murta. I may not like their tatics but they are calling the Executive branch out and this Adminstration has done a terrible job of responding to that call. When challenged they toss out names like "treason" and threat to "national security" which was why a key voting station in Ohio was closed to the press in 2004. It's not challenging the political agenda that disrespects the office or executive power, it's remaining apathetic to it that disrepects it. As for Mr. Bush he's done a terrible job of being transparent and appearing truthfull with the American public. His Adminstration has had more to deal with then many and they've had fewer press conferences then any other. He only has them when he must and the American public is now finding out he conducts "secret programs " without warrents. When challenged they lash out with name calling and blame. It's not the office that people disrepect it's the man representing it because they question his respect for all it represents.
Nefarious I always like reading your posts they are intelligent and thought out with a touch of humor. Added to that they are brief.
2006-06-29 11:19:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by jason83go 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither Bush nor Clinton have earned any respect.
Now there was Jimmy Carter. He wasn't the greatest president, but he earned and deserved respect...he is a decent human being and I love the work he has done for Habitat for Humanity.
2006-06-29 10:37:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Shaula 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
That only works with democrats. They can do anything they want and get respect because they are acting like the people that vote for them. George Bush gets disrected because he tells them what they don't want to hear. He cares about other people in the world where as the demos couldn't care less how corrupt dictators treat there citizens.
2006-06-29 10:36:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by reallyfedup 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
He has not earned respect. 60% of Americans approved of Clinton after the impeachment. Only 30 some percent respect Junior right now. Sometimes your father figure doesn't know best, I know I know it is hard to believe.
2006-06-29 10:39:36
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋