LBJ was corrupt and blew it in Vietnam. Nixon was paranoid and blew it with his lying. Ford was ok but was defeated by an idiot named Jimmy Carter who gave away the Panama Canal and the Iran hostage scenario. Reagan was ok but almost spend us into bankruptcy. Bush I was a wimp and reptilian blue blood. Clinton was a pervert/womanizer. And now the idiot mamma's boy Bush II. Good grief people can't we nominate a man with smarts, common sense and INTEGRITY???????
2006-11-30 07:35:22 · 19 answers · asked by Guadalupe Joe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Clinton was a pervert/womanizer but JFK was a superior person. Dude if you lookup pervert womanizer in the dictionary there is a picture of JFK.
Your assertion has no validity. Fact is required in a debate not personal opinion, just because you like someone or not does not make them superior or inferior.
However I agree with your assertion to a point but would not hold JFK as your example (Reagan is a far better example of a quality president). Party politics will almost certainly endanger the likelihood of a person of substance serving in the high office.
Although I give to you Rudy Guiliani '08. He is a man of substance.
2006-11-30 07:58:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
um no...... obviously you no nothing about liberals....... and you unfortunately associate liberalism with the Democratic party and conservatism with the Republican party wholly. Politics is a little more gray than people give it credit for being. And unfortunately for you.... most of the people in the party you support are smart enough to not say liberalism is a can't can't ...... which if read correctly not in the way you wish it to be read is that liberalism is a can.......... and I'm happy to pay taxes as long as i get something out of it...... better/cheaper health care, quality PUBLIC education (which honestly NONE of the top people in either party understand public educations, as they are almost entirely graduates from the top tiers of college educations), cleaner air and water, and better border security.......
2016-05-23 05:39:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You throwing your hat in the ring? It's easy to criticize, but JFK had his problems, too. Bay of Pigs, anyone? Let's also not forget that he's the one that put us in Vietnam to begin with. In my experience, there is no such thing as a superior person. Just superior decisions. And Reagan was much more than OK. Without him, the stagnant economy of Carter would have continued. But that's another rant.
2006-11-30 07:40:09 · answer #3 · answered by togashiyokuni2001 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
JFK was more of a womanizer than Clinton, and believe me that is not said in support of bubbah but it is true. Plus there are a whole lot of people who feel there is a connection between him and Marilyn Monroes "suicide".
Special interests, lobbiest, media, there are so many reasons that it is difficult to get a great man, not all great men can be great leaders and sometimes great leaders just aren't great men.
I would like to see it too, someone we can feel great about to do the right thing.....I think it is nearly impossible to have an over abuntance of integrity in todays poliitcs....the sad truth. good question.
2006-11-30 07:46:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
JFK was a womanizer and an alcoholic. He almost blew it with the communists and was the one the led us to Vietnam.... Learn history.
Every president leaves a legacy. Some good, some bad. Some great and some simply pathetic.
JFK was not the role model you think he was, nor was he superior.
2006-11-30 07:40:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You may need to read some different history books.
If we had a president like JFK today, there's no doubt he would be defending against impeachment. He was a big time womanizer.
Here's my truth: We need to elect some one who believes in the will of the people and is not, let me repeat, not a democrat or republican! In that same line of thinking, we need to vote out all career senators and congressional representatives also.
FYI: No libertarian or Ross Perot reform party either! And, I liked JFK very much!
2006-11-30 07:45:40 · answer #6 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does it really matter?? the only influence the president have is on going to war overseas which no one internally gives a s**t about and maybe some vito power that he'll never use against majority voters.. basically a monkey can do this job !! and they even get paid about the same as a civilian pilot..
2006-11-30 07:48:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's very simple to answer this. The American people prefer to have presidents (especially true since JFK) who reflect themselves. And Americans, in general, aren't particularly smart and are suspicious of people who are smarter than they are. As to common sense, there is no such thing in politics. As to integrity, there is no such thing in politics. Most people didn't vote for Adlai Stevenson not because he was a Democrat or because Eisenhower, after what he did in WW2, couldn't lose, but because they thought he was "too smart." They called him an egghead. Nothing new here....
2006-11-30 07:53:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Please don't swallow the four-decade old JFK / Camelot / It Was Wonderful When He Was President media campaign.
Ol' Jack was a seriously flawed character (and President) and the details of his time as President have been well-documented (if not well-reported by the fawning media whose leadership has bought the campaign hook, line, and sinker even though they know better).
2006-11-30 07:43:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
JFK was a womanizer. You call that integrity?
PLEASE - The words kennedy and integrity just don't go together! Maybe YOU are the real idiot mamma's boy!
2006-11-30 07:39:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋