Borack Obama: Unpatriotic

Started by Bardock423 pages
Bardock42 Junior Member

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, but that is apples to oranges

in both situations we have a leader lying to the public, in one situation to start an unjust war, the other to ignore personal embarrassment.

I would say this makes Bush a worse person, but I will not excuse Clinton's act because someone did the same thing, only with worse consequences.

I'd rather be led by a Clinton than a Bush, but realistically, I wouldn't want either.

Actually, I feel that I could forgive Clinton's lying to me about a trivial subject and would not assume that his leadership is compromised by it, while lying about a most vital issue to cheat the whole nation into a course of action it would not have wanted otherwise ... well, to me that just disqualifies someone.

lord xyz Restricted

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think he shouldn't have lied, but there should have been an option for him to refuse to answer and he should have used it. He should have no obligation to show his personal life to everyone. Of course lying was wrong. But I feel like distinguishing between the lesser of two evils is quite essential.
YouTube video

Victor Von Doom Latverian Diplomat

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, but that is apples to oranges

in both situations we have a leader lying to the public, in one situation to start an unjust war, the other to ignore personal embarrassment.

I would say this makes Bush a worse person, but I will not excuse Clinton's act because someone did the same thing, only with worse consequences.

I'd rather be led by a Clinton than a Bush, but realistically, I wouldn't want either.

Although that is also apples to massive, mutated apples.

Schecter Restricted

:edit:

KingTech Senior Member

I think you don't like him and don't want to see him as a president of America.That is why you are saying this.I think he has all the rights to fight foe president ship.Let the people decide.

King Kandy Senior Member

Boy, why is it elections are never based on ISSUES?

Sadako of Girth Extreme Mode

Cause if say, I attack you on some legitimate issue and I once elected totally fail on that (or have failed in the past on the same issue), then the hypocrisy would be there for all to see for even the most ininformed of voters.
Therefore personal attacks and attacks on areas which can unite the ignorant hater parts in some folk are a much safer bet.

Mind you, having said that, even with the majority of America hating Bush, they still wouldn't/couldn't get rid of him (he who shouldn't have been in the whitehouse in the first place)...

So maybe slaggin off Obama or any other opposition in this way is just a liberty enjoyed by the undesposable.

Darth Jello Cheese Spelunker
Originally posted by King Kandy
Boy, why is it elections are never based on ISSUES?

Because anyone who has a chance of being elected is just a puppet with the same handler's hand jammed up his or her ass.

Sadako of Girth Extreme Mode

That too. 🙂