George H.W. Bush, 41st POTUS, dies at 94

[RiverDog]

Thank you for your service, both in war and peace.

R.I.P.

[NorthHawk]

Although he was tough, he was still a gentleman as evidenced by his friendship with his bitter political rival Bill Clinton.
Unlike many if not most of the players on today's political scene, he could segregate the political battlefield from real life
and be civil or even make friends with others he competed with.
Sadly, the times have changed to what we have today.

[idhawkman]

His legacy will be mixed. He was president when the Iron block finally caved in, Desert Storm, Deregulation of the Internet which created the boom in the 90s, etc. But he was also the first Globalist, he was out of touch, went back on his "no new taxes" pledge and let the economy slip into mild recession.

Personally, I liked 41 and think he would go down as a very significant president. Time will tell. R.I.P. H.W.

[RiverDog]

Although he was tough, he was still a gentleman as evidenced by his friendship with his bitter political rival Bill Clinton.
Unlike many if not most of the players on today's political scene, he could segregate the political battlefield from real life
and be civil or even make friends with others he competed with.
Sadly, the times have changed to what we have today.

Agreed about the gentleman part, and the ability to compartmentalize his emotions, something the current POTUS seems unable to do.

But some would argue that part of Bush 41's political problems was that he wasn't tough enough. During his '88 campaign, some of his primary opponents tried to hang the "Wimp" label on him, and his going back on his "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge was one of the incidents that led to his failed re-election bid.

[idhawkman]

Agreed about the gentleman part, and the ability to compartmentalize his emotions, something the current POTUS seems unable to do.

But some would argue that part of Bush 41's political problems was that he wasn't tough enough. During his '88 campaign, some of his primary opponents tried to hang the "Wimp" label on him, and his going back on his "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge was one of the incidents that led to his failed re-election bid.

I firmly believe that he would have won reelection if he would have just simply said that he was focused on the first 4 years internationally to finally end the cold war and solve problems abroad but would turn that same focus internally on the domestic problems in his new term. "its the economy, stupid" would have crashed to earth if he made that his platform. (NOTE: Isn't it fun to look back at that slogan and know that the Dems were trying to hang the "stupid" lable on 41 - well before they successfully hung on 43). And many of you don't think the MSM is biased and helping the dems.

[RiverDog]

His legacy will be mixed. He was president when the Iron block finally caved in, Desert Storm, Deregulation of the Internet which created the boom in the 90s, etc. But he was also the first Globalist, he was out of touch, went back on his "no new taxes" pledge and let the economy slip into mild recession.

Personally, I liked 41 and think he would go down as a very significant president. Time will tell. R.I.P. H.W.

Not sure how much he 'let' the economy go into recession. In the aftermath of all wars, the economy naturally slows down, and it wasn't too long after the end of the Gulf War that the Soviet Union collapsed, leading to more cuts in defense spending. But as you indicated, with his "New World Order" vision, he was seen as an international President that didn't focus enough on the economy, and an opportunistic Bill Clinton took advantage of it.

But Bush's real problem in '92 was that moonbat Ross Perot, who split the conservative vote.

[idhawkman]

Not sure how much he 'let' the economy go into recession. In the aftermath of all wars, the economy naturally slows down, and it wasn't too long after the end of the Gulf War that the Soviet Union collapsed, leading to more cuts in defense spending. But as you indicated, with his "New World Order" vision, he was seen as an international President that didn't focus enough on the economy, and an opportunistic Bill Clinton took advantage of it.

But Bush's real problem in '92 was that moonbat Ross Perot, who split the conservative vote.

Just FYI - the gulf war caused the collapse of the soviet union. The HWY of death showed the world that the only export at the time for the soviet union was ineffective against our weapons. The recession was due after all the years of Reaganomics.

Perot did effect the outcome of the election but again, if Bush had admitted he was more concerned with ending the 40 years of cold war and that he would concentrate on the domestic issues he would have de-fanged Perot and Ross may have dropped out himself at that point. Being stubborn and not admitting he was more concerned overseas did him in (but for the record, I think it was absolutely what was needed at the time).

[RiverDog]

Just FYI - the gulf war caused the collapse of the soviet union. The HWY of death showed the world that the only export at the time for the soviet union was ineffective against our weapons. The recession was due after all the years of Reaganomics.

Perot did effect the outcome of the election but again, if Bush had admitted he was more concerned with ending the 40 years of cold war and that he would concentrate on the domestic issues he would have de-fanged Perot and Ross may have dropped out himself at that point. Being stubborn and not admitting he was more concerned overseas did him in (but for the record, I think it was absolutely what was needed at the time).

The Gulf War was arguably the straw that broke the camel's back, but it did not in itself cause the collapse of the Soviet empire.

Ross Perot had a personal vendetta against GHW Bush. Nothing Bush could have said or done would have caused him to drop out of that race.

[idhawkman]

Just FYI - the gulf war caused the collapse of the soviet union. The HWY of death showed the world that the only export at the time for the soviet union was ineffective against our weapons. The recession was due after all the years of Reaganomics.

Perot did effect the outcome of the election but again, if Bush had admitted he was more concerned with ending the 40 years of cold war and that he would concentrate on the domestic issues he would have de-fanged Perot and Ross may have dropped out himself at that point. Being stubborn and not admitting he was more concerned overseas did him in (but for the record, I think it was absolutely what was needed at the time).

The Gulf War was arguably the straw that broke the camel's back, but it did not in itself cause the collapse of the Soviet empire.

You are correct. Reagan broke the USSR's bank and their gold reserve in the arms race. The only thing they had for GDP left was their military sales to the other Iron block countries and those that were aligned with them. e.g. Iraq, Syria, etc. When our military shot through the (at that time) third largest army like crap through a goose it broke the USSR and they couldn't do anything to stop the collapse. I could tell you stories of how this played out in the early 90s since I was stationed in Kiev, for a couple years after the fall and traveled to many of the CIS stans during that time. Nevertheless, the final straw was the Gulf war which turned out to be a godsend instead of a war in Europe.

Ross Perot had a personal vendetta against GHW Bush. Nothing Bush could have said or done would have caused him to drop out of that race.

Ross may not have dropped out but he still would have been de-fanged as I pointed out. His 19Million votes is what cost H.W. his second term. If H.W. would have turned the focus domestically, he would have gotten at least half of those votes back and would have been a 2 term president.

[RiverDog]

You are correct. Reagan broke the USSR's bank and their gold reserve in the arms race. The only thing they had for GDP left was their military sales to the other Iron block countries and those that were aligned with them. e.g. Iraq, Syria, etc. When our military shot through the (at that time) third largest army like crap through a goose it broke the USSR and they couldn't do anything to stop the collapse. I could tell you stories of how this played out in the early 90s since I was stationed in Kiev, for a couple years after the fall and traveled to many of the CIS stans during that time. Nevertheless, the final straw was the Gulf war which turned out to be a godsend instead of a war in Europe.

It wasn't just Reagan that caused the USSR to collapse, although I will admit that he certainly accelerated it. A decades long struggle spanning multiple administrations caused their debt to pile up. Additionally, IMO the coming information age allowed their people to see what the outside had that they didn't and gave them a yearning for democracy and capitalism. They could see without the filter of their state controlled news events such as what was happening in Poland.

Ross may not have dropped out but he still would have been de-fanged as I pointed out. His 19Million votes is what cost H.W. his second term. If H.W. would have turned the focus domestically, he would have gotten at least half of those votes back and would have been a 2 term president.

Maybe. Perot had a very deep following. It would have taken one heck of an about face for GHW Bush to influence the number of voters to turn to him as you are claiming. Heck, Bush couldn't even win in deep red states like Louisiana and Georgia, didn't get a majority of voters in any state, and only got 37% of the popular vote nation wide, so it's hard to imagine how just a little change in his posturing could influence as many voters as you are claiming. Clinton's southern roots served him well.

But clearly, Perot's candidacy changed the math of the election and made it a much easier road for Clinton.

[idhawkman]

Maybe. Perot had a very deep following. It would have taken one heck of an about face for GHW Bush to influence the number of voters to turn to him as you are claiming. Heck, Bush couldn't even win in deep red states like Louisiana and Georgia, didn't get a majority of voters in any state, and only got 37% of the popular vote nation wide, so it's hard to imagine how just a little change in his posturing could influence as many voters as you are claiming. Clinton's southern roots served him well.

But clearly, Perot's candidacy changed the math of the election and made it a much easier road for Clinton.

Yeah, we'll never know. What I find appalling is how the media is treating him now as opposed to how they treated him in that re-election year. They did everything to paint him as weak and out of touch but now show how he tried to work with Dems, reached out to the iron block instead of strong arming them into the dirt, etc. What a hypocritical group they are.

[RiverDog]

Yeah, we'll never know. What I find appalling is how the media is treating him now as opposed to how they treated him in that re-election year. They did everything to paint him as weak and out of touch but now show how he tried to work with Dems, reached out to the iron block instead of strong arming them into the dirt, etc. What a hypocritical group they are.

Bush did plenty to reinforce that perception himself. The media aren't the ones that hung the "kindler, gentler" moniker on him, force him to give his "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge that he caved in on, nor did they poison his food causing him to throw up during a state dinner. They also didn't force him to take in Dan Quale, which prevented him from drawing a contrast between his military service and Clinton's anti war past. Bush 41 was his own worst enemy.

[idhawkman]

Yeah, we'll never know. What I find appalling is how the media is treating him now as opposed to how they treated him in that re-election year. They did everything to paint him as weak and out of touch but now show how he tried to work with Dems, reached out to the iron block instead of strong arming them into the dirt, etc. What a hypocritical group they are.

Bush did plenty to reinforce that perception himself. The media aren't the ones that hung the "kindler, gentler" moniker on him, force him to give his "Read my lips: No new taxes" pledge that he caved in on, nor did they poison his food causing him to throw up during a state dinner. They also didn't force him to take in Dan Quale, which prevented him from drawing a contrast between his military service and Clinton's anti war past. Bush 41 was his own worst enemy.

And yet all you hear today is accolades for him and how he ended the cold war without a shot, re-united Germany, liberated Kuwait and built the largest coalition ever made, freed Panama from a dictator and brought down the corrupt Marcos regime in the P.I. As I mentioned earlier, he's also credited with being civil and working with the dems to bring down the deficit (by raising those taxes) and so much more bunk. None of it was there in '92 just like none of the weaker, no new taxes criticism is there today.

[RiverDog]

And yet all you hear today is accolades for him and how he ended the cold war without a shot, re-united Germany, liberated Kuwait and built the largest coalition ever made, freed Panama from a dictator and brought down the corrupt Marcos regime in the P.I. As I mentioned earlier, he's also credited with being civil and working with the dems to bring down the deficit (by raising those taxes) and so much more bunk. None of it was there in '92 just like none of the weaker, no new taxes criticism is there today.

Which is fine with me. We should take a more favorable opinion of people in the wake of their death. They've done it with all deceased POTUS's. When Nixon died, all we heard about was his statesmanship, how he was the first sitting POTUS to visit China and the USSR and relatively little about Watergate. I'm sure that you're not going to want people to be preoccupied with all of your failings in the wake of your death. There will be plenty of time in the years following to revisit his legacy. Let's first give him a hero's funeral before we start dissecting the finer details of his past.

[idhawkman]

I'm sure that you're not going to want people to be preoccupied with all of your failings in the wake of your death. There will be plenty of time in the years following to revisit his legacy. Let's first give him a hero's funeral before we start dissecting the finer details of his past.

This is where you are wayyy wrong. I'd rather they NOT destroy my life with half truths and lies when I'm living and could really care less what they say about me when I'm DEAD!

[RiverDog]

This is where you are wayyy wrong. I'd rather they NOT destroy my life with half truths and lies when I'm living and could really care less what they say about me when I'm DEAD!

Alright, then I won't attempt to speak for you.

What I'm talking about was eulogies, which don't have to be an objective biography, to the contrary, they often times omit many negative aspects of a person's life. It's part of the mourning process of honoring the deceased and his/her family. I wouldn't eulogize JFK in the days following his passing by saying that during his time in office he got more ass than a warm toilet seat.

[Aseahawkfan]

R.I.P. to the last president to actually serve in our wars rather than just talk a great game about patriotism, sacrifice, and love of nation. Bush Sr. was the last president I could look at with some respect as a man and patriot. He may have envisioned globalism, but he pictured with America as its leader and as a force of peace, stability, and quality of life improvements for all. He risked his life to attain it as after witnessing a World War and all the suffering it caused, he wanted better for the world's future.

I haven't considered any president since Bush Sr. as an honorable and decent American.

[RiverDog]

R.I.P. to the last president to actually serve in our wars rather than just talk a great game about patriotism, sacrifice, and love of nation. Bush Sr. was the last president I could look at with some respect as a man and patriot. He may have envisioned globalism, but he pictured with America as its leader and as a force of peace, stability, and quality of life improvements for all. He risked his life to attain it as after witnessing a World War and all the suffering it caused, he wanted better for the world's future.

I haven't considered any president since Bush Sr. as an honorable and decent American.

IMO Bush 43 and Obama were both 'honorable' and 'decent.' W may not have served in a war, but at least he served in the military. Obama in particular came from a different generation where their military service was not required so I'm not holding his lack of service against him (how can I? I never served). They were not chicken hawks like Trump is, taking advantage of multiple deferments to dodge the draft.

Other than that, good thoughts about Bush 41. He's one of the last politicians from my parent's generation. Very touching to see Bob Dole pay his respects.

[Hawktawk]

RIP Mr Pres. You served with dignity and class, a true compassionate conservative republican I was proud to support. Quite a contrast to what's going on these days.

[idhawkman]

Alright, then I won't attempt to speak for you.

What I'm talking about was eulogies, which don't have to be an objective biography, to the contrary, they often times omit many negative aspects of a person's life. It's part of the mourning process of honoring the deceased and his/her family. I wouldn't eulogize JFK in the days following his passing by saying that during his time in office he got more ass than a warm toilet seat.

You and I both know the only reason the MSM is playing up H.W. is for backhanded swipes at Trump. Pretending it isn't is just folly.

(just like HawkTalk's post above)

[idhawkman]

R.I.P. to the last president to actually serve in our wars rather than just talk a great game about patriotism, sacrifice, and love of nation. Bush Sr. was the last president I could look at with some respect as a man and patriot. He may have envisioned globalism, but he pictured with America as its leader and as a force of peace, stability, and quality of life improvements for all. He risked his life to attain it as after witnessing a World War and all the suffering it caused, he wanted better for the world's future.

I haven't considered any president since Bush Sr. as an honorable and decent American.

I have often said that Bush Sr. will go down in history as one of the greatest presidents ever for much of the reasons you post here. I also agree that subsequent presidents have dementedly corrupted his "new world order" vision. I personally witnessed Clinton do it. Bush jr. with his compassionate conservatism got taken to the cleaners by the dems who had no intention on a "give and take" circumstance - they only wanted to "take" from him and he let them. No wonder they labeled him as "Stupid". Obummer... There's just too much to cover on this guy who was so out of his league it wasn't funny especially on the world stage. What a puppet he was.

[RiverDog]

You and I both know the only reason the MSM is playing up H.W. is for backhanded swipes at Trump. Pretending it isn't is just folly.

(just like HawkTalk's post above)

If reading remarks like Hawktalk's causes you to think that they are directed solely at Trump then I'd suggest that you're so over the top obsessed with Trump that you're paranoid.

The way I read Hawktalk's remarks, as well as the MSM's, includes but does not necessarily mean exclusive to DJT. Specifically, I thought of both Trump and the Dem Senators and their behavior during the SCOTUS confirmation hearings when I hear or read comments like Hawktalk's.

Besides, it's completely accuracte and appropriate to contrast Bush 41 in a favorable light with today's politicians as a way of eulogizing him.

[Hawktawk]

RD there aren't many politicians today in either party who resemble those from the greatest generation. The letter written by GHWB to Bill Clinton that was left on his desk in the oval office when he arrived is but one of many examples. Presidential candidate John McCain's refusal to agree with a woman accusing Obama of being a Muslim during a town hall is another although had he played the racist slash and burn card so prevalent in today's toxic climate it may well have worked. The great Bob Dole whose heart wrenching salute yesterday after requesting help to stand before the casket of a former political adversary is another.

As for ID Hawkmans characterization of the actual fact reporting adversarial MSM that holds both parties accountable as only eulogizing GHWB to cast a negative light on Trump I think its more that having the current blowhard tweeting lunatic in the white house has helped them APPRECIATE someone like Bush 1 more.

I heard a quote from none other than Nancy Pelosi very early in Trumps term say "Id take GW, HW, Dole, McCain, anyone over this"..... hear hear its one thing in the world i agree with her on.

Trump casts a negative light on himself, he doesn't need any help with that. To his credit he has mostly handled this passing fairly graciously although his twitter war with our justice department has not been able to take a break. Hopefully he will learn a tenth of the decorum and class of this dignified honest servant GHWB.

[idhawkman]

If reading remarks like Hawktalk's causes you to think that they are directed solely at Trump then I'd suggest that you're so over the top obsessed with Trump that you're paranoid.

The way I read Hawktalk's remarks, as well as the MSM's, includes but does not necessarily mean exclusive to DJT. Specifically, I thought of both Trump and the Dem Senators and their behavior during the SCOTUS confirmation hearings when I hear or read comments like Hawktalk's.

Besides, it's completely accuracte and appropriate to contrast Bush 41 in a favorable light with today's politicians as a way of eulogizing him.

And how about now after he clarified he was talking mainly about Trump?

[RiverDog]

If reading remarks like Hawktalk's causes you to think that they are directed solely at Trump then I'd suggest that you're so over the top obsessed with Trump that you're paranoid.

The way I read Hawktalk's remarks, as well as the MSM's, includes but does not necessarily mean exclusive to DJT. Specifically, I thought of both Trump and the Dem Senators and their behavior during the SCOTUS confirmation hearings when I hear or read comments like Hawktalk's.

Besides, it's completely accuracte and appropriate to contrast Bush 41 in a favorable light with today's politicians as a way of eulogizing him.

And how about now after he clarified he was talking mainly about Trump?

Yes, I agree with you now, but that wasn't apparent in his first musing, nor is it apparent in your generalized MSM complaint which you didn't give any specific references to.

When someone talks about a toxic atmosphere in politics nowadays, I think of more than just DJT even though he's a major contributing cause of it. You see the same nameless reference to a toxic atmosphere and immediately assume it's s a direct insult to DJT and only DJT.

[idhawkman]

Yes, I agree with you now, but that wasn't apparent in his first musing, nor is it apparent in your generalized MSM complaint which you didn't give any specific references to.

When someone talks about a toxic atmosphere in politics nowadays, I think of more than just DJT even though he's a major contributing cause of it. You see the same nameless reference to a toxic atmosphere and immediately assume it's s a direct insult to DJT and only DJT.

River, there's a whole montage out there where the MSM is specifically naming Trump in their rants. I thought you knew that and that I didn't need to point out the obvious.

[RiverDog]

River, there's a whole montage out there where the MSM is specifically naming Trump in their rants. I thought you knew that and that I didn't need to point out the obvious.

I never said there wasn't. What I said was that in any unnamed mention of a toxic atmosphere you are assuming it is being directly attributed to Trump and only Trump.

[idhawkman]

River, there's a whole montage out there where the MSM is specifically naming Trump in their rants. I thought you knew that and that I didn't need to point out the obvious.

I never said there wasn't. What I said was that in any unnamed mention of a toxic atmosphere you are assuming it is being directly attributed to Trump and only Trump.

You forgot to add to the end of that sentence that I WAS RIGHT, TOO!!!!

[Aseahawkfan]

IMO Bush 43 and Obama were both 'honorable' and 'decent.' W may not have served in a war, but at least he served in the military. Obama in particular came from a different generation where their military service was not required so I'm not holding his lack of service against him (how can I? I never served). They were not chicken hawks like Trump is, taking advantage of multiple deferments to dodge the draft.

Other than that, good thoughts about Bush 41. He's one of the last politicians from my parent's generation. Very touching to see Bob Dole pay his respects.

Bush Jr. was a result of nepotism. He avoided the war with appointments to political buddies of his dad. He wasn't half the man his father was. His presidency was marred by being a puppet of Dick Cheney and whoever ran Cheney.

Obama was part of the liberal hippy generation that doesn't even know what the word honor means. He was a propped up orator pushed by the cult of celebrity and SJWs to the office of presidency. The best I can say about the man is he was a great speaker when well-prepared and seemed like a nice guy, though woefully out of his league on the world political stage. He was either snookered by Iran or willingly agreed to a deal detrimental to our nation.

I don't look at either of their presidencies as successful or desirable. Best I can say is neither one was caught up in any cheating scandals. I don't look at them as the same way as a man like Bush Sr. That was the type of man that made America appear strong and accomplished. He was an old America raised with manners and war-tested. Maybe we'll see some of these men when the Afghan and Iraq veterans start rising in politics.

[RiverDog]

Bush Jr. was a result of nepotism. He avoided the war with appointments to political buddies of his dad. He wasn't half the man his father was. His presidency was marred by being a puppet of Dick Cheney and whoever ran Cheney.

Obama was part of the liberal hippy generation that doesn't even know what the word honor means. He was a propped up orator pushed by the cult of celebrity and SJWs to the office of presidency. The best I can say about the man is he was a great speaker when well-prepared and seemed like a nice guy, though woefully out of his league on the world political stage. He was either snookered by Iran or willingly agreed to a deal detrimental to our nation.

I don't look at either of their presidencies as successful or desirable. Best I can say is neither one was caught up in any cheating scandals. I don't look at them as the same way as a man like Bush Sr. That was the type of man that made America appear strong and accomplished. He was an old America raised with manners and war-tested. Maybe we'll see some of these men when the Afghan and Iraq veterans start rising in politics.

You might want to find another term to describe Obama's generation other than "liberal hippie", which is a better fit for Clinton and Bush 43. Obama was in grade school during the hippie movement. But I get your point.

In contrast to the current occupant as well as the one that preceded them, both Bush 43 and Obama were far more honorable and respectful personalities, so I guess it depends on your perspective.

[Aseahawkfan]

You might want to find another term to describe Obama's generation other than "liberal hippie", which is a better fit for Clinton and Bush 43. Obama was in grade school during the hippie movement. But I get your point.

In contrast to the current occupant as well as the one that preceded them, both Bush 43 and Obama were far more honorable and respectful personalities, so I guess it depends on your perspective.

I can't think of a president in my lifetime that represents our nation in a worse manner than Trump. The man doesn't know the words honor, respect, humility, sacrifice, and manners. Biggest jackass to ever hold the office. Almost anyone looks good compared to Trump. A far cry from even Trump's TV personality. Even Trump prior to being president looks better than the current Trump. It's like he's lost himself.

[Hawktawk]

I can't think of a president in my lifetime that represents our nation in a worse manner than Trump. The man doesn't know the words honor, respect, humility, sacrifice, and manners. Biggest jackass to ever hold the office. Almost anyone looks good compared to Trump. A far cry from even Trump's TV personality. Even Trump prior to being president looks better than the current Trump. It's like he's lost himself.

Absolutely True Asea, every word of it including Trump pre presidency compared to now. Look at his current television appearances and delusional ramblings on twitter at all hours of the day and night compared to even in his P@$$y grabbing tape days and the decline in mental acuity, speech syntax is shocking. Look back 20 years it's even more obvious. He's lost his mind entirely, totally unfit for the office, a shell of himself. He was always a morally bankrupt A hole shyster but he didn't have the nuclear football and the ability to tweet out foreign and domestic policy then.

[RiverDog]

I can't think of a president in my lifetime that represents our nation in a worse manner than Trump. The man doesn't know the words honor, respect, humility, sacrifice, and manners. Biggest jackass to ever hold the office. Almost anyone looks good compared to Trump. A far cry from even Trump's TV personality. Even Trump prior to being president looks better than the current Trump. It's like he's lost himself.

Absolutely True Asea, every word of it including Trump pre presidency compared to now. Look at his current television appearances and delusional ramblings on twitter at all hours of the day and night compared to even in his P@$$y grabbing tape days and the decline in mental acuity, speech syntax is shocking. Look back 20 years it's even more obvious. He's lost his mind entirely, totally unfit for the office, a shell of himself. He was always a morally bankrupt A hole shyster but he didn't have the nuclear football and the ability to tweet out foreign and domestic policy then.

I agree with ASF and don't disagree with you, but once again, you're going over the top with your characterizations.

But in defense of Trump, I will say that he's not the first p@$$y grabbing scum bag to have occupied the Oval Office, like one former POTUS using his cigar as a French tickler on a 21 year old intern, and some would argue that Reagan experienced a mental decline while in office.

[c_hawkbob]

I can't think of a president in my lifetime that represents our nation in a worse manner than Trump. The man doesn't know the words honor, respect, humility, sacrifice, and manners. Biggest jackass to ever hold the office. Almost anyone looks good compared to Trump. A far cry from even Trump's TV personality. Even Trump prior to being president looks better than the current Trump. It's like he's lost himself.

Absolutely True Asea, every word of it including Trump pre presidency compared to now. Look at his current television appearances and delusional ramblings on twitter at all hours of the day and night compared to even in his P@$$y grabbing tape days and the decline in mental acuity, speech syntax is shocking. Look back 20 years it's even more obvious. He's lost his mind entirely, totally unfit for the office, a shell of himself. He was always a morally bankrupt A hole shyster but he didn't have the nuclear football and the ability to tweet out foreign and domestic policy then.

I agree with ASF and don't disagree with you, but once again, you're going over the top with your characterizations.

But in defense of Trump, I will say that he's not the first p@$$y grabbing scum bag to have occupied the Oval Office, like one former POTUS using his cigar as a French tickler on a 21 year old intern, and some would argue that Reagan experienced a mental decline while in office.

Though he often may, I disagree that in in this instance HT went "over the top" in this characterization.

[RiverDog]

Though he often may, I disagree that in in this instance HT went "over the top" in this characterization.

Perhaps not when contrasted to earlier musings, but he did start a thread on forum decorum, complaining about how some posters were characterizing him. It might help to find another term besides "morally bankrupt A hole shyster" if he's seeking to tone things down a bit.

[c_hawkbob]

Point taken, but I took his thread to be referring to the way we treat each other, not necessarily a third party.

[RiverDog]

Point taken, but I took his thread to be referring to the way we treat each other, not necessarily a third party.

I understand what you're saying, and will offer my apologies to HT if he feels I'm being a little too pretentious. But that's usually how the "better up your meds" comments start, ie with an over-the-top characterization of DJT.

[politicalfootball]

He brought our country together this last week with his wake that was well publicized all over the TV and in the papers.

I was around during his vice presidency and his Presidency
but not for when he was a WW 2 aviator of course.
He was a significant President in the United States history and also in modern history.
He and Barbara are looking down on the country that they loved and smiling now.

[RiverDog]

He brought our country together this last week with his wake that was well publicized all over the TV and in the papers.

I was around during his vice presidency and his Presidency
but not for when he was a WW 2 aviator of course.
He was a significant President in the United States history and also in modern history.
He and Barbara are looking down on the country that they loved and smiling now.

Yes, it was a long tribute, the longest I've witnessed since JFK was assassinated. But if you think they over did it with Bush 41, just think what it as like back in November of 1963, when I was 9 years old.

From the afternoon of Friday, November 22nd when news first broke of JFK being shot until Tuesday morning after the funeral on Monday, November 25th, all 3 national television networks cancelled all programming...including commercials...and covered nothing but events surrounding the assassination and funeral.

Can you imagine any company cutting off their source of income for 3.5 days?

[idhawkman]

Yes, it was a long tribute, the longest I've witnessed since JFK was assassinated. But if you think they over did it with Bush 41, just think what it as like back in November of 1963, when I was 9 years old.

From the afternoon of Friday, November 22nd when news first broke of JFK being shot until Tuesday morning after the funeral on Monday, November 25th, all 3 national television networks cancelled all programming...including commercials...and covered nothing but events surrounding the assassination and funeral.

Can you imagine any company cutting off their source of income for 3.5 days?

OMG, I actually laughed out loud on this. I used to hate it when the president would do a national address as ALL THREE STATIONS would carry it and there was literally nothing to watch. (that was when I was much less interested in politics needless to say...)