OooSplendiforous wrote:cgf wrote:OooSplendiforous wrote:
I'm 23... I just have myself, that same personality, kind of a cross between Jim Rome and T.O. actually. I enjoy it, and I appreciate showmanship in others. All things aside though, I guess my real point was go ahead and hate a guys personality but that doesn't take away from his skills on the court. Jennings is a talented guy and we might have made the playoffs last season if we had him.
Its like the same thing when Clinton had all those problems because of the Monica Lewinski situation. Who gives a crap if the public doesn't like his actions regarding his romances? It doens't make him any less qualified as a president.
And kinda betrayed the trust a lot of the population had in him doing a good job of representing their interests which is kind of the only qualification one needs to become president other than being older than 35 and born in the USA.
Do you tell the truth on every single aspect? Does it really pertain to you that he lied about an affair that would've destroyed his marriage? Is that relevant to running the country? Oh okay...
Do you tell your wife/girlfriend she gained some weight if she had asked you? I'm sure you'd lie and say "you look fine babe". People tell insiginificant white lies all the time. It doesn't matter in the scheme of things. Who the hell cares man...
Clinton had a surpluss while he was president rather than this huge deficit were in today. Talent is talent, it doens't go away because you don't like their personality or behavior.
Again, it made him easy to blackmail. Think about that. That is certainly relevant to running the country. He put himself into that position for something exceptionally frivolous. After it came out he did everything he could to obfuscate the situation.
BTW we did not have a surplus. He changed the way we handled our debt. It gets kinda detailed but basically it was an accounting switch.
Anyway, I liked Clinton for the most part although his administration pushing for the repeal of some parts of the Glass-Steagal act helped set us up for the bank failures we are currently experiencing. The Republicans were all too happy to accommodate him. That and Greenspan constantly increasing the money supply.
The deficits did rise rapidly under Bush.
Here's one reference, there are others that go into detail how exactly he declared a surplus but our deficit actually increased you can google them if you like.
http://meetthefacts.com/tag/budget-surplus/1) According to the Treasury Department, when George W. Bush took office in 2001 the national debt was $5.73 trillion and when Bush left office in 2009, the national debt had increased to $10.63 trillion. That’s a 85% increase of $4.9 trillion. Sen. Menendez is off by 13%, but he is correct in the underlying message that the national debt did significantly increase under George W. Bush. Thus, we rate Sen. Menendez’s statement MOSTLY TRUE.
2) According to the Congressional Budget Office, under former president Bill Clinton there was a budget surplus in 1999 ($1.9 billion) and in 2000 ($86.4 billion). But the surpluses in 1999 and 2000 were not enough to eliminate the national debt. When the federal government spends more money than it takes in, that’s a deficit. When the government takes in more money than it spends, that’s a surplus (Treasury Department budget FAQs). Though former president Bill Clinton had two consecutive surplus years, the U.S. national debt actually increased $400 billion over his term (1992 to 2000).
MozGov: But in the game vs. Miami coach allowed me to smell the powder and face LeBron.
