i am not going to rebut your arguments because anyone reading them with a half-way open mind and any sense of logical reasoning can pick them apart themselves. anyone else would not be swayed by a rebuttal, no matter how good. the reason i am replying is to get back to a question that i asked on this board a while back (may have been before dawgfood showed up):Originally Posted by dawgfood
what did clinton do to bring his presidency even to the level of mediocre?
jimmy carter is the only thing between clinton and the title "worst president in the last 50 years". i never said that bush was "great", but i think that history will judge him at least as "very good". history will judge clinton as 8 years of nothing -- oh, and one great big sex scandal.