BJean

T_O_M: No doubt about it -- you're back!! Humidor. Heh, heh, heh. Just wait until I'm president. heh, heh, heh. I missed you!

Me Three!!!

The difference between most men and Clinton though is that his penile bodily function must be influenced by an addiction, like Betsyjane says. No different than cookies for me really. heh, heh, heh. I'm trying to trade in my food addiction for a sexual one so I can get more exercise. Just kidding!

Betsyjane: Did you feel as betrayed as I did when you found out that he really had been with her? Actually I knew the minute I saw the clip of her looking at him while he was glad handing the crowd. For someone who was so smart and was so able to identify with people and who wanted to be a good president and leave a good legacy, it is unfathomable that he let her in the door. If he were head of one of the European countries no one would have cared, but he was the sitting American President and a lot of Americans feel just like you about infidelity. Or at least they SAY they do.

Carlene I was just surprised he did it with a cigar.

Yeah Jack, but how do you really feel about Carter. Just kidding. Of course you obviously don't find anything funny about it. I just had no idea that his presidential decisions were so far reaching, including the robbery of guns and camping gear just last year. I feel equally as angered about how George W. Bush has sold us all down the river in many more ways than with a few of his domestic policies, which granted, suck. But I'm obviously not as mad as you have demonstrated that you are at Carter and I guess the Democratic party in general. Far out. I didn't think anyone could think less of someone than I do of George W. Bush.

Green, at least you wouldn't have actually been having "sex" with him (according to his definition).

Jimmy also has a team that goes to other countries and they monitor elections. Like I said once earlier, too bad he didn't set up shop here for the last two presidential elections. Yep Hillary was actively for Goldwater. Can you just imagine Hillary a "Goldwater Girl"? I'm beginning to think that she never really got that out of her system.

Green! Who you trying to kid? Lazy...? Nope me thinks it's a different thing that motivates your "reverse" thought process. And babycakes I'm with you!

It's true. You know there is one fellow who I believe is a true humanitarian and he's really only become one since he was no longer president. That is Jimmy Carter. Don't get me wrong, he is still influenced by people with power, but I think he has a good heart and that he does care about Americans, especially those with small voices. I also think that Truman was someone who cared. For all the good it did him.

laurend: If we knew what all went on behind the scenes in politics, we'd probably have to be treated for shock. We know a lot, but not even close to how things are really done in Washington. When I was a legislative aide in Virginia, I was young and involved in politics a little (worked for the Attorney General, worked on campaigns, etc.) but once I was able to see the bargaining and power struggles behind the scenes, I became very disgusted and for a while didn't want to even vote. But as someone said earlier, it's a system that we have and we have to work with it or change it.

Smart AND good looking? Obviously not presidential material. What was he thinking?

You gotta admit it was a pretty brilliant plan. If someone had told me about it before hand, I would have probably thought they couldn't pull it off. Maybe that's what G.W. thought.

Nope. You're right. Our spiffy weapons systems can't stop terrorists. Do you think that our actions in Iraq can? We probably agree on the principles of having a national defense and we undoubtedly agree on our misuse of bombs and other weaponry. But I confess that I have a vested interest in all this, so I should probably shut the heck up about it. I'm feeling guiltier by the minute.

Carlene: It is surprising that Clinton overcame his unfortunate home life. You do know he was a Rhodes Scholar too?

Thanks T_O_M! I'll check it out.

Carlene: I'll vote for that thread!

Ohmigosh, that was FUN! Thanks for all the input Betsyjane. Leave it to you to set the record straight. I really thought I'd have even more fun when the pro Republican subscribers jumped in, but it was fun nonetheless! You people are just too quick for me!!!

Betsyjane: sorry I didn't cite all the ways in which the panel formed their opinions, but Jimmy Carter's has been published elsewhere.

Rats. You say it's false T_O_M? Why? If you were to rate them based on your own intelligence, how would you change the list? Want a web address? There are many more unflattering articles about BuSh that they've written. The ones I read aren't wrong.

Jodie: Thanks for clearing up why your post did sound rather off. T_O_M: I really appreciate and loved your last post. Since this is about whether G.W. is the worst American president, you might enjoy reading the following bit of info that was published Monday by the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, which detailed its findings of a 4 month study of the intelligence quotient of President George W. Bush. The Lovenstein Institute participants include high caliber historians, psychiatrists, sociologists, scientists in human behavior, and psychologists. There have been twelve presidents over the past 50 years, F.D. Roosevelt to G.W. Bush, who were rated based on scholarly achievements: 1. Writings that they produced without aid of staff. 2. Their ability to speak with clarity, and several other psychological factors, which were then scored using the Swanson-Crane system of intelligence ranking. The study determined the following IQs of each president, accurate to within five percentage points. In order by presidents term: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D) 142 Harry S. Truman (D) 132 Dwight David Eisenhower ® 122 John Fitzgerald Kennedy (D) 174 Lyndon Baines Johnson (D) 126 Richard Milhous Nixon ® 155 Gerald R. Ford ® 121 James Earle Carter (D) 175 Ronald Wilson Reagan ® 105 George Herbert Walker Bush ® 98 William Jefferson Clinton (D) 182 George Walker Bush ® 91 Listed in order of IQ rating: 182 William Jefferson Clinton 175 James Earle Carter 174 John Fitzgerald Kennedy 155 Richard Milhous Nixon 147 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 132 Harry S. Truman 126 Lyndon Baines Johnson 122 Dwight David Eisenhower 121 Gerald R. Ford 105 Ronald Wilson Reagan 098 George Herbert Walker Bush 091 George Walker Bush Among comments made concerning the specific testing of G.W. Bush, his low ratings are due to his apparent difficulty being in command of the English language in public statements, his limited use of vocabulary (6,500 words for Bush versus an average of 11,000 for other presidents), his lack of scholarly achievements other than a basic MBA, and an absence of any body of work which could be judged on an intellectual basis. The report documents the methods and procedures used to arrive at these ratings, including depth of sentence structure and voice stress confidence analysis. All of the presidents prior to George W. Bush had at least one book under their belt, and most had written several white papers during their education or early careers. Not so with President Bush, Lovenstein said. We relied heavily on transcripts of his unscripted public speaking. He has no published works or writings, which made it more difficult to arrive at an assessment. There is lots more in the article, but you get the point.

I just returned from an appt. with the exercise physiologist and the doctor because I decided I wanted a fill. I had lost 5.5 lbs. in 4 weeks. I've lost 35 lbs. and 35 inches - about the size of my granddaughter. Just think. I was carrying around my granddaughter (in fat) full time! The doc gave me a sweet lecture. He did not think I should get an adjustment. He said that I should wait until I plateau. He says I'm being impatient and not giving myself enough credit for what I've already lost. He says that we bandsters tend to give our bands all the credit. We need to be proud of our accomplishments and take full credit. I was pretty pumped after I left. I think I just wanted even more restriction so I could lose it faster. But faster isn't better if you want to keep your health, including your hair. Plus slower gives time for our minds to adjust and really register our weight loss. He said that one day, in another 30 lbs. or so, I will come to the realization that I won't gain the weight back like I always have before. So I hope this helps somebody else at least a tiny bit. I can't eat fast, but I don't PB a lot. Only twice in the past month. And he says that's a good thing. It means I am learning how to eat properly... with or without the band. Good point I guess.

Maybe we should start a thread titled: Clinton, best decision-making president? Or maybe: Clinton, best use of a cigar by a president? Or: Since we are no longer in a cold war, is it still important to have a president who is vulnerable to blackmail? Or: What does having sex in the White House have to do with good presidential decision making? Or: What does Clinton's decision making have to do with G. W. Bush's ability to govern fairly?

T_O_M: I agree that Defense is a term that may not describe our military and weapons systems accurately. Ministry of Aggression is certainly a more accurate name under the current administration. You go on to drive my point home however, when you state that there are no countries chomping at the bit to overrun our shores. That is because we have the most powerful weapons systems in the world. Under this administration Congress didn't approve our aggressive action in Iraq. They allowed the president to make the call. That this has come about might be an argument for a smaller Department of Defense or fewer and less sophisticated weapons systems. But do you really think that this country would be as safe from Iran, China and North Korea if they thought that we don't have the strongest military in the world? Do you remember the Russians weapons' parades? We sure thought we should be afraid of them. We tried to use diplomacy rather than might when it came to dealing with Russia. Just because it was terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 doesn't negate the need for the U.S. to have a formidable national defense.

Well I feel pretty happy that my feeble paragraph may have helped generate the outpouring of opinions that have sprung up. Although we can't all agree that G.W. is the worst president ever, there have been some interesting points made. As far as I am concerned Dubya still wins by a landslide. Some of the citings here about the poor decisions made by previous presidents certainly do not sway me. I have found it interesting to note how often Dubya's supporters say something like, "I may not agree with all of his decisions..." We can certainly hope that pressure from the new Congress will influence better decisions from here on out (until 2008 elections) and one day we will all be able to look back and decide that he didn't turn out to be the worst president ever. That, my friends, would be a Godsend.