The Two Most Divisive Presidents?

[Minor Axis]

I was listening to NPR today and a speaker there called President Clinton and President Bush the two most divisive presidents in our history. The comment struck me odd because when Clinton was in office things were pretty good for the country. Of course you all know the disaster that has been the Bush Presidency.

My point and question is just what made Clinton divisive? What exactly had Clinton done? By most accounts he had an excellent record as Chief Executive. The economy was surging, government spending was under control, and times were good.

My perception is that it was the Republican Party under Newt who adopted "Slash & Burn" Politics worked for 8 years spending 10's of millions of dollars to bring this President down mostly because he was not a Republican. This was also the beginning of "character assassination" politics as authored by the Republican Party. It's not good enough to say your an honorable person, but your policies are wrong. Character assassination politics is not only are your wrong, but your the scum of the earth.

If you want to look back before this, take a look at Bush Sr's Presidency. You don't see any Democrats trashing that President's character. This has become SOP- standard operating procedure for the Republican Party- question your opponents motives, character, and patriotism. I blame the Republican Party for making U.S. partisan politics what it is today.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

It's true, when Clinton was in office he did a good job. He was a pretty good president... whether he is a good person, why that's a different question that has nothing to do with politics, IMO

 

[pjbleek]

I was listening to NPR today and a speaker there called President Clinton and President Bush the two most divisive presidents in our history. The comment struck me odd because when Clinton was in office things were pretty good for the country. Of course you all know the disaster that has been the Bush Presidency.

My point and question is just what made Clinton divisive? What exactly had Clinton done? By most accounts he had an excellent record as Chief Executive. The economy was surging, government spending was under control, and times were good.

My perception is that it was the Republican Party under Newt who adopted "Slash & Burn" Politics worked for 8 years spending 10's of millions of dollars to bring this President down mostly because he was not a Republican. This was also the beginning of "character assassination" politics as authored by the Republican Party. It's not good enough to say your an honorable person, but your policies are wrong. Character assassination politics is not only are your wrong, but your the scum of the earth.

If you want to look back before this, take a look at Bush Sr's Presidency. You don't see any Democrats trashing that President's character. This has become SOP- standard operating procedure for the Republican Party- question your opponents motives, character, and patriotism. I blame the Republican Party for making U.S. partisan politics what it is today.

ok, I can understand the prosperity in which we were under Pres. Clinton....but if you look back at Reagan's first tenure he too had a great 1st term and was bringing the USA back after the whole Iran hostage/Energy crunch etc....but it always seemed to me that this nation goes on a ten year swing. we are the worlds police and our own worst enemy. We have to look inside before we can look out. but we far too often look outward....Clinton was very lucky to have a war effort ( at the time) seemed like we had pushed back Saddam and his followers and we could reclaim a great place to live....but he got pushy with his finger and started meddling in affairs in the Middle East and he should have NOT got involved with anything in that area of the world.....it wasn't that long ago that gas prices were below two dollars a gallon...Clinton saw the writing on the wall with the USS Cole attack and he did NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!! that opened up a gap that we all will not soon forget.....

 

[Alien Allen]

You are blinded by your allegiance to the democrats Minor

If you can not think of anything Clinton did wrong then there is no point debating. We can throw out the Lewinsky scandal. That was stupid on his part but even more stupid for the reps to try to impeach him for it. The guy had a litany of issues that dogged him. When there smoke there is fire. He lit the flame and then the reps blew on it. He had a chance to be one of the very best ever and had the charisma and all the tools but make no mistake he made his own bed.

As to the reps being the only ones who play dirty that is laughable.

I don't think this shit all started recently. Maybe I am wrong but all the presidents in my life have been dogged by the other party. that is the nature of the beast unfortunately. I think why it is more noticeable today is due to the internet and the 24/7 news cycle. Plus the massive amounts of money in campaigns. With that much money it makes it too enticing to dig up dirt.

 

[Minor Axis]

You are blinded by your allegiance to the democrats Minor
If you can not think of anything Clinton did wrong then there is no point debating. We can throw out the Lewinsky scandal.

I've no allegiance to the Dems. I'm an independent voter who goes with who I think is best for the country and me.

A litany of issues? Lewinsky is all the Republican's got after 8 years of harassing Clinton.

No comment about Slash and Burn, Character Assassination politics? Very convincing rebuttal.

 

[gLing]

No comment about Slash and Burn, Character Assassination politics? Very convincing rebuttal.

That stuff has been around since the concept of politics was invented.

 

[groundpounder]

I blame the Republican Party for making U.S. partisan politics what it is today.

This week's nominee for The Most Ironic Post in OTz History :clap

You are blinded by your allegiance to the democrats Minor

As to the reps being the only ones who play dirty that is laughable.

I don't think this shit all started recently. Maybe I am wrong but all the presidents in my life have been dogged by the other party.

that would be correct. to think it's the creation of one party or the other is so naive, it borders on lunacy.

that is the nature of the beast unfortunately.

the beast being, partisan politics. See: current thread.

I've no allegiance to the Dems. I'm an independent voter who goes with who I think is best for the country and me.

posting patterns suggest otherwise, but that's something else entirely, I would suppose....:cool











Partisan politics blow >> this thread started off in a distinctly partisan fashion >> ergo, this thread blows. :thumbdown




But I like the discussion it fosters....:thumbup

 

[Alien Allen]

I've no allegiance to the Dems. I'm an independent voter who goes with who I think is best for the country and me.

A litany of issues? Lewinsky is all the Republican's got after 8 years of harassing Clinton.

No comment about Slash and Burn, Character Assassination politics? Very convincing rebuttal.

ah but your words betray you. You are a democrat. You just think you are an independent

IMO ........... based on what you post

Just because there was no conviction does not mean there were no crimes. Come on admit it,,, you think Regan was leading all the Contra stuff and you buy the October surprise.


Like I said the playground is full of dirt. Yet you still only see it on the other side.

 

[Strauss]

Wouldn't one of the most, if not the most, divisive presidents be Abraham Lincoln? The Civil War seemed to reveal a certain strain within the country.

 

[groundpounder]

you can NOT be serious...

 

[Alien Allen]

Ground Pounder I know I am new here ..... and no disrespect as I like your style but..... has anybody ever said your sig is a bit irritating?? maybe a smaller video??

And as far as Strauss's comment I believe he was trying to make a point

Ironic how we can interpret things.

 

[groundpounder]

..has anybody ever said your sig is a bit irritating?? maybe a smaller video??

yes...

And as far as Strauss's comment I believe he was trying to make a point

Ironic how we can interpret things.

yes, I know. And I think I know where he was going with that...

 

[Alien Allen]

yes...






yes, I know. And I think I know where he was going with that...

ya take up half the frickin page with that damn baby video :willy_nilly:

and I think I knew you knew that :cool

on both points :24:

 

[valley]

Wouldn't one of the most, if not the most, divisive presidents be Abraham Lincoln? The Civil War seemed to reveal a certain strain within the country.

He's the first guy that came to mind when I read this thread too! :thumbup The Civil War divided our country more than any other event in history...brother against brother, father against son...how can anyone overlook Lincoln? :confused

Unless we are talking about presidents who lived in our own lifetime. I guess then our choice would be limited.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I would agree with the O/P to be honest, but the divisive wasn't as obvious with Clinton, that's because I personally have always believed that Hillary was running a "Republican Hate Campaign" behind closed doors.

Hillary has always exhibited a public.....I guess contempt for Repulican political views, primarily because she does fit the "Liberal Elitist" mold, she has the "You poor poor soul, who cannot make decisions for yourself, let me run your life for you with all this new administration" kinda mentality.

Make no bones about it, while Willie was philandering, Hillary was making a name for herself with the far left dems, and I think contributing to dividing the aisle.

Personally I liked Bill, I think he was endearing and easy to like, but Hillary was/is the apitomy of partisan politics, which has been established to be the fail.

 

[Minor Axis]

just because there was no conviction does not mean there were no crimes. Come on admit it,,, you think Regan was leading all the Contra stuff and you buy the October surprise.

When both Bill Clinton and Bush Jr showed up on the National scene, I did not know either of them. They both started with a neutral slate from my reference. And because I was pissed that Clinton who was President allowed his personal urges to get in the way of official business and opened himself up to more attacks, I was more than willing to give Bush a fair chance. But as I watched Bush in the debates, I realized he was an empty suit. Despite that, both of these Presidents showed up with a chance to do some good. Neither one showed up divisive based on being a Republican or a Democrat imo, although some (many?) might feel that way.

My understanding of a "divisive" President is one who by his actions after becoming President becomes divisive. I can easily name a list of divisive acts Bush has accomplished. Please enlighten me on the list of divisive acts of President Bill Clinton?

The point is with Clinton, was this divisiveness across the country or was it a campaign formulated by the Republican party to neutralize a sitting president? What crimes did Clinton walked into office with? Ken Star started with White Water but then turned it into an 8 year fishing trip and came up empty. You guys are quick to promote the facts. Besides Lewinski everything else is innuendo and rumor.

And you all don't want to admit it but in recent history it was the Republican Party and Newt who took todays politics into the gutter. I'm not saying there has never been fun and games in the past, but I was a kid in the 60's and 70's and I don't remember the political character assassination as it is going on today. The Parties were more civil in those days. Most character assassination type attacks I've seen come from the Republican Party. And for your viewing entertainment the 5 Most Vicious Attack Ads and guess what they are all coming to you from Republicans!

And if you believe Reagan did not know about Contra and don't think Ollie took the bullet for the boss, that's your choice. I believe the head guy sets the agenda for his Administration. Contra was too big of a project for the powers in control not to know.

Prior to 1993 in forums they would have been accusing me of being a die-hard Republican too. Clinton was the first Democratic President I have ever voted for, and I currently think the Democrats are a better choice. In your eyes I'm a Democrat, but I'm not. If the Republican party changes their current strips and puts up someone palatable, I'd be willing to vote for them again.

BTW based on actions, Bush and the Republican Party deserve the country's wrath. There is no way to spin your way out of it.

Wouldn't one of the most, if not the most, divisive presidents be Abraham Lincoln? The Civil War seemed to reveal a certain strain within the country.

I'm not sure as that was wrapped up in the Civil War, issues that preceded Lincoln.

ya take up half the frickin page with that damn baby video :willy_nilly:

Many forums have restrictions on signature size...

 

[Strauss]

I'm not sure as that was wrapped up in the Civil War, issues that preceded Lincoln.

Yeah but Lincoln didn't attempt to have a meeting with the Southern leaders to defuse the situation. He engaged in provocative speeches and alleged that the South was massing weapons of destruction and then he invaded without reason. Divisive no matter how you spin it.

 

[Minor Axis]

Yeah but Lincoln didn't attempt to have a meeting with the Southern leaders to defuse the situation. He engaged in provocative speeches and alleged that the South was massing weapons of destruction and then he invaded without reason. Divisive no matter how you spin it.

Really he invaded? Your not referring to Ft. Sumter are you? I believe the South fired the first shots but this is in no way trying to engage with you.

1. Go ahead and name the list of "divisive" acts.
2. Tell us why "divisive" in your mind is necessarily negative. In other words, why can it not be a "positive?"

You speak and I jump? "Mulder engagement" is currently off.

 

[Minor Axis]

I figured as much--one of the most common "tricks" people use to bolster the unsupportable positions is to say, "I could name a 1000 things such and such did, blah, blah, blah" when in reality the person has no facts at all. You provided a myriad of generalized non specific allegation on a whole host of subjects, never being able to back any of it up with facts--this thread is no different.

Bush's record is well documented and just about every thing he has done has been divisive. If you don't know, go google it. I don't feel the need to repeat it for you. You guys must have had a real laugh when he described himself as the compassionate conservative.

 

[Minor Axis]

I'm still waiting for someone to throw out some documented examples of why Bill Clinton was a divisive president? No more of this "if there is smoke, there is fire" please.

That's what you can't grasp--that making unpopular decisions is what makes a great leader. Clinton did nothing unless he believed it would enhance his popularity--that why for example he didn't take care of Bin Laden when he was offered him on a silver platter. Its also why he ignored Hussein for 8 years (aside from lobbing a missile or two at a drug factory to take the public's attention off his blow job).

You heard it here, Bush's unpopular decisions is the makings of a great leader! Or are you not saying Bush is a great leader? If this has something to do with being divisive, maybe you'd care to elaborate on Clinton ignoring Hussein for 8 years... btw, Bush's handling and engineering an offensive war was number 1 on the divisive list. Your not suggesting that Clinton should have been the one to invade are you?

From The Raw Story 2005-
The U.S.-led coalition in Iraq dropped far more bombs during the sunset of Bill Clinton’s presidency than under President George W. Bush in the run-up to war in Iraq, RAW STORY has found.

Between 1999 and 2001, the U.S. and British-led air forces in Iraq dropped 1.3 million pounds of bombs in response to purported violations of the no-fly zones and anti-aircraft fire from Saddam Hussein. The details of the bombings, provided by the British ministry of defense to parliament in February 2002, markedly revise a picture painted by critics of Bush’s airstrikes and that of a piece RAW STORY carried last week.

Speaking of war, the Bush Administration has consistently talked up veterans, but have either not supported them or moved to cut federal spending on them whether it be for proper gear, or medical health after they come home from war. Actually sending them into combat without proper gear actually sounds like individuals were considered expendable.

From Sept 2006-
This week, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld will appear at the 107th annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Las Vegas, where Cheney gave the keynote address today. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson should use their time at the convention to explain why the Bush Administration has slashed veterans' benefits and refused to act swiftly to protect the privacy of their personal information. Bush Republicans in the House of Representatives have also fought Democratic efforts to end an unfair tax that affects 60,000 widows "whose husbands died of causes relating to their military service" and who "lose out on thousands of dollars a year in survivor benefits because of a law that dates from the 1970's."

Then there is Bush's environmental record of over 300 crimes against nature as documented by The Sierra Club (of which I am a proud member). I automatically know you poo poo the environment, so role out your page wide LOLs but the environment is not just darter snails and owls, it's you and me, our water, our air, and the environment we live in all degraded because the environment is a commodity to be used up and make profits on.

I will clarify in advance I don't consider these items as legal punishable crimes, but they do reveal a disregard for the environment we live in. Here is the first 10 on the list:
JANUARY 20, 2001
White House freezes all rules set at end of Clinton term–including tougher ones for raw sewage

JANUARY 20, 2001
Bush proposes opening Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling

FEBRUARY 12, 2001
Energy Department puts off enforcing new efficiency standards for air conditioners

FEBRUARY 15, 2001
EPA delays new rule protecting wetlands from mining and development

MARCH 7, 2001
Fish and Wildlife Service withdraws report calling for protection of endangered salmonids

MARCH 9, 2001
Bush appoints oil and mining lobbyist as deputy secretary of Interior

MARCH 13, 2001
Bush reneges on campaign promise to reduce carbon dioxide emissions

MARCH 16, 2001
Bush administration refuses to defend in court rule protecting 58 million acres of wild forest

MARCH 20, 2001
Bush withdraws proposed stricter limits on arsenic in drinking water

MARCH 28, 2001
Bush administration rejects Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change

APRIL 9, 2001
Bush budget proposal cuts $500 million from EPA