Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Bill Clinton is the most admired President of the past 25 years. Wow, that's like being the one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind   (nbcnews.com) divider line 99
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

431 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jun 2014 at 10:07 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



99 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-15 09:05:03 AM  
Something something "gold medal at the special Olympics"...
 
2014-06-15 09:24:13 AM  
World's tallest midget!
 
2014-06-15 09:41:26 AM  
Worlds sexiest asexual.
 
2014-06-15 09:43:14 AM  
Best shortstop in Iceland.
 
2014-06-15 09:56:34 AM  
I can see that. I'm in my early 30s, its been mostly Republican presidents that have been elected in that time frame, and they've all pretty much sucked.
 
2014-06-15 10:07:26 AM  
He's definitely in the top 4
 
2014-06-15 10:13:43 AM  
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
 
2014-06-15 10:19:19 AM  
For intelligent people who identify as republican, they tend to hate current democratic presidents but look back on them with fondness. Likewise, they love current republican presidents, but look back on them poorly. I use the qualifier "intelligent," because a lot of idiots look back on Reagan fondly.

For most people who identify as democrat, they already don't like the previous republican presidents, and they like previous Democratic presidents. The current president is still mostly liked by democrats, except for tho ones who have bought into the message of constant scandals told by those with ODS.
 
2014-06-15 10:25:42 AM  

raerae1980: I can see that. I'm in my early 30s, its been mostly Republican presidents that have been elected in that time frame, and they've all pretty much sucked.


You have to go back to Eisenhower to find a good Republican president. Nixon could almost qualify, but for every good thing he did (EPA, opening relationships with China) he did at least one bad thing (extending and expanding the Vietnam war, Watergate).
 
2014-06-15 10:28:16 AM  
Clinton and Obama are to only two presidents liked internationally (where I am) since JFK.

We're the ones who have to live in the world you lot bloody make.
 
2014-06-15 10:28:38 AM  
Clinton was always likable so I'm not too surprised by this. His only competitors are Bush jr. and Obama. It's too soon for objective judgements.
That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.
 
2014-06-15 10:31:49 AM  
i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.

or the guy who botched the response to katrina.

or the guy who presided over the worst terror attack on US soil ever.

or the guy who watched the economy crash in 2008.

wait - they're all the same person? holy fark, what a loser!
 
2014-06-15 10:39:25 AM  
hysterical that the clintons cant remember shiat on the stand

but get paid 20mil for memoirs..... fkn funny

best president my ass. this whole regime in place since they killed kennedy is a farking joke
 
2014-06-15 10:43:20 AM  

FlashHarry: i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.

or the guy who botched the response to katrina.

or the guy who presided over the worst terror attack on US soil ever.

or the guy who watched the economy crash in 2008.

wait - they're all the same person? holy fark, what a loser!


Uh, that's kinda what I noticed as well.

WTF, that clown is more respected than his father?
 
2014-06-15 10:44:05 AM  
Clinton left office more popular than the patron saint of dog-whistle racism, Ronald Reagan.
 
2014-06-15 10:47:35 AM  

spawn73: FlashHarry: i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.

or the guy who botched the response to katrina.

or the guy who presided over the worst terror attack on US soil ever.

or the guy who watched the economy crash in 2008.

wait - they're all the same person? holy fark, what a loser!

Uh, that's kinda what I noticed as well.

WTF, that clown is more respected than his father?


Remember when Chimpy was asked whether he'd made any mistakes in his first term, and he replied that he couldn't think of any?  THAT'S BOOTSTRAPS!

His father raised taxes.  That's not.
 
2014-06-15 10:53:32 AM  

CanisNoir: Clinton was always likable so I'm not too surprised by this. His only competitors are Bush jr. and Obama. It's too soon for objective judgements.
That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.


Bill Clinton is most definitely a 'schmoozer'....he's a likable guy.  If you met him at work or at a social event he'd be your buddy.  Despite all the hysterics coming from the right during Clinton's administration, he was also the best friend of bankers and Wall St.  Most of the changes in financial laws and regulations that ultimately tanked our economy took place on Clinton's watch.
 
2014-06-15 11:01:09 AM  

spawn73: FlashHarry: i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.

or the guy who botched the response to katrina.

or the guy who presided over the worst terror attack on US soil ever.

or the guy who watched the economy crash in 2008.

wait - they're all the same person? holy fark, what a loser!

Uh, that's kinda what I noticed as well.

WTF, that clown is more respected than his father?


That should tell you the priority of the right wing.

Crash the economy, start a war costing thousands of lives, lower global opinion of the country: meh, the guy wasn't so bad.

Raising taxes: The man is vomit personified.
 
2014-06-15 11:05:51 AM  

NeverDrunk23: spawn73: FlashHarry: i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.

or the guy who botched the response to katrina.

or the guy who presided over the worst terror attack on US soil ever.

or the guy who watched the economy crash in 2008.

wait - they're all the same person? holy fark, what a loser!

Uh, that's kinda what I noticed as well.

WTF, that clown is more respected than his father?

That should tell you the priority of the right wing.

Crash the economy, start a war costing thousands of lives, lower global opinion of the country: meh, the guy wasn't so bad.

Raising taxes: The man is vomit personified.


Addendum: raising taxes may be exempt if republican.
 
2014-06-15 11:05:55 AM  

spawn73: WTF, that clown is more respected than his father?


lets not go too far. Junior, Senior, and Obama are statistically tied
 
2014-06-15 11:15:32 AM  

CanisNoir: Clinton was always likable so I'm not too surprised by this. His only competitors are Bush jr. and Obama. It's too soon for objective judgements.
That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.



She might win the whole thing in 2016
 
2014-06-15 11:23:04 AM  

Fissile: CanisNoir: Clinton was always likable so I'm not too surprised by this. His only competitors are Bush jr. and Obama. It's too soon for objective judgements.
That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.

Bill Clinton is most definitely a 'schmoozer'....he's a likable guy.  If you met him at work or at a social event he'd be your buddy.  Despite all the hysterics coming from the right during Clinton's administration, he was also the best friend of bankers and Wall St.  Most of the changes in financial laws and regulations that ultimately tanked our economy took place on Clinton's watch.


And under Republican control of Congress.

But at least they did *something*, right?
 
2014-06-15 11:30:27 AM  
He shouldn't be. His signing of NAFTA into law has doomed us all to a country with far less economic opportunity, simply so it could be given to nations who didn't deserve it in the first place.

Why didn't they deserve it?  OK. Say you take the time to make your property nice how you like it-then suddenly someone gives it away to someone who was too stupid to do it themselves, leaving you to do the jobs that they would have done.

It's about spreading the pain around.

Bill Clinton has helped ruin the country just as much as Dubya, yet in different ways.

I'm telling you, had it not been for NAFTA, CAFTA;et al, there would be more factories to work in, more opportunity. Higher pay, but nope, we're now a fast-food economy and a high tech economy with little in between, and it'll get worse.
 
2014-06-15 11:31:59 AM  
That'll change once people rightly blame him for making President Hillary Clinton possible.
 
2014-06-15 11:35:02 AM  
Why wouldn't he be admired?  He demonstrates what the liberals in this country value most ... he committed several crimes, exercised incredibly poor judgment and lack of character, he bald faced lied about it, committed perjury to try and cover it up, got caught, was completely remorseless ... and got away with it.  That's like Wilt's 100 point game to liberals; it's a dream come true.  It's the same reason the black community was dancing in the streets when O.J. was acquitted.
 
2014-06-15 11:36:59 AM  

SunsetLament: Why wouldn't he be admired?  He demonstrates what the liberals in this country value most ... he committed several crimes, exercised incredibly poor judgment and lack of character, he bald faced lied about it, committed perjury to try and cover it up, got caught, was completely remorseless ... and got away with it.  That's like Wilt's 100 point game to liberals; it's a dream come true.  It's the same reason the black community was dancing in the streets when O.J. was acquitted.


i.imgur.com
 
2014-06-15 11:49:37 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: You have to go back to Eisenhower to find a good Republican president. Nixon could almost qualify, but for every good thing he did (EPA, opening relationships with China) he did at least one bad thing (extending and expanding the Vietnam war, Watergate).


Prior to the '52 election, Eisenhower was politically unaffiliated. Truman actually asked him to run as a Democrat but Eisenhower chose the Republicans, in part to prevent the expansion of a non-interventionist movement in the GOP. Nevertheless, it's hard to imagine any Republican at any time in the past sixty years using the term "military-industrial complex," under any circumstances. Eisenhower ran as a Republican but he was pretty apolitical. You really need to go back the Teddy Roosevelt to find a "good" Republican president.

Actually, GHW Bush wasn't a bad president. Not a particularly great one, but not a bad one either. Plus, he was the first Republican sacrifice on the altar of tax revolt. History will remember him with at least a little kindness.
 
2014-06-15 11:56:14 AM  

walktoanarcade: He shouldn't be. His signing of NAFTA into law has doomed us all to a country with far less economic opportunity, simply so it could be given to nations who didn't deserve it in the first place.

Why didn't they deserve it?  OK. Say you take the time to make your property nice how you like it-then suddenly someone gives it away to someone who was too stupid to do it themselves, leaving you to do the jobs that they would have done.

It's about spreading the pain around.

Bill Clinton has helped ruin the country just as much as Dubya, yet in different ways.

I'm telling you, had it not been for NAFTA, CAFTA;et al, there would be more factories to work in, more opportunity. Higher pay, but nope, we're now a fast-food economy and a high tech economy with little in between, and it'll get worse.


the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The signed agreement then needed to be authorized by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

With much consideration and emotional discussion, the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, 234-200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

Yep, NAFTA is all Bill Clinton's fault
 
2014-06-15 12:01:11 PM  

TheRevHairless: walktoanarcade: He shouldn't be. His signing of NAFTA into law has doomed us all to a country with far less economic opportunity, simply so it could be given to nations who didn't deserve it in the first place.

Why didn't they deserve it?  OK. Say you take the time to make your property nice how you like it-then suddenly someone gives it away to someone who was too stupid to do it themselves, leaving you to do the jobs that they would have done.

It's about spreading the pain around.

Bill Clinton has helped ruin the country just as much as Dubya, yet in different ways.

I'm telling you, had it not been for NAFTA, CAFTA;et al, there would be more factories to work in, more opportunity. Higher pay, but nope, we're now a fast-food economy and a high tech economy with little in between, and it'll get worse.

the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The signed agreement then needed to be authorized by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

With much consideration and emotional discussion, the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, 234-200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

Yep, NAFTA is all Bill Clinton's fault


It was ULTIMATELY SIGNED BY BILL CLINTON, guy. He did not have to sign it.

Thanks for showing that they're all cut from the same cloth, though.
 
2014-06-15 12:01:55 PM  
Clinton was a very good president; Obama's a great president. To paraphrase an old saying, you can determine the measure of a man by the character of his enemies.
 
2014-06-15 12:03:43 PM  
For the "record": George H.W, Bush's signing of NAFTA in RIO in 1992 was ceremonial.

Do you get it now? Clinton made it OFFICIAL. (of course H.W. was an ass for it too)

So yes, the buck stopped with him and it is his fault.
 
2014-06-15 12:04:48 PM  

FlashHarry: i'm surprised the guy who started an illegal war that cost 4,500 american lives, hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives and several trillion dollars didn't win.


500,000 Iraqi children died because of the sanctions during the Clinton administration. He's got plenty of Iraqi blood on his hands.
 
2014-06-15 12:07:26 PM  

SunsetLament: Why wouldn't he be admired?  He demonstrates what the liberals in this country value most ... he committed several crimes, exercised incredibly poor judgment and lack of character, he bald faced lied about it, committed perjury to try and cover it up, got caught, was completely remorseless ... and got away with it.  That's like Wilt's 100 point game to liberals; it's a dream come true.  It's the same reason the black community was dancing in the streets when O.J. was acquitted.


img.fark.net
 
2014-06-15 12:11:56 PM  
I love how Wikipedia doesn't mention the Rio Summit at all, which was about NAFTA and other things.

That's why Wiki cannot be trusted on history or politics, though it is a good starting point.
 
2014-06-15 12:18:06 PM  
At least he remembers birthdays:

d3819ii77zvwic.cloudfront.net
 
2014-06-15 12:24:51 PM  

CanisNoir: That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.


lol
 
2014-06-15 12:30:15 PM  

Mantour: At least he remembers birthdays:

[d3819ii77zvwic.cloudfront.net image 650x488]


I gotta say that I really, really don't blame him that. Could he have pulled better? Sure, but when your President, sometimes a hummer from the intern is the best you squeeze in.
 
2014-06-15 12:31:37 PM  
Yeah.

Quite the visionary...

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2014-06-15 12:35:47 PM  

grumpfuff: CanisNoir: That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.

lol


Canis has a point.  Clinton didn't pussyfoot around with the GOP the way Fartbongo has.
 
2014-06-15 12:39:11 PM  

mgshamster: For intelligent people who identify as republican...


img.4plebs.org
 
2014-06-15 12:45:44 PM  
walktoanarcade:
I'm telling you, had it not been for NAFTA, CAFTA;et al, there would be more factories to work in, more opportunity. Higher pay, but nope, we're now a fast-food economy and a high tech economy with little in between, and it'll get worse.

Because until there was NAFTA capital couldn't cross borders and no capitalist had ever chased low paid labor. True fact. You could study it out.
 
2014-06-15 12:52:45 PM  
If the polls were open, I'd vote for the Big Dog tomorrow
 
2014-06-15 12:55:42 PM  
Well the 1990s were farking awesome, not just for the country but I actually started to get laid. I don't know how much of that has to do with Clinton but I just know that almost everything was better in the 1990s.
 
2014-06-15 12:55:59 PM  

walktoanarcade: He shouldn't be. His signing of NAFTA into law has doomed us all to a country with far less economic opportunity, simply so it could be given to nations who didn't deserve it in the first place.

Why didn't they deserve it?  OK. Say you take the time to make your property nice how you like it-then suddenly someone gives it away to someone who was too stupid to do it themselves, leaving you to do the jobs that they would have done.

It's about spreading the pain around.

Bill Clinton has helped ruin the country just as much as Dubya, yet in different ways.

I'm telling you, had it not been for NAFTA, CAFTA;et al, there would be more factories to work in, more opportunity. Higher pay, but nope, we're now a fast-food economy and a high tech economy with little in between, and it'll get worse.


NAFTA isn't a bad thing.  The bulk of our manufacturing jobs aren't moving to Mexico, they're moving to China.  If we want to encourage more domestic manufacturing we should impose stiff tariffs on Asia, not Mexico.

Like it or not Mexico and China are our neighbors, and what's good for them is good for us.  The people who wail about immigration and the loss of US jobs are the same ones who complain about NAFTA.  Guess what, when there are good jobs available in Mexico we'll have less people who feel the need to immigrate here from there.
 
2014-06-15 12:56:58 PM  
So you're saying that he's King, subby?
 
2014-06-15 01:03:16 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: NAFTA isn't a bad thing.  The bulk of our manufacturing jobs aren't moving to Mexico, they're moving to China.  If we want to encourage more domestic manufacturing we should impose stiff tariffs on Asia, not Mexico.


I don't know anything about manufacturing but I know the software engineering industry has suffered from outsourcing to people in other countries who are cheaper and look good for this quarter's bottom line but don't know WTF they're doing and screw the company over in the long run.
 
2014-06-15 01:09:29 PM  

Mugato: TuteTibiImperes: NAFTA isn't a bad thing.  The bulk of our manufacturing jobs aren't moving to Mexico, they're moving to China.  If we want to encourage more domestic manufacturing we should impose stiff tariffs on Asia, not Mexico.

I don't know anything about manufacturing but I know the software engineering industry has suffered from outsourcing to people in other countries who are cheaper and look good for this quarter's bottom line but don't know WTF they're doing and screw the company over in the long run.


That's a problem with outsourcing in general, even if it's done locally.  I'm sure there are some examples of firms that can offer savings based on better economies of scale and savings through specialization, but in my personal experience every instance I've seen where a company function was outsourced has resulted in a considerable drop in quality compared to doing it house.
 
2014-06-15 01:27:12 PM  

CanisNoir: Clinton was always likable so I'm not too surprised by this. His only competitors are Bush jr. and Obama. It's too soon for objective judgements.
That said, I doubt Clinton of the 90s could win a democratic primary today.


Why did you make that claim? His wife is almost a shoo-in for the Democratic primary.
 
2014-06-15 01:29:08 PM  

clambam: Prior to the '52 election, Eisenhower was politically unaffiliated. Truman actually asked him to run as a Democrat but Eisenhower chose the Republicans, in part to prevent the expansion of a non-interventionist movement in the GOP. Nevertheless, it's hard to imagine any Republican at any time in the past sixty years using the term "military-industrial complex," under any circumstances. Eisenhower ran as a Republican but he was pretty apolitical. You really need to go back the Teddy Roosevelt to find a "good" Republican president.


Eisenhower will forever have the stain of Operation Ajax on his legacy. Overthrowing the government of Iran because BP was pissed about the Iranians getting uppity about their oil continues to haunt the middle east today.
 
2014-06-15 01:33:01 PM  

SunsetLament: Why wouldn't he be admired?  He demonstrates what the liberals in this country value most ... he committed several crimes, exercised incredibly poor judgment and lack of character, he bald faced lied about it, committed perjury to try and cover it up, got caught, was completely remorseless ... and got away with it.  That's like Wilt's 100 point game to liberals; it's a dream come true.  It's the same reason the black community was dancing in the streets when O.J. was acquitted.


How was his sexual dalliances admired? At the end of his second term, he was positively toxic because of what occurred with Lewinsky. He wasn't even invited to speak at the DNC when Al Gore was making his way to campaigning for president. Indeed, Gore didn't want to be attached in any way to Clinton. There was no admiration from the liberals.
 
Displayed 50 of 99 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report