from the poll results its just a biased bush bashing as usual. im done here.

Both

Ofcorse Bush was worse. Obama is not much (if at all..?) better. The national debt is now ludicrous... Get em' both out of there.

You forgot to mention the thousands of innocent people (foreigners and Americans alike) that Obama has killed overseas with drones. You also forgot to mention that he allowed, and even enhanced the illegal secret courts and allowed the spying of billions to continue. You also forgot that Obama and his criminal associates have committed treason against all nations of this world by alientaing Edward Snowden and making him a criminal when in all reality, he is a hero to all. You also forgot to add in the criminals who gave him the Nobel Peace Prize for absolutely nothing besides being able to lie and manpulate multiple millions with just speeches. I could go on, but I think you guys get the point.

Unfortunately neither have any impeachable crimes. And as much as I hate political debate Obama is worse. The drone thing was all in Obama's presidency. The spying thing I'm leaving alone because history is full of martial law type backlash after events like 9/11.

I don't agree with a lot of things G. R. Bush did, (father is G. H. W. Bush) but at least he did his job, something the current president cannot say. There was a full fleshed out budget each and every year, there was no government shutdown. And he actually had a coalition government where he negotiated with the other party. The thing with Katrina was not his fault, there is a lot of bureaucracy that need to be waded through before anything moves in the government. Heck at least during his term the victims were getting help. Now they are not and it pretty much brushed under the rug because the media cannot play the race card.

As for the debt thing it was bad in the 80's, during Clinton's term they cooked the books to make it look like the deficient wasn't there. They where taking money for Social Security and using it else where. The same book keeping was used by IBM, Enron and MCI Worldcom among others during this period.

As for Clinton he deserved to be impeached, he actual had a pretty bad crime. He was impeach for breach of security among other things, something that if he wasn't president carries some nasty consequences. (And if he was convicted of them now he would be considered a terrorist under current laws.) Another thing he wasn't impeach by the Republicans he was impeached by the Democratically lead Senate who in the impeachment process acts as the judge and jury. (He republican lead House acted as the prosecutor.) If I remember correctly 9 charges were brought up against him and only two where thrown out (Whitewater, Monica more than likely) They decided not to remove him because of how close the next election was but the rest of the term he was a "lame duck".

And one other thing the 2007 Security problem that pushed the economy back into the toliet could have probally been avoided if Clinton didn't strip the SEC of most of it's budget, they are suppose to watch for things like over loading profoils with too many high risk ventures and passing them off as safe.

On a side note as for the war back in 2001/2002 when it was start the US public was behind the war. I didn't care either way but I did say to some of my employees at the time who were caught up in the blood thirst, that they would end up regreting the US removing a ruler. All cases they told me no they wouldn't but six months later were wondering why we were still there, and I pointed out the article in the Geneva Convention, that state that any country that removes the government of another country has to stay until the country is Stable.

... I guess you can say that the US may be guilty of breaking the terms laid out in the Genva Convention.

Unfortunately the President isn't the one calling the shots anymore. He's just a puppet.

I think the American people should be impeached for continuing to keep their heads up their asses while we continue to behave like spoiled brats. We spend far too much time worrying about about petty rights and liberties while corporations steal our souls by selling us crap we don't need.

If any other human being had been elected President in 2008 do you think the debt situation would be any different?  Do you think the debt will be addressed in 2016? 2020? 2024?

Well a willing puppet. But the thing is the president was never suppose to call the shots. It's suppose to be an equal balence between him and the congress, with the the juditaial (Spelling?) system playing mediator of shorts. On paper the VP is suppose to have more internal power than the president. (Something like in school the Vice principal is suppose to deal with the internal and the Principal deals with getting money from the state etc.) Sorry about the spelling for some reason my spell checker isn't working, and I'm too tired to be posting. So I'm going to bed.

Yeah I brought it up in a previous post but the debt started to rack up since 1916 and hasn't been fully addressed since then, the biggest part of the debt is still the cold war. But the deficite, which is how much more debt we are getting into has been growing by leaps and bounds since the 80's. Clinton presidency you really cannot tell clearly how much the deficiate was because they were syphoning off of other money that was set aside for programs. (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc) And this was a common practice then, unfortantly for a lot of people because a lot of people lost their retirement funds because the companies thought "they would make the money back latter".

On a side not on the deficite and the debt. When the tax thing about the rich was going on. A local radio station brought in a economics professor in to talk about it. And he had a nice illustration on how bad it is. He first cut some zero off the end to help people envision how much money we are actually getting into debt. (Because most when you are talking billions and trillions kind of glaze over) He reduced the country's operating cost to about $150,000. Currently the US is only taking in $26,000 in taxes. He then went on to say even if they increase the taxes on every one who make over $250,000 or more to 100% (meaning they are taking all their money), that will only make the revenue go up by $10,000. So increasing the taxes will not work. You have to cut programs, you have to streamline the government, or else  we run the very likely possibity of becoming insolvant.