Who would you rather be vactioning with this weekend, President Obama, who is at an exclusive golf and yacht club in Florida, or the first lady, who has taken the rest of the family skiing out West?

How about doing a little skeet shooting with Dick Cheney.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Why would a bunch of losers go anywhere with the President or First Lady.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I feel your pain leftwing, I wouldn't like to go with them either.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tough choice MDN...but have to go with the Prez in FLA,just becuz its a helluva lot warmer there hopefully : )

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I think he should look into working vacations, come out here to ND and spend 12 hours outside working in the winter. President Jimmy Carter does actually help people now days, we sure have allot of out of work living Presidents.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Lets send the President to Africa to help Bill Gates get a computer in every house over there. That should keep him busy for awhile. Mr Gates feels it is one of every persons human rights to have to agree with Western ways. Wazooo!!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bill, I hope everybody understands that the Bush family business is oil, I had nothing to do with putting them in position to protect their American interests.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

No mention about Congress being out on vacation?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I can bet Boehnor is out golfing and getting his tan!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

My comment on the President and Africa has no intended racial divisions, I am so not prejudice that I always forget that some people are. There was a good interview with Bill Gates on TV today is where that thought came from.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Looks like over 60 percent would like to have a good cry and beer with boehner.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

I can't afford a vacation to those two locales either, so where's the "N/A" option?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Speaking of Dick Cheney & GW....

Man, you need to read the book Hubris and view the documentary on the manufactered war in Iraq.. Every credible individual from both sides of the house, intelligence,scientists,diplomats etc.,etc. are finally telling all about the behind the scenes covert operation to take down Saddam at any and all costs....

Over 4000 US Troop lives, 100,000 Iraqi's..3 Trillion....

I suspect GW will be the first US President being brought up on war crimes in this countries history.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Understanding how your mind works lorexxx...One post at a time.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Typically one might have to wait 20 to 50 years for transcripts/info to come out on executive decison making involving decisions why an act of war was declared...In GW's case the motives were so egregiously they will surface this year..People are distancing themselves.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Egregiously salivating? All because of "Hubris?"

Is there another source confirming the book's statements? Or is that one book enough?

What president's decisions have completely passed muster, after examining his "motives" years later?

Which president's record has remained free from the second-guessers' conclusions, in the years after his term in office?

Short answer: none.

And newsflash: all U.S. presidents thus far have been human, and not infallible. I'd expect "stuff" to come up in any president's biography because of that fact. Even future biographies--of the next Republican president, in case you're thinking of someone else. :-)

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lorexxx, why feed the bears?

It doesn't matter what anyone else says about any subject. Another poster had it right about billgrr. He's "right" and the rest of us "wanna be" but that's only in his eyes. So don't worry...be happy!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

billgrr's imagination rules.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Oh, I've got it now. billgrr thinks lorexxx's posts are based in imagination and lies (his take), so he's going to show lorexxx & all of us exactly how imagining and lying are to be done properly.

Is that the game now?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive Feb-19-13 2:47 PM "Is there another source confirming the book's statements?"

Guess you missed the documentary last night loco....The credibility of all those who gave statements and personal accounts are chilling to say the least... You can try to spin this any way you want....at the end of the day and at the conclusion of history GW is responsible for starting a war under false pretenses just as LBJ did in 1964... Some of you want to compare sex in the Whitehouse and the tradegy of the ambassador/aides in Libya to countless deaths and destruction... Shame on you!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The only documentary I saw a bit of recently was the PBS one on Reagan. Interesting it was. However, my point, about every president being second-guessed and having his motivations, actions and decisions gone over with a fine-tooth comb by friend and foe alike after he's out of office, remains the same.

Not a one of them has been pure and clean as the wind-driven snow.

Also, to say that Clinton's legacy is only tarnished by escapades in the Oval Office is a narrow interpretation of his presidency, to say the least. There have been others to say more about Pres. Clinton. They can be referred to as desired.

It is interesting that many lefties on here are very willing to promote responsibility in presidents. Why does it appear that "presidential responsibility" starts with Republican presidents and ends before Democrat presidents?

Wait, I guess someone mentioned LBJ. (My bad on that one.)

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

"Instead of doing your usual shuck and jive deflections..."

billgrr, I thought these words were off-limits. They aren't now, because you're using them?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive Feb-20-13 10:51 AM "Why does it appear that "presidential responsibility" starts with Republican presidents and ends before Democrat presidents?"

"Wait, I guess someone mentioned LBJ"

Wait a minute loco...I could give a rats behind which party the individual was that manipulated the facts and sent soldiers to their deaths for unjustified reasons and this is what history will remember.. The MAN...Not the party!!!

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Veritas, you can't say that the Democrat party did not use a previous Republican presidency to further the ends of their own campaigns in our most recent elections.

I heard a gazillion times how everything has been Bush's fault for years, and how in 2008, if McCain was elected, and how in 2012, if Romney was elected, both men would continue Bush's policies, in spite of each man's individual campaign platforms in both elections.

Not the party? Maybe for some, but for others, it is the forest, the trees, the kit and kaboodle.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

billgrr says: "Instead of doing your usual shuck and jive deflections..."

I reply: "billgrr, I thought these words were off-limits. They aren't now, because you're using them?"

Then billgrr says: "You are lorexxamay now?"

So I have to be lorexxx...amaybe...whatsit...whozat in order to comment on the words billgrr uses to describe "deflections?"

Aren't the words supposed to be objectionable when used?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »