Seabiscuit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:33 PM
Original message |
| Who would be the most dangerous U.S. President? |
|
Edited on Thu Aug-04-05 08:35 PM by Seabiscuit
And by dangerous, I mean to both the welfare of Americans as a whole and to that of the rest of the planet.
George W. Bush?
or
Kim Jong-il?
|
| Seabiscuit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Bush, because Kim Jong-Il isn't backed by the neocons. n/t |
| John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. Neither would be as bad as Darth Vader, IMHO |
| Windy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
even though he is essentially in power. It would be much worse however if he were the "visible" president.
|
| KingFlorez
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message |
|
But he's not invading other countries. George W. Bush is more dangerous than any leader in the world right now.
|
| pitohui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:37 PM
Response to Original message |
|
fairly sure kim jong-il is not a usa president
we only think reagan is ok because we survived him, the dude was seriously hazardous, "the bombs left the silo five minutes ago"
we're very damb lucky to be alive
second most dangerous, i will grant you caligula junior
|
| wli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 08:45 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. Bushler; why not make this a poll? |
| Seabiscuit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-04-05 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
| 7. I could tell you, but then I'd have to shoot you. Nah, just kidding. n/t |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:37 PM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
