[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Well, if she's the candidate, it will be good to finally cast a vote -- against Washington's Least Convincing Blonde. Face it: the Clintons, husband and wife, are incompetently evil. Of the many things they're not good at, they are among the worst at being bad, and do it remarkably poorly. You vote for that, you're voting for a schmuck.

I recommend sixteen Bushes in the Oval Office over one more self-destructive Clinton. Seventeen might be too much of an antifascist good thing, though -- on the grounds that new blood would be wanted by then.

Actually, most people would consider the Clinton presidency pretty competent. Of course, you could make the case that some of the bad decisions made then came to roost in the next administration, but you could also make that argument about the Reagan administration.

As for the multi-Bush option. Outside of a lesbian nightclub, this is not a good idea. While H was a competent president, the $1-3 trillion dollar quagmire that GW put us in will probably take an entire generation to pay off, when the bill finally comes due. Rumor has it that GWB is the stupid one in the family and that Jeb would probably have been and might be better at the job, but considering the monumental cost at this point, writing off the entire clan seems like a good idea.