April 24, 2006

CNN: 32% Approval Rating

Take a look at what CNN is saying:
President Bush's approval ratings have sunk to a personal low, with only a third of Americans saying they approve of the way he is handling his job, a national poll released Monday said.

In the telephone poll of 1,012 adult Americans carried out Friday through Sunday by Opinion Research Corporation for CNN, 32 percent of respondents said they approve of Bush's performance, 60 percent said they disapprove and 8 percent said they do not know.
How bad can things get for President AWOL?


Anonymous said...

David --

President AWOL? I sincerely hope for your sake that you're not questioning his military service record -- especially since Bill Clinton dodged the draft. And here you have the balls to sit there and talk about Bush being AWOL. Man, if you're not the hypocrite. Seriously David, has your hatred for the President blinded you so badly that you're beyond reasoning due to your obvious "do as I say but not as I do" state of mind you're in?

By the way, David: CNN polled 1,012 adult Americans, eh? I find it ironic that CNN fails to reveal the political party that these 1,012 people belong to, nor does their provided PDF document. Don't you find that pretty convenient, David? Or will your silence continue to persist?

Dayvoe said...

Ladies and Gentlemen;

Our troll has returned. I have just a few things to point out. I won't waste any more time than is absolutely necessary.

Here's the big question: Does our troll have any credibility to ask any question on any subject here at this blog?

On April 4 of this year our troll, in order to deflect attention away from my posting on Tom Delay's resignation, dishonestly misquoted an article from the Washington Times. He was using it to try to say that the NSA domestic spying wasn't a violation of FISA. He omitted the very next sentence in which one judge said that "the President chose to ignore established law." That "established law" of course was FISA.

Check it out here:

And when all his dishonesty was finally pointed out, what did our troll do? He resorted to immature name calling.

Now I ask you, why should we even bother to respond to someone so dishonest that he can not even quote a right-wing newspaper correctly?

I'll give you a hint as to our trolls response to this posting. He'll either bring up how I "failed" to respond to his charge that Clinton dodged the draft (he didn't - go check and see what it says at or how Bush fulfilled his military duty (he didn't - go check and see what it says at Then he might go on about the bias of the CNN poll that shows Bush at 32% approval levels. The question here is that if the poll is skewed, as our troll is so desperate in implying, then where are the other polls that show Bush's high approval ratings? Even Fox News has him in the mid-30s. Is Fox news another example of "liberal bias"? Our troll probably won't say.

And when that fails, our troll will fall back, perhaps, on the "diversity challenge." By this I mean that he will take my criticism with his arguments and try to pin a "hypocracy" label on me with this argument, "But liberals are supposed to honor diversity! That means that when you disagree with me, you're not doing that, you hypocrate!!" He may even insult me again - not that it makes any difference.

And when that fails he'll say this:

Do as I say, not as I do, eh?


Pot. Kettle. Black.

As arguments go, neither has much to do with anything.

Thus endeth the lesson.

Anonymous said...

David --

Huh? Say what? What does any of what you just said have to do with the original subject of this post and my subsequent comment? Nothing, that's what. By the way, I clicked on the link you provided which goes back to your archived comments and I couldn't find any "name calling." Oh, I did find a comment made by myself which contains the phrase "concrete headed liberal," however if you take that as "immature name calling" as you so put it, then most likely you have to be offended by your "anonymous" commenter as well, who's called me personally a lot worse. Or does that not matter, David? Come on, surely you can think of a better argument than what you just typed up, which by the way contains a typo which I am shocked to see considering you're a writer by trade. That's "hypocrisy," and "hypocrite," David...Just in case you wanted to know; if this offends you, then I sincerely apologize.

Furthermore, I am not surprised by you sitting there and making accusations of me not quoting a right wing newspaper correctly when you yourself cannot bring it upon yourself to reveal who CNN polled in regards to the original topic of this post. If you cannot come up with an honest and intelligent response to my comment, then why bother with all of the "victim card" nonsense that you're spewing out?

Credibility, Dave? Well, prove yours then by responding intelligently to my original comment rather than pointing your fingers at me and claiming yourself as the victim.

Now, that being said:

Thus endeth the lesson.

Anonymous said...

Oh, by the way Dave:

I did a whois on the domain and the following information came up via (a very well known www domain registrant/web hosting/SSL certificate provider corp.):

goddam librul commie queers of the USA

Registered through:
Domain Name: GLCQ.COM

Domain servers in listed order:

Don't believe me? Look it up yourself.

Now, do you honestly think I'll take the site which you just directed me to in your previous comment seriously, even if the registrant is being, dare I say, sarcastic in nature? Come on, reality check.

Anonymous said...

CNN is wrong to have Bush at 32% but somehow Fox has him at 33% and they are an all-knowing benevolent news source? Dave is right - Braden will manipulate anything to make Bush the hero and Clinton the villian.
As to the name calling, Braden is on the money: I am better at undoing of spineless brainwashed trolls than he is.
Let me try.......small penised lonely boy who has no friends where he works or in his neighborhood due to his unhealthy desire for Rush Limbaugh and George W Bush. Or, how about....angry white male (saw the pic - know that you are pasty looking) with an ego driven need to 'make' the GOP dream a reality because he can't admit that he is wrong. No, maybe this would fit him best....troll so in need of human contact that he tries to fight with liberals on their blogs using GOP talking points o'the day. Nope - how about...big giant waste of DNA who accidentally popped his blow-up doll wife and can't fix her with his Homeland Security issued duct tape and is more enraged than ever before.
Oh, try and best me Mr. Computer Geek! BTW, aren't you a little uppity for a 'Technical Coordinator'? One would think a fella with your brass balls would be have a better job!

Yours truly,

Anon #2

Maria said...

"...can't fix her with his Homeland Security issued duct tape"


Anonymous said...

Keep going to church anonymous #2, oh thou hypocrite queen.

You're a hoot, I'll give you that much. Additionally, you're downright pathetic; especially since you revealed to everyone here that you attend church, yet you spew out the venom you just did at me. Now, all that being said, make sure you don't miss next Sunday's service so you can get saved based on all the venom spewing you just hissed at me (and God knows whomever else). LOL. Look at you, you're so hateful you don't even know what you're saying half the time. You say one thing claiming you're the all around good person, then the next thing you say, you're spewing your hateful venom. I think it's funny, and just a perfect example of the liberal mentality.

Your attempts at offending/hurting my feelings in regards to my personal appearance/employment does not hurt me, anonymous #2, all you are doing is demonstrating to everyone how much of an a**hole you are (again). Keep it up. Keep showing your true liberal, loving, diverse, caring, open-minded colors.

Auntie Roo said...


Oh pumpkin, why are you asking Dave to explain the methodology of CNN's poll? If you have a problem with the results, I suggest you take it up with CNN. But that wasn't the purpose of your comment was it? Your name gives you away - you're here to troll.

And I have to tell you that you're laboring under a severe mis-conception when you go on about us liberals & our "liberal mentality".

Anonymous said...

Auntie Roo --

My comment was sincere, I wish to know David's position on a poll which doesn't reveal the political party of those being polled. Wouldn't you?

I do question as to why someone who's disagrees with what's said on here and voices his (or hers) opinion is labeled as a troll? Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't this country itself founded disagreements? Is it offensive to disagree with each other in this modern age we live in? If it is, then we're all in deep doo-doo.

Moving on, I am tickled pink though that you refered to me as "pumpkin."


Auntie Roo said...

Democrats-lie ~ I wouldn't be so tickled if I were you. I tend to call children pumpkin. Your comment struck me as immature, hence I called you pumpkin.

As far as your pretend astonishment at being called a troll - your nick tells all of us that you're here to troll. Anyone who truly desired a polite airing of their opinions wouldn't start out by calling the people who are hosting the conversation liars.

Again, as to the CNN poll, if you have a problem with it, take it up with CNN. A cursory glance at your site where you tend to quote from Newsmax shows me that you aren't so concerned about neutrality when it comes to points that you agree with.

Anonymous said...

"And I have to tell you that you're laboring under a severe mis-conception when you go on about us liberals & our "liberal mentality"

So, I guess I was right judging from your last response, ain't that right, pumpkin?

"A cursory glance at your site where you tend to quote from Newsmax shows me that you aren't so concerned about neutrality when it comes to points that you agree with."

But it's ok for 2polj's to quote from CBS news, right? A media outlet who got caught in a red handed lie 60 some days before the 2004 Presidential Election. Where's Dan Rather? Oh right, we all know.

All that said, your comment to me represents a double standard, eh, pumpkin?

Anonymous said...

I'm absolutely shocked that Braden Parker Bowles thought he had made a friend!
See Pal - you really do need to read 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'. Maybe you would be happier then and even find a real wife -one who breathes an all that!


Anon #2

Auntie Roo said...

Hit a nerve pumpkin?

Anonymous said...

Speaking about ratings...
As Internet user you, probably, have already tried to find ratings on some things which you consider to buy, use or get more information on. It may be services (hosting, design or movie rentals), public figures, consumer goods, articles or books, news, movies, beer, hotels, websites and much more.

You have, perhaps, seen thousands of fragmented websites, discussion forums, which force you to dig for the information even more.

With Ratingo you got one-stop shop, where you can find what people think (and why) about all you have been searching for before.