New Leaders

[Pinchak]

To get back on topic however, my reason for not agreeing with Bush in Civ is that he simply didn't do much compared to Lincoln, Washington, JFK, Hoover, Rosevelt, etc...

He's just the buffoon of the hour.

Other leaders? Hmmm, the argument has been made for Lenin. I wouldn't disagree with that.

[Pinchak]

this is a civ forum dude

Yes, and my initial responce to a suggestion that Bush be a leader in CIV was that he is a failure. Not noteworthy enough to be included as a leader.

If you are so concerned about staying on topic, you shouldn't simply throw out a flame that has NOTHING to do with CIV.

But as you have done in the past, you took this as an oppertunity to take a stab at me from out of left field... so I feel compelled to point out the hypocrisy of your initial statement, and your followup.

YOU HAVE BEEN....

[Wiglaf]

just say he's not a great leader and has made too many mistakes. there's no reason to say he's a failure "in every way", because that is needlessly provocative. use your ****ing head.

[Pinchak]

Well, it's my opinion that he has been a failure in every way. I would suggest Zachary Taylor as a Civ leader before Bush.

You and a few others around here really have a problem with personal flaming when it is really not called for. If you disagree, argue the issue.

Tell me why Bush should be a Civ leader. I would suggest simply mentioning ONE reason why he is not a failure in everyway, but this would be going off topic.

[Maquiladora]

Pinchak

[Willem]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
there's no reason to say he's a failure "in every way", because that is needlessly provocative.

He's just telling it like it is. Bush is going to go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever. With an approval rating of about 30%, he can't sink much lower.

[Pinchak]

The real fun is going to be 10 - 20 years from now when all the dirt on Bush rises to the surface. You will see features on the History Channel like "Bush, America's Biggest Mistake".

I really think he might have a chance to bump Nixon out of first place for most corrupt US president. We just haven't seen the whole picture... YET.

Ok, back on topic... what other leaders should be added?

I vote for adding Scotland, and making William Wallace a leader!

[Wiglaf]

The real fun is going to be 10 - 20 years from now when all the dirt on Bush rises to the surface. You will see features on the History Channel like "Bush, America's Biggest Mistake".

e's just telling it like it is. Bush is going to go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever. With an approval rating of about 30%, he can't sink much lower.

I think the civ4 forum should be about civ, not your opinions about george bush's future. since your arguments are all speculative [eg, Bush "will be" known as the worst leader] or simply provocative ["he is a failure in every way"] , they are not objectively factual reasons Bush should not be a civ leader.

a good reason he should not be in Civ4: he's not popular at all, he made mistakes in iraq -- in short, he's way too controversial a pick. too many people think he's bad.

A bad reason: "I think he's a sucky leader who is liek the worst president ever and never did anything good for anyone"

The former justification is reasoned and on-topic; the latter, mindless political crap to take to the OT.

There's no reason to argue whether he's a good politician -- just the fact that there IS so much doubt is reason enough to exclude him from Civ4.

No use taking cheap shots at Bush supporters to boost your egos.

[Wiglaf]

He's just telling it like it is. Bush is going to go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever. With an approval rating of about 30%, he can't sink much lower.

when george bush sr had 90% approval, people were saying he couldnt go much higher

Seriously, stop trying to be big tough bush bashers. You've clearly been too controversial for a civ forum. Me listing reasons for supporting bush policies would be irrelevant to this discussion, any mod would agree.

[Pinchak]

You've clearly been too controversial for a civ forum.

You do realize that had you not come out of nowhere and told me to "shut the **** up" that the thread would have probably stayed on topic.

I don't proclaim myself as a "tough Bush basher" (my wife might ) I disliked him when 90% of the country was mislead.

Sorry if my OPINION regarding his entry into CIV (a laughable idea truth be told), has offended you. It still is my opinion, and I'll phrase it as I see fit.

You are welcome to voice your opinion regarding the topic, and I assure you I will not flame you for doing so.

[proviisori]

back to the topic...

Originally posted by Pinchak
I vote for adding Scotland, and making William Wallace a leader!

IMO Wallace should not be in the game, because there is already too many european civs in the game and he really didn't have continent wide impact on history.

[Pinchak]

Hmmm, good point.

I just find the idea of Mel Gibson's face all painted up and crazy looking in Civ too appealing.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Brutus66
The problem with Bush as your civ leader, you have permanent open borders with everybody.

Except Montezuma.

Oh, and gotta give Pinchak a for this thread.
I even restrain myself from wishing him a happy Hitler remembrance day - you can't believe how hard that was.

[Kuciwalker]

Off-Topic Forum, people.

[couerdelion]

Firaxis won’t have Dubya as a leader. It would offend too many people