I think you can say Bush is stupid. I don't think many people argue that he's not the sharpest knife that's ever entered the White House.
As for the Clinton being a murderer... it's not like everyone took it without question. I felt that would only be significant if there could be a comparison made to fatalities of people who worked for other administrations.
I think we're okay.
I agree.
Sometimes an insult isn't meant as to be offensive but simply as the most accurate description to the Subject. For example why do people call Bush "Stupid"?
Here is the evidence:
He struggles with basic English (this is not a demonstration of low intelligence per se, but it does give him the appearance of being dumb), He routinely makes very poor decisions, he is fiercely anti-intellectual, he is both arrogant and stubborn, he is uninformed, and he is completely seperated from present day reality.
That there is documented fact, as said by him who have either worked with him or for him, even Bush himself has admitted to at least several of these. Based on this isn't it fair to at least suggest that he is stupid. Its like calling Bill Clinton a gigolo. Now I support Bill Clinton, I think he was a good president. But even I can admit that he IS a gigolo. (The only women he doesn't try and sleep with is his wife).
An insult cannot be an insult if it is true.
Another example. I once got a wrist slap by a Mod for calling Cheney a "Chickenhawk". I still maintain that was very unfair mod edit. Why? Look at the definition:
Chickenhawk:
Chickenhawk (also
chicken hawk and
chicken-hawk) is a
political epithet used in the
United States to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a
war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person actively avoided military service when of draft age.
Doesn't that accurately describe Dick Cheney?
A very vocal supporter...Check
Has never been in a war...Check
Actively Avoided Military Service...Check.
Those are irrefutable facts, even Cheney doesn't deny this. So why is it considered a rule violation, if the description is accurate.