How will you react if Hillary Clinton wins? [Archive]

DarkReign

11-06-2007, 10:11 AM

Same way I reacted when Bush was re-elected to his second term.

Stunned incredulence (MerriamW says that isnt a word. Seems to me it should be. Whatever.).

Fact is though, I already know Billary is going to win. So I have 14 months to adjust to that truth. I was damn sure Bush was going to lose, so damn sure of it, that he won. Afterword, I realized I am truly different and dissimilar to most (electoral) Americans. Barring some HUGE scandal, HRC is going to win. I know whomever I vote for is going to lose, which is just as reliable as knowing who I vote for will win. You lose every time, but at least you know who is going to win. The candidate that is least intriguing, most offensive and a caricature of their political persona have the best odds of winning in this dumbed down land of socially deficient cretins.

Hillary

11-06-2007, 10:11 AM

Well, depending on who is the vice president, I'll probably actively lobby for her impeachment on the crimes she's already committed or those she's surely going to commit in office.

The woman is a Criminal with a capital "C."

How's that for a reaction.

As opposed to all the crimes Bush has already committed? And you call me a bitch!? Yonivore is Bush's bitch.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:20 AM

As opposed to all the crimes Bush has already committed? And you call me a bitch!? Yonivore is Bush's bitch.
Hey, you have a Democratic Congress and not just a few Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers screaming for impeachment. Make it happen.

President Bush has committed only those crimes fabricated in the minds of BDS sufferers. Otherwise, Pelosi would have drawn up articles on day one of her Congress.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:22 AM

Same way I reacted when Bush was re-elected to his second term.

Stunned incredulence (MerriamW says that isnt a word. Seems to me it should be. Whatever.).
I think you're looking for stunned incredulity

Fact is though, I already know Billary is going to win. So I have 14 months to adjust to that truth. I was damn sure Bush was going to lose, so damn sure of it, that he won. Afterword, I realized I am truly different and dissimilar to most (electoral) Americans. Barring some HUGE scandal, HRC is going to win. I know whomever I vote for is going to lose, which is just as reliable as knowing who I vote for will win. You lose every time, but at least you know who is going to win. The candidate that is least intriguing, most offensive and a caricature of their political persona have the best odds of winning in this dumbed down land of socially deficient cretins.
Wow, you're the optimist.

Oh, Gee!!

11-06-2007, 10:25 AM

How's that for a reaction.

idiotic

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:26 AM

idiotic
Well, seems in line with many of President Bush's detractors.

DarkReign

11-06-2007, 10:30 AM

I think you're looking for stunned incredulity

Yes, yes I was. Good call.

Wow, you're the optimist.

Mom?

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:50 AM

I think this is a little more than a bimbo eruption. I'm telling you, if you think President Bush has "evaded" being held accountable for crimes; Hillary Clinton is going to be dancing like a cat on a hot tin roof.

Kathleen Willey suspects Clintons murdered husband (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/staticarticles/article58533.html)

New book details evidence of 'smear' campaign orchestrated by Hillary

Yeah, buddy! It's gonna be a wild ride.

j-6

11-06-2007, 10:55 AM

I will get polluted drunk watching the election returns with the knowledge that we're further circling the drain as a country.

Her term will be a four year witch hunt that'll make all of the crap spewed against Dubya pale in comparison. It will be brutal. Shocking. Angry. Shameless. The right will attempt to crucify her at every single opportunity, the left will cry, and the country will be divided even further than it is today.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 11:01 AM

boutons_

11-06-2007, 11:19 AM

ABR

Anything But Repugs

I don't like her personally. What is said in a campaign is pure bullshit, totally unrelated to what will be actually done if elected.

Aggie Hoopsfan

11-06-2007, 01:33 PM

I don't like her personally. What is said in a campaign is pure bullshit, totally unrelated to what will be actually done if elected.

There could be hope for you yet...

Personally, I've got my eye on a piece of property in Belize. Time to get the hell away from here before Hillary goes Marxist and takes all my hard earned money and gives it to the poor.

boutons_

11-06-2007, 01:50 PM

Costa Rica, Pacific side, is my goal.

101A

11-06-2007, 01:54 PM

Buying my ass as island:

101Aland.

Mr. Peabody

11-06-2007, 02:12 PM

There could be hope for you yet...

Personally, I've got my eye on a piece of property in Belize. Time to get the hell away from here before Hillary goes Marxist and takes all my hard earned money and gives it to the poor.

I don't think she's as far to the left as you make her out to be. In fact, the big criticism of Hillary from progressives is that Hillary's interests are far too aligned with those of corporate America and she is too centrist on most issues.

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 02:23 PM

Pffft.

The bleeding vaginas on this board will increase their flow, but that's all will change.

101A

11-06-2007, 02:43 PM

I don't think she's as far to the left as you make her out to be. In fact, the big criticism of Hillary from progressives is that Hillary's interests are far too aligned with those of corporate America and she is too centrist on most issues.I agree. Edwards and Obama are scarier.

Mr. Peabody

11-06-2007, 03:09 PM

I agree. Edwards and Obama are scarier.

I think they would be for many conservatives.

mookie2001

11-06-2007, 03:15 PM

the next president will be a two termer

bet your life and your kawasaki

boutons_

11-06-2007, 03:23 PM

George Gervin's Afro

11-06-2007, 03:25 PM

I would laugh... :lol

We don't need more of the same and that's what we will get from the republicans.

Wild Cobra

11-06-2007, 05:23 PM

If Hillary wins, I'll know the elections are rigged. I will deduce that because I refuse to believe there are that many stupid people in America.

Same goes for measuresd 49 and 50 here in Oregon's election today. Any one with a shred of intelligence will vote NO on both.

But then... It's too easy for the party in power to controll the Oregon elections.

Mr. Peabody

11-06-2007, 05:29 PM

If Hillary wins, I'll know the elections are rigged. I will deduce that because I refuse to believe there are that many stupid people in America.

I felt the same way in 2004, but apparently there really are that many stupid people in America.

Wild Cobra

11-06-2007, 05:38 PM

I felt the same way in 2004, but apparently there really are that many stupid people in America.
LOL.... This again...

We were suppose to be stupid enough to vote for John Kerry? Give me a break.

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 06:11 PM

If Hillary wins, I'll know the elections are rigged.Then what?

Mr. Peabody

11-06-2007, 06:15 PM

LOL.... This again...

We were suppose to be stupid enough to vote for John Kerry? Give me a break.

:lol

Just a play on your post. Nothing more.

I actually felt that Kerry was a poor choice for the Demo nomination, but I still liked him more than GW.

Wild Cobra

11-06-2007, 06:24 PM

:lol

Just a play on your post. Nothing more.

I actually felt that Kerry was a poor choice for the Demo nomination, but I still liked him more than GW.
We both have our lesser of two evil choices. Must just be me. I cannot fathom how anyone who:

1) Is properly informed
2) Is intelligent
3) is not getting personal gain

can vote for anyone like Kerry, or Hillary.

Mr. Peabody

11-06-2007, 06:39 PM

I cannot fathom how anyone who:

1) Is properly informed
2) Is intelligent
3) is not getting personal gain

can vote for anyone like Kerry, or Hillary.

It's quite simple really. Just have those candidates run against someone like George W. Bush. That was my dilemma in 2004 and will be my dilemma again when Hillary is running against Rudy.

Wild Cobra

11-06-2007, 07:25 PM

It's quite simple really. Just have those candidates run against someone like George W. Bush. That was my dilemma in 2004 and will be my dilemma again when Hillary is running against Rudy.
Well, I would vote for Rudy if he was the republican nominee, because there isn't a single democrat who is better than him. There are several things I dislike about him. However, he knows how to lead.

Another thing. How many people think it’s OK for someone to be president who hasn’t either managed a successful business, or already been the head of an executive branch? Senator Clinton has no prior experience. Senator Kerry had no experience.

Aggie Hoopsfan

11-06-2007, 07:33 PM

"Hillary going Marxist"

... is typical right-wing boogy-man scare tactic, like dubya and dickhead scaring everybody about terrorism, scare-mongering that only the Repugs can protect America, after Repug dubya and dickhead FAILED to protect America on 9/11.

You're a fucking idiot, you know that?

We've seen what Hillary's idea of the perfect America is, remember her 'health plan for America'? I don't need any scare tactics and frankly you are farther to the left than anyone on this site is conservative, even Yoni.

You want something more mundane? Howabout her waffling since the debate on rights for illegals (getting drivers licenses, etc.)? She's already see-sawing and she hasn't even made it out of her party primary yet.

Who do you want to be president boutons? Don't give me your diarreah of the mouth Republican hate mongering bot posting waste of bandwidth posts, let's see some mother fucking substance.

Right now I'm digging Ron Paul, but most of America is too fucking stupid to read what his actual platform is because his name isn't Hillary or Obama.

And when our country is at this point where they're a bunch of mindless idiots letting ABC, CBS, etc. make their presidential choices for them, it doesn't say much for our future.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 09:26 PM

Reminds me of a Reagan quote:

"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

And, speaking of Hillary and illegal aliens. Columnist James Pinkerton has an interesting article premised on the idea that Clinton's support for drivers licenses for illegals is "a slow hemorrhaging" that will finish her off in the general even as it's ignored during the primaries.

He analogizes her situation to that of Michael Dukakis in 1988. Dukakis was way out ahead of Bush 41 in the national polls after having shrugged off attacks from then-Senator Al Gore on the topic of prison furloughs during the primary.

I'll cut to the chase, but you should read it all (http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-oppin065448332nov06,0,6463881.column):

Now fast-forward to 2007. I'm long out of partisan campaign politics, but Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminds me a lot of Dukakis. As he was two decades ago, she's from a big state, has a lot of money, is ahead in the polls - and she's been grievously injured. This time, the issue isn't prison furloughs, but driver's licenses for illegal immigrants in her "home" state of New York. Clinton has broadly defended Gov. Eliot Spitzer's unpopular plan, even as most New Yorkers have reviled it.

During the Philadelphia debate of Democratic hopefuls on Oct. 30, Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, aiming from way back in the Democratic pack, took a stab at Clinton. Her position was "troublesome," he said, adding, "I think the American people are reacting to it."

Yes, they are, but not inside the "nominating wing" of the Democratic Party, which doesn't worry about illegal immigration. So just as Gore failed to get anywhere in criticizing Dukakis 20 years ago, Dodd is not destined to get any lift from his Clinton criticism.

But the country, of course, is bigger than a few lefty-dominated presidential primaries and caucuses. If Spitzer can't sell his licenses-for-illegals plan to New Yorkers in 2007, how can Clinton hope to defend that plan to Americans in 2008?
This may explain why she's starting to backpedal (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1107/Grievously_injured.html).

CROWLEY: If I wrote a story that said: "Absent a broad illegal immigration bill, Hillary Clinton agrees about giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants," is that correct?
CLINTON: No. What I have said is that I support what governors are trying to do. And governors are on the front lines because of the failures to get comprehensive immigration reform.
Video at the second link if you want to subject yourself to both Clinton and Candy Crowley. Masochist.

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 10:21 PM

So what indictment is Hillary currently under?

PixelPusher

11-06-2007, 10:22 PM

If Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency, it would be comparable to what happens after a summer of $4 a gallon gas, when the price drops down to $2.89. The feeling of relief would last only as long as it takes you to remember that the low price used to be $2.69 a year ago, and $2.49 a year before that, etc.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:23 PM

So what indictment is Hillary currently under?
Did the post accuse her of a crime? Was Dukakis under indictment?

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 10:26 PM

So what indictment is Hillary currently under?

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:27 PM

What's a matter, forget what you said?

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 10:28 PM

Answer the question.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:30 PM

Answer the question.
It's not relevant to the thread...ask it in the one where I've accuse her of a crime. If, that is, you're not on ignore for hijacking threads.

You've got an unhealthy fixation I think.

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 10:35 PM

Well, depending on who is the vice president, I'll probably actively lobby for her impeachment on the crimes she's already committed or those she's surely going to commit in office.

The woman is a Criminal with a capital "C."

How's that for a reaction.It's relevant.

You made it relevant.

Answer the question, coward.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:37 PM

It's relevant.

You made it relevant.

Answer the question, coward.
She's not under indictment, yet.

ChumpDumper

11-06-2007, 10:38 PM

She's not under indictment, yet.Why isn't she?

PixelPusher

11-06-2007, 10:39 PM

We haven't found the Loch Ness monster...yet.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:40 PM

We haven't found the Loch Ness monster...yet.Well, good luck with that.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:41 PM

Why isn't she?
Not a question I can answer; you should probably call a prosecutor.

PixelPusher

11-06-2007, 10:42 PM

Well, good luck with that.
Same to you for your mythical WMDs.

Yonivore

11-06-2007, 10:43 PM

Same to you for your mythical WMDs.
Thanks, although the "mythical" reference kind of belies your insincerity.

Walter Craparita

11-07-2007, 01:01 PM

Adapt and work harder to overcome the shithole she will turn America into.

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 01:24 PM

From that Candy Crowley interview the other day...

"Well, but you know, Candy, well, but I think that if you go back and look at the complexity of this issue, I don't think a lot of these hard questions lend themselves to raising your hand. And I know that that's easier in a 30 second context to try to do.

I think the fact that governors are being forced into this position is really unfortunate. They should not be making immigration policy. The federal government should be making immigration policy and that's what I'm going to try to do as president again...
Stop right there.

Again?!?

Was she Billy's Immigration Czar?

But, seriously, why should it take longer than, say, 3 seconds to say yes or no to the question of whether or not she supported the illegal immigrant license program being proposed by the New York Governor?

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 01:32 PM

From that Candy Crowley interview the other day...

Stop right there.

Again?!?

Was she Billy's Immigration Czar?

But, seriously, why should it take longer than, say, 3 seconds to say yes or no to the question of whether or not she supported the illegal immigrant license program being proposed by the New York Governor?

so do you agree with her assessment that governors shouldn't be responsible for enacting immigration laws? yes or no.

is this a fed issue yes or no?

SRJ

11-07-2007, 01:36 PM

Who do you want to be president boutons? Don't give me your diarreah of the mouth Republican hate mongering bot posting waste of bandwidth posts, let's see some mother fucking substance.

In case boutons is busy, I'll go ahead and field this for him:

What we don't need is big oil, big pharma Repugs like dubya and dickhead with their neocon trash and condaloozer in the state department

That wasn't very good, but it's actually difficult to be that stupid and paranoid.

smeagol

11-07-2007, 01:37 PM

I don't care either way.

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 01:39 PM

so do you agree with her assessment that governors shouldn't be responsible for enacting immigration laws? yes or no.

is this a fed issue yes or no?
I'm not sure that's her assessment -- particularly when she concurs with a plan to give driver licenses to illegal aliens. And, that was the question to her, not who she thinks is responsible for immigration law but whether or not she supports the Governor of New York's plan to issue driver licenses to illegal immigrants.

But, as for me, I think it is both a federal and a state issue.

A federal issue from the perspective of immigration and border security. A state issue from the perspective of criminal law enforcement and civil policing in their respective jurisdictions.

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 01:40 PM

I don't care either way.
Of course you don't, you live in a third world country.

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 01:40 PM

I'm not sure that's her assessment -- particularly when she concurs with a plan to give driver licenses to illegal aliens. And, that was the question to her, not who she thinks is responsible for immigration law but whether or not she supports the Governor of New York's plan to issue driver licenses to illegal immigrants.

But, as for me, I think it is both a federal and a state issue.

A federal issue from the perspective of immigration and border security. A state issue from the perspective of criminal law enforcement and civil policing in their respective jurisdictions.

I aksed for a yes or no answer. i guess you just as bad as hillary clinton.. :lol

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 01:43 PM

I aksed for a yes or no answer. i guess you just as bad as hillary clinton.. :lol
You asked for a yes or no question to something you claimed Hillary stood for. I'm not convinced that was her assessment. There is no indication she misunderstands the governor's intention to license illegal aliens.

Poor analogy.

Ask me if I support the governor's plan to license illegal aliens.

No. I don't. Do you?

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 02:54 PM

"
Why am I saying this? Because, I had the feeling that at the end of that last debate we were about to get into cutesy land again," Clinton said. "Ya'll raise your hand if you're for illegal immigrants getting a driver's license. So, we then let the Republicans go ahead saying all the Democrats are against the rule of law."

Of course it's gotcha politics. If she says yes then the GOP bashes her if she says no then the GOP can come in later and call her a flip flopper when she tries to answer a similar question in the future...

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 02:56 PM

"

Of course it's gotcha politics. If she says yes then the GOP bashes her if she says no then the GOP can come in later and call her a flip flopper when she tries to answer a similar question in the future...
She was asked the question by a fellow Democrat -- Chris Dodd -- during the debate.

And, as for the "raise your hand" thing. It was pretty funny watching the Democrats trying to figure out how you raise your hand without raising your hand.

Someone should post video of that if it's still out there.

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 02:57 PM

She was asked the question by a fellow Democrat -- Chris Dodd -- during the debate.

regardless of who asked her that question she is smart enough to understand the that either way she's f*cked. Are you telling me that the GOP wouldn't have attacked her answer?

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 02:59 PM

regardless of who asked her that question she is smart enough to understand the that either way she's f*cked. Are you telling me that the GOP wouldn't have attacked her answer?
She's only fucked because she supported the program and got busted for supporting it on national television.

You're right, there was no way for her to answer tha question honestly without fucking herself.

But, in the process, she fucked herself anyway.

Pretty cool if you ask me.

xrayzebra

11-07-2007, 03:27 PM

Well at least I guess it will be easier to get a drivers license.
Just go onto the internet and give someones name dob and
click on paypal, show them the money and drive and live safely in
America. And don't forget to vote, as many times as you want
and often so long as your vote the Billary way.

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 03:28 PM

She's only fucked because she supported the program and got busted for supporting it on national television.

You're right, there was no way for her to answer tha question honestly without fucking herself.

But, in the process, she fucked herself anyway.

Pretty cool if you ask me.

how do you know she supports the program? she's never come out and said that so how do you know?

xrayzebra

11-07-2007, 03:30 PM

how do you know she supports the program? she's never come out and said that so how do you know?

She never, never, ever says what she supports. Remember
that!

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 03:31 PM

She never, never, ever says what she supports. Remember
that!

well yoni just told me that couldn't answer that question honestly because she actually supports it. yet he has ZERO proof that she does.

xrayzebra

11-07-2007, 03:33 PM

well yoni just told me that couldn't answer that question honestly because she actually supports it. yet he has ZERO proof that she does.

Hey ask him for a link. Don't gripe about it to me. Okay!

Nbadan

11-07-2007, 03:36 PM

Question to Hillary: Yes or No? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bygAResnA2c)

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 03:38 PM

great. she broadly supports programs like gov. spitzer and other governors who have created similiar programs but she doesn't support 50 different programs. there is your answer.

xrayzebra

11-07-2007, 03:39 PM

great. she broadly supports programs like gov. spitzer and others have created but she doesn't support 50 different programs. there is your answer.

No it isn't. She earlier said it was a state problem. And
one they should answer.....................

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 03:41 PM

No it isn't. She earlier said it was a state problem. And
one they should answer.....................

ray she said that the states have had to try and deal with it because bush failed at implementing a comprehensive immigration plan. so it is a state problem because the fed haven't done anything.

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 03:51 PM

how do you know she supports the program? she's never come out and said that so how do you know?
The framing of your question reminded me of a how my pre-teen children interrogate one another. The only thing missing was the protracted, "huuuuh?" at the end.

Well, the New York Times (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/31/a-day-later-clinton-embraces-spitzers-license-effort/) reported this:

“Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration’s failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform,’” her campaign said.

Mrs. Clinton’s aides said her statement was intended to signal that she broadly supported Mr. Spitzer’s goal of awarding driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.
And that's after the debate.

Priot to the debate, she told a New Hampshire editorial board that Governor Spitzer's plan to license illegal immigrants, quote, "made a lot of sense."

ChumpDumper

11-07-2007, 03:54 PM

Not a question I can answer; you should probably call a prosecutor.Then quit pretending you know of all her "crimes."

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 03:55 PM

The framing of your question reminded me of a how my pre-teen children interrogate one another. The only thing missing was the protracted, "huuuuh?" at the end.

Well, the New York Times (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/31/a-day-later-clinton-embraces-spitzers-license-effort/) reported this:

And that's after the debate.

Priot to the debate, she told a New Hampshire editorial board that Governor Spitzer's plan to license illegal immigrants, quote, "made a lot of sense."

it made sense because we need to know who is in the country!!!!! that's what she said. she made that claim during the debate as well that this program indentified who is in the country.. we do need to know who is in this country right yoni? so would you agree with spitzer's attempt to try and indentify who's here illegally a good attempt to accomplish this? she also followed up her statements that this problem should be handled by the feds..

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 04:01 PM

it made sense because we need to know who is in the country!!!!! that's what she said. she made that claim during the debate as well that this program indentified who is in the country.. we do need to know who is in this country right yoni?
Well, you don't do it by giving illegal aliens the one document accepted by most voting precincts and, by which doing so, would completely fuck up several national security processes -- such as air travel.

Yeah, I agree, we should know who's in our country but, there's no way Spitzer's plan was going to do that.

so would you agree with spitzer's attempt to try and indentify who's here illegally a good attempt to accomplish this? she also followed up her statements that this problem should be handled by the feds..
No, I don't agree it was a good attempt. And, if she followed up with a statement to that affect why is she saying Spitzer's idea sounds good?

But, more importantly, why isn't she saying -- now -- yes, it's a good idea or no, it's a bad idea to license illegal immigrants. Even if she was confused by the complexity on debate night. Answering that simple yes or no question should have been on her things to do before now.

ChumpDumper

11-07-2007, 04:05 PM

If they are able to pass a drivers test and the license specifically identifies the person as an illegal immigrant, what's the problem?

Holt's Cat

11-07-2007, 04:08 PM

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 04:17 PM

Mrs. Clinton’s aides said her statement was intended to signal that she broadly supported Mr. Spitzer’s goal of awarding driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.
I'm not sure you can get more clear than that. Mrs. Clinton should answer the question, "Yes, I support Governor Spitzer's goal of awarding driver's licenses to illegal immigrants."

It's what her campaign is saying.

What's even more hilarious is that the New Hampshire editorial board -- from whom the original question was drawn by Tim Russert, wrote an editorial defending Mrs. Clinton and, after reading it, I was ready to admit that I was wrong.

However, when I got to the end of the editorial (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071102/OPINION01/311020012/-1/opinion), they had updated it:

Since we penned this editorial, Clinton has refined and shifted her position on this matter, appearing to more strongly endorse the idea of driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants.
So, apparently, Hillary disagrees with you and the Nashua Telegraph editorial board; she supports -- no, BROADLY supports Governort Spitzer's plan to license illegals.

George Gervin's Afro

11-07-2007, 04:31 PM

I'm not sure you can get more clear than that. Mrs. Clinton should answer the question, "Yes, I support Governor Spitzer's goal of awarding driver's licenses to illegal immigrants."

It's what her campaign is saying.

What's even more hilarious is that the New Hampshire editorial board -- from whom the original question was drawn by Tim Russert, wrote an editorial defending Mrs. Clinton and, after reading it, I was ready to admit that I was wrong.

However, when I got to the end of the editorial (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071102/OPINION01/311020012/-1/opinion), they had updated it:

So, apparently, Hillary disagrees with you and the Nashua Telegraph editorial board; she supports -- no, BROADLY supports Governort Spitzer's plan to license illegals.

WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This broadly

adverb
1. without regard to specific details or exceptions; "he interprets the law broadly"

Yonivore

11-07-2007, 04:35 PM

And, that'd be all well and good for your argument if the New York Times didn't attribute the part about supporting (broadly or otherwise), "...Mr. Spitzer’s goal of awarding driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants," to the Clinton Campaign.

Because, no matter how hard you try and turn the word "broadly" into a statement about some nebulous non-specific immigration plan of the Governor's, the campaign is the one that said, "...her [Hillary Clinton's] statement was intended to signal that she broadly supported Mr. Spitzer’s goal of awarding driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.

That's pretty specific...even in a broad sense.

Nbadan

11-07-2007, 11:13 PM

Slate writes on the Clinton unraveling....

Hillary Clinton's lead in New Hampshire is now only 10 points in Rasmussen's robo-poll--down from 23 points in mid-September. Ten points isn't nothing two months before a New Hampshire primary, but it's pretty close to nothing. Especially if it's ten-points-and-falling. ... P.S.: Hillary has now used two of what she must have considered the most powerful weapons in her arsenal--1) the gender victim/Rick Lazio card, and 2) her husband - and they both backfired. Doesn't that make them hard to use again? ... Hillary shouldn't panic. But judging from her performance so far, she will.

...

Hitting A Vain: A full week after the Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton is still flailing on the licenses-for-illegals issue--justifying her position on unconvincing federalist grounds, letting her husband mount an equally specious it's-all-too-complicated defense. Maybe she can keep it going until Iowa Caucus Day! ... Yuval Levin is astounded by this performance. Wouldn't it be better for her just to take the hit for supporting Spitzer's plan and move on? The most troubling aspect of this incident, for Democrats, isn't that Hillary can't finesse an issue as well as her husband--we knew that. It's the possibility that a) she panics in adversity--a point Levin emphasizes or b) she's too vain to let herself be perceived as having given a wrong answer, so she goes back to correct it even when that only compounds the damage. ..

Slate (http://www.slate.com/id/2177540/#flailing)

SAtoDallas

11-08-2007, 02:03 PM

I'll be sad, but just live with it.

George Gervin's Afro

11-08-2007, 02:39 PM

I'll be sad, but just live with it.

don't worry 50% of the country has been sad for the last 7 yrs and they have managed to survive.

but there is one bit of good news. dick cheney told america that if dems to control of congress that we would be more vulnerable to an attack. it didn't happen..

Yonivore

11-08-2007, 03:25 PM

don't worry 50% of the country has been sad for the last 7 yrs and they have managed to survive.
And after being sad for absolutely no reason, at that.

but there is one bit of good news. dick cheney told america that if dems to control of congress that we would be more vulnerable to an attack. it didn't happen..
How do you know?

Being more vulnerable and actually being attacked are two different things. Maybe the administration stepped up efforts to thwart the terrorists in response to this Congress making us more vulnerable.

George Gervin's Afro

11-08-2007, 03:26 PM

And after being sad for absolutely no reason, at that.

How do you know?

Being more vulnerable and actually being attacked are two different things. Maybe the administration stepped up efforts to thwart the terrorists in response to this Congress making us more vulnerable.

or dick was just lying again. playing politics with national security..

Yonivore

11-08-2007, 03:53 PM

or dick was just lying again. playing politics with national security..
You have to prove he lied once to say again...

JoeChalupa

11-08-2007, 04:00 PM

Can she do it? Oh hell yeah. But she has to get over the "I can't stand the bitch" attitude of those who know she can do the job but just plain don't like her.

George Gervin's Afro

11-08-2007, 04:16 PM

You have to prove he lied once to say again...

In 1991, Cheney noted the intense sectarian rivalries that dominate Iraqi society and the likely inability to maintain stability in Baghdad. As for replacing Saddam with a democracy, Cheney asked his audience, “How much credibility is that government going to have if it’s set up by the United States military when it’s there?” He added:

“The notion that we ought to now go to Baghdad and somehow take control of the country strikes me as an extremely serious one in terms of what we’d have to do once we got there. You’d probably have to put some new government in place. It’s not clear what kind of government that would be, how long you’d have to stay. For the U.S. to get involved militarily in determining the outcome of the struggle over who’s going to govern in Iraq strikes me as a classic definition of a quagmire.”

Then, in 1994, Cheney reiterated his position.

“Once you got to Iraq and took it over, and took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world and if you take down the central government in Iraq, you can easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off. How many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? And our judgment was - not very many and I think we got it right.”

As ThinkProgress noted this morning, Cheney was repeating the line as recently as 2000:

“[T]he only way you could have done that would be to go to Baghdad and occupy Iraq. If we’d done that, the U.S. would have been all alone. We would not have had the support of the coalition, especially of the Arab nations that fought alongside us in Kuwait. None of them ever set foot inside Iraq. Conversations I had with leaders in the region afterwards–they all supported the decision that was made not to go to Baghdad.

“They were concerned that we not get into a position where we shifted instead of being the leader of an international coalition to roll back Iraqi aggression to one in which we were an imperialist power, willy-nilly moving into capitals in that part of the world taking down governments.”

I won't waste my time finding where dick says one thing and then later the exact opposite happens. I guess you could him a liar an incompetent. or medal of freedom recipient..

I'll just call him a flip flopper.. can't decide.. whether invading iraq is a good iudea or a bad idea..

George Gervin's Afro

11-08-2007, 04:42 PM

You have to prove he lied once to say again...

MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree

And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei, frankly, is wrong. And I think if you look at the track record of the International Atomic Energy Agency and this kind of issue, especially where Iraq is concerned, they have consistently underestimated or missed what it was Saddam Hussein was doing. I don’t have any reason to believe they’re any more valid this time than they’ve been in the past.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Reconstituted nuclear weapons. You misspoke.

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Yeah. I did misspeak. I said repeatedly during the show weapons capability. We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon.

it's amazing that our beloved darth vader lied when he proclaimed that:

And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.

but of course dick didn't lie he simply misspoke... of course his little slip came during the selling of the war but hey we don't have the right to challenge the dickster..