Reply With Quote
I would laugh...
We don't need more of the same and that's what we will get from the republicans.
"Hillary going Marxist"
... is typical right-wing boogy-man scare tactic, like dubya and head scaring everybody about terrorism, scare-mongering that only the Repugs can protect America, after Repug dubya and head FAILED to protect America on 9/11.
I would laugh...
We don't need more of the same and that's what we will get from the republicans.
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.
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.
Then what?If Hillary wins, I'll know the elections are rigged.
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:
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.
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.
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.
You're a ing 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 ing substance.
Right now I'm digging Ron Paul, but most of America is too ing 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.
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:
This may explain why she's starting to backpedal.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?
Video at the second link if you want to subject yourself to both Clinton and Candy Crowley. Masochist.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.
So what indictment is Hillary currently under?
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.
Did the post accuse her of a crime? Was Dukakis under indictment?
What's a matter, forget what you said?
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.
It's relevant.
You made it relevant.
Answer the question, coward.
She's not under indictment, yet.
Why isn't she?
We haven't found the Loch Ness monster...yet.
Well, good luck with that.
Not a question I can answer; you should probably call a prosecutor.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
