Clinton to the rescue?

[CADsortaGUY]

California's Embattled Governor Gains a New Adviser: Bill Clinton

<snip>
Mr. Clinton met privately with Mr. Davis and his wife, Sharon, at an A.F.L.-C.I.O. convention in Chicago last week, offering a political tutorial on how Mr. Davis should beat back the effort to remove him. (Points 1, 2, and 3: act gubernatorial, make sure the fight is about the recall initiative and not about Mr. Davis, and do not get baited by the news media into a fight with Arnold Schwarzenegger, one participant said.)
</snip>

Interesting.

CkG

 

[sMiLeYz]

This is a testament to the man's skill as a politician, his advice is sought by everyone from Democratic hopefuls to African and european leaders, including his political prodigy Tony Blair. Even his former opponents (Bob Dole) highly respect him.

He may have been a bad husband, but he was good president and a even better politician.

 

[sMiLeYz]

One of his advisers, Douglas Sosnik, who was his political director in the White House, said that "among the reasons that the president would have to get involved with the race is that having a recall of a governor who has been re-elected sets a terrible precedent for this democracy."

Several people who have talked to Mr. Clinton described him as distressed with what was taking place in California, and suggested that he, like many Democrats, saw it as part of a pattern that included the impeachment and the recent efforts by Republicans in Texas to redraw Congressional district lines in a way would eliminate some Democratic-leaning districts.

"There are a lot of people in the party who are connecting the dots: What's occurring is a conscious and well-heeled effort to try to undo traditional democratic processes," one of Mr. Clinton's associates said.

:disgust::frown::Q

Suddenly everything from the debacle that was election 2000, Patriot Act I and II, the appointment of John Ashcroft, redistricting in texas to california recall all makes perfect sense now.

The Republicans see it upon themselves to convert America into a one party police state backed by coporate allies, and delude the rest of us into thinking it's a democracy.

I usually never believed in conspiracies, but the evidence here is overwhelming. I mean what else could it possibly be but "1984" coming true?

 

[JellyBaby]

If Clinton is the only one who can save us, we may as well fall on our own swords. Perish the very notion.

 

[Matt2]

I personally liked Clinton. He was a good leader. like they say, "Do as I say, not as I do"

He helped the economy, was good at forming International relations, yet he was not afraid to back up his word.

 

[JellyBaby]

was good at forming International relations

Your forgot his internationl relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

He was a good politician, that's it. I value a good garbage collection more.

 

[Matt2]

Well, take your pick. Good politician that advanced our country and got a little play while doing it...

or

Bad politician who is on a power trip and costing us billions, but happily married...

I really think it was absurd what happened to him, such an awesome leader, everything he did for this country was discredited cause he got a BJ, big fuckin deal.

 

[JellyBaby]

Nah, it was about far more than the cigar session. Pick your scandal, there were plenty to choose from.

My pick is neither. I prefer someone with higher character, who pursues truth, who engages in plentiful open dialogs with the nation (Clinton went into hiding for what nearly a whole year?), who actually favors fiscal responsibility and seeks to eliminate waste, one who doesn't lead by polling results and one who holds our constitution in high regard. Whether he's married or single...I really couldn't care less.

The real question is how to do encourages these types of folk to start running for office again?

 

[Matt2]

Sounds like the green party to me.

I dunno, it just seems like either way you vote, you're gonna have to make compromises.

We're never gonna have a perfect president. He's either gonna be too soft, too tough, too passive....

 

[DealMonkey]

I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. If the recall petition was more of a grassroots effort I would feel differently about it. Instead, it seems like yet another example of republican party dirty tricks. The republican party bought those recall signatures plain and simple. I wouldn't be surprised if the impetus to recall Davis originated outside the state...

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. [/i]

...but you probably respect the Democrats in Texas who ran to Oklahoma, right? You can't have your cake and eat it too, sir; A is A.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby

was good at forming International relations

Your forgot his internationl relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

He was a good politician, that's it. I value a good garbage collection more.

I would rather have a good politician whose economic policies had me roughly twice as wealthy as I am now. I hope it turns around, law school is on the line...

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby
Nah, it was about far more than the cigar session. Pick your scandal, there were plenty to choose from.

My pick is neither. I prefer someone with higher character, who pursues truth, who engages in plentiful open dialogs with the nation (Clinton went into hiding for what nearly a whole year?), who actually favors fiscal responsibility and seeks to eliminate waste, one who doesn't lead by polling results and one who holds our constitution in high regard. Whether he's married or single...I really couldn't care less.

The real question is how to do encourages these types of folk to start running for office again?

Ah morals the realm of legistaltion

and on your contention about open dialogues with the nation, read up on Bush and his meeting with the NAACP. They are more scarce than french millitary victories.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. [/i]

...but you probably respect the Democrats in Texas who ran to Oklahoma, right? You can't have your cake and eat it too, sir; A is A.

Why did they go to OK? Was it possibly to keep the quorum from being absent so the republicans could not create a one party political system? yep.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. [/i]

...but you probably respect the Democrats in Texas who ran to Oklahoma, right? You can't have your cake and eat it too, sir; A is A.

Why did they go to OK? Was it possibly to keep the quorum from being absent so the republicans could not create a one party political system? yep.

Spin it any way you wish; the original post claimed that Republicans were subverting the democratic process. If you can justify the spineless Democrats in Texas using your own reasoning and can conclude that they weren't 'subverting the democratic process', by all means..whatever makes you happy.


Also, the answer to your question is no...learn political jargon, then come here posting your nonsense. Until you figure out what you are talking about, you just make yourself look dumber than...

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Oh, wait, you are from Florida; it is beginning to make sense.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxxSpin it any way you wish; the original post claimed that Republicans were subverting the democratic process. If you can justify the spineless Democrats in Texas using your own reasoning and can conclude that they weren't 'subverting the democratic process', by all means..whatever makes you happy.


Also, the answer to your question is no...learn political jargon, then come here posting your nonsense. Until you figure out what you are talking about, you just make yourself look dumber than...

You're the one who's spinning. The democrats left Texas to prevent redestricting by Repubs. More dirty tricks.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. [/i]

...but you probably respect the Democrats in Texas who ran to Oklahoma, right? You can't have your cake and eat it too, sir; A is A.

Why did they go to OK? Was it possibly to keep the quorum from being absent so the republicans could not create a one party political system? yep.

Spin it any way you wish; the original post claimed that Republicans were subverting the democratic process. If you can justify the spineless Democrats in Texas using your own reasoning and can conclude that they weren't 'subverting the democratic process', by all means..whatever makes you happy.


Also, the answer to your question is no...learn political jargon, then come here posting your nonsense. Until you figure out what you are talking about, you just make yourself look dumber than...

By your logic fillibusters are subverting the democratic process. You confuse freedom of speech with subversion. BTW back with the ad hominem, I keep trying to beat that into you yet you continually bash the man. Sad really.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Oh, wait, you are from Florida; it is beginning to make sense.

You say that like it is something I should be ashamed of? I mean yes it is true I do have to live under not one but two bushes, but that doesn't make me ashamed of living here, besides their ridiculous antics and abuses of power give me ammo for people like you. And BTW Jeb is an elitist, he worries me more than GW, if he ever got into the white house... God help us.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I too feel the CA recall campaign is yet another example of republicans subverting the democratic process. [/i]

...but you probably respect the Democrats in Texas who ran to Oklahoma, right? You can't have your cake and eat it too, sir; A is A.

Why did they go to OK? Was it possibly to keep the quorum from being absent so the republicans could not create a one party political system? yep.

Spin it any way you wish; the original post claimed that Republicans were subverting the democratic process. If you can justify the spineless Democrats in Texas using your own reasoning and can conclude that they weren't 'subverting the democratic process', by all means..whatever makes you happy.


Also, the answer to your question is no...learn political jargon, then come here posting your nonsense. Until you figure out what you are talking about, you just make yourself look dumber than...

By your logic fillibusters are subverting the democratic process. You confuse freedom of speech with subversion. BTW back with the ad hominem, I keep trying to beat that into you yet you continually bash the man. Sad really.

Did you look up "quorum" yet and learn from your mistake? If so, I'll continue down this path with you, sir.

As to my logic, no, a filibuster is not subverting the democratic process; in fact, any action taking by a politician that is in the proverbial rule book, is fair game in my book. The majority leader, more often than not, will "fill the tree" when introducing a bill to the floor, thus limiting the number of amendments that can be added...more often than not, a majority leader will facilitate a cloture vote to prevent filibusters, etc, etc, etc...all within the rules of the game. Recalling the clown in California takes no exception. Running away from the political process does, however.

Perhaps you confused my logic with your own confusing logic, which caused you to be utterly confused.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxxSpin it any way you wish; the original post claimed that Republicans were subverting the democratic process. If you can justify the spineless Democrats in Texas using your own reasoning and can conclude that they weren't 'subverting the democratic process', by all means..whatever makes you happy.


Also, the answer to your question is no...learn political jargon, then come here posting your nonsense. Until you figure out what you are talking about, you just make yourself look dumber than...

You're the one who's spinning. The democrats left Texas to prevent redestricting by Repubs. More dirty tricks.

Yes, the democrats were using "more dirty tricks." If you implying that redistricting is a dirty trick, then I refuse to continue this discussion with you any longer. Granted, redistricting is a partisan process, but to imply that it is a "dirty trick" is stupid.

 

[DealMonkey]

Republicans are redrawing lines that were just adopted in 2001, defying the rule that redistricting occurs only once a decade, after the census. So it's OK to ignore the rules if you're republican? Is that what you're trying to say?

Besides, why are you changing the subject? This thread is about Clinton/Davis. Why don't you stay on-topic for once?

 

[Macro2]

I liked Clinton...great guy to hang at bars with and pick up Chicks...
He's probably great with lies and pick up lines too...

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Republicans are redrawing lines that were just adopted in 2001, defying the rule that redistricting occurs only once a decade, after the census. So it's OK to ignore the rules if you're republican? Is that what you're trying to say?

Besides, why are you changing the subject? This thread is about Clinton/Davis. Why don't you stay on-topic for once?

Because I felt a need to correct your reasoning, Monkey.