What exactly is objectionable about Ms Clinton?

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: marincounty
It's her name, Clinton. If her name were Bush or Reagan or Rice, they would be praising her like she was the second coming of Jesus. She is very middle of the road. Something I think this country needs after 8 years of disastrous radical right politics.

If you read her book and look at her ideas she is about the closet thing to a communist/marxist you will find. THAT's what is so dangerous about her. She is not middle of the road. Extreme left/socialist/communist.

Just read her book. It reads like The Manifesto.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: marincounty
It's her name, Clinton. If her name were Bush or Reagan or Rice, they would be praising her like she was the second coming of Jesus. She is very middle of the road. Something I think this country needs after 8 years of disastrous radical right politics.

If you read her book and look at her ideas she is about the closet thing to a communist/marxist you will find. THAT's what is so dangerous about her. She is not middle of the road. Extreme left/socialist/communist.

Just read her book. It reads like The Manifesto.

No, I want to hear you explain it. If it's so obvious, it should be no trouble at all for you to explain just how exactly she's an "extreme communist".

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: marincounty
It's her name, Clinton. If her name were Bush or Reagan or Rice, they would be praising her like she was the second coming of Jesus. She is very middle of the road. Something I think this country needs after 8 years of disastrous radical right politics.

If you read her book and look at her ideas she is about the closet thing to a communist/marxist you will find. THAT's what is so dangerous about her. She is not middle of the road. Extreme left/socialist/communist.

Just read her book. It reads like The Manifesto.

No, I want to hear you explain it. If it's so obvious, it should be no trouble at all for you to explain just how exactly she's an "extreme communist".

I even doubt if he's read the "Manifesto" I know I haven't.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's a manifestation of the top-down leadership, solidarity and discipline on the rightwing- they've been conditioned to hate the Clintons, so they do. No reasons required.

Part of it, at the top, is that the Clintons are really more like their repub counterparts than most Dems, with Bill's presidency being a good example of it. Except that they can compromise, reach consensus, get things done in ways that ideological demagogery simply can't...

The most telling criticism of Bill was that "He stole our issues!"- which says a lot about the whole headset of Hillary-hate... that would have been impossible if there were no answers other than radical right boilerplate...

 

[ProfJohn]

Hillary's socialist quotes:
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." (spoken about raising taxes)

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

"(We) ....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

?I have a million ideas, America can?t afford them all.?

The last one was meant to be a joke, but good humor does not work unless there is a sense of truth in it.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Bill was actually a competent and successful criminal who brought shame to the White House.

Why do I keep having to fix your posts?

He had sex with an intern and lied about it. Not real commendable behavior, I'll admit, but it's damn sure better than what we got from the majority of people who've occupied that office.

He lied under oath in a court of law. Then he lied to the American people. And yet you still pretend it was only the sex that got him in trouble...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Bill was actually a competent and successful criminal who brought shame to the White House.

Why do I keep having to fix your posts?

He had sex with an intern and lied about it. Not real commendable behavior, I'll admit, but it's damn sure better than what we got from the majority of people who've occupied that office.

He lied under oath in a court of law. Then he lied to the American people. And yet you still pretend it was only the sex that got him in trouble...

He paid a fair price forn his indescretions and none of them cost any American lives.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I even doubt if he's read the "Manifesto" I know I haven't.

Everyone should. Clinton kool-aid sippers won't touch it with a ten foot pole, because it highlights Hillary for exactly what she is - a full blown Communist. In fact, you don't even need to read it. Google around for a few of her college thesis papers...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I even doubt if he's read the "Manifesto" I know I haven't.

Everyone should. Clinton kool-aid sippers won't touch it with a ten foot pole, because it highlights Hillary for exactly what she is - a full blown Communist. In fact, you don't even need to read it. Google around for a few of her college thesis papers...

Hey look, it's Tail Gunner Joe:thumbsup:

 

[Jhhnn]

Face it, PJ- for the rightwing, democracy itself is "leftist", and any sort of progressive tax system is undesirable, even though it's a shared feature of all modern democracies. It has to be. Those of extreme wealth would much prefer the ancient regime where they collected taxes rather than paying them...

The demise of the former soviet union and the disappearance of any true american left has created the opportunity for the far right to claim anybody not in agreement with them to be "communists". I certainly haven't heard any nationally recognized politicians calling for the dictatorship of the proletariat, confiscation of all private property, or collectivization...

When I do, then yeh, I'll agee that they're communists, and they would too... Meanwhile, the attempt to characterize Hillary as "Leftist" is one of the lamest smears currently in vogue. Part of the reason she's not more popular with Dems in general is that she's too far right to suit 'em... meaning htat about half the electorate must be commies, too...

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Bill was actually a competent and successful criminal who brought shame to the White House.

Why do I keep having to fix your posts?

He had sex with an intern and lied about it. Not real commendable behavior, I'll admit, but it's damn sure better than what we got from the majority of people who've occupied that office.

He lied under oath in a court of law. Then he lied to the American people. And yet you still pretend it was only the sex that got him in trouble...

Yes, and the way you can tell I'm ignoring the lying is the way I totally didn't mention it at all in the post you quoted :roll:

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Face it, PJ- for the rightwing, democracy itself is "leftist", and any sort of progressive tax system is undesirable, even though it's a shared feature of all modern democracies. It has to be. Those of extreme wealth would much prefer the ancient regime where they collected taxes rather than paying them...

The demise of the former soviet union and the disappearance of any true american left has created the opportunity for the far right to claim anybody not in agreement with them to be "communists". I certainly haven't heard any nationally recognized politicians calling for the dictatorship of the proletariat, confiscation of all private property, or collectivization...

When I do, then yeh, I'll agee that they're communists, and they would too... Meanwhile, the attempt to characterize Hillary as "Leftist" is one of the lamest smears currently in vogue. Part of the reason she's not more popular with Dems in general is that she's too far right to suit 'em... meaning htat about half the electorate must be commies, too...

You don't call Hillary's views collectivization? Really? I mean <southpark> really, really?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Hillary's socialist quotes:
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." (spoken about raising taxes)

"It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

"(We) ....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

?I have a million ideas, America can?t afford them all.?

The last one was meant to be a joke, but good humor does not work unless there is a sense of truth in it.

Wow, that reiteration of a Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: really convinced me.

Posting a few out of context quotes (... in the middle of a sentence is always suspect) does not paint a picture of someone's ideology. Describing the ways you're wrong about those quotes being "socialist" would be time consuming, but fortunately, snopes.com beat me to it. In fact, their page was the very first Google result when I searched for your first Hillary quote. Maybe if you were interested in the truth instead of pushing your silly-ass agenda, you might have found this too.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/marxist.asp

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Face it, PJ- for the rightwing, democracy itself is "leftist", and any sort of progressive tax system is undesirable, even though it's a shared feature of all modern democracies. It has to be. Those of extreme wealth would much prefer the ancient regime where they collected taxes rather than paying them...

The demise of the former soviet union and the disappearance of any true american left has created the opportunity for the far right to claim anybody not in agreement with them to be "communists". I certainly haven't heard any nationally recognized politicians calling for the dictatorship of the proletariat, confiscation of all private property, or collectivization...

When I do, then yeh, I'll agee that they're communists, and they would too... Meanwhile, the attempt to characterize Hillary as "Leftist" is one of the lamest smears currently in vogue. Part of the reason she's not more popular with Dems in general is that she's too far right to suit 'em... meaning htat about half the electorate must be commies, too...

You don't call Hillary's views collectivization? Really? I mean <southpark> really, really?

No more than I'd call anyone even slightly to the right a Nazi. This absolutist stance you guys are in love with is pretty fucking stupid, but you know that already.

 

[feralkid]

at exactly is objectionable about Ms Clinton? -sic



I think I read somewhere that she is married, hence, would not Mrs. Clinton be the correct salutation?

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: feralkid
at exactly is objectionable about Ms Clinton? -sic



I think I read somewhere that she is married, hence, would not Mrs. Clinton be the correct salutation?

Well, no. Not necessarily. Either work just fine.

"Ms" was a device created long ago (The 60's, 70's??) so that a female could be identified without the burden of having to know if she was married or single.

As an example: It permitted a female job applicant to not identify herself (on paper) as married or single to thwart predatory employers (the wedding ring was usually a dead givaway though) before it became illegal to ask questions like that on job applications.

It was about the same time that names / pronouns / titles that used to end in "...man" started to end in "...person" (i.e., salesperson versus salesman or saleswoman).

I don't like Candidate Clinton. Not because she's a Gyno-American (as I mentioned in the past, I think Condi Rice would do a great job), but because her voice, especially when she gets wound up, is like ten thousand fingernails on the world's loudest blackboard ... louder than a fart on a church pew during service ... that voice....

and she would easily make to the decision to make Bill 125 grains heavier behind the ear if she thought it'd advance her career even a millimeter.

She's a soulless power-hungry bitch that'd sell off Chelsea if it'd guarantee her the seat.

She has no scruples. She has no ankles. Her mother dressed her funny, and apparently her hair stylest is not gay enough to know her haircut perpetually sucks.

But anyway, "Ms" is always appropriate, unless the person requests Miss or Mrs.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: ScottMac
and she would easily make to the decision to make Bill 125 grains heavier behind the ear if she thought it'd advance her career even a millimeter.

She's a soulless power-hungry bitch that'd sell off Chelsea if it'd guarantee her the seat.

QFT. :thumbsup:

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Face it, PJ- for the rightwing, democracy itself is "leftist", and any sort of progressive tax system is undesirable, even though it's a shared feature of all modern democracies. It has to be. Those of extreme wealth would much prefer the ancient regime where they collected taxes rather than paying them...

The demise of the former soviet union and the disappearance of any true american left has created the opportunity for the far right to claim anybody not in agreement with them to be "communists". I certainly haven't heard any nationally recognized politicians calling for the dictatorship of the proletariat, confiscation of all private property, or collectivization...

When I do, then yeh, I'll agee that they're communists, and they would too... Meanwhile, the attempt to characterize Hillary as "Leftist" is one of the lamest smears currently in vogue. Part of the reason she's not more popular with Dems in general is that she's too far right to suit 'em... meaning htat about half the electorate must be commies, too...

You don't call Hillary's views collectivization? Really? I mean <southpark> really, really?

No, they're not really. Just like Bill, Hillary's policies tend strongly towards the corporatist Third Way agenda.

Jhnnn, however, is your typical ATPN moron troll. He wouldn't know democracy if it bit him on the ass. Democracy is not an ideology. It is neither left nor right. It has nothing to do with wealth distribution or taxes. It is a system of political representation and decision-making. No more. No less. If the people decide upon an "unfair" system of taxation, that is still democracy, because it was the people that decided. Likewise the other way around.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: brxndxn
She is for socialized medicine, amnesty for illegals, for the war in Iraq, for the future attacking of Iran, riddled with a past of scandals, and for increasing the insane amount of government debt.

I thought that was the Bush policy?

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
On this forum, I have read Ms Clinton basically described as being the anti-christ to being the path to the end of Western Civilization as we know it, "communist cvnt", etc

Please enlighten me* and list what exactly is wrong with her. I make this request so that I can make an educated decision if she is the nominee next November.

TIA

She is the needle that pricks the bubble of conservative self-delusion.

 

[Jhhnn]

Jhnnn, however, is your typical ATPN moron troll. He wouldn't know democracy if it bit him on the ass. Democracy is not an ideology. It is neither left nor right. It has nothing to do with wealth distribution or taxes. It is a system of political representation and decision-making. No more. No less. If the people decide upon an "unfair" system of taxation, that is still democracy, because it was the people that decided. Likewise the other way around.

Thanks for the ad hom, vic- It's the last resort of the argumentatively challenged, the language of intellectual cowardice and emotional insecurity.

Modern democracies, other than in the infantile conceptualization of the rightwing and some so called libertarians, have certain goals wrt the whole idea of public welfare and equality of opportunity, something that the whole idea of unlimited wealth accumulation by a very few seeks to deny. Democracy *is* an ideology, and it depends on certain conditions being met- "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite"- conditions not fulfilled by economic serfdom and media control by the few.

What do you think that the French and American revolutions were about, other than the succession of the ideology of democracy over that of monarchy, the divine right of kings?

That's basically where the far right wants to lead us, economically- minus the titles, of course- that'd be too obvious.

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Vic
I still miss Bill. One of the best statesman Presidents that the US has ever had.

Nor have I ever understood Monica-gate beyond bitter partisan politics. He got a BJ from a intern, whoopdedoo. That was between him and Hillary, not the rest of us. FDR used to sleep with his mistress in one White House bedroom while Eleanor slept in another bedroom. We know for a fact that at least one president has fathered an illegitimate child while in office. President James Buchanan was quite possibly a homosexual. Their sexual lives and habits are not what we hire them for.


edit:

Both Clintons are career criminals. period.

:roll:

That's where you're wrong...that (and stupid reasons like that) are almost entirely the reasons for which we hire them.

Well... I wouldn't say entirely, but their morals are a direct reflection of the US so it does matter.

I don't see why everyone brings up the BJ like it was the reason he was impeached. It was for lying under oath... Why do people still not understand that?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
I don't see why everyone brings up the BJ like it was the reason he was impeached. It was for lying under oath... Why do people still not understand that?

Because left-wing Kool Aid sippers think the people are stupid enough to believe it. And many of them are.

It was obstruction of justice and perjury, not sex.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Slick Willie's BJs were what outraged the right; his allergy to truth was what gave the Republicans the rope with which to try to hang him.
Sex sold the story, perjury gave it legs.

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Slick Willie's BJs were what outraged the right; his allergy to truth was what gave the Republicans the rope with which to try to hang him.
Sex sold the story, perjury gave it legs.

Here, read this. It was made a big deal because that is one of the things he lied about. Had he not lied it wouldn't have been a big deal, but he lied about the relationship to help cover up the whitewater scandal.