why wouldn't you vote for hillary?

[DealMonkey]

The GOP should run Laura Bush for prez in 2008. According to polls, she's the most popular Republican these days . . .

Who would vote for LB?

 

[yllus]

I'd vote for Elizabeth Dole. Smart woman.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The GOP should run Laura Bush for prez in 2008. According to polls, she's the most popular Republican these days . . .

Who would vote for LB?

Great, we'd have our first Downs Syndrome president.

 

[MrMajestyk]

She would make a great President. But then what do I know, I voted for Tony Bair.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: VooDooAddict
[Hmm someone who doesn't just stick to a party line and can cross the center line when it's rational to do so or when the popular support is there? ... why would we ever want someone like that? We want someone to stick to a corner and stay the coarse regardless of where the popular support is on the issues! err... wait a minute.

Not sticking to a party line would be OK if she had a rational explanation for her choice and stuck to it one way. Bending and crossing and reversing positions as the momentary political winds blow is another matter.

OK. Your minute's up. You can start thinking again... if you can.

Damn... collecting votes by doing what people want. Evil. She should tell us what we want and where we stand instead!

No, but if she wants to be a leader who leads, she should tell us what she believes and where she intends to lead us if elected and ask us to vote for her if we agree with her.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Hillary is the last, best hope for the USA, before it sinks into complete irrelevancy

:laugh::laugh:


If that's true, we are a hell of a lot worse off than we all previously thought.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: sandorski
She's got balls! That scares the feminized males.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read here at this forum. If she had "balls", she would have left her cheating husband long before he made a fool of her in front of the entire country.

Looks like rudder beat me to it!

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: VooDooAddict
[Hmm someone who doesn't just stick to a party line and can cross the center line when it's rational to do so or when the popular support is there? ... why would we ever want someone like that? We want someone to stick to a corner and stay the coarse regardless of where the popular support is on the issues! err... wait a minute.

Not sticking to a party line would be OK if she had a rational explanation for her choice and stuck to it one way. Bending and crossing and reversing positions as the momentary political winds blow is another matter.

OK. Your minute's up. You can start thinking again... if you can.

Damn... collecting votes by doing what people want. Evil. She should tell us what we want and where we stand instead!

No, but if she wants to be a leader who leads, she should tell us what she believes and where she intends to lead us if elected and ask us to vote for her if we agree with her.

I agree with Harvey on this one. She's a little too "goes with the wind" for me. However, if she is the nominee against someone like McCain, I'm voting for her. If he wouldn't have pulled his little flip flop trip to Liberty U earlier this year, I'd vote for him instead. Sorry John.

 

[VooDooAddict]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Not sticking to a party line would be OK if she had a rational explanation for her choice and stuck to it one way. Bending and crossing and reversing positions as the momentary political winds blow is another matter.

OK. Your minute's up. You can start thinking again... if you can.

...

if she wants to be a leader who leads, she should tell us what she believes and where she intends to lead us if elected and ask us to vote for her if we agree with her.

I'm sorry my post gave you cause to attack me personally. That wasn't my intention. I was simply trying to give a different perspective.

I don't necessarily disagree with you that she's not the best person for the job. All I'm saying is that I want someone more flexible to changes in the popular opinion and direction. From your description alone she sounded like she had that flexibility. I didn't notice any mention that her choices where irrational in the post I responded to; only that she swings back and forth based on popular opinions. I don't know if I'd vote for her because I'm simply not going to bother doing the heavy research on her voting record until I'm certain she's running.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: VooDooAddict
I'm sorry my post gave you cause to attack me personally. That wasn't my intention. I was simply trying to give a different perspective.

OK. That wasn't what I intended. Sorry you took it that way.

I was just playing with your "err... wait a minute" line. :beer: :thumbsup:

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: randym431

why wouldn't you vote for hillary?

Horny interns back in the white house :laugh:

Don't you mean butch lesbians in the White House?

You already have one of those, "Condie" Rice.

ummm condie is porking some canuck politician.

i would never vote for hillary simply because i do not trust her.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Corn
This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read here at this forum. If she had "balls", she would have left her cheating husband long before he made a fool of her in front of the entire country.

:thumbsup:

 

[BoomerD]

IMO, the ONLY good thing that would come of having Hillary in the White House, is that we'd have Bill there again! In spite of the BJ issue, (yeah, that was VERY stupid on his part), he was a good president. MUCH better than the buffoon we currently have in office...I can deal with a president who can't keep his pants up much easier than I can one who sells the American people out to his oil buddies...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
IMO, the ONLY good thing that would come of having Hillary in the White House, is that we'd have Bill there again! In spite of the BJ issue, (yeah, that was VERY stupid on his part), he was a good president. MUCH better than the buffoon we currently have in office...I can deal with a president who can't keep his pants up much easier than I can one who sells the American people out to his oil buddies...

Hmmm I wonder if Clinton is happy that the Dub is President because it makes his legacy seem better than it would have been if we had elected a competent man as President.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BoomerD
IMO, the ONLY good thing that would come of having Hillary in the White House, is that we'd have Bill there again! In spite of the BJ issue, (yeah, that was VERY stupid on his part), he was a good president. MUCH better than the buffoon we currently have in office...I can deal with a president who can't keep his pants up much easier than I can one who sells the American people out to his oil buddies...

Hmmm I wonder if Clinton is happy that the Dub is President because it makes his legacy seem better than it would have been if we had elected a competent man as President.

ROFL!! No sh!t...Chimpy McFlightsuit makes Reagan look good...and IMO, Reagan was possibly the worst president we have had in my lifetime...until now...

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BoomerD
IMO, the ONLY good thing that would come of having Hillary in the White House, is that we'd have Bill there again! In spite of the BJ issue, (yeah, that was VERY stupid on his part), he was a good president. MUCH better than the buffoon we currently have in office...I can deal with a president who can't keep his pants up much easier than I can one who sells the American people out to his oil buddies...

Hmmm I wonder if Clinton is happy that the Dub is President because it makes his legacy seem better than it would have been if we had elected a competent man as President.

ROFL!! No sh!t...Chimpy McFlightsuit makes Reagan look good...and IMO, Reagan was possibly the worst president we have had in my lifetime...until now...

It's KING Chimpy McFlighsuit to you pal.

That's a good one. First time I've heard that. :thumbsup:

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
ROFL!! No sh!t...Chimpy McFlightsuit makes Reagan look good...and IMO, Reagan was possibly the worst president we have had in my lifetime...until now...

Still burns ya that history records Reagan as one of the greatest Presidents ever, eh?

I know Slick is way down there, but come on.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
ROFL!! No sh!t...Chimpy McFlightsuit makes Reagan look good...and IMO, Reagan was possibly the worst president we have had in my lifetime...until now...

I take it you're not old enough to remember Nixon. He was the worst President in at least this century until Bush-lite.

You don't have to take my word for that. Ask John Dean, Nixon's Whitehouse counsel, who famously warned Nixon that the Watergate scandal was "a cancer on his presidency." In his book, Worse Than Watergate (2004), he says in the preface:

George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have created the most secretive presidency of my lifetime. Their secrecy is far worse than during Watergate, and it bodes even more serious consequences. Their secrecy is extreme?not merely unjustified and excessive but obsessive. It has created a White House that hides its president's weaknesses as well as its vice president's strengths.

It has given us a presidency that operates on hidden agendas. To protect their secrets, Bush and Cheney dissemble as a matter of policy. In fact, the Bush-Cheney presidency is strikingly Nixonian, only with regard to secrecy far worse (and no one will ever successfully accuse me of being a Nixon apologist). Dick Cheney, who runs his own secret governmental operations, openly declares that he wants to turn the clock back to the pre-Watergate years?a time of an unaccountable and extraconstitutional imperial presidency. To say that their secret presidency is undemocratic is an understatement.

In his newest book, Conservatives Without Conscience, he says:

Legitimizing Authoritarian Conservatism:
The Ugly Politics of Fear

If George Bush had not selected Dick Cheney as his running mate in 2000, and if the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington had not occurred in 2001, authoritarian conservatism could not have surfaced in the executive branch with its current ferocious sense of purpose. When a president embraces a concept, though, it gains legitimacy throughout the federal establishment, as political appointees?those several thousand men and women who serve at the pleasure of the president, head up various departments and agencies, or work on the White House staff?follow their leader.

Depending on the president (or, in the case of the current administration, the vice president), varying degrees of dissent are tolerated in the decision-making process, but once policy is set, political appointees are expected to carry it out or leave. This is what happens within an authoritarian government.
.
.
As Bush proceeds with his second term, we have had some six years to observe him. It is abundantly clear that he is a mental lightweight with a strong right-wing authoritarian personality, with some troubling politics and policies social dominance tendencies as well. Bush?s leading authorities are ?his gut,? his God, and his vice president. . . .

Without terrorism, George W. Bush would have likely been a one-term president; with terrorism as a raison d?être, Bush and Cheney?s authoritarianism has not been questioned seriously enough.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BoomerD
ROFL!! No sh!t...Chimpy McFlightsuit makes Reagan look good...and IMO, Reagan was possibly the worst president we have had in my lifetime...until now...

I take it you're not old enough to remember Nixon. He was the worst President in at least this century until Bush-lite.

You don't have to take my word for that. Ask John Dean, Nixon's Whitehouse counsel, who famously warned Nixon that the Watergate scandal was "a cancer on his presidency." In his book, Worse Than Watergate (2004), he says in the preface:

George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have created the most secretive presidency of my lifetime. Their secrecy is far worse than during Watergate, and it bodes even more serious consequences. Their secrecy is extreme?not merely unjustified and excessive but obsessive. It has created a White House that hides its president's weaknesses as well as its vice president's strengths.

It has given us a presidency that operates on hidden agendas. To protect their secrets, Bush and Cheney dissemble as a matter of policy. In fact, the Bush-Cheney presidency is strikingly Nixonian, only with regard to secrecy far worse (and no one will ever successfully accuse me of being a Nixon apologist). Dick Cheney, who runs his own secret governmental operations, openly declares that he wants to turn the clock back to the pre-Watergate years?a time of an unaccountable and extraconstitutional imperial presidency. To say that their secret presidency is undemocratic is an understatement.

In his newest book, Conservatives Without Conscience, he says:

Legitimizing Authoritarian Conservatism:
The Ugly Politics of Fear

If George Bush had not selected Dick Cheney as his running mate in 2000, and if the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington had not occurred in 2001, authoritarian conservatism could not have surfaced in the executive branch with its current ferocious sense of purpose. When a president embraces a concept, though, it gains legitimacy throughout the federal establishment, as political appointees?those several thousand men and women who serve at the pleasure of the president, head up various departments and agencies, or work on the White House staff?follow their leader.

Depending on the president (or, in the case of the current administration, the vice president), varying degrees of dissent are tolerated in the decision-making process, but once policy is set, political appointees are expected to carry it out or leave. This is what happens within an authoritarian government.
.
.
As Bush proceeds with his second term, we have had some six years to observe him. It is abundantly clear that he is a mental lightweight with a strong right-wing authoritarian personality, with some troubling politics and policies social dominance tendencies as well. Bush?s leading authorities are ?his gut,? his God, and his vice president. . . .

Without terrorism, George W. Bush would have likely been a one-term president; with terrorism as a raison d?être, Bush and Cheney?s authoritarianism has not been questioned seriously enough.

I wish I didn't remember Tricky Dick...I went to Vietnam during his presidency. Yeah, he was a crook, in spite of his protestations otherwise, but over all, he wasn't a TERRIBLE president...
Certainly no worse than Reagan...
The only part of history that rates Ronnie Rayguns as "one of the greatest", is the part written by the conservatives. The rest of us thought (and still think) that he was terrible. YES, he is credited for bringing down the Berlin Wall, and for breaking up the Soviet Union, but he nearly bankrupt the USA in his quest. "Trickle down economy" never worked then, won't work now... Ketchup/Catsup as a vegetable in school lunches? Give me a fvcking break...Iran-Contra? Wasn't in the loop? Must have been out of the room when that was discussed? More Republican lies...He was just fortunate that Col. North was willing to be the fall guy for that one...

This IS P&N...

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I wish I didn't remember Tricky Dick...I went to Vietnam during his presidency. Yeah, he was a crook, in spite of his protestations otherwise, but over all, he wasn't a TERRIBLE president...

Overall, I'd say he was a "TERRIBLE" President. Anyone who abuses the trust and power of the office to spy on American citizens and the press and attempts to bribe and coerce other public officials in trying to quash and divert attention from crimse surrounding the Watergate breakin is so corrupt that he dishonors and disgraces the office of President.

Bush has taken the worst of Nixon to an entirely new level of disgrace and criminality. :|

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I wish I didn't remember Tricky Dick...I went to Vietnam during his presidency. Yeah, he was a crook, in spite of his protestations otherwise, but over all, he wasn't a TERRIBLE president...

Overall, I'd say he was a "TERRIBLE" President. Anyone who abuses the trust and power of the office to spy on American citizens and the press and attempts to bribe and coerce other public officials in trying to quash and divert attention from crimse surrounding the Watergate breakin is so corrupt that he dishonors and disgraces the office of President.

Bush has taken the worst of Nixon to an entirely new level of disgrace and criminality. :|

Well, I won't disagree with you on that issue, I believe he WAS corrupt politically, and willing to do whatever it took to get re-elected, but looking at his overall record as a president, he wasn't terrible. On the part I bolded, we are in complete agreement. I remember that Nixon got Vietnam dumped into his lap, as did Johnson and Kennedy before him, and each president seemed to only make things worse. Nixon got us out, about as dishonorably as we could possibly have. I have a good friend who was the crew-chief on one of the last helicopters out of Saigon in 75...IMO, we left with our tails between our legs in disgrace...I suspect Iraq will end as badly for us...


Edit...don't misunderstand. I disliked Nixon then, I still do. IMO, he took the coward's way out by resigning with a pardon pre-arranged before hand. He SHOULD have been impeached and convicted for his criminal activities during Watergate.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: sandorski
She's got balls! That scares the feminized males.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read here at this forum. If she had "balls", she would have left her cheating husband long before he made a fool of her in front of the entire country.

Looks like rudder beat me to it!

The Feminized like to imagine they know what balls are like, but usually miss the mark. Rudder just missed the mark before you did.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Overall, I'd say he was a "TERRIBLE" President. Anyone who abuses the trust and power of the office to spy on American citizens and the press and attempts to bribe and coerce other public officials in trying to quash and divert attention from crimse surrounding the Watergate breakin is so corrupt that he dishonors and disgraces the office of President.

And I agree 100%. Nixon got off the hook easy. Now, how do you feel about Slick sliding off the hook? They are both crooks who got off way too easy. They both disgraced the office of President. They both committed crimes while holding that office. And I have zero respect for either one of them.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Harvey
Overall, I'd say he was a "TERRIBLE" President. Anyone who abuses the trust and power of the office to spy on American citizens and the press and attempts to bribe and coerce other public officials in trying to quash and divert attention from crimse surrounding the Watergate breakin is so corrupt that he dishonors and disgraces the office of President.

And I agree 100%. Nixon got off the hook easy. Now, how do you feel about Slick sliding off the hook? They are both crooks who got off way too easy. They both disgraced the office of President. They both committed crimes while holding that office. And I have zero respect for either one of them.

Clinton's biggest failure was failure to return his fly to its full upright position on landing. The rest of it falls out of lying to Congress and in court. He was impeached but not convicted by Congress. The judge fined him, and his license to practice law was revoked.

Exactly what evidence of what other crimes do you believe Clinton committed, and can you prove any such allegations?

Nixon was a despicable asshole who was the record holder for Presidential criminality until
Bushwhacko, who is definitely the worst President in our history. I believe there are plenty of grounds for trying and convicting him of treason and other felonies. This isn't wild speculation. The evidence is as close as a couple of clicks of your mouse on Google.

Bush is directly and personally responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of innocent civilians in a war based entirely on LIES. Are you really going to shred your credibility further (if that's possible) by claiming that ANYTHING Clinton did in office is down to that level? :roll:

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: sandorski
She's got balls! That scares the feminized males.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read here at this forum. If she had "balls", she would have left her cheating husband long before he made a fool of her in front of the entire country.

Looks like rudder beat me to it!

The Feminized like to imagine they know what balls are like, but usually miss the mark. Rudder just missed the mark before you did.

Example of "balls" for the feminized: Bill, how many times have I told you to quit cheating on me, now stop it!