PDA

View Full Version : hillary's "experience"



eg8r
03-11-2008, 10:33 AM
Team Obama decided to begin forcing Clinton to back up her lies. They have taken the first steps into answering her "experience" claims, that have been also widely regurgitated on this forum by those who "think" they are in the know. Anyways, here is the link (http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/team_obama_hits_clinton_on_exp.html) and here is the text...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To: Interested Parties
From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department

RE: Senator Clinton's claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words?

DA: March 11, 2008

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is simply not supported by her record.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:
Senator Clinton has said, "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland." It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, "[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord." With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that "[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one."

News of Senator Clinton's claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph's report at the time, "[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times." Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: "The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn’t on it."

Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage."

Kosovo:

Senator Clinton has said, "I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo." It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments - U.S. diplomats. President Clinton's top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, "I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue." Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration's National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that "she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations."

Rwanda:

Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote - urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda - in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America's failure to do more to prevent the genocide.

China:

Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama’s speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women's rights. But Senator Obama's opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton's speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama's speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called "a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics." In that speech, he said prophetically: "[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would "fan the flames of the Middle East," and "strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda." He urged the United States first to "finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama's advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation's history. Some of the most "experienced" men in national security affairs - Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others - led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.

Conclusion:

The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation - the War in Iraq - Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled "The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq." As she cast that vote, she said: "This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make - any vote that may lead to war should be hard - but I cast it with conviction." In this campaign, Senator Clinton has argued - remarkably - that she wasn't actually voting for war, she was voting for diplomacy. That claim is no more credible than her other claims of foreign policy experience. The real tragedy is that we are still living with the terrible consequences of her misjudgment. The Bush Administration continues to cite that resolution as its authorization - like a blank check - to fight on with no end in sight.

Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader - an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.

And Barack Obama does not use false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security.

</div></div> hillary does not have any of the experience she professes to have but none of her sheeple (especially those on this board) care to ask her for proof. Obama has decided his team will provide the background data for all to decide themselves.

eg8r &lt;~~~wondering how much of beating these two will be able to withstand once one of them gets the nod and has to go against Rove /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

LWW
03-16-2008, 06:19 AM
Hillary is a total fraud.

The DNC has backed itself into a corner to an unimaginable degree in this primary season.

LWW

Gayle in MD
03-27-2008, 08:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader - an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.
</div></div>

This si the biggest crock of **** I've ever read!

First of all he wasn't even briefed on Iraq, or in Washington D.C. at that time. He was serving in his state legislature then.

The only reason why we even know about this man is because he gave a speech at the Democratic convention, and nothing would have been made of it if he hadn't been black.

Compare that to being the wife and most trusted advisor to the President Of The United States Of America for eight years, traveling to eighty foreign countries tto talk with the leaders of the world, entertaining them for eight years, dealing with the Republican attack machine for nearly thirty years, and surviving it to run and win a Senate seat, and run as the first woman for President, neck to neck, with loads of delegates committed to her, and working of national policies for sixteen years, and Obama's the one who is exaggerating his experience.

McCain, is plum nuts, and even his own party talks about his temper. Not to mention that he supports Bush's failing policies, and doesn't even know who the hell the enemy is!

Hillary is by far the best candidate. A lie here and there shouldn't bother you of all people, as a Bush supporter!

BTW, did you wife have anything at all to do with your own accomplishments throughout the course of your marriage? Whom do you seek out when making decisions? Being the wife of a powerful man depends on what role you play in all the he faces. No one could convince me that Hillary didn't play a huge role in every Bill Clinton achieved, particularly since she had distinguished herself as a problem solver long before he came along.

There are some women who tackle problems because that is their natural approach to life, and she's definitely one of them.

McCain is senile. Just what we need! And he won't have anyone as savy as Nancy Reagan by his side to cover it up for him. That wife of McCain's is only qualified to advise women on mascara. Hillary, OTOH, will have one of the most effective presidents, by her side throughout. McCain, is called De Jeckle in the halls of the Senate. There are Republicans on the hill who are shaking in their shoes, just thinking about a nut like him running this country. While he deserves respect, and appreciation from all Americans for what he suffered through, the fact that all that took a severe toll on his psychological health, is far from a secret inside the beltway.

Gayle in Md.

Deeman3
03-27-2008, 08:45 AM
Gayle,

You have to stop these racist tirades or the PC people will come after you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif JK

Gayle in MD
03-27-2008, 09:13 AM
I'm sick and tired of watching the press give this guy a bye, just because he's black!

The last thing this country needs is another president that the press lays down and licks. Nothing could be worse for our country right now, on top of everything else, than to distract the country from our serious problems, and focus it on racism!

The whole thing disgust me.

Obama is all glitz, no substance. the guy is a great orator, but he can't think on his feet, and that's obvious through his long, slow responses, and Uh, but but but, uh, it's actually irritating listening to him when he's ot reading, or speaking from a memorized text. McCain, is so senile, he has to stand there and wait when the teleprompter malfunctions, and he is known for being unbalanced, and flying into rages, and being an all round prick in general.

Hillary is the only one with enough grit, and experience, determination and intellect, to get us out of the mess we're in right now. Given her natural love of problem solving, she'd be best for the job, of the three. Anyone who survives everything she's been faced with, and keeps on getting up, accomplising her goals, and winning in spite of it all, deserves some respect, IMO.

I've never been concerned with political correctness... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Deeman3
03-27-2008, 09:46 AM
Gayle,

All good points and, strangely, I have agreed with you in the past that Obama is not treated like Hillary by the press.

I guess the real question is how is she going to pull this off? It is obvious that, despite the Rev. Wright rants, she is not getting that "gotcha" moment along with the party powerful now saying, "Don't turn this more negative." I just can't see how she plays this to a good end for her without fracturing the party. Obama may be a sham and plenty of us would agree with that, but he does have the votes and despite the possibility of a 15 or 20% win in Pennsylvania, she's still gonna face that "Nuke the Party" fight at the convention.

Of course, your McCain comments are partisan as he may be a little short tempered as he has admitted but if you guys try to make out a war hero as a babbling fool, you'll even lose the left middle in the general election. Anything outside his continuing refusal to surrender in Iraq will not be that profitable for the left and you know the costs of the two democrat's new programs is gonna be fodder to all but the most socialist in this country. It will play well in Europe but not here. He is looking Presidential lately, isn't he?

So, does Hillary continue to fight Obama or does she just hope he makes a real mistake that MSNBC will not ignore. I did see that she went on Fox last night with that Greta Van whatever and was treated much better than the other cable news has treated her. If she was smart, she's do more of that type stuff and avoid the Oprah type news shows.

bamadog
03-27-2008, 09:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The last thing this country needs is another president that the press lays down and licks.


</div></div>

I didn't realize Monica was with the press!

bamadog
03-27-2008, 09:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
</div></div>


Hillary is by far the best candidate. A lie here and there shouldn't bother you of all people, as a Bush supporter!





Gayle in Md.

</div></div>

Gayle, you are hilarious. You have been railing for years about anything you imagined was a "lie" by the Bush administration, and now that several lies have dripped from the warrior princesses lips you are quite happy to excuse them because she shares the same plumbing. You are quite the little sexist hypocrite.

Thought for the day Gayle: CHARACTER MATTERS!

Deeman3
03-27-2008, 10:27 AM
Gayle,

I had a strategy for Hillary but for fear of her winning I never made it public. Now, it is, of course, too late so I can share.

As soon as she was elected to the Senate, for the second term, she should have admitted to an affair with Vince Foster, even if it never happened, especially if it never happened, then checked herself into sex addiction counciling and came out in favor of guns in all states south of the Mason Dixon line and called for closing the southern border to illegals.

The beauty of all this is she would be seen as human, given her an excuse for staying with the Hoon Dog and garnered half the flyover vote while maintaining the "Girls Done Wrong" vote. She then has reason for cleaning out Vince's Office, quiets unfair rumors about her sexual preference and has a further right position on immigration and can then really attack NAFTA. Her campaign could then leak her love name from Vince, "Hot Pockets" and many men would see her pantsuits in a whole new light. Rumors that Vince killed himself for unrequieted love would soon follow and she would be a mortal lock for the Presidency.

And you thought Karl Rove was a shrewd political advisor? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

sack316
03-27-2008, 11:02 AM
Deeman,

Will you be my campaign manager when I begin my political career? Hell, even if we never won a thing I'd develop one helluva "guy rep" in the process... I'm sure your spin and "the way I remember it..." stories should at least get me elected Governor in New York /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack

eg8r
03-27-2008, 11:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and Obama's the one who is exaggerating his experience.</div></div>Everything you have said about Hillary is an exaggeration.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hillary is by far the best candidate. A lie here and there shouldn't bother you of all people, as a Bush supporter!</div></div> LOL this is funny. Just another example a lefty accepting the lies of the Clintons.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McCain, is plum nuts, and even his own party talks about his temper.</div></div> The Clintons are nuttier and with all the broken lamps from those 8 Clinton years you should not have anything to say about another's temper.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being the wife of a powerful man depends on what role you play in all the he faces.</div></div> The only thing she has to show for being the wife of Bill is their daughter, and her lies about Clinton being faithful.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one could convince me that Hillary didn't play a huge role in every Bill Clinton achieved</div></div> You do bury your head deep in the sand. Hillary is a nobody without Bill and would never be where she is at if not for him.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That wife of McCain's is only qualified to advise women on mascara.</div></div> You sure do like to attack other first ladies but forget to remember that the only thing Hillary was qualified to do was piss Bill off on the nights he was not out cheating.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are Republicans on the hill who are shaking in their shoes, just thinking about a nut like him running this country.</div></div> Half the world is shaking in their shoes to have another clinton in office for 4 years.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While he deserves respect...</div></div> You will make sure not to show any.

eg8r

eg8r
03-27-2008, 11:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm sick and tired of watching the press give this guy a bye, just because he's black! </div></div> We are sick and tired of you giving hillary a bye because she is a woman.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the guy is a great orator, but he can't think on his feet, and that's obvious through his long, slow responses, and Uh, but but but, uh, it's actually irritating listening to him when he's ot reading, or speaking from a memorized text.</div></div> Gayle would much prefer the quick-speaking-forked tongue lies from a Clinton.

eg8r

LWW
03-27-2008, 12:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle,

You have to stop these racist tirades or the PC people will come after you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif JK </div></div>
Every hard core DNC partisan I've ever met was a racist deep down.

There may be one somewhere who isn't, but they are far and away the exception.

LWW

Deeman3
03-27-2008, 01:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Deeman,

Will you be my campaign manager when I begin my political career? Hell, even if we never won a thing I'd develop one helluva "guy rep" in the process... I'm sure your spin and "the way I remember it..." stories should at least get me elected Governor in New York /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack </div></div>


Anytime friend... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I ran across a new term, at least to me. It is Depressive Realism meaning that "a person who has the most accurate view of the world is clinically depressed."

It means we all have to be willing to suspend belief to remain sane. IN my case it may mean that I am willing to accept that John McCain, for instance, is a knowledgable Senator who served our country with pride when he may in fact be a doddering old man who has to be helped around at each event and only cognetive enough to answer simple questions while assistants wipe drool from his mouth.

On the other hand, to cling to some sanity, some may have to see Hillary as a dynamic leader, who's every truth filled word is twisted by the media, while she loaded up her philadering husband and carried him through politics for 20 plus years when she might be an opportunistic person who is playing on people's guilt over wrongs done to other women in the past and, while using old line smear tacitcs to protect her man at the cost of the reputations of many women, has been prooved out by actual voice and film that never bothered to blink, that she is a perpetual pathological lie machine feeling to "deserve" a shot at the Presidency.

Who is wrong? I don't have clue as we all fool ourselves in some ways to beleive what our eyes and ears tell us.

While we can't change reality, it's funny that lies and cheating on someone is now accepted by some as fine as long as it suits my vision of the reality.

Short answer, if Hillary can get elected, I can put you in the NY govenor's office in no time. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

SKennedy
03-27-2008, 02:27 PM
And, I'm way too friggin' happy! You just have to learn to keep your eyes closed tightly and hear only what you want to hear. Works for me......

sack316
03-27-2008, 10:34 PM
Actually I do tend to do that a lot. I guess my version of reality is much more interesting to myself. But I do quite often use the phrase "the way I remember it..." followed by my personal opinion of how I would have liked the event to happen. Then people try to correct me, and I say "no, no, no... the way IIIIII remember it" and they tend to catch on. Several friends actually started doing that too... so much so that we are at the point that we don't even have to finish the sentence /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

So, the way I remember what deeman said in part two of his McCain paragraph is "man helped at each event and still cognetive enough to answer questions while assisting". I'd vote for that guy! The Hilary paragraph, well... the way I remember it is pretty much the way it was written /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Disclaimer: this method of life doesn't work so well with bill collectors. Saying "the way I remember it, I paid you last week" tends to be countered with a different recollection of events. But it's OK, new ammo has arrived... "The way I remember it, the government is gonna handle that for me"---click.

Sack

Gayle in MD
03-29-2008, 09:36 AM
Here's my take, FWIW, it's a long shot for Hillary, but a lot can happen. Remember, McCain was dead and burried long ago by the press, who obviously preferred Mitt, IMO.

Leiberman's beginning to remind many of Nancy REagan, standing just to the side of Ronnie, telling him what to say. I don't think McCain's inability to discriminate between Shiia, Sunni and al Qaeda and Iran, are easily overlooked, after all.

In my view, the continuing chaos in Iraq, where there has been no political reconciliation, and where few but the RW nuts could possibly insist that our troops are sacrificing their lives for what, no one knows, in the midst of a civil war, while our own country faces the worst economy in over twenty five years, won't make McCain more electable, particularly since he's already admitted he doesn't have a clue about economics. He's too old, and since he has shown signs of his lack of mental sharness all along, he looks more and more like a risk which we can ill aford to take, at this time.

The economy is much worse than many Americans know, apparently. both the war, and the economic situation, will make election for any Republican, a long shot.

IMO, there is certainly nothing unusual about candidates going all the way to the bitter end, in Presidential elections. The fact that Hillary and Obama are virtually tied, with Florida and Michigan presently uncounted, could turn things around by then. A lot could happen.

As for Hillary's so called lie, several present have come forward to recall that there was in fact risk involved, and protective gear worn. Not much of a story, really, since four thousand are dead due to Bush's lies, and while Iraq is not the whole cause of our economic ills, it certainly plays a huge role, especially since 55% of the deficit is held by foreign potential enemies, which look more and more like enemies every day.

the very thought that China, Russia and Saudi Arabia own our debt, and are buying out our financial institutions, among other assets, my prediction is that the huge corruption of spirit brought on by Neocon mentality, and the financial, political, and spiritual damage caused to our great country by fantasy thinking, mixed with corruption, and imperialism, will be the subject of shock and awe, come election time.

Bailing out financial institutions, while the CEO's skip out dragging their millions behind them, is not going to go well. nor will the absurd methods which have been implimented by this worst president in history.

Cheney's Imperial answer to the question of how he feels about two thirds of this country believing that this illegal occupation of Iraq...."So" will ring in the ears of many for a long time, since he has also led the destruction of our Consittution, checks and balances, secret hidden separate government, will the chimp folowing right behind, and lovin' it, will bring about the very kind of country wide dialong which has been missing for far too long.

Iraq, will bury McCain. Hillary and Obama, and their differences, while being over played by the press, will be but a faint rattle, as this economy, and the war, become more and more insane.

Americans are pretty damned mad at this administration. McCain's rhetoric about surrrendering, and patriotism, along with the never ending re-labeling of the "Mission" as Iraq continues to slide into many multifaceted power mongering sects, along with the exhorbitant costs, and continuing gouging by the war profiteering pigs, are becoming much more obvious to happy Harry homeowner, on his way to losing his home, his job, and his kids future.

Neoconism, is finally being exposed for the unamerican activity that it has been all along. The results, are far too real in the minds of thinking Americans. And, I must say, my contention that the consumer cannot trust the corporate pigs to regulate themselves, and that the free market is the solution for all things produced by greed, are no longer digestibel, unless of course you wash it down with a giant glass of kool aid, ad most are drinking that stuff much lately, ever former Republicans have given it up.

In any case, four thousand dead, and so real gain visible, is enough to make one take to the streets and march, and we'll be seeing far more of that as AMericans without enough gas to get out and look for a job, which cannot be found, watch the Bush fantasy team blow billions a month on a projact that was not only un-necessary, but devastatingly damaging on every level.

Hillary's lie, if one should care, isn't much of a smoke screen against the bitter realities which Americans will be facing between now, and election time. Just my 2C.

God save America, if He's up there. Not everything said by the Reverend, was racist, some of his points were quite true. patriots experience exposing governments and administration's damage to their country, as a duty. Many patirotic Americans are ready to take up the cause of saving this country from neoconism.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
03-29-2008, 09:45 AM
Hey, I'd hire you! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif Well, unfortunately, poor Hillary is even bashed for showing a bit of cleavage. What can I say, the woman is just so accomplished, and smart, she's the target of everyone. That's what happens when you live your life to achieve. Jealousy abounds. She's just a rock star, with brains, and either Obama, or Hillary, will be the next president.

As for little ol' me, until the crash hits, I plan to make hey while the sun shines. I've done all I can to prepare for it, and from here on out, it's every man, or woman, for him/her-self. Being married to a genius, who thinks that two heads are better than one, will be a great advantage! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Love,
Gayle

Sid_Vicious
03-29-2008, 01:53 PM
"As for little ol' me, until the crash hits,"

Gayle...are we both getting to feel the same, that with this bafoon f-ing up all logic and hosing the American economy, that we are headed for a 100 year cycle for another crash like the 1920s? I ain't joking or going skizzoid, I had to ask. If so, then just maybe the feds will halt mortgage payments and the subsistance $$$ will at least give me some semblance of an actual retirement. I can live cheap, lots of squirrels and rabbits on my land, plus my Dear Ol Mom taught me how to economize on dry goods and localized radiant heat. I already have a pool table here, plus the down time would force me to get keen on making a small living on gambling at pool. Hellova POS we have in this monkey screwing up EVERYTHING!. Reality, that's what the bushites really fail to understand in their own personal futures. Only prayer we really have is Hillary...sid

LWW
03-30-2008, 06:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"As for little ol' me, until the crash hits,"

Gayle...are we both getting to feel the same, that with this bafoon f-ing up all logic and hosing the American economy, that we are headed for a 100 year cycle for another crash like the 1920s? I ain't joking or going skizzoid, I had to ask. If so, then just maybe the feds will halt mortgage payments and the subsistance $$$ will at least give me some semblance of an actual retirement. I can live cheap, lots of squirrels and rabbits on my land, plus my Dear Ol Mom taught me how to economize on dry goods and localized radiant heat. I already have a pool table here, plus the down time would force me to get keen on making a small living on gambling at pool. Hellova POS we have in this monkey screwing up EVERYTHING!. Reality, that's what the bushites really fail to understand in their own personal futures. Only prayer we really have is Hillary...sid </div></div>
Are you referring to the debacle brought on by Clinton and the RNC congress rescinding Glass-Steagall 1n 1999 and starting this mess ... the mess that all good little moonbats must blame on B-B-B-BOOOOSH! rather than learn what they are actually talking about.

You have heard of Glass - Steagall haven't you?

Of course not.

That would require education of yourself on the issues that you speak about.

There was a reason that commercial and investment banks were forced to remain separate all these decades.

LWW

LWW
03-30-2008, 06:12 AM
BTW, if anyone is actually interested in research ... the last time this happened it was Jimmuh Cahtuh tinkering with S&L regs that had worked since the depression.

A few years later when the chickens came home to roost all of the good little sheeple howled B-B-B-BBUT R-R-R-RAY-GUN! when they had been screwed by their own leaders yet again.

History.

Learn it or repeat it.

LWW

Gayle in MD
03-30-2008, 07:12 AM
Martin,
We'll be very lucky if we don't slide right into a depression, and a deep one at that. You're not going nuts, since it's a fifty-fifty chance, a prediction by economists, and by about the same fifty-fifty percentage points in their opinions of what we are truly facing.

I have come to the realization that the only way that the Republicans who voted twice for Bush can feel good about themselves, those geniuses who kept an incompetent lying president in the W.H. for eight years, and the incredibly corrupt Republican party in majority with their votes, in spite of all their illegal and corrupt, ignorant and arrogant actions, is by attacking all the stupid people, according the them, who are now in dire straights. I suppose that's the only way they can skip around their own stupidity, by thinking that everybody else is dumb, and it couldn't happen to them, because their so smart! BWA HA HA HA!

You know the kind, the ones who blamed the poor in New Orleans because they didn't have any money to get out before the Hurricane hit, same ones who blame only the consumer for this mortgage meltdown, while in fact, none of it could or would have happened without greed and corruption by predatory lenders, greedy R.E. Agents who failed their fudiciary responsibilities, lax government regulations, Slick Wall Street Operators, and this idiotic non-regulatory Republican philosophy of spend now, worry later, and don't do anything to protect the American Worker, or the American Consumer, if it cuts down on the profits of the corporate fascists.

It all started with RR, and his de-regulatory, anti-Union fiasco. His, and the Republican love of the military industrial complex, along with his corporate bail out philosophy, save the corporate fascist pigs, at all costs... our filthiest, greediest, richest CEO leeches. Believe me, they're all fine, and enjoying the profits of wholesale theft of the middle class tax payers in this country, with billions and more in their greedy CEO holdings, and trillions more in foreign accounts, safe from the IRS, while the American workers are scrounging around for low paying jobs, the great global market fiasco, no bid contracting Republicans, and their outsourcing no-bid, neocon pro war, pro elitist, pro imperialism insanity, has led us straight to this mess.

F*** the Iraqis, and F*** the Republicans. Fourteen million dollars an hour being wasted in Iraq, as oil goes through the roof, and we subsidize big oil while our own infracture is over a trillion dollars in need of repair. Our food, toys and vegtables, poisoned, and medications that are killing Americans, while this idiot, senile Republican, John McCain, is out there bad mouthing regulations on the corporate killers of Americans, and touting the global free market, non regulatory Bush/Reagan policies, supposedly the solution to all our ills.

If all Americans who are not happy with any of the candidates, and fed up with both parties, would vote for Ralph Nader, I'd be thrilled! He's the ONLY candidate that accepts absolutely no money from lobbyists, or special interests. I just learned that all three candidates have gotten loads of money from guess who, the sub prime mortgage lobbyists!

I'd love to see a late and sudden "Surge" for Ralph Nader. It would serve both patries just right, IMO, and I think that if there were suddenly enough people answering "I'm for Nader" in the polls, we'd have the best shot at reducing corruption, and we'd have the first candidate in the White House of our lifetimes, who wasn't at all "Owned" by Special Interests before they were even sworn into office.

If the chimp was counting on getting out in time to blame the Democrats for the bad economy that follows every Repuublican administration, and the debacle in Iraq, it looks like once again, the decider grossly mis-calculated, and his supporters are indignant and nastier than ever, but what else could they be! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif