A lot of people criticize Hillary for the failure of Hillary-Care in the 90's. That was a great extent of her involvement with the Clinton White House, and soon after that the powers that be decided that she should have a smaller role in the administration.
Is it fair to criticize her because of the failure of her health care plan since she was so involved in the Presidency to run for President based on that experience?
Yes its fair and yes that would be a reasonable basis to question her ability to get things done. But it is also an example of why she might have learned a few things from her experience in the white house, that she would hopefuly benefit from.
I could care less about any of her positions... she's dirty and she is divisive. Lets give someone that isn't quite the institution the Clinton's are a chance. Republicans HATE the Clintons... republicans and independents are voting for Obama when they can. Why wouldn't we all want someone that actually has a chance to bring people together and make some progress. Look at what has happened with this divisive administration we have had for the past 8 years. I can't understand ONE good reason to give Hillary your vote...
Just read this... she's already saying one thing doing another. So shady...
Yes its fair and yes that would be a reasonable basis to question her ability to get things done. But it is also an example of why she might have learned a few things from her experience in the white house, that she would hopefuly benefit from.
I could care less about any of her positions... she's dirty and she is divisive. Lets give someone that isn't quite the institution the Clinton's are a chance. Republicans HATE the Clintons... republicans and independents are voting for Obama when they can. Why wouldn't we all want someone that actually has a chance to bring people together and make some progress. Look at what has happened with this divisive administration we have had for the past 8 years. I can't understand ONE good reason to give Hillary your vote...
Just read this... she's already saying one thing doing another. So shady...
Cmon, now, "a certain degree of manipulation" is to be expected. :rolleyes:
the clintons, neither one of them, have any integrity whatsoever. None.
I am just curious. You are obviously no republican, but you seem to hate Hilary more than all republicans combined. If she wins the nomination, will you vote republican?
I am no fan of hers either and I may vote 3rd, depending on who she runs against.
Just curious.
I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
I am just curious. You are obviously no republican, but you seem to hate Hilary more than all republicans combined. If she wins the nomination, will you vote republican?
I am no fan of hers either and I may vote 3rd, depending on who she runs against.
Just curious.
If hillary wins the nod, i'll vote for Pedro...
then i'll start checking the housing market in canada.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
My thoughts are that the political bickering in Washington has never been as bad as it was during the Clinton years. Hell, even the Democratic congress has folded to the Bush administration (another subject alone), and I have a feeling a Hillary administration will bring all of that back.
Wouldn't it just be nice to have a candidate who could be a bridge between both sides of the aisles and actually inspire people to get involved in the political process?
Wouldn't it just be nice to have a candidate who could be a bridge between both sides of the aisles and actually inspire people to get involved in the political process?
what this means to me is more status quo and less change ... to say someone can bridge the gap means that they are gonna try and please everyone ... which means that no actual change will occur ...
like what if you knew there was a good chance you would be the official white house framer if she was elected
Honestly? I'd tell her to find someone else. I think the Clinton's are opportunists and do not really care about the country, they care about the Clinton Legacy.
what this means to me is more status quo and less change ... to say someone can bridge the gap means that they are gonna try and please everyone ... which means that no actual change will occur ...
Then you don't fully understand how things get passed though different houses of government.
Honestly? I'd tell her to find someone else. I think the Clinton's are opportunists and do not really care about the country, they care about the Clinton Legacy.
I respect your integrity. You would hold fast to your politics rather than make a boatload of money. Admirable.
what this means to me is more status quo and less change ... to say someone can bridge the gap means that they are gonna try and please everyone ... which means that no actual change will occur ...
Right now the Senate and House are Democratic, but not by much. If there is anything substantial that some Dems wouldn't vote for you need a President who can reach across the aisle and work with them to get something passed. That's how it works.
I think deep down we all want the same things, it's the means to getting there that have been fucked up for so long.
Right now the Senate and House are Democratic, but not by much. If there is anything substantial that some Dems wouldn't vote for you need a President who can reach across the aisle and work with them to get something passed. That's how it works.
I think deep down we all want the same things, it's the means to getting there that have been fucked up for so long.
the country needs a president prepared to make tough decisions ... decisions on the war machine, decisions on a failing economy, decisions on actions against climate change ... every one of those issues will require someone who is prepared to piss off special interests ... every member of congress is pretty much tied to some group that will be affected ... how is it possible to appease everyone?
All of the Hillary bashing on this thread is so baseless. I hear a great deal about how the Clintons have no integrity or how they are scoundrels, but nobody bothers to post any reason why they feel this way.
All of the Hillary bashing on this thread is so baseless. I hear a great deal about how the Clintons have no integrity or how they are scoundrels, but nobody bothers to post any reason why they feel this way.
It doesn't get more dirty and underhanded than this. The whole "fuck what the party said" mentallity is typical of the Clinton's. It's their way or the highway.
the country needs a president prepared to make tough decisions ... decisions on the war machine, decisions on a failing economy, decisions on actions against climate change ... every one of those issues will require someone who is prepared to piss off special interests ... every member of congress is pretty much tied to some group that will be affected ... how is it possible to appease everyone?
Interesting you bring up special interests. Who is president often determines which special interests are stroked and which ones are shafted it dosen't change the relationship to special interest groups and the greasing of the political wheels. The more "experience" the canidate has the more potential they have been corrupted by special interest. Pissing off one and stroking another just creates new and different issues. As they say...Follow the Money you'll find the dirt.
This is quite an interesting thread. I'll say this, I sure hope in 20 years or so we can move on to the content of the persons character rather than gender or pigmentation. I get that these kinds of things haven't happened yet and this is the reason for some of the passion in this area, I just think segmentation and division by race creed and gender etc aren't helping things. I'll be nice to get the first Black and or Female president out of the way so there is a precident. Personally I have a profound distrust of the Hillary Clinton, because of White Water and the various other nefarious events (dead witnesses, theft of documents, a lot of pardons..... not quite Louisiana politics but close) as well as the general ruthless style of campaigning not really on ideas but moreso on targeting various gender, race, or socioeconomic groups to pit against a particular easy straw man. Kind of like this administration did when they decided to invade Iraq. I'd like to see a woman president soon, but not this one not now. I'd much rather see Obama.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
the country needs a president prepared to make tough decisions ... decisions on the war machine, decisions on a failing economy, decisions on actions against climate change ... every one of those issues will require someone who is prepared to piss off special interests ... every member of congress is pretty much tied to some group that will be affected ... how is it possible to appease everyone?
You are correct. You don't have to appease EVERYONE, just enough to get whatever you want passed. Sometimes that requires working with the other side of the aisle and Obama has proven to be good at that. The Clinton's...not so much.
Just look at how they attacked Obama for even mentioning Ronnie a couple of weeks ago. Is that the partisanship that you want for the next four or eight years every night on the evening news?
All of the Hillary bashing on this thread is so baseless. I hear a great deal about how the Clintons have no integrity or how they are scoundrels, but nobody bothers to post any reason why they feel this way.
It isn't baseless, and you havn't been reading. i'll, speaking only for myself, summarize just a little. bill's presidency speaks for itself. Lies, perjury, evidence tampering, more lies, impeachment. billary's current campaigning is much the same. Lies, fabrications, distortions of record, fake tears, planted rally hecklers, stupid fucking lawsuits when you don't get the endorsements you want, race baiting (attempting to tokenize Obama as the "black candidate and then blaming HIM for playing the race card), making pacts within the democratinc party to ignore Michigan and Florida and then turning your back on them when you realize "fuck, i might lose", bill and hillary running around like Deagol and Smeagol from the Lord of the Rings... would you like me to continue, or is that enough?
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
Comments
Yes its fair and yes that would be a reasonable basis to question her ability to get things done. But it is also an example of why she might have learned a few things from her experience in the white house, that she would hopefuly benefit from.
Thanks for keeping it rational.
perhaps you might change your tune if having Hilary in the white house benefitted you personally...perhaps not
I can live with that, too.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Cmon, now, "a certain degree of manipulation" is to be expected. :rolleyes:
the clintons, neither one of them, have any integrity whatsoever. None.
You gonna get a sweet cabinet spot?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Like what? How are her positions that much different than Obama, they are not. What does one gain with Hilary but looses with Obama? I'm interested.
I am just curious. You are obviously no republican, but you seem to hate Hilary more than all republicans combined. If she wins the nomination, will you vote republican?
I am no fan of hers either and I may vote 3rd, depending on who she runs against.
Just curious.
hahahaha
wise one
close but no cigar.
then i'll start checking the housing market in canada.
Wouldn't it just be nice to have a candidate who could be a bridge between both sides of the aisles and actually inspire people to get involved in the political process?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
like what if you knew there was a good chance you would be the official white house framer if she was elected
The funny thing is that you say "cigar" when mentioning a possible Hillary administration.
Wooooooo Weeeeeeee
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
glad you caught that quickly
my faith has been restored
Just WHO will you be framing for the clintons?
what this means to me is more status quo and less change ... to say someone can bridge the gap means that they are gonna try and please everyone ... which means that no actual change will occur ...
Honestly? I'd tell her to find someone else. I think the Clinton's are opportunists and do not really care about the country, they care about the Clinton Legacy.
http://slatev.com/player.html?id=1377935786
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
Starting with the Hillary bashers.
Then you don't fully understand how things get passed though different houses of government.
I respect your integrity. You would hold fast to your politics rather than make a boatload of money. Admirable.
You'll be busy. There is definitely job security in that.
Right now the Senate and House are Democratic, but not by much. If there is anything substantial that some Dems wouldn't vote for you need a President who can reach across the aisle and work with them to get something passed. That's how it works.
I think deep down we all want the same things, it's the means to getting there that have been fucked up for so long.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
You're going to be the official White House Get_Right?!?! Nice.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Will be in charge of making sure Hillary listens to the lukin>not for you>blood sequence before addressing Congress.
And making sure she doesnt get too RIGHT.
the country needs a president prepared to make tough decisions ... decisions on the war machine, decisions on a failing economy, decisions on actions against climate change ... every one of those issues will require someone who is prepared to piss off special interests ... every member of congress is pretty much tied to some group that will be affected ... how is it possible to appease everyone?
As was posted earlier.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902998_pf.html
It doesn't get more dirty and underhanded than this. The whole "fuck what the party said" mentallity is typical of the Clinton's. It's their way or the highway.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Interesting you bring up special interests. Who is president often determines which special interests are stroked and which ones are shafted it dosen't change the relationship to special interest groups and the greasing of the political wheels. The more "experience" the canidate has the more potential they have been corrupted by special interest. Pissing off one and stroking another just creates new and different issues. As they say...Follow the Money you'll find the dirt.
This is quite an interesting thread. I'll say this, I sure hope in 20 years or so we can move on to the content of the persons character rather than gender or pigmentation. I get that these kinds of things haven't happened yet and this is the reason for some of the passion in this area, I just think segmentation and division by race creed and gender etc aren't helping things. I'll be nice to get the first Black and or Female president out of the way so there is a precident. Personally I have a profound distrust of the Hillary Clinton, because of White Water and the various other nefarious events (dead witnesses, theft of documents, a lot of pardons..... not quite Louisiana politics but close) as well as the general ruthless style of campaigning not really on ideas but moreso on targeting various gender, race, or socioeconomic groups to pit against a particular easy straw man. Kind of like this administration did when they decided to invade Iraq. I'd like to see a woman president soon, but not this one not now. I'd much rather see Obama.
You are correct. You don't have to appease EVERYONE, just enough to get whatever you want passed. Sometimes that requires working with the other side of the aisle and Obama has proven to be good at that. The Clinton's...not so much.
Just look at how they attacked Obama for even mentioning Ronnie a couple of weeks ago. Is that the partisanship that you want for the next four or eight years every night on the evening news?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm