Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Bill and Hillary do tend to wind....

Posted By: nm on 2008-09-14
In Reply to: and Palin - Sunday

that's correct.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Does that mean you believe that Bill and Hillary were....
sincere?
Hillary and Bill do not REALLY want Obama to win.
nm
Hillary's comment about Bill
I've posted the link to youtube below for anyone that hasn't seen this - I didn't until today.  I wanted to know what everyone else thought about this comment - was she just being funny and cheeky or was she letting everyone know that she's not forgiven him for what he did?  And, do you think this was the appropriate place or situation to make this kind of comment? 
Hillary Clinton Calls for Privacy Bill...sm
Now I agree with Senator Clinton on this and I have said all along wire tapping should have checks and balances, goverment 101.

Also, living in an information society there has to be something in place to protect citizens privacy. This past week I read a blog with pictures of unknowing obese or tacky dressed people posted in the blog with comments about them. These people were enjoying a private day at the pool and this blogger was snapping their pictures. Not only was this downright evil and disrespectful but it should be illegal.
---------------


(AP) Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, drawing on her experiences as a young Watergate lawyer who decades later was investigated as first lady, urged creation of a privacy bill of rights Friday to protect people's personal data.

Modern life makes many things easier and many things easier to know, and yet privacy is somehow caught in the crosshairs of these changes, Clinton said in a speech to a left-leaning legal group.

Clinton's speech on protecting consumers from identity theft and citizens from government snooping was the latest in a series of talks billed as major addresses by aides. Previous speeches were on energy and the economy.

A potential presidential candidate in 2008 whose eight years as first lady were marked by numerous investigations, Clinton noted her work on a House committee investigating the Nixon administration's illegal snooping and other abuses.

And she ruefully called herself an expert in the loss of privacy.

Having lost so much of my own privacy in recent years I have a deep appreciation of its value and a firm commitment to protecting it for all the rest of you, she said, prompting laughter from the audience of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.

Clinton wants to create a privacy czar within the White House to guard against recent problems like the theft of personal data from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

She also wants legislation to let consumers know what information companies are keeping about them and how it is used, and create a tiered system of penalties for companies who are not careful with consumer data.

Clinton also waded into the debate over anti-terror eavesdropping. For months Democrats have hammered at the Bush administration over the National Security Agency's program of domestic wiretapping without warrants from judges. The administration insists it is both legal and necessary.

Clinton said any president should have the latest technology to track terrorists, but within laws that provide for oversight by judges.

The administration's refrain has been, Trust us,' said Clinton. That's unacceptable. Their track record doesn't warrant our trust. ... Unchecked mass surveillance without judicial review may sometimes be legal but it is dangerous. Every president should save those powers for limited critical situations.


MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Bill Clinton believed it, so did Hillary and so did John Kerry.
So did a great many in the congress else they would not have said so! How is it possible that you have such selective memory?  I wish I could do that.
I would like to believe that, but I tend to look at
nm
*We tend to believe our party*...sm
Re-reading my postI can see how I misspoke. What I was trying to get across, and my post was not directed at you BTW, was that psychologically people tend to put more trust in and defend the party they support by default. Whether you are a registered republican or not, you support the republican party, and I glean that from your statement *I have not seen a Democrat I could vote for in good conscious.* And whether you are aware of it or not, you defend that party tooth and nails on here, and there is nothing wrong with that if they follow your belief systems.

Good for you for criticizing Foley, and any other person who is inappropriate with the pages. I have said here before I do not know why Studds didn't stepdown and more importantly why he was reelected. I'm against his having a relationship with a page as much as I am Foley.

As to Juanita, I understand you are personally connected with her in some way, so you will obviously be more sensitive to her situation than I will. I am looking at the big picture. Since she did not come forward in 1978, the statue of limitations gone, all she can do is tell her story, and Clinton has a story. Like I said her story is believable. She has proven genuine and not making claims out of spite or for money. I think it was Brunson who posted ladies that Clinton was supposed to have either raped or sexually harrassed earlier this year. Out of them all, Juanita was the only one I believe has substance.

I disagree with you again; when it was brought up that conservative presidents were accused of rape below, it was rebutted with *that was only one time...but..but..but..* That's rationalizing and minimizing.

I know your mind is made up about Vincent Foster, but this is what's on snopes.com. What I find interesting is the *suicide note.*

White House deputy counsel Vince Foster committed suicide on the night of 20 July 1993 by shooting himself once in the head, a day after he contacted his doctor about his depression. A note in the form of a draft resignation letter was found in the bottom of his briefcase a week after his death. (Note that this letter was not, as is often claimed, a suicide note. It was Foster's outline for a letter of resignation.) Foster cited negative Wall Street Journal editorials about him. He was also upset about the much-criticized role of the counsel's office in the controversial firing of seven White House travel office workers.

On 10 October 1997, special prosecutor Kenneth Starr released his report on the investigation into Foster's death, the third such investigation (after ones conducted by the coroner and Starr's predecessor, Robert B. Fiske) of the matter. The 114-page summary of a three-year investigation concluded that Foster shot himself with the pistol discovered in his right hand. There was no sign of a struggle, nor any evidence he'd been drugged or intoxicated or that his body had been moved.

If Foster had been murdered or if unanswered questions about his death remained, Starr would have been the last person to want to conclude the investigation prematurely. Or are we to believe Starr is part of the cover up, too? And if we buy into the conspiracy theory, what are we expected to believe? That a group of professional killers capable of carrying out dozens of murders all over the world shot Vince Foster, then clumsily dumped him in a park (after he had bled out), planted a gun he didn't own in his hand (without bothering to press his fingerprints onto it), amateurishly forged a suicide note (in several different handwritings), and then seriously expected the nation would believe it was suicide? Claims too crazy to believe are never discounted when they're needed to help establish a conspiracy, of course.

Oh, and did you check out the Bush body count??

I try NOT to --- they tend to leak!
{
I tend to believe the Mayans.

I tend to believe the Word of God, it is
NM.
I'm in too. I admit I tend to just
In part because it seems that some people respond to who is posting and not what they are saying. But I am game for giving it a fair go. It only seems fair that we level the posting playing field and accept cyber-responsibility for what we post here.
I tend to think, after reading this, t hat you are the one out of touch
with Jewish teachings.  It would seem to me that rabbis saying these things would carry a lot more weight.  As far as the number who attended, that doesn't seem important.  It is what they are saying that carries import.   I don't think you speak for the Jewish community. 
I tend to agree with the greediness of people...

any responsible homeowner would READ the contract. We sat down with our mortgage company and read each item line by line so we could fully understand what we were signing. I don't feel sorry for those who bought and now claim they didn't understand what they were signing, didn't realize they had an ARM loan or that a balloon payment was coming up. Also, anyone who does get bailed out should have to put up 20% or more in cash the next time they try to buy a home. Too many people used their home as a piggy bank, thinking it was free money.


Wow, we are wee weeing in the wind here. nm

They are waiting in the wind for the day...sm
to bring the Lords of the Talking Loud and Saying Nothing back full swing.

This was a good read.
you must mean "whine" although it is a lot of wind too.
x
What gets me is this prevailing wind of "otherness"
Houston is located on the west side of a man-made ship channel that sevices the petrochemical industrial complex. Whenever we get hot, humid winds from the east, a foul stench of sulfur, oil, carbon and the like blankets the city. It is oppressive and inescapable.

The sentiments expressed in these hateful rants make those conditions seem like a a breeze coming off a grassy meadow full of jasmine and lavender. These "they-sayers" are not living in the same America where I grew up and I will do everything in my power to make sure that my own chidren do not inherit that kind of world after I'm gone.
now, Praire Wind, we find
in Bill Ayer's book, (hard to find, 1974), has the forward dedicating his book to a number of radicals, including Sirhan Sirhan who killed Pres. Kennedy, and STILL, the democrats do not have a problem with Obama's association with this man????
Who's God? Your God? My God? Earth, Wind and Fire?
x
Wind turbines. They are on top of a mountain

in my area. The company is going to build 51 more. There goes the view for sure! The people that live in the valley below this mountain are always complaining about them.


Seriously, not every state can, or will go along with wind turbines. They're big, ugly, and noisy. They do not provide jobs for local people. They do provide jobs for the company maintaining them.


You're so easy to wind up. LOL. nm
nm
The answer my friend is blowing in the wind...


by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Columnist




Glenn

Glenn Beck. (Photo: Jennifer Ackerman / Deseret Morning News)



Idiott wind, blowing like a circle around my skull,
From the Grand Coulee Dam to the Capitol.
Idiott wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
You're an idiott, babe.
It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.

- Bob Dylan



    One thing is certain: martial arts movie star Chuck Norris does not like President Obama. Not at all. Not one little bit. Norris dislikes Obama so much, in fact, that he discussed running for the office of president of Texas, which doesn't exist, as part of a larger move by him and a variety of other right-wing groups to overthrow the American government and return honor and decency to the country.


    No, really, he said all that, and more. Read it yourself if you don't believe me. The best part is where he writes, "Remember the Alamo!" Great stuff.


    Or something.


    There's more. The owner of right-wing web forum Free Republic, Jim Robinson, was recently forced to post a truly deranged piece of apologia regarding the attention his web site recently earned from the Secret Service. "Unfortunately," wrote Robinson, "we are saddled with a communist sympathizer in the White House. I don't know whether or not he's an actual card carrying commie, but he's definitely an America-hating, anti-capitalist Marxist leftist who thinks communism is the way to go. So now comes the problem. If you feel it's your duty to call Obama a traitor and use salty language in your proposed resolution, ie, suggest the commie be keelhauled, walked off the plank, run up the yardarm, tarred and feathered and run out of Dodge, etc, etc, etc, you may be facing a visit from your friendly Secret Service."

"Keep," wrote Robinson in closing, "your powder dry." Yeah, O.K., good thinking.


    Or something.


    Last month, Fox News celebrity Sean Hannity ran a poll on his web site. It asked readers what kind of revolution they'd prefer: military coup, armed rebellion or war for succession? "#3 seems most realistic," opined Hannity, "since it does present an opportunity for more homogeneous states to sort of capitalize on their homogeneity. However, it would likely lead to mass migrations of the minority partisans out of the rebel states. Of course, that may be fine with those states. Yet it seems that the ultimate paradox in any rebellion for freedom from within is that the ultimate goal is to impose the will of the rebels on everyone else through force. It seems the very foundation of representative democracy is ****tered if we accept that we exchange the power of ideas for the power of the sword upon each other. Nevertheless, I am still very interested in your own preferred form of revolt."


    That page has since been removed from Hannity's web site, surely due to some technical glitch, but before it was taken down, "armed rebellion" appeared to be the most popular choice of the three.


    Of course.


    Earlier this week, right-wing loudmouth Glenn Beck asserted during his radio show that President Obama's lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research would open the way for the genetic development of a new master race. "So here you have Barack Obama," said Beck, "going in and spending the money on embryonic stem cell research, and then some, fundamentally changing - remember, those great progressive doctors are the ones who brought us Eugenics. It was the progressive movement and it was science. Let's put science truly in her place. If evolution is right, why don't we just help out evolution? That was the idea. And sane people agreed with it! And it was from America. Progressive movement in America. Eugenics. In case you don't know what Eugenics led us to: the Final Solution. A master race! A perfect person. The stuff that we are facing is absolutely frightening. So I guess I have to put my name on yes, I hope Barack Obama fails. But I just want his policies to fail; I want America to wake up. "


    One assumes this forthcoming master race will enjoy minds of greater volume and depth than Mr. Beck's, because, well, people just can't get much dumber than this. It would be a profound waste of genetic material if we went out and created some master race that, like Messrs. Beck, Hannity and Robinson, was incapable of rational thought or speech. Just an idea.


    There is even more out there like this, from all over the place, with each seemingly trying to out-weird the other. So, yeah, it appears a fair portion of America's hard-right population, along with most if not all of their spokespeople and commentators, have been driven absolutely, positively bat-poop crazy by the election of and policies by Barack Obama.


    The trend has been sucking in more and more high-profile members of the conservative community. Newt Gingrich was forced to jump up and down on Rush Limbaugh for saying he wants Obama to fail. Limbaugh responded by calling Gingrich "a fly-by-night operator," who can't be depended on and who "will sell you out." Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah came close to threatening Arizona with an infestation of crickets to shut John McCain up about earmarks in the budget. Conservative commentator David Brooks called House Minority Leader John Boehner "insane" after Boehner called for a complete freeze on federal spending as an answer to the ongoing economic crisis.


    Perhaps the most resounding cannonade fired at conservatives by a conservative was David Frum's Newsweek article lamenting the sad state of the party, and the ongoing catastrophe represented by the ascendancy of Limbaugh. "Even before the November 2008 defeat," wrote Frum, "even before the financial crisis and the congressional elections of November 2006 - it was already apparent that the Republican Party and the conservative movement were in deep trouble. And not just because of Iraq, either (although Iraq obviously did not help)."


    "Every day," continued Frum, "Rush Limbaugh reassures millions of core Republican voters that no change is needed: if people don't appreciate what we are saying, then say it louder. Isn't that what happened in 1994? Certainly this is a good approach for Rush himself. He claims 20 million listeners per week, and that suffices to make him a very wealthy man. And if another 100 million people cannot stand him, what does he care? What can they do to him other than ... not listen? It's not as if they can vote against him. But they can vote against Republican candidates for Congress. They can vote against Republican nominees for president. And if we allow ourselves to be overidentified with somebody who earns his fortune by giving offense, they will vote against us."


    Unfortunately for Mr. Frum and any conservatives who share his concerns, it does not appear any of the hard-right noisemakers have any intention of moderating either their tone or their tantrums. Maybe it will be another couple of months before the swelling from that electoral bruising goes down enough for these people to calm themselves, but at this point, it ain't happening.


    The hardest part for the GOP? Neither Obama nor any other Democrat have been required to say a word about any of this. The right-wing shouters do their shouting, get shouted at by other right-wing shouters, and a perfect circle of Republican self-destruction is formed.


    Stay tuned ... and, yeah, keep your powder dry.


    Or something.


When Bill Clinton was in office, OHHH you better believe Bill and Carter have had..sm
their day of mudslinging matches, at the pleasure of a many conservatives. So, no there's not a double standard here.
Political wind have shifted in an ugly direction.
One does not have to look any further than this forum to know PRECISELY what he was talking about....racism and bigotry has reared its ugly head once again. When that happens, the damage transcends race and ethnicity. This is why you see so many of us stepping up every single time this kind of trash is posted to call it down and expose it for exactly what it is.

Middle Eastern Moslem ethic minorities DO need the protection of our leaders and of our laws when this shameful, dangerous and destrucive behavior emerges. Their citizenship DOES matter and the protection they need is against the very same GARBAGE your are posting here that, whether you realize it or not, incites fanatic whack jobs to violence.

Nothing to be sorry for when the truths comes to the light of day. Get a grip on yourself and do some soul searching, for a change.
Bill Maher Takes On Bill O'Reilly

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight, political humorist Bill Maher (search), he has a new book out called "New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer." Of course, Mr. Maher is about as polite as I am and as timid as Dracula. He joins us now from Los Angeles.


You know, you've had some celebrities on your HBO show, "Real Time," which begins again on Friday, talking about policy and war on terror and stuff like that. I get the feeling they don't know very much, but you do. So I'd like to make Bill Maher, right now, the terror czar. Bill Maher, the terror czar. Could be a series.


How would you fight this War on Terror? How would you fight it?


BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I think the first and most important thing is to get the politics out of the War on Terror. You know, maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist, Bill, maybe I'm naive, but I thought that 9/11 was such a jarring event that nobody would dare return to business as usual on that one subject after that.


But of course, we found out that nothing could be further from the truth. And your president, my president too, but the one you voted for...


O'REILLY: You don't know that. Were you looking over my shoulder there? I could have voted for Nader. I could have voted for Kerry, but Kerry wouldn't come on the program, so I wouldn't vote. But I could have gone for Ralph. Ralph's a friend of mine.


MAHER: Yes. Anyway, I said the guy you voted for, President Bush, you know, how come this guy, who was supposed to be such a kick-and-take- names kind of guy, how come he has not been able to get the politics out of this?


You know, as a guy who's been accused of treason, I'll tell you what real treason is: Treason is when legislators vote against homeland security measures because it goes against the wishes of their political or financial backers. Treason is the fact that, as a terrorist, you could still buy a gun in this country because the NRA (search) lobby is so strong.


O'REILLY: OK. But you're getting into the political, and I agree with you. I think that the country should be united in trying to seek out and kill terrorists, who would kill us.


But I'd like to have some concrete things that you, Bill Maher, the terror czar — and take this seriously, this could be a series — what would you do?


All right, so you've got bin Laden. You've got Al Qaeda (search). You've got a bunch of other lower-level terrorist groups. What do you do to neutralize them?


MAHER: OK. Well, first of all, you discounted my answer, which is get the politics out, but OK.


O'REILLY: Well, assume you can do that. They're gone.


MAHER: We'll let that go. Keep going. I wouldn't worry that much about bin Laden. I mean, capturing bin Laden at this point, it doesn't really matter whether he's dead or alive. He's already Tupac to the people who care about him and work for him. Capturing bin Laden, killing him would be like when Ray Kroc died, how much that affected McDonald's.


O'REILLY: It would be a morale booster. But I understand. You're not going to send...


MAHER: A morale booster, right. Well, we've had plenty of morale boosting. We've had plenty of window dressing. What we need is concrete action.


In the book I wrote before this one about terrorism, I suggested that we have a Secret Service for the people. I said whenever the president goes anywhere, he has very high-level, intelligent detectives who look around at a crowd. They know what they're looking for. They're highly paid. They're highly trained.


We don't have that in this country. We should have that. We should have a cadre of 10,000 highly trained people who would guard all public events, bus stations, train stations, airports — and stop with this nonsense that this robotic sort of window dressing...


O'REILLY: OK, so you would create a homeland security office that was basically a security firm for major targets and things like that. It's not a bad idea. Costs a lot of money. Costs a lot of money. It's not a bad idea.


MAHER: Costs a lot of money compared to what? If you paid 10,000 people a salary of $100,000 a year, that would, I think, cost $10 billion or something. That's nothing. There's that much pork in the transportation bill before you get...


O'REILLY: Yes, 10,000 wouldn't do it, but I get your drift.


MAHER: Whatever it costs.


O’REILLY: You would create a super-security apparatus. OK, that's not bad. That's not bad. How about overseas now?


MAHER: What we need to do is what I call get Israeli about this. Because the Israelis are not afraid of profiling. The Israelis are not afraid to bury politics in the greater cause of protecting their nation. We don't act that way. You know, I'm afraid 9/11 really changed nothing.


O'REILLY: Boy, your ACLU (search) pals aren't going to like that. You're going to lose your membership card there.


MAHER: I'm not a member of the ACLU.


O'REILLY: Oh, sure you are, just like I voted for Bush. You're a member of the ACLU. I can see the card right in your pocket there.


MAHER: Bill, I'm not a joiner. I'm not a joiner. I don't like organizations.


O'REILLY: They won't have you, Maher, let's be honest about that. All right, now, in your book, which is very amusing, by the way — if you want a few laughs buy Maher's book.


MAHER: Thank you.


O'REILLY: You take some shots at FOX News, which is your wont, and I just want to know why you think we're so fabulously successful here.


MAHER: Well, I think that question has been answered many times. It's because the conservative viewer in this country, or on radio the conservative listener, is very predictable. They like to hear what they like to hear. They like to hear it over and over again.


O'REILLY: All the surveys show that the viewers are all over the map. They're not conservative in a big bloc. Some of them are moderate. Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are Moroccans. I mean, they're everywhere. That's your analysis? That just the conservatives watch us?


MAHER: Well, I think mostly the conservatives do watch you. That's not to take anything away from what you guys have achieved over there. It's a very well-produced broadcast, and they have excellent personalities like yourself, Bill. Who could resist watching you when you get home from work at night?


O'REILLY: Whoopi Goldberg, maybe? I don't know.


MAHER: Yes.


O'REILLY: Anyone who doesn't watch here is misguided. We identify them as such.


But look, I think there's more to it than — you're in TV. You know the ratings game. I mean, if you don't provide a product that is satisfying people, no matter what your ideology, they tell you to take a hike.


There's a guy over at MSNBC. He's a very conservative guy. He was hired and nobody's watching him. They hire liberals. Nobody watches them. Air America (search). Nobody's listening to it.


I mean, there's got to be a reason why we're No. 1, a punch line for you, and No. 2, you know, becoming the most powerful news network in the world.


MAHER: Well, I think, as I say, it's a well-produced product. You know, your program moves along, always at a clip that never seems to bore. You know, you move along to the next topic, the next guest. It never sort of drags. I don't think a lot of people know how to produce that stuff that way.


O'REILLY: All right. It's bells and whistles and my charming personality. That's what I thought it was.


Last thing: You know, one thing I like about Maher is he's not a hypocrite. He drives a little hybrid vehicle. Right? You putter around there. Does it have training wheels? What's it like?


MAHER: Actually, I had the Prius hybrid for three years. I was one of the first ones to get it right after 9/11. And I traded it in a few months ago for the Lexus hybrid.


O'REILLY: I think we should all cut back on our energy consumption, and I think we should all get these hybrids as fast as we can.


Hey, Bill, always nice to see you. Thanks very much. Good luck with the season on the TV show.


MAHER: Continued success there, Mr. No. 1.


O'REILLY: All right. Thank you.


Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"


Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.


Bill Clinton and his ties to India (yes, Bill),...
and China (yes, Bill) sent a lot of our jobs their way. Google it some time. Even I was amazed.

Look, it is simple economics. The big bad corporations everyone hates...first of all, it is not 5 or 6 rich guys and that's it. They employee thousands of people just like us...and when the government puts those huge taxes on them, if they want to stay in business, they are forced to move offshore. Higher taxes are responsible for more jobs going overseas than "greed." The DNC has told its members for years that "corporations" and "the rich" are the cause of all their problems and they have bought that Marxist rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Corporations are not the cause of ill in this country. They are the backbone of the economy in this country. That is simple economics 101. And I am certainly not rich...and I certainly am not on the upper echelon of a corporation, but I do understand reality and I understand how the economy works. Yes, there is wrongdoing by some upper level folks in corporations. There is wrongdoing in the government. Where there is power, there will be wrongdoing. But for every Enron there are thousands of other good, solid companies that employ thousands of Americans, but the DNC does not share the success stories, because it does not promote their agenda. In order to control people they want them beholden to government and hating free enterprise. They want big government, total power, and control. And following Alinksy's program...you have to instill class warfare. You have to make corporations the enemy. You have to make classes envy the next rung up. Classic Marxist socialism. It is being played out in this country every day.

It is just that some of us have not bought the myth and jumped on the socialism train.
Did you read the bill? It was a regulatory reform bill...
asking them to regulate, not de-regulate. But Democrats blocked it...no wonder. Fannie was greasing a lot of Democratic palms...and Frederick Raines, the Dem CEO at the time...was in the Clinton administration. They were taking care of their own...and we are paying for it.
if abe is on the $5 bill & george is on the $1 bill, what is Obama on?
****censored****
Blows whatever way the wind blows

At least his O lovers can't say this is a lie, since they actually see him speaking. 


He's so two-faced.....


http://noblesseoblige.org/wordpress/2008/08/20/the-obama-iraq-documentary-whatever-the-politics-demand/


Hillary

I've actually been thinking of voting for her if she runs.  A year ago, I couldn't stand her.  I don't know if she's changed or if I've changed, but what I mostly think it is, is that the further right the neocons go, the further toward center she seems to wind up.


As far as respect, let's see... She has the ability to articulately and intelligent form SENTENCES using the English language.  That in and of itself is worthy of much more respect than what we've currently got.


She seems to have enormous strength without being a bully.  I can't recall her telling the rest of the world to "Bring it on." 


I'm somewhere between being a Democrat and Republican.  I tend to vote for someone because of issues, not because of party affiliation.  I've registered as an Independent because of that, and I'm glad I did because these days of Republicans and skyrocketing deficits, increasing intrusion of government into the personal lives of American citizens, etc. leaves me wondering just what Republican and Democrat means any more.


Republican seems to now mean a particular, narrow brand of Christianity (rather than a brand of politics), lying as a regular and customary part of doing business with the American people and the world, destroying the lives of people who disagree with them, completely stalling and bringing science to a screeching halt, forcing regime change on weaker countries through war, while showing weakness and backing down from true threats, such as North Korea.


And Democrats -- well, I just don't know any more what they stand for.


Again, as far as Hillary is concerned, she left a bad taste in my mouth when she seemed to put down stay-at-home moms with her comment about choosing her career over staying home and "having teas."  I feel being a mother is probably the most important job there is, and I didn't appreciate that comment.  However, recently she's looking a lot better to me.


I also would like to see more from Giuliani.  I think he demonstrated excellent leadership during the 9/11 tragedy, and he seems to be more moderate when it comes to the personal lives of people.


My DREAM President would have been Colin Powell.  I can't recall seeing such grace, dignity and intelligence in a politician.  He also has firsthand combat experience in foreign lands and might not be so hasty to jeopardize soldiers' lives as someone who didn't have the guts to put his own life on the line yet seems to find the lives of our young people readily disposable for nation building, rather than defending America.


I truly don't think we can do any WORSE than what we have now.  If we can just all hold our breath and tread lightly, we just might be able to survive the next three years, not because of this president but IN SPITE of him. 


Hillary just might be someone who would actually put Americans' safety and America, in general, FIRST.  Wouldn't that be a nice change?


If it had been Hillary...

Personally, I don't care what Laura did when she was 17, even if she was driving drunk. But, republicans are relentless and we can't let this go without mentioning the certain media frenzy if this had been Hillary who killed her first fiance.


If it had been Hillary:


Barbara Olson would have a best seller on it.
Ann Coulter would have a best seller on it.
Peggy Noonan would have a best seller on it.
Laura Ingraham would have a best seller on it.
Laura Schlessinger would have a best seller on it.
David Limbaugh would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Hitchens would have a best seller on it.
Dick Morris would have a best seller on it.
Bob Woodward would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Ruddy would have a best seller on it.
Ben Stein would have a best seller on it.
Gail Sheehy would have a best seller on it
Neal Boortz would have a best seller on it.
David P. Schippers would have a best seller on it.
David Maraniss would have a best seller on it.
Mike Barnacle would claim he was in the car with Hillary.
Joe Klein would write a best seller on it, but swear he didn't
Judas Stephanopolous Maximus would have a best seller on it.
Joe Eszterhas would fabricate quotes from Hillary's vagina.
Michael Isikoff would swear the conversation was "off the record"
but then turn around and print every word (plus some he made up.)
Kenneth Starr would write an impeachment referral over it.
Susan McDougal would still have to do time in prison,
and Julie Hiatt Steele would still lose her house.


The vulgar Pigboy would pound on her 15 hours a week until 2009.
O'Reilly would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Hannity would pound on Hillary for months and years.
(and Colmes would remain silent while he did...)
Paula Zahn would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Brit Hume would have weekly "Special reports" called "Accident? You Decide!"
Juan Willaims and Mara Liason would agree Hillary belongs in prison.


CNN would create a spin off network to cover it 24/7.
Tim would mention it every Sunday until he died.
Chris would pound on Hillary for months and years,
but no guest would ever get to answer any questions about it.
Cokie Roberts would mention it every week, then giggle.
Henry Hyde would scream, "The flag is falling."


Richard Mellon Scaife would pay David Brock $80,000 to talk to the cops who were paid $80,000 to say "We thought we smelled liquor, but everyone in Arkansas knows there'd be hell to pay if we wrote this up as a drunk driving accident."
The American Spectator would then run a front page story on it, and somehow Paula Jones would run into the spotlight screaming, "Hillary was trying to kill me - and missed," then the 
mainstream media would've made Paula a star on this story instead of the other one.
Then every night, Larry King and his "panel of experts" would search for the connection between Hillary's accident and Clinton's penis - as he always does.


...but since it was Bush's wife, Karl Rove gave orders not to bring it up.


Better keep an eye on Hillary as well...
Ironically, Hillary – who is evidently now opposed to military action – said in February that "no option can be taken off the table" when dealing with Iran.

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal,” she told a crowd of Israel supporters. “We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table."

Either she has flip-flopped or she was pandering to the pro-Israel crowd to get their votes. Which was it I wonder?
Hillary
I do not think Obama has enough experience to be president.  Two years in the senate, spent his third year on the campaign trail, not enough experience for me.  Also do not believe he sat in a church for 20 years and never heard the preacher say the things we heard on the TV.  He also talks but never explains how he will do things.  Not sure about the black issue.  Would have voted for Colin Powell if he had run back sometime ago. Some people will never vote for a black person, just like some men would rather vote for a turnip rather than vote for a female.  It is a man thing.
Hillary
I am not happy with any of the candidates. That being said, I do think Hillary should be in the White House. I detested her at first but compared to Obama (all smoke and mirrors, no substance) and McCain (Mr. Ego personified) I believe she truly does love this country. I also feel when another terrorist attack occurs on us, and I feel it will, she will be a good person in office to deal with this. Obama would be a disaster with his inexperience.
Anyone else getting fed up with Hillary?
I used to have a lot respect for Hillary, and while I favored Obama for the nomination I was fine with her being the nominee instead.  Now she is on this "crusade" to make the votes of MI and FL count as they are, in her favor of course.  Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that if those states had favored Obama that she wouldn't be down there pushing hard for the votes to count?  She keeps trying to spin this as not changing the rules or not about her, but it's about the voters being heard!  Funny how she didn't have any complaints when the ruling was first made that their votes wouldn't count.  She insults everyone's intelligence with her arguments and I am just fed up with her.
Hillary
Love Hillary. Hope she gets VEEP!
And so she should be. I am not a Hillary fan...
but they messed her over big time. To quote reverend wright...the chickens have come home to roost!
Hillary did it too....sm
Seems to me I read about people from Mass or NY being bused in and out of the NH or VT democrat primary....to vote for Hillary, or so I heard.

Gee, that story got buried real quick, as I recall.


Not a big Hillary fan but it looks like...

she really got a major hatchet job sent her way....


http://www.lynettelong.com/my_weblog/2008/07/are-superdelega.html#more


No wonder a bunch of Hillary supporters are ... shall we say...angry?


Hillary C

Campaigning in Lansing, MI for Obama Sat morning.


 


While I am not a Hillary fan -

http://www.democrats-against-obama.org/sept2008.html


 


 


Ha ha! I wonder if Hillary sent Roberts a thank you
All she has to do is point out that Republicans want to go backwards in time, want women barefoot, pregnant and inferior to men.  This is probably the best thing to happen to a Democratic campaign n a long time!  Gotta love it!
Seems no one wants a piece of Hillary :)

GOP Challenger to Sen. Clinton Quits Race




By Chris Cillizza
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A05



Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro (R) ended her campaign against New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday, bringing to a close a brief and decidedly rocky attempt to unseat perhaps the country's most famous Democratic officeholder.


Even as she announced she would shutter her campaign against Clinton, Pirro jumped into the state attorney general's contest. A recent independent poll showed her trailing the two Democrats seeking that office.









In a statement released by her campaign, Pirro said her law enforcement background better qualifies me for a race for New York State Attorney General than a race for the United States Senate.


Pirro's exit leaves the Republicans adrift for now, with only two obscure candidates vying for the nomination: former Yonkers mayor John Spencer and tax lawyer William Brenner.


From the start of Pirro's Senate campaign in mid-August, she was beset by questions about her fundraising ability and readiness for such a high-profile contest.


Pirro is the second Republican to drop a bid against Clinton, who is seeking a second Senate term next November. New York City lawyer Ed Cox, the son-in-law of President Richard M. Nixon, left the contest Oct. 16 when New York Gov. George E. Pataki (R) announced his support for Pirro.


We know at some point the Republicans will sort out this process and choose a nominee, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said.


Cillizza is a washingtonpost.com staff writer.


I feel the very same way about Hillary.

I remember several years ago hearing some pundits speculate about political royalty and how the Bushes and Clintons would be basically the only *families* in the White House from here on out.


Given Bill's sudden closeness to and *adoption* by Bush, Sr. and Hillary's refusal to take a stand, as you said, it kind of makes me wonder if maybe they didn't hit the nail on the head.


She's been listening to Hillary too much. :) nm
xx
Hillary on immigration...
not sure why you are asking me; I didn't post anything about Bush and immigration...I don't happen to agree with him on that. Apparently Hillary does though...see article:
WASHINGTON --Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a potential White House candidate in 2008, said Wednesday some Republicans are trying to create a "police state" to round up illegal immigrants.

Alerts Clinton, D-N.Y., spoke out on the U.S. immigration policy after largely staying away from an issue that has roiled Congress in recent months and spurred a number of conflicting proposals.

Speaking at a rally of Irish immigrants, Clinton criticized a bill the House passed in December that would impose harsher penalties for undocumented workers.

"Don't turn your backs on what made this country great," she said, calling the measure "a rebuke to what America stands for."

The House measure would make unlawful presence in the United States, which is currently a civil offense, a felony.

Clinton said it would be "an unworkable scheme to try to deport 11 million people, which you have to have a police state to try to do."
That sounds to me like she is supporting amnesty from the back door saying that it would not be possible to round them all up.

You will also notice that the Republican congress wants to make it a felony to be here illegally...good for them. Hillary does not agree, and neither does Bush. As I stated...I do not agree with Bush on this issue.


Hillary is wonderful

Hillary is wonderful so is every other democrat running..ANYONE is better than the tired old men running as republicans.  I would vote for my dog before I would vote for a republican.  We need four years of peace and prosperity and building our reputation in the world and healing this country and fixing all the destructive things this administration has done here and abroad.  Hillary, when she worked as a lawyer, was one of the top five lawyers in America.  Her IQ is higher than Bill and that has to be quite high as Bill is quite an intelligent man.  Contrast that to the person in the WH now.  I think his IQ must be around 75 to 90.


Hillary Exposed? Not quite....

I took the time to watch the trailer of Peter Paul's Hillary Exposed trailer again this morning, took a few notes, and did a little internet research.  It is my conclusion that this is mostly fabrication with a stab at Hillary because he is angry that his investment/ideas didn't go as he had planned.


The 2000 Hollywood Gala was a farewell for Bill to garner his favor in supporting him on a business venture, with the added benefit as a fundraiser for Hillary.  Paul also gave fundraisers for others.  For whatever reason, this didn't go as he had planned.  Paul specifically stated that he only gave the fundraiser for Hillary to get to Bill.  There is no evidence suggesting that Clinton told Levin to seduce Oto to oust Paul to destroy him and SLM. 


The phone call to SLM from Hillary says nothing other than that she is pleased with what they are doing for her and thanking them.  I do not believe that she helped plan the gala whatsoever nor knew the full details. 


Is being a fundraiser the same as campaign contributor?  If you are shelling out money for the affair, is that considered a campaign contribution?  I didn't have time to dig into that this morning.


As David Rosen was Hillary's finance director, if he falsified documents, whether on his own or told by someone else to do it, he is the one culpable.


Digging into Peter F. Paul's past doesn't lend much to his credibility.  I am loath to believe anything from such a person.  I think he is just trying to save his own butt and trying to get back at Bill through Hillary. His stint in Brazil and being put in jail was of his own doing.


In essence, there is just not much substance here when you start digging.  This is the first of many attacks that are just beginning for Hillary as well as the other presidential candidates and should not be taken at face value.  


Should Hillary step down?
I've heard people say she should step down before things get worse within the party. That it would be the best for the Democrat party.

Thoughts, opinions, comments?

Is Hillary for real?
Talk about being out of touch with Americans.  She cannot relate to what we go through at all.  She came from a weathly family yet she portrays in her ads that she is like everyone else.  Then on top of that seems like every state she campaigns in she says she is from.  So I'm confused...Is she from Arkansas, New York, Pennsylvania, now Indiana?  Give me a break!  She's so full of it.  She came from a wealthy family, married a wealthy guy and she's never had to worry where the money for her food is coming from.   She's never had to pump her own gas (by her own admission).  This is all a "photo stunt" into making people think she's out there pumping gas and dealing with the problems and issues we are facing.  She didn't even know what a gallon of gas cost before just a couple days ago.  I'm sure she also doesn't know what a gallon of milk or loaf of bread cost.  And her gas stimulus or whatever it is she's trying to pass off as some great program.  Basically it boils down to you will get one free fill up for your vehicle for the day.  Right - like that's going to solve the problems.  The sooner that hag loses the better for America (also the better for my blood pressure to finally resume its normalcy).
Poor Hillary

So Bill is now coming out saying people are picking on Hillary. 


Oh the poor baby.  Wasn't she the one who said "If you can't stand the heat....."


Whether I like her or not is besides the point.  This is an election and Bill & Hillary need to realize if you want to win you have to work towards it.  It's not going to be handed to you. 


Yes, I realize she is working hard, but so is Barack Obama.  Do you hear him crying when she makes a racial statement about him about how nobody "white" is going to vote for him?


Grow up Bill & Hillary!