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

You mean under the Clinton years

Posted By: i've been running my own life on 2008-10-16
In Reply to: You mean like it's been doing for the last - EIGHT years?

And I've been getting refunds and finally have something to show for the hard work I've done these past 8 years. Under Clinton I had nothing. N-O-T-H-I-N-G! Nada, Zip! Except a bill to the IRS every year at tax time because 42% of my pay was not enough in taxes for them!

For the first time since Clinton and his regime left have I finally been able to have any sense of worth and self esteem. Clinton/Gore was the worst time our country has seen since Jimmy Carter was president (and yes I voted for him too). After Clinton finally left and Gore lost the election the first thing that came to mind was Fords speech when he said "My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over".

Sorry, but I don't want to go through another national nightmare.


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

I was much better off in Clinton Years
I was making a lot less money but I could afford to turn my furnace on in the winter, I could take my kids to the movies, camping, buy nice clothes and laundry soap and paper towels weren't a "luxury." Now, we use a gas fireplace for heat in a 4 bedroom/2 bath house that is in dire need of numerous repairs that we have NOT been able to afford. During the Clinton years, I put a new roof on the house, new siding, put the gas fireplace in, redid the kitchen with all new oak cabinents and added a bathroom. MAKING LESS MONEY. So, hmm, my standard of living has sunk to driving to see my mom as my only source of entertainment and maintaining internet. The last 8 years ruined me financially. Gas prices? In turn everything else went through the roof.
Clinton years

It's not just California -- it was bad everywhere during the Clinton years.  This country was living with a false economy.  Dumb Bill signed NAFTA so all of our manufacturing jobs, etc. could go overseas (free trade, they call it) -- free to everyone except U.S. citizens. 


Insofar as the terrorists, they may have started during the first George Bush's terms, but Clinton did nothing to stop them.  And after the towers, what were we suppose to do -- wait for the terrorists to come over here so we could fight on our ground?  I still think there were WMD --- they just removed them.  After all, everything is advertised on TV before we do it.  Do you not think the Iraqs knew in advance we were going to check for WMD -- and do you not think they had an ally somewhere that would help them remove them?  Wake up!  NAFTA has probably been our biggest downfall economically.


You mean 16 years - Both Bush AND Clinton
Disastrous!
Oh my gosh - the Clinton years were the worst
I have never seen such horrible horrible times as the Clinton years. It was awful, awful, awful. DH and I both worked full time. We both had excellent salaries but we could never get ahead. We didn't live life in the rich lane - a 1 bedroom apartment (no washer dryer) in a hole-in-the-wall complex. A Ford Taurus (so not a fancy car). I don't own any diamonds or furs and my clothes were bought at the local Walmart, Sears or stores like that. No children, no college education to pay off and we had absolutely nothing. Clinton's tax increases raised our taxes so high that we were paying out 38% in taxes and even then at the end of the year we always owed an extra $2000. Everyone kept telling us to buy a house and get all these great "benees". In SF? Right! We couldn't afford to go out to eat never mind buy a house and when we did try to apply for a loan we were turned down. On top of that my family and friends back east were losing their jobs (thank you NAFTA). Family freinds were losing their homes because they lost their jobs and they were starting to live in their cars. My dad took in a couple he knew because they were living in a campground and winter came and it got too cold to stay in their tent. It wasn't until Clinton got out of office that our taxes went down, we were able to save some money, get a better place to live, and go out to eat with family and start to enjoy life a little more. The economy may be bad now, but we're in better shape than we were when Clinton's were in. Now we're terrified we're going to be back into the same exact sitaution. We're certainly not in great shape here, so anything worse would put us in a bad situation but luckily we rent so can move if we have to. But the economy needs a lof of work. We have no health insurance (unless you want to call having a policy that you have to pay 10K/year first before the insurance company will pitch in), DH is out of work and we just take one day at a time. All I know is most everyone I know (family, friends, and acquantances of my family) say they may have thought Clinton to be a good looking guy, but they have been better off financially since he left office.
If it Clinton screwed something up - why didn't Bush fix it? He had 8 years!

As much as you want to blame Bill Clinton......don't forget who held the reins for the last 8 years......who let them run amuck? Why was nothing done?


Check out the mortgage failures.
Tell me which failed more, prime or subprime
Tell me what is the rate of failures under the CRA or even Bush's ADDI (which i attack alll the time)
Once again, REALITY AND THE DATA doesn't fit ya'lls claims.




Basically what happened was.. we reformed bankruptcy laws.. so that people who ran into dire straights could not restructure.





We packaged the loans into commodity derivatives. These are sorta mirror bets on the loans. Sorta..as the same loan will be sold many times in many derivative packages.. that's why the housing derivatives are worth more than all the real estate in the US. Derivatives are actually not that bad.. when a market is stable and only has to deal with natural forces. The housing market was bubbled.. partially due to low interest rates that encouraged everyone to buy, even the rich, and partially due to the CRA and the ADDI.. which did add customers to the market (helping form the bubble was the extent the CRA and the ADDI had in this mess)




All it took was a few failures to pop the bubble..and make real estate prices drop,. and mind you, it was mainly prime loans (READ not loans given to poor people and not loans under the CRA) that failed. The derivative market.,.which like I said, is really mirrors of the same loans.. cause the defaults to explode with ten times the ferocity, because one loan could effect the price of dozens of derivatives.




Really the poor and even irresponsible people .. simply did not have the economic ability to cause this mess. Pool all their money together and waste it on hookers.. it would have zero effect without help from the rich elites and their magnifying packaged derivatives.




THE CRA and ADDI both had stricter requirements than loans you got from normal banks.. both required income data.. where many prime loans did not.. they also greatly limited you on how much home you could purchase..whereas private banks did not care if you tried to buy something you could not afford.
Don't believe me?.. Look in the phone book.. call your own housing authority - you can get a loan for 106% the purchase price of a home even today.. if you're poor enough.
 



Ask to hear the red tape and hoops you must go through.. Heck, it is probably easier to just get a real job and earn real money than go through the FHA.


For this you have to wait at least 3 years and 8 months , maybe 7 years and 8 mohths...nm
nm
Not quite- 2 years Catholic, 2 years Muslim. NM
X
clinton
You mean wonderful super intelligent President Bill Clinton and his lovely super intelligent lawyer wife, Hiliary?  So much better than the dufus warmonger and Stepford wife in the WH right now..Jerks, both of them, backward thinking monsters, Bush and Stepford.
clinton
I think Clinton should have been impeached. He is to be a role model? Please, what kind of a role model is that cheating on his wife.
No on Clinton as VP

No way can Obama offer VP to Queen Hillary.  He should remember what happened to JFK (with Johnson being involved).  What a better way for the Queen to annoint herself to the presidency by getting rid of him.  Don't put it past her either - just remember Ron Brown, Vince Foster, Eric Fox, Sandy Hume, Danny Casolaro, Ronald Rogers, John Wilson, Gandy Baugh, Mary Mahoney, Suzanne Coleman, Judy Gibbs, Gary Johnson, Kathy Ferguson, Bell Shelton, Sally Perdue (didn't mysteriously die but was told if she didn't keep her mouth shut they would break her legs), Jon Walker, Johnny Franklin, Ed Willey, Barbara Alice Wise, Jerry Parks, C. Victor Raiser, L.J. Davis, Herschel Friday, Ron Brown, and the list goes on and on an on....


So no, I would not put it past either of them that something would happen and she would swear herself in as the anointed queen.  Lets just hope Obama has more sense - which I believe he does.


Clinton

Where do I start?  I love Bill Clinton.  Hs is very intelligent, he can talk about anything and knows what he is talking about.  He did what the first person posted.  He was impeached but he could not be removed from office because he was impeached for was not govenment and it has to pertain to the government to be removed from office.  He was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth and he earned everything he got.  He has worked very hard.  Funny, but I get the same sick feeling in my stomach whenever I see George Bush's face on TV and the man cannot even speak so how he can do anything else.   The trillion dollar debt, people with no jobs, and the list goes on and on.  Put us in a war we had no business being in.  He has never done anything on his own that turned out good.  Whatever he did was with the help of his father or someone else doing it for him.   He will not return to Crawford, they are going to build a house, but I forgot the location, and he will not be traveling around the world working to get meds for  AIDS patients, starving  children, etc.  Maybe he can help bring back other countries to like us again like they used to until Bush told just about everyone of them he did not need their help and made them angry with us.  I could go on and on but I am tired and going to bed. 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


This has been going on even when Clinton
was in office.  This has been going on for years.  Shoot, I lived in Arizona for 25 years and illegals were everywhere.  Finally, Arizona will NOT hire anyone that is illegal.  The companies have to hire people who show BC and if the employees do not, they are not hired.  So most illegals moved to other states.  Also the companies are audited and have to show proof that each employee is legal or the company will be fined.  Arizona has border patrol that runs along Mexico and Arizona and that should have been up years ago.  Even tried putting up border control when Clinton was in office, but everyone ignored her plea until a few years ago.  Also work for a company that outsources to India.  This has been going on for years and years.  When the O takes over, he will probably sell our country out and will be worse.  He says he will help the the middle class yet cause electricity rates to skyrocket and so on.  I do not trust O with ANYTHING.  He is a smooth talker, the ones I do not trust.  If McCain wins, at least I know he will try to make our country safe from nukes of Iran.    
Again I will say it. Clinton and his
cronies cooked the books. There was no surplus. It came out after an audit after Bush got in office.
I really do wonder how Clinton will
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480126,00.html

U.S. Obtains New Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Intrigue

Friday, January 16, 2009


Iran Presidency Office

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inspects the Natanz nuclear plant in central Iran.

WASHINGTON — U.S. security and law-enforcement officials say they have fresh evidence of recent efforts by Iran to evade sanctions and acquire metals from China used in high-tech weaponry, including long-range nuclear missiles, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

Iran's efforts are detailed in a series of recent emails and letters between Iranian companies and foreign suppliers seen by The Wall Street Journal. Business records show one Iranian company, ABAN Commercial & Industrial Ltd., has contracted through an intermediary for more than 30,000 kilograms (about 66,000 pounds) of tungsten copper — which can be used in missile guidance systems — from Advanced Technology & Materials Co. Ltd. of Beijing. One March 2008 email between the firms mentions shipping 215 ingots, with more planned.

The United Arab Emirates has informed the U.S. that in September it intercepted a Chinese shipment headed to Iran of specialized aluminum sheets that can be used to make ballistic missiles. A month earlier, UAE officials also intercepted an Iran-bound shipment of titanium sheets that can be used in long-range missiles, according to a recent letter to the U.S. Commerce Department from the UAE's Washington ambassador.

Evidence of Iran's efforts to acquire sensitive materials also is emerging from investigations by state and federal prosecutors in New York into whether a number of major Western banks illegally handled funds for Iran and deliberately hid Iranian transactions routed through the U.S. One focus of the inquiries is the role of Italy, including the Rome branch of Iran's Bank Sepah and Italy's Banca Intesa Sanpaolo Spa. Banca Intesa said it is cooperating in the inquiries.

Iran Produces Enough Uranium to Build Nuclear Weapon

The developments could present President-elect Barack Obama with an early test in responding to what many Washington security officials now say is a rapidly growing threat to the region, including U.S. allies Israel and Saudi Arabia.

All of the high-performance metals Iran has been acquiring also have industrial uses such as commercial aviation and manufacturing, making it difficult for intelligence agencies to be absolutely certain how the materials are being used.

"We can't say we know it would, or would not, be used for military purposes," said proliferation expert Gary Milholland of the nonprofit Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, noting that broad economic sanctions on Tehran led by the U.S. mean Iran has to go to unusual lengths to find high-grade materials for industrial use as well as weapons.

Still, he added, "There doesn't seem to be any real doubt or debate whether Iran is going for the bomb or whether Iran is using front companies to import things. Everyone agrees on that around the world."

Officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency said they believe Iran could have enough fissile material for an atomic weapon sometime this year, though it would need to be further processed into weapons-grade uranium. That assessment was echoed Thursday by Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael V. Hayden. U.S. and European governments have grown increasingly alarmed in recent months at the speed they believe Iran is developing ballistic-missile and nuclear capabilities. Last year the United Nations Security Council, which includes China, formally imposed sanctions on Iran's military and most of its banks for nuclear proliferation activities.

A spokesman for Iran at its U.N. mission in New York declined to comment. China "has been strictly implementing" U.N. proliferation sanctions on Iran, said a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing. The export of restricted items such as high-grade metals, which include specialized aluminum and titanium, is prohibited, he added.
Wow, Clinton
Probably had Monica hiding under the desk. LOL. Sorry, could not resist.
No, Clinton just used

the Oval Office (that I pay for) and ''company time'' to get Lewinskyed on a regular basis.  He may even have gotten a Lewinsky on Fathers Day, who knows?


I believe it is called Fathers Day for a reason.  Obama went golfing on the sacred day, and I don't think Michelle and the kids were with him.   On Fathers Day, it's Daddy that gets the gifts, otherwise it would be called Family Day or Wife and Children's Day or something else. 


Some men give their wives a day at a spa for Mothers Day...should she be required to spend all day with Hubby and kids instead?  Technically, I think the honoree gets to spend their time the way s/he chooses on that day.


Sanford having his trist in Argentina was quite bad enough, do you really have to pile on with Fathers Day as well? 


Well, how did you feel about Clinton
get a B.J. just outside the Oval Office and then lying under oath about it?   Oh, but that was his personal life though...
Yes, Clinton lied, and I

thought it was terrible when he did.


But Clinton's lies didn't result in a war.  Clinton created a surplus.  Bush squandered it all and created a huge deficit with his war. I'm amazed that you can't see the huge difference between the two lies.  Bush's lies are placing every single American in danger of a terror attack because he refuses to do anything about the borders.  This is here.  This is now.  Why don't you care about TODAY and the futures of your children and their children?  We're living in the most dangerous era that America has known, yet you're more concerned about the sexual practices of a former President?  I truly don't understand your way of thinking.


 


Clinton's Lies
Clinton made his worst mistake by not taking Osama bin Laden when he was offered to him on a silver platter by the Sudan. In case you have forgotten, he was major planner and money man of 9-11. Had Bill not been afraid of the political fallout...he might have been able to stop 9-11. And when it all comes out about Able Danger...he is finished and so, hopefully, is his wife, as far as politics are concerned. And the surplus you drone on about was a PROJECTED surplus, if spending was frozen for the next 10 years. Like THAT was going to happen. Sheesh.
Clinton/Bush

Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity.  I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected.  Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie.  Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.


Clinton/Bush

Again, GT brought the whole subject up about presidential integrity.  I just wanted to see GT's feeling about what Clinton did, but of course, GT justified Clinton's lies which was what I fully expected.  Again, Bush hasn't been proven to lie.  Like I have said several times before on this board I will be the first to cry uncle if Bush is proven to have lied by investigation and that doesn't include accusations and conjecture by liberal politicians, grieving mothers, or leftist bloggers.


Well, are they back up since the Clinton adm.

You used the word now, so I assume they are still at these levels and maybe even lower.


The point was that while everybody is again noticing poverty and thinking that Bush had done a dismal job in fighting poverty.  The numbers just don't back that up.  While there are some people living in poverty because of life circumstances beyond their control MOST are there because of bad life choices.  You can throw all the money you want at it, but until morality is advocated and pushed for in this country then you will always have poverty.  Jesus even said you will always have the poor among you.  Now, is that a reason not to try and do something about poverty?  No, but just throwing more and more money their way through higher taxation of the work force will not fix it either.  It will only make more people classified as poor. 


WHATever and thank you, Bill Clinton
with a thriving economy, an honest attempt at protecting our environment, and peace.

can we forget about clinton?
When you need a punching bag, bring up Clinton..If in doubt, bring up Clinton, if a republican is being investigated, bring up Clinton.  Who cares about Clinton.  He is not in office, however, Delay, Frist and Rove are all working in the govt.
She has a point about Clinton. SM
We had a porn star for president!   Big deal.  Who cares.
When Clinton did this did you have a problem with it
When he tracked financial records of terrorists during his admin.: See below.
******

From the August 28, 1998, edition of the Washington Post in an article entiteld “Bin Laden’s Finances Are a Moving Target; Penetrating Empire Could Take Years” by John Mintz:

Last week, President Clinton announced the addition of bin Laden’s name to a list of terrorists whose funds are targeted for seizure by the U.S. Treasury. Clinton aides said one of their goals is to locate bin Laden’s bank accounts and make him so radioactive in the eyes of global bankers that they won’t handle his funds. Some U.S. officials also suggested they could drain his accounts using highly classified means of information warfare involving electronic networks.

“We want to take financial action against him,” a senior administration official said. “The objective is to take down the infrastructure.”

Bin Laden’s money is the key to his power, U.S. officials say. He needs his fortune to pay his thousands of Muslim followers, bribe officials and plan terrorist strikes.

“If you go after his money, you’ll hurt him,” said Larry Johnson, a former CIA official and now a security consultant. “You need cash to make his system run.”

The United States has never launched such a financial attack on terrorists. In 1995 Clinton banned U.S. financial institutions from dealing with several dozen suspected terrorist individuals and groups, and Americans from donating funds to them.

But until last week the U.S. Treasury, which continually updates this list of “sanctioned” terrorists, never placed bin Laden on the list, despite the fact that the U.S. government had identified him since 1995 as the world’s leading terrorist paymaster. A senior administration official said the government’s understanding of his role “was evolving.”

So we’ve been going after bin Laden’s financing and the al-Qaeda money network for eight years now. But that doesn’t really blow the whole case open about the Bush administration’s “secret program.” This does:

The CIA and agents with Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network also will try to lay tripwires to find out when bin Laden moves funds by plugging into the computerized systems of bank transaction monitoring services — operated by the Federal Reserve and private organizations called SWIFT and CHIPS — that record the billions of dollars coursing through the global banking system daily.

Call me crazy, but that looks pretty gosh darn similar to what the New York Times and Los Angeles Times are freaking out about and calling a Bush administration “secret program.”

This isn’t news. This is just an attempt by these two newspapers and the associated reporters to “expose” the Bush administration’s attempts to keep this country safe from terrorism and root out those who would do us harm. The ACLU, the Democratic Party, and the “netroots” will proceed to go bananas about a program that’s been tracking bin Laden and al-Qaeda financial transactions for eight years–and was established under none other than Bill Clinton.
This is what Clinton was impeached for:
This is what he was impeached for:



The House voted 228 to 206 to approve proposed Article I of Impeachment (Perjury before a Federal Grand Jury), and voted 221 to 212 to approve proposed Article III of Impeachment (Obstruction of Justice).

And he was guilty of both. His impeachment had nothing to do with cigar dates with MOnica Lewinsky, though it should have...it had to do with lying under oath before a grand jury, and obstructing justice. Against the law in ALL 51 states. Also, he broke his presidential oath of office to uphold and defend the laws of the United States all to pieces. But that is okay, because he is Bill Clinton? How is it you liberals check any moral values you might have at the door whenever it suits you?
Clinton and Somalia...
The article was clear, and in military circles the truth is known. When Blackhawk Down happened, Clinton, instead of doing the right thing and stamping on Al Qaeda when he had the chance, chose to run. Al Qaeda was emboldened by that, and were left alone to grow, plan, etc. They felt they scored a great victory in Mogadishu, and in fact, because Clinton ran, they did. You say the country would not have supported a war in the middle east before 9-11. Perhaps not. The people might not have supported a war in Somalia either, as there are some people, like yourself, who believe war is never the answer. As I have said ad nauseam, until the enemy shares your belief (which will never happen), we must defend ourselves or be overtaken or having our cities turn into East Baghdad. They cannot defeat us in a real war, and they know this. I personally do not feel we should accept having 3000 people murdered. Had we smashed them in Somalia, we probably would not have had the issues we now have in Iraq, because the *insurgency* is fueled by Al Qaeda and we all know that. The rank and file Iraqi people would have had no idea how to put forth a guerilla war. Point being...Clinton's administration, or he himself, bear a great burden of responsibility for what we now face. AL Qaeda did the same thing in Somalia they are doing in Iraq now...arming and training. And we had the chance to stop it, and our President chose not to. Sudan offered bin Laden to Clinton later, and again he chose not to take it. You choose to take Bush to task for Iraq. I continue to take Clinton to task because I think he is more wholly reponsible. Not because he is a leftist or a Democrat, but because he made a decision based on keeping his political popularity than on doing what was right at the time for the security of this country. Anything else Clinton did, while reprehensible, pales in comparison to that as far as I am concerned. However, that is past, there is nothing I can do to change it. I do, however, resent the fact that the left totally dismisses all that and instead pounces on Bush for at least trying to do the right thing for this country, regardless of the political consequences. But, that takes moral courage, and something Bill Clinton never had and never will have

What I see regarding staying in Iraq is trying to finish what Clinton should have finished in Somalia. And not to abandon those rank and file Iraqis who desperately do want freedom. The insurgents do not speak for the majority of the Iraqi people. The majority of the Iraqi people are almost like children...they have no clue how to fight or defend themselves because they were so oppressed for so many years. It is those people who will be hurt horribly if we go now. But you seem willing to abandon them to it. That is what I do not understand. For someone who professes compassion, I don't know how you justify that. It could be that we are never able to do what we want to do and at some point need to withdraw. I am willing to give Petraeus a chance. I prefer to look at it like he does...stop looking through the rear view mirror and look out over the hood...and let's win this thing. He still believes it can be done. I have a great deal of respect for him, and I think he deserves the chance, and the Iraqi people deserve the chance, to see if he can.
I know it, if it comes up between clinton and McCain I just
i don't know which one would truly be worse.
Clinton vs Bush

Clinton gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity DESPITE the opposition of the neocons throughout his administration.  Bush failed over and over again DESPITE having party control of both houses.  The leadership ability simply speaks for itself.  Looking forward to Hill and Bill in charge again. The neocon fanatics have destroyed themselves by their own hand. So be it.


 


 


Clinton v Obama

Anyone know anything about Jimmy Carter? Most  people (even Republicans) agree that he was/is an exceptionally good man, maybe the most moral man in recent years. From what I have read, though, he was not a 'beltway insider" and therefore not able to get anything done.


Having said that, I thing Obama is a good man and I think Hillary is bascially a good woman. However I am afraid Obama will be another Jimmy Carter, a truly good man who is unable to be very effective.


Just my thoughts!


thank you senator clinton!

for backing Obama:


 


http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbXkuYmFyYWNrb2JhbWEuY29tL3RoYW5rc19teXNwYWNl


FYI Hillary Clinton
She is from Chicago. She started her life as a Republican, like her father. Believe it or not, she was a volunteer in Barry Goldwater's campaign. Bet he is rolling in his grave.

It does not matter what they call themselves, they are different flavors of the same bad ice cream. Democrat or Republican, they are controlled by the men behind the curtains and the wealthy establishment whose agenda they are promoting. If they cannot get you to pick their (CFR) candidates through their media, they use Diebold to hack the vote electronically.
Why is he kissing the Clinton's you know what

I don't get it.  Why is Obama kissing Bill and Hillary's you know what.  Now I hear something about she wants Obama to pay off her debt.  I don't get it.  Maybe I'm not hearing the full story, but something about this doesn't sound right.  I think I heard him saying he needs Bill and Hillary - like heck he does!  Why is he in a "love-fest" with them.  It's just a little to close for comfort for me.  If he pays off her campaign debt he's one notch down on the party pole for me.


And where in the world did these Clinton clowns come from.  They crawled out of a hole from Arkansaw parading around as if they are royalty.  They are acting like they are like the Kennedy's and I keep hearing about the Clinton Dynasty from the media.  Dynasty? Dynasty?  There is no dynasty.  These are just 2 people.  Two low class citizens who have mesmerized and conned (sp? con-artist) the American people.  They are 2 skum bags that I wish would just go away.  Why Barack is acting this way towards them I have no idea.  She tried to steal the election from him and he should just ignore her and go about his business.  If he pays off her campaign debts I will be thinking twice about voting for him.


So does Clinton & McCain
That's always been Hillary's plan...to socialize American and create a system similar to the EU with Canada, America, & Mexico. She wants one country and wants to be the ruler. Always been her game plan. I have not heard that about Obama though. Can you state facts and sources so that I can go look it up?

He is a destroyer? I kind of laughed when I read that. Isn't that a little dramatic. :-)

Would be interested to read what you have found out about him changing America.


Bill Clinton
Any party that could celebrate the presence of Bill Clinton at their convention like he was the second coming has their priorities wrong as far as I am concerned...bizarre!
Hilliary Clinton is

returning to the national stage to talk to her 18 million voters and which candidate truly represents change in the country.  What an election.  Beautiful. 


 


and I believe she will. When Clinton ran for president...
with the same credentials she has, a governorship...he didn't jump right in and give interviews either. He had to sit down with advisors and bone up on areas he was not as well versed in, because he came from state politics, not national politics. That happens in every case. It happened with Obama. He didn't sit down for interviews with someone who would really ask him questions until this week and he has been running for 18 months. She has been running for a week.

I would like to post some questions to Obama too. About teaching the Alinsky method of organizing. About William Ayers. About his early days in Chicago politics. I would like to ask a lot of questions more important than books in a library in wasilla alaska. But you will NEVER hear the mainstream media ask him those questions. Ever. They protect him, and they attack her.

So much for fairness in American journalism. What a joke.
Biden and Clinton

Anyone else read the article where Biden says Hilary Clinton might have been a better choice as a VP than him?  How true.  Hilary doesn't scare me nearly as much as Obama does!


We could have had him when Clinton was President....
before the towers came down. He decided not to take the Sudan up on their offer to deliver him. If you are going to lay blame, blame all involved.
Clinton had a surplus because he had a...sm
Republican Congress. Left to his own devices, he would have put us belly up, have no fear.

Bush, has a Democratic Congress at the end of his term, who have really jacked up the national debt, all on their own (war not included, thank you very much).
Here's another one: Bill Clinton....sm
I don't know how valid this story is, as I have read it too, and don't know the details.


I do know, and you probably do too, that Bill Clinton did this, and I'm sure countless others. But we didn't and don't hear about it because they weren't/aren't SP.



Seems kind of hypocritical to condemn Gov. Palin for this practice, when it's been going on for decades in the good ol' boy system, don't you agree?







But the point is, what Clinton did with his...
anatomy and poor choices did not affect his Presidency...a major percentage of Democrats will tell you that. If it did not affect him I would not expect it to affect McCain, and if you felt like Clinton was a good President in spite of it, why would you think McCain would not be?
Bill Clinton

let this Country down with his behavior.  That doesn't mean I don't think he did good things for this Country.  Certainly, he did not harm the Country like the present administration has.  There are many reasons I don't think John McCain should be the next president.  I believe that anyone who is going to cast their vote in November should find out the facts about both candidates and make an educated decision, taking everything into consideration.  This is an important election.  We are facing many serious problems and we need the best person in there to do the best he can. 


Clinton and his cigars....
did not affect his ability to be President. Did it?
it goes back to Clinton

My brother is Sr. VP of an investment firm, and he knows first-hand when this started.  My sis-in-law mentioned that today when we talked.  She did say that most of his investors were okay, as they knew this was coming.  But he's been at this long enough to have built a hefty list of A-list clients.  I don't know if a new broker could say the same.


Why people enjoy the co-dependency with gov't is beyond me.  It's dumb and also lazy, in no particular order.


I agree. Clinton did not let us know
who he picked to be on his team until 2 days before he was sworn into office.  Good for Obama to pick his members right away.
Clinton Administration.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.


Here is the link to this article


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink


Here is another one


http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,432501,00.html


I was taught in school if the economy is doing bad now, it was due to the president 6-8 years ago.  If the economy is doing well, it is also due to the president who was in office 6-8 years ago. 


Since it's almost Income Tax time, here's some interesting facts about the Democrat and Republican tax policies.  Just compare - and, while you're at it, use these facts the next time you hear that President Bush only "cut taxes for the rich".  Looks to me like someone single and making $30K, or a couple making $60K, got a 46% tax break under the Republicans.  That's what I would call taking care of the "middle class".


And remember, the truth only comes out when we refuse to be silent....
 Source:  www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html


      Taxes under Clinton 1999                         Taxes under Bush 2008


      Single making 30K - tax $8,400                Single making 30K - tax $4,500


      Single making 50K - tax $14,000              Single making 50K - tax $12,500


      Single making 75K - tax $23,250              Single making 75K - tax $18,750


      Married making 60K - tax $16,800             Married making 60K- tax $9,000


      Married making 75K - tax $21,000             Married making 75K - tax $18,750


      Married making 125K - tax $38,750           Married making 125K - tax $31,250


 


Clinton was so much more than an embarrassment...sm
Monica Lewinsky the least of which.


Why don't you talk about Clinton selling our military secrets and technology to the Chinese?


What a waste of a Rhode's Scholar.




AND THE OLD CLINTON REGIME WILL BE
NM
Clinton did the same thing
It has nothing to do with the last day. That's just a mean spirited thing to say.