B-Man Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Younger than Hillary, anti-Iraq war, no role in failed Obama Adm. Gore 2016? http://tws.io/1H71Kf8 .
Deranged Rhino Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Younger than Hillary, anti-Iraq war, no role in failed Obama Adm. Gore 2016? http://tws.io/1H71Kf8 . Yes please. Anyone but Hillary.
IDBillzFan Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Yes please. Anyone but Hillary. Al Gore would get hammered at this point. You can't spend your life flying around on private jets and having your house compete with Pyongyang for aerial night time visibility while warning that his own actions are just the kinds of things the little people shouldn't be doing lest Bill Nye the Science Guy is right about global cooling warming climate change.
/dev/null Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Younger than Hillary, anti-Iraq war, no role in failed Obama Adm. Gore 2016? http://tws.io/1H71Kf8 . Thinking back to the contested Election of 2000, I was torn between two candidates Not Bush vs Gore. But Bush vs Harry Browne. I bought into the 2 party don't throw your vote away thing so I voted for Bush. In retrospect, Bush, Browne, or stay at home. In Virginia my vote would not have mattered. I should have voted my conscience as I did in following elections and voted Libertarian Reflecting on the last 16 years, head to head with what we know now. Bush is still a better option Anyways, regarding the Florida recount. Every time they counted Bush won. Even if there was an official recount that showed Gore ahead, does that negate every other count that showed Gore lost?
B-Man Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 (edited) The problem for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, according to Charles Krauthammer: “She can’t run on her record.” “Ask yourself,” Krauthammer queried on Friday’s Special Report: “What did she achieve as secretary of state? Nothing. What was her signature achievement as senator? I can’t remember. What did she achieve as first lady? Hillarycare, which went down in flames.” Continued Krauthammer: “She is running on two things: gender and her name. And her name evokes the ’90s, and until these recent scandals, it would evoke the good stuff in the ’90s: peace and prosperity, her association with it. It is really a tremendous asset. But what has happened now is people are now re-remembering the other side of the ’90s and the Clintons, and that was a sort of low-level corruption, above-the-law Clintonisms, and that is what hurts you.” “What we are getting right now,” said Krauthammer, “is early-onset Clinton fatigue.”Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner Edited March 8, 2015 by B-Man
Nanker Posted March 7, 2015 Author Posted March 7, 2015 (edited) Yes! I would LOVE to see AlGore release his inner chakra on stage during the debates. He did such a fantastic job the last time. Of course that was before he sold his TV station to Al Jazeera for $100million, joined the Apple Board of Directors and made about $30 million in stock options, and sold his soul for a convenient lie which grossed him another $24 million. But he's still a humble man of the people. Just ask Tipper. Edited March 7, 2015 by Nanker
OCinBuffalo Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Yes please. Anyone but Hillary. What ? I suppose you don't buy in to Baskin's "Obama hasn't lead, foreign policy is a mess, and Hillary was SoS for most of it...which are all good things for Hillary" analysis, huh? Well, it's not hard to see why, when one considers that if the exact opposite had occurred...they would ALSO all be a good things for Hillary. Just like with Climate Change, everything that happens...is good for Hillary. And you wonder why I say that most of the left lives in Wishful Thinking theme park and resort? It's hilarious just how far the Obama left has fallen since 2008. We've gone from arrogant, absolute self-certitude...to shameless, crackwhore-like, will do/say anything...in only 6 short years. That's the theme I've picked up on, even with the reasonable pundits on the left. They are in full "say anything" mode, and they know it. They know it's only a short term thing, and that doom awaits, but, they are simply doing what their bosses tell them...and patiently waiting for the day when they can begin the long and arduous process of regaining their dignity.
Nanker Posted March 8, 2015 Author Posted March 8, 2015 That's the theme I've picked up on, even with the reasonable pundits on the left. They are in full "say anything" mode, and they know it. They know it's only a short term thing, and that doom awaits, but, they are simply doing what their bosses tell them...and patiently waiting for the day when they can begin the long and arduous process of regaining their dignity. That day may never come. There are no statesmen in today's Democrat party. It's been taken over by the Occupy movement. They are bereft of ideas other than wealth redistribution and are at war with anyone and everything that rises above "average". They should rename their party the Mediocrity party because that's what they stand for.
B-Man Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 'Clinton Family Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from Middle Eastern countries known for violence against women and for denying them many basic freedoms'... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-faces-test-of-record-aiding-women.html FT: Clinton fatigue... .
keepthefaith Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Any chance Obama invokes squatters rights and signs and executive order declaring himself President until he decides otherwise?
3rdnlng Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Any chance Obama invokes squatters rights and signs and executive order declaring himself President until he decides otherwise? Possession is 9/10 of the law. Also, remember that early on he stated that he wanted a large paramilitary force equal to our armed forces? Palace Guard?
B-Man Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 ASHE SCHOW: Hillary Clinton tries to reverse history and be seen as women’s champion. It took awhile, but it appears people are coming around to the fact that even though Hillary Clinton is trying to position herself as a defender of women’s rights, she really is no champion. Two weeks ago, Hillary revealed that her presumed 2016 presidential campaign would be based on the fact that she is a woman. Almost no one seemed to notice. Now, after three weeks of bad headlines involving donations from foreign governments with abysmal human rights records, gender pay gaps and an e-mail scandal, some in the media appear to be second-guessing her woman card credentials. Amy Chozick of the New York Times published an article that appeared online Sunday titled “Hillary Clinton faces test of record as women’s advocate.” Her point is that as Clinton tries to “reintroduce” herself to voters as a champion of women’s rights, her namesake foundation takes money from foreign governments that deny women basic human rights. Saudi Arabia, for example, has given the Clinton Foundation $10 million since 2001. In 2011, the State Department — still under Hillary — denounced Saudi Arabia for its “lack of equal rights for women and children.” As Chozick noted, common abuses against women in Saudi Arabia include “violence against women, human trafficking and gender discrimination.” Hey, nobody’s perfect, and with the Clintons forgiveness is always available for a fee: Does Hillary think America-bashing is necessary to discuss global women’s problems? Whatever brings in the foreign money. YA THINK? Poll: Voters see Hillary and Jeb as old hat. .
keepthefaith Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Why would anyone at the age of 67 want to run for President? Yea, several have but isn't retirement and having a great time especially when you can afford it so much more appealing?
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Why would anyone at the age of 67 want to run for President? Yea, several have but isn't retirement and having a great time especially when you can afford it so much more appealing? Not to the egomaniacal power hungry.
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Why would anyone at the age of 67 want to run for President? Yea, several have but isn't retirement and having a great time especially when you can afford it so much more appealing? Altruism. When you know better than everyone what everyone needs, you're morally obligated to assume the power to stop them from making mistakes.
Dante Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Any chance Obama invokes squatters rights and signs and executive order declaring himself President until he decides otherwise? Could be. Maybe he gets us in a war with Russia and declares that he has to remain prez. Maybe some terrorist attack "conveniently" happens so close to the election he has to remain in office under emergency powers or some crap. They're all criminals. Capable of anything which has become painfully evident the last 6 years or more. Edited March 11, 2015 by Dante
B-Man Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 WAPO: Senior Dems “wringing their hands” about Hillary’s shrug.
4merper4mer Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 WAPO: Senior Dems “wringing their hands” about Hillary’s shrug. They are wringing their hands over the methods she used to lie about it but nobody seems to care about lying itself. Seemingly even less of a concern is the egregious methods she use to subvert her accountability. She put herself ahead of the country an nobody on either side of the aisle is calling her out with any vigor. Disgusting.
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 WAPO: Senior Dems “wringing their hands” about Hillary’s shrug. They shouldn't. Her detractors already hate her, and her supporters don't care - the Clintons are more teflon than Reagan ever was. Hillary Clinton could shove a hobo through a lawn chipper and people like PastaJoe would still find a way to absolve her for it and blame the "vast right wing conspiracy." On the other hand, she could rescue a dozen orphans from a burning building, single-handedly, and people like you and me would call it a typical Clinton PR stunt and accuse her of setting the fire. The bottom line is that anything Hillary Clinton does or does not do is absolutely meaningless - she's a female Democrat with the last name of "Clinton," and everyone's already decided. Her entire "campaign" is going to be a complete sham, since there's no one in the country who's an undecided vote w/r/t her.
FireChan Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Could be. Maybe he gets us in a war with Russia and declares that he has to remain prez. Maybe some terrorist attack "conveniently" happens so close to the election he has to remain in office under emergency powers or some crap. They're all criminals. Capable of anything which has become painfully evident the last 6 years or more. I think that was the plot in Star Wars.
Recommended Posts