RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas

RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

pahunkboy -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 4:51:30 AM)
she rather militant- aint she?

Real0ne -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 4:52:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Damn Michael! [sm=confused.gif] On Moderation!? [sm=whoa.gif] Why not call me with your response? Meanwhile, can I try to post for you? Merc - WHAT a bunch of crap. Those quote are taken out of context and are just propaganda from the RNC. Bush has done more to take away our rights than Hilliary would ever try. I'm sick and tired of you and the other neocon Republican apologists who believe that the Clinton's represent the anti-Christ. The country was never better than under his Presidency and we can only hope that Hilliary continues in her husband's footsteps. She's well on her way - I understand she already is interviewing interns and has her own brand of cigars for the Oral, I mean Oval Office. (Okay - that last sentence wasn't something you'd say...SORRY!) Take care my friend. Hope to see you again soon! you will enjoy this little doc :) Oh yeh and number 12 is hands down the best of them all!! Bill & Hillary Clinton: Their Secret Life 1 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7732548143518857516 2 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3373040056926399184 3 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4750006280195609650 4 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4795896100205556782 5 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-662906987373975824 6 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-195624641570821200 7 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8901535717879600669 8 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9019213117367774142 9 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2567850516186544447 10 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6790348451596303120 11 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2016096191458745708 12 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5360434836569199830

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 6:33:40 AM)
Pretty weak with the same reply anytime someone disagrees with you. I know you have a hard time understanding this, but .......... I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, though I do lean more conservative. Was the douche bag comment directed at me? I am sure you meant that in general, otherwise it would be a violation of the TOS. I am wondering which poster said they would only vote for someone that committed to pulling our troops out. I see things realistically, and realize that no one can commit to pulling our troops out completely (reassign mission and reduction to just 30,000 is doable though), but it is the Dem congress that keeps saying they were given a mandate by the people to end this war. So besides politics, what is the differences between a fanatical Neo-con and a fanatical Socialist anway? Orion quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf But Popeye, the Dems would not do that. They promised to bring our boys home. Orion quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 One "idea" she has which I don't like at all is something about "Troops being in Iraq 'till 2013." I love this,the douche bags who drove us into this ditch,are now going to complain about the folks who are trying to get us out of the ditch.lol I wish republicans would open a can of STFU!,and lay off eating GOP bull-shit,and stop drinking the cool-aid,for a while.

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 6:47:07 AM)
quote: In our system,a minority can stop any legislation,if they want to. Then why didn't they stop the legislation authorizing this mess before it began? Were they simply outsmarted by a dolt like Bush? Ignorant of the facts available to everyone at the time? Or a few too many shares in Royal Dutch Shell, and BP at stake? [;)]

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 6:48:01 AM)
Then Hillary should say that she is going to bring them home just as soon as she is elected. The Dem Congress has stated it should only take a couple of years to bring them home, if my memory serves me correctly. I am sure Murtha would be the perfect consultant for how long to ship them all back. Why is she saying 2013? Orion quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Owner, the Democrats were elected to get our Troops O-U-T of Iraq in 2006. They've so far done diddly squat. Hillary Clinton shouldn't even be talking about Troops, Iraq and 2013. The way you get them out is you bring them home. Well Popeye, The dems have put up bill after bill,either to be vetoed or filibustered,by the neo-cons.That`s on the record. In our system,a minority can stop any legislation,if they want to. True,the dems were voted in to get us out of Iraq,but it`s bush that`s keeping us there. Without doing something illegal(something neo-cons have no problem with),or something extra-legal(ditto),the dems are powerless to stop the war. Only a veto proof majority,will end the war.As it is now.bush and the neo-cons have us locked in till after bush is out of office.That is of course,if bush leaves office, voluntarily. bush is playing this thing in the most treacherous way.Using our GIS and their welfare,as pawns.Holding them as hostages,and demanding anything,everything ,to keep them safe.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 7:33:55 AM)
Owner, You need to appreciate the myopic position you have toward the Democrats is no different than that which you hate regarding the Republicans. I thought this thread would die, so I didn't respond here when Philosophy raised similar issues. Instead I sent him this response directly. I hope he doesn't mind me sharing the email with the board: My 'Hillary' post was pure fluff. Wouldn't have posted at all except one of my email "friends" sent it to me. Having the thread regarding Hillary already started, I posted it there instead of in humor or 'random stupidity'. Sorry if it wasn't up to my standards - but it wasn't meant to be. Its why I posted the response I did from Simply Michael. We'd just gone to dinner on Tuesday night and I thought I poke him a bit. There was no evil intention and no real issue. I didn't even try and verify and source the quotes as I would normally to insure they were accurate or reflective of her position. I don't expect I'd vote for Senator Clinton, but my reasoning will have nothing to do with 'buzz word' manipulation from either side. Its much to early to pick a candidate - currently I don't like any. But I will vote, therein lies my dilemma. Sorry! quote: DomKen: Precisely how should the Dems in Congress get our troops out? Pass a law requiring it? This is an easier question to address. All that is required is a simple majority to not pass a spending bill for the Iraq war. The Democrats have a simple majority. There is no Presidential veto involved. No money - no War. That's how. The veto's were to bills specific to troop withdraw time-lines NOT relevant to spending. I appreciate that it's a nuance that is lost on many. I think that's the hope of BOTH political parties - Keep the constituency confused and diverted from the issues. It seems to be working.

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 8:51:47 AM)
And then of course, there is this little item... quote: Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition. Now she says she'd do the same thing, too. During a Democratic presidential debate in July, Obama said he would be willing to meet without precondition in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.Standing with him on stage, Clinton said she would first send envoys to test the waters and called Obama's position irresponsible and naive. But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions."... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071012/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_iran Why isn't everybody tired of this same-old, same-old crapola? Pure psychopathy zealously in pursuit of power at any cost, over any obstacles. And just because there are more than one of them, people somehow assume we have to take sides? [sm=banghead.gif]

Owner59 -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:17:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: In our system,a minority can stop any legislation,if they want to. Then why didn't they stop the legislation authorizing this mess before it began? Were they simply outsmarted by a dolt like Bush? Ignorant of the facts available to everyone at the time? Or a few too many shares in Royal Dutch Shell, and BP at stake? [;)] Because of 9/11. Without that,I don`t think bush would have pulled it off. Does anyone here think that there would have been an invation of Iraq,without 9/11?Think about it.Would the British have joined in?Or any other nation? He cleverly used the event,for his own(and the neo-cons)personal/private ambitions.They exploited 9/11,and our natural reactions,to invade Iraq. Remember Greenspan?How he just said it was about oil,and not WMD?That`s obvious,even to the least interested among us. What get`s me is how the neo-cons continue,today, to exploit 9/11 and all of our GIs,for there own selfish polital ends. That they(not you Orion),the one`s who`s treachery got us into this mess,are now going to give advice and critisize the folks who are actually trying to repair the mess,that`s fucked up. On the one hand,calling anyone who`s against this occupation,un-patriotic or a phony,and on the other hand,playing us all for suckers.That`s fucked up. A win-win, for neo-cons.

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:20:38 AM)
And a handy stock dividend for major share holders in big oil, with a convenient excuse...'We only did it because we were forced to make millions in war profits against our will...' [8\|]

pahunkboy -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:25:40 AM)
lol against our will. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:32:02 AM)
Just out of curiosity, exactly what did happen to the 156 members of Congress with the balls to vote against going to war? Lynched? Imprisoned at Gitmo as traitors? Impeached? Family attacked and beaten? Kids expelled from school? Pets mutilated and killed? Excommunicated from their churches? oh, wait a minute, that's right... Not a freaking thing.

Owner59 -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:48:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Pretty weak with the same reply anytime someone disagrees with you. I know you have a hard time understanding this, but .......... I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, though I do lean more conservative. Was the douche bag comment directed at me? I am sure you meant that in general, otherwise it would be a violation of the TOS. I am wondering which poster said they would only vote for someone that committed to pulling our troops out. I see things realistically, and realize that no one can commit to pulling our troops out completely (reassign mission and reduction to just 30,000 is doable though), but it is the Dem congress that keeps saying they were given a mandate by the people to end this war. So besides politics, what is the differences between a fanatical Neo-con and a fanatical Socialist anway? Orion quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf But Popeye, the Dems would not do that. They promised to bring our boys home. Orion quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 One "idea" she has which I don't like at all is something about "Troops being in Iraq 'till 2013." I love this,the douche bags who drove us into this ditch,are now going to complain about the folks who are trying to get us out of the ditch.lol I wish republicans would open a can of STFU!,and lay off eating GOP bull-shit,and stop drinking the cool-aid,for a while. I wasn`t referring to you,with my comment.I should have said that.But to the extent that one defends bush ,or the Right`s world view,that`s where my energy goes. One shouldn`t take what I say personally,unless you associate yourself with this new fangled neo-conservative leadership, we have now.If you do,then it is exactly you, that I`m talking about.If your a neo-con,carry water for the neo-cons,or defend them,you can eat shit and die. The neo-cons,to a person,put us into this mess. I don`t dislike/hate conservatives.I have Conservative for friends and associates.NJ`s full of them.I`ve voted republican,and would again,if that person were best. So besides politics, what is the differences between a fanatical Neo-con and a fanatical Socialist anway? Well,we know the fanatical neo-cons are in control of the republican party,and most of the Federal government. Can you name any "fanatical socialists",who lead the democratic party. I have a problem with people saying that both partys are the same.That they both lie, cheat and steal.That there isn`t a lick of difference between the two parties. That`s just not true.

Real0ne -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:55:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Just out of curiosity, exactly what did happen to the 156 members of Congress with the balls to vote against going to war? Lynched? Imprisoned at Gitmo as traitors? Impeached? Family attacked and beaten? Kids expelled from school? Pets mutilated and killed? Excommunicated from their churches? oh, wait a minute, that's right... Not a freaking thing. pay raise!

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 9:58:53 AM)
quote: If your a neo-con,carry water for the neo-cons,or defend them,you can eat shit and die. Trouble is, you define 'carrying water' as anyone who questions, or points out the identical behaviors, motives, and hypocrisy in the pseudo-libs. Continuing this war is bad no matter whether Gore or Bush or Cheney or the Clintons get more profits out of it. Trampling the Constitution is bad, no matter which party is condoning it to eliminate opposition to their ends. It is a twin-party system, and the players are interchangeable. When someone defends either side, they are defending the same venal behavior they decry in 'Them', as being OK, when it is done by 'Us'. And I ain't buying it, no matter who is peddling it.

Owner59 -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 10:06:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: If your a neo-con,carry water for the neo-cons,or defend them,you can eat shit and die. Trouble is, you define 'carrying water' as anyone who questions, or points out the identical behaviors, motives, and hypocrisy in the pseudo-libs. Continuing this war is bad no matter whether Gore or Bush or Cheney or the Clintons get more profits out of it. Trampling the Constitution is bad, no matter which party is condoning it to eliminate opposition to their ends. It is a twin-party system, and the players are interchangeable. When someone defends either side, they are defending the same venal behavior they decry in 'Them', as being OK, when it is done by 'Us'. And I ain't buying it, no matter who is peddling it. Nice violin buddy.You fiddle,while our GIs die. Must be nice,to be above it all. Oh God, help us.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 10:15:41 AM)
quote: I have a problem with people saying that both partys are the same.That they both lie, cheat and steal.That there isn`t a lick of difference between the two parties. That`s just not true. Owner - Can you provide any support to that position? I almost posted a list of their similarities on the issues of taxation, rights, international trade, and foreign intervention; but I'll defer to you since you take the clear distinction position. The question is regarding the position of the Democratic and Republican political party platforms; not an individual personal hypocrisy which has ample representation from both.

Alumbrado -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 10:25:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: If your a neo-con,carry water for the neo-cons,or defend them,you can eat shit and die. Trouble is, you define 'carrying water' as anyone who questions, or points out the identical behaviors, motives, and hypocrisy in the pseudo-libs. Continuing this war is bad no matter whether Gore or Bush or Cheney or the Clintons get more profits out of it. Trampling the Constitution is bad, no matter which party is condoning it to eliminate opposition to their ends. It is a twin-party system, and the players are interchangeable. When someone defends either side, they are defending the same venal behavior they decry in 'Them', as being OK, when it is done by 'Us'. And I ain't buying it, no matter who is peddling it. Nice violin buddy.You fiddle,while our GIs die. Must be nice,to be above it all. Oh God, help us. Better than being the apologist for war, hypocrisy, dead GIs, and corrupt profiteering that you portray yourself as, every time you defend it when done by your heros.

Owner59 -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 10:42:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: I have a problem with people saying that both partys are the same.That they both lie, cheat and steal.That there isn`t a lick of difference between the two parties. That`s just not true. Owner - Can you provide any support to that position? I almost posted a list of their similarities on the issues of taxation, rights, international trade, and foreign intervention; but I'll defer to you since you take the clear distinction position. The question is regarding the position of the Democratic and Republican political party platforms; not an individual personal hypocrisy which has ample representation from both. Hey Merc, I need to work now but will put together a list, later. Pick any issue,from so called "tort reform",to bankruptcy,to health care/pharma,polluting the air and water,consumer protection,even taxes,etc.,and the republicans are on the side of corporate America and the up-trodden wealthy,and against the middle class. On the other hand,the dems are in the pockets of the Sierra Club,and most consumer advocates. True,with hundreds and thousands of people in office,not everyone fits the molds.But most do. Hell,find me a democrat(and I `m sure there are some) that`s voted agaist the middle class,and I`ll be the 1st to call them on it. Last night on the Daily Show,Jon Stewart mentioned bush`s veto to extend and expand the SCHIP program. The audience made a low boooo sound.To witch Stewart replied,(I`m paraphrasing)"Oh, so you must be in the pocket of,.... "big",.....children." (as in "big tobacco" or "big oil") Got a good laugh,but that`s the point.Both parties may take money from corporate America,or wealthy people,but it`s how the parties vote,that count. As an aside,the SCHIP extension was a bi-partisan bill,with support in both houses,and may well pass,in spite of bush.

Real0ne -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 11:42:59 AM)
Yeh the reps think the shit up and the dems sign it! LMAO! NAFTA

Owner59 -> RE: Some of Hillary Clintons Ideas (10/12/2007 11:51:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: If your a neo-con,carry water for the neo-cons,or defend them,you can eat shit and die. Trouble is, you define 'carrying water' as anyone who questions, or points out the identical behaviors, motives, and hypocrisy in the pseudo-libs. Continuing this war is bad no matter whether Gore or Bush or Cheney or the Clintons get more profits out of it. Trampling the Constitution is bad, no matter which party is condoning it to eliminate opposition to their ends. It is a twin-party system, and the players are interchangeable. When someone defends either side, they are defending the same venal behavior they decry in 'Them', as being OK, when it is done by 'Us'. And I ain't buying it, no matter who is peddling it. Nice violin buddy.You fiddle,while our GIs die. Must be nice,to be above it all. Oh God, help us. Better than being the apologist for war, hypocrisy, dead GIs, and corrupt profiteering that you portray yourself as, every time you defend it when done by your heros. yawn,...... Next?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875