Ready For Hillary?

Not much I'd like better than an economic replay of Bill's 8 years, especially after O got things moving in the right (left) direction.

I was ready seven years ago. Hill

Hillary it is.

My altruistic side wants more socialism.

The greedy side wants the stock market to go up.

Explaining the mystery of fast economic growth under Democratic presidents

What does it matter WHO you lot elect for president?

The attitude of American exceptionalism will prevail. Your agencies will continue to tell your citizens that your foreign policies are altruistic when it benefits only the very wealthy of the corporatocracy.

Your media is propagandized; US Democratic process is dead.

Hillary Clinton is just another piece of meat like Obama and the Bushes before her.

Woman? White? Black? Blue? Red? Left ? Right?

Who cares.

Flame away.

Yeah, our country is just as bad. Bought off by America Incorporated or handed over to the Chinese.

Ugh.

Why would we start giving a sh#t about what the rest of the world thinks, now?

Huh?

DMT

If the current crop of radical baby boomer leftists succeeds in turning the U.S. into an expanded version of California...

If you guys hate white males why don't you vote for Marco Rubio?



He has lovely brown skin

I'll take door #2

Ho man....posting worthless, skewed graphs already. Where did you get this 'factual' info Fritz?? I get it, you'll say anything for your team but.... C'mon man...you can do better than that. This kinda stuff is worthy of a good tea(party)-bagging. One in the same. Crankloon will oblige

Apr 15, 2015 - 03:19pm PT
moosedrool! Re your comment:


Hillary it is.

My altruistic side wants more socialism.

The greedy side wants the stock market to go up.

Not a problem dude. Per this link to an article in FORTUNE magazine: the economy & of course the stock market does much better under Democratic presidents. Smirkle;) You can tell that it kinda pisses the Fortune folks off.

http://fortune.com/2014/07/29/economic-growth-democratic-presidents/


Explaining the mystery of fast economic growth under Democratic presidents

Especially after 8 years of the worst "President" and malignant narcissist in the history of American politics?

Benghazi.....and emailgate

And while your digging for something that resembles an accomplishment, feel free to explain Benghazi.....and emailgate......and that she and Bill are "broke".......and.....and.......and.....

What does it matter WHO you lot elect for president?

The attitude of American exceptionalism will prevail. Your agencies will continue to tell your citizens that your foreign policies are altruistic when it benefits only the very wealthy of the corporatocracy.

Your media is propagandized; US Democratic process is dead.

Hillary Clinton is just another piece of meat like Obama and the Bushes before her.

Woman? White? Black? Blue? Red? Left ? Right?

Who cares.

Flame away.

Yeah, our country is just as bad. Bought off by America Incorporated or handed over to the Chinese.

Ugh.

Hillary Clinton's Accomplishments Speak for Themselves
Rather than talking about her husband's past, we should be discussing her future

Although her major initiative, the Clinton health care plan failed, it certainly set the groundwork for the health care law we have today, the Affordable Care Act. And she played a leading role in advocating the creation of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides state support for children whose parents cannot provide them with health coverage. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses. She also played a leading role in creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act. She encouraged older women to seek a mammogram for early detection of breast cancer (which is covered by Medicare) and successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the NIH. She worked to investigate illnesses that were reportedly affecting Veterans of the Gulf War; now commonly known as Gulf War Syndrome. And she created an Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. She is also the first first lady to hold a post graduate degree, and she traveled to more countries than any other first lady had at that time.



As a U.S. senator, she was the first first lady to be elected to this office. She was instrumental in securing $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center site's redevelopment. She subsequently took a leading role in investigating the health issues that 9/11 first responders were facing.

After visiting soldiers in Iraq, Clinton noted that the insurgency had failed to disrupt the democratic elections held earlier, and that parts of the country were functioning well. Noting that war deployments were draining regular and reserve forces, she cointroduced legislation to increase the size of the regular Army by 80,000 soldiers to ease the strain and supported retaining and improving health benefits for veterans. She also she introduced the Family Entertainment Protection Act.

That was just in her first term. She was easily re-elected and accomplished much in her second term as well. And who can forget her run for the presidency, receiving more than 17 million votes during the nomination process?


As our secretary of state, Clinton visited 112 countries, helping to repair a badly damaged U.S. reputation. She advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions. Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security program, prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, saved the signing of a Turkish-Armenian accord, and assisted the president with major decisions as to the U.S. position with regard to the revolution in Egypt and the decision to use military force in Libya.

Hillary doesn't need the merits of her husband; nor does she need to be attacked for standing by her man after his affair. That is her private and personal decision. And the fact that we are still focused more on Bill than Hil speaks volumes to why the United States still has not had a female president.

But I tell you America, that time is coming ... brace yourselves.

Crankster.....please kindly list Hillary's so called "qualifications" that you seem to think she possesses.

Also...while you're at it...please tell us all what her accomplishments are throughout the course of her life, that would even make you think she was POTUS material.

feel free to explain Benghazi.....

America has no real leaders who want to lead to begin with.

Only puppets in the District of Criminals.

America needs Putinators.

A whole army of Putinators to save us from stoopid crankloons of America ....

I know doze conservative boyze got some smarts, but they are ate up with hate.

So much hate and not enought smarts,

You don't care that the person you wish to elect POTUS is a liar, and has zero integrity?

LOL, Sketch wants to hear what Huckabee has to say.

Hell, libertarians rarely get elected.

This a good discussion...better hurry before you-know-who shows up and this thread gets very, very cold.

The shallow side of the electorate will vote for Hillary

To simply vote for someone based on their gender, and not on their substance of qualifications as well as their level of integrity, is shameful.

Obama is a little girl who soiled his panties.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality

The brief involved precedent for representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. When Hillary endeavored to write a legal brief arguing there is no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding, Zeifman says, he told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970.

“As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer,” Zeifman said.

The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do?

“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.

The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Zeifman says that if Hillary, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded, members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

Of course, Nixon’s resignation rendered the entire issue moot, ending Hillary’s career on the Judiciary Committee staff in a most undistinguished manner. Zeifman says he was urged by top committee members to keep a diary of everything that was happening. He did so, and still has the diary if anyone wants to check the veracity of his story. Certainly, he could not have known in 1974 that diary entries about a young lawyer named Hillary Rodham would be of interest to anyone 34 years later.

But they show that the pattern of lies, deceit, fabrications and unethical behavior was established long ago – long before the Bosnia lie, and indeed, even before cattle futures, Travelgate and Whitewater – for the woman who is still asking us to make her president of the United States.

Obama is a little girl who soiled his panties.

The time to learn to speak chinese is now.

If a manufacturer can't afford the shares it can't pollute.

she did stand by Bill when he was getting naughty with his cigars ... but beyond that .... Zero

Obama is a little girl who soiled his panties.

Maybe she decided that businesses create jobs after all. NBC certainly created one for Chelsea

Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.

Apr 16, 2015 - 08:23pm PT
This Tea Party Patriot Is Voting For Hillary, Terrified He’ll Lose Obamacare If Republicans Win

Columbia University has not removed TV celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz from his faculty position as a group of top doctors have demanded, citing his "egregious lack of integrity" for promoting what they call "quack treatments."

"Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine," said a letter the 10 physicians sent to a Columbia dean earlier this week. They say he's pushing "miracle" weight-loss supplements with no scientific proof that they work.

The New York Ivy League school responded Thursday, issuing a statement to The Associated Press saying only that the school "is committed to the principle of academic freedom and to upholding faculty members' freedom of expression for statements they make in public discussion."

Led by Dr. Henry Miller of California's Stanford University, the doctors sent the letter to Lee Goldman, dean of Columbia's Faculties of Health Sciences and Medicine. The nine other doctors from across the country included Dr. Joel Tepper, a cancer researcher from the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, and Dr. Gilbert Ross of the American Council on Science and Health in New York City.

The doctors wrote that Oz, for years a world-class Columbia cardiothoracic surgeon, "has manifested an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain." They said he has "misled and endangered" the public.

Oz first came to public attention as a frequent television guest of Oprah Winfrey. For the past five years, he's been the host of "The Dr. Oz Show."

Last year, he appeared before a U.S. Senate panel that accused him of endorsing products that were medically unsound. At the time, Oz acknowledged that some of the products he advised his viewers to use "don't have the scientific muster to present as fact."

Is Cmac too bored to freeze this thread?

Really? If they support legalization what does it say?..

I didn't know that Chelsea was working at NBC

TGT, you and your ilk have the market cornered on hypocrisy.

Says a few things, To ME at least.

#1.... Not afraid to actually discuss an Issue.

#2.... Will say a lot about their thinking on a topic called "personal freedom"

#3 ..... and will give a strong indication of what they see as the role of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

Carry on people... I look forward to peoples comments on this most important issue.

guy, what's crazy was voting for CheneyBushCo not once...but twice...when that administration lied through it's f*#king teeth to the American people so that it could go to war, kill thousands for the profit benefit of a few corporate giants.

...and then getting all self-righteous about 'lying'.

That's crazy, guy.

So let's correct that wrong by electing OUR liar, eh?

Not a convincing line of argument.

When the Repubs won state legislatures and gerrymandered districts to give them more representatives the worst impact IMO was more far right conservatives who refuse to compromise, and are bigots in the classic sense of the word, which is intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

hat loony nazi Rand Paul will make the biggest waves...he may sneak in, like Hitler did

Make no mistake, Rand Paul is a hot-tempered militant & he won't waste time in disposing of anyone with socialist, pinko tendencies

He'd round up every obese bureaucrat who is eyeing a 40 year public pension and lock them in barbed-wire "Fat Camps" ....where they'd lose that fat sweating on treadmills 18 hours a day

Why even bother having a stoopid election!

This group is a hotbed of rightwing conspiracy nonsense. Figures.

Southern Poverty Law Center:
Veterans Today (VT) is a website that bills itself as a “military veterans and foreign affairs journal.” And, indeed, many of its contributors are military veterans or veterans’ advocates from across the political spectrum. VT also offers some information about veterans’ benefits (lifted from the Veterans’ Administration) and links to home and other loans for vets.

But start reading the posts, and you’ll find something else entirely: myriad claims that there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 (Israel orchestrated it, in cahoots with the American government), that the American government is a puppet (of Israel), that the Holocaust never happened or was greatly exaggerated (Jews made it up to manipulate non-Jews), and, most recently, that Julian Assange, the man behind Wikileaks, is a pawn (of Israel).

Notice a theme?

Gordon Duff, the senior editor and chairman of the board at VT, is a prolific proponent of these anti-Israel conspiracy theories, including the Wikileaks claims. Though he does occasionally write on issues and policies that directly affect American veterans (he claims to be a Marine Vietnam veteran), most of his ammo is reserved for churning out articles that claim 9/11 was a U.S./Israel conspiracy and that Israel controls the U.S. government. According to Duff and VT contributors like author and attorney Jeff Gates, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a civil rights watchdog group, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobbying group, are Zionist-controlled fronts for Israeli intelligence operations.

In December, Duff claimed that “insiders at the ADL” admitted that Israel was behind Wikileaks, perhaps a slam at an ADL piece a few days earlier. In that article, the ADL pointed out that many of the conspiracy theories about Israel and Wikileaks “are being promulgated by … anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist” Gordon Duff. Marilyn Mayo, a director at the ADL Center on Extremism, told Hatewatch that Duff did not speak to anyone at the ADL and, like other conspiracy theorists, he “makes information up and presents it as the truth.” Indeed, Duff claimed that the ADL website was “loading up with warnings and attacks” defending Wikileaks and Assange. But the ADL’s website claims nothing of the sort and Duff provides no evidence that the “ADL source” he says he is quoting actually exists.

Then none was for a party—
Then all were for the state;
Then the great man helped the poor,
And the poor man loved the great; 260
Then lands were fairly portioned!
Then spoils were fairly sold:
The Romans were like brothers
In the brave days of old.

Now Roman is to Roman 265
More hateful than a foe,
And the tribunes beard the high,
And the fathers grind the low.
As we wax hot in faction,
In battle we wax cold; 270
Wherefore men fight not as they fought
In the brave days of old.

Now while the three were tightening
Their harness on their backs,
The Consul was the foremost man 275
To take in hand an axe;
And fathers, mixed with commons,
Seized hatchet, bar, and crow,
And smote upon the planks above,
And loosed the props below.

Cal Worthington and his dog Spot

At least Troll Weiner is consistent...anyone involved in politics is a criminal. Who then for president, the bread delivery guy?

after a political rally this week in which Democrats criticized the Obama administration for siding with Republicans on trade, I had a talk about the future of the party with Rep. Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat who is one of the most ferocious partisans in the House.

It does no good, he told me, for Democrats to “pretend to be Republican” or to “run corporate campaigns and try to pretend that they’re going to govern from the middle.” His rationale: There is no middle. "Essentially there are no undecided voters. Everybody has picked a team. The only question is, do your guys vote or not?” Grayson explained. What matters, he said, is “what side are you on?”

Up until the mid-1980s, the typical American held the view that partisans on the other side operated with good intentions. But that has changed in dramatic fashion, as a study published last year by Stanford and Princeton researchers demonstrates.

It has long been agreed that race is the deepest divide in American society. But that is no longer true, say Shanto Iyengar and Sean Westwood, the academics who led the study. Using a variety of social science methods they document that “the level of partisan animus in the American public exceeds racial hostility.”

Americans now discriminate more on the basis of party than on race, gender or any of the other divides we typically think of — and that discrimination extends beyond politics into personal relationships and non-political behaviors. Americans increasingly live in neighborhoods with like-minded partisans, marry fellow partisans and disapprove of their children marrying mates from the other party, and they are more likely to choose partners based on partisanship than physical or personality attributes.

“Unlike race, gender and other social divides where group-related attitudes and behaviors are constrained by social norms, there are no corresponding pressures to temper disapproval of political opponents,” they conclude. “If anything, the rhetoric and actions of political leaders demonstrate that hostility directed at the opposition is acceptable, even appropriate. Partisans therefore feel free to express animus and engage in discriminatory behavior toward opposing partisans.”

Up to and through the early 1980s, the average American had a neutral view of opposing partisans. But since then, “partisans have come to dislike the opposition and like co-partisans dramatically more,” Westwood told me. Favorable feelings toward partisans on the other side have dropped by 10 percentage points — going from tepid on what social scientists call a “feeling thermometer” to being “clearly in the cold.”

This hyper-partisanship has occurred even though fewer people identify with the actual parties. The vast majority of self-described independents actually lean toward one party or the other, and they are often even more partisan in their views than those who identify themselves with a party.

Also of note is that the partisan polarization occurs even though Americans aren’t all that split on policies or ideology. Their partisanship is more tribal than anything — the result of an ill-informed electorate. “In order to have an understanding of the ideology of your party and the opposing party you have to have a lot of information,” and “that’s something that just doesn’t happen for the majority of the electorate,” said Westwood. “However, most people understand their side is good and the opposing side is bad, so it’s much easier for them to form these emotional opinions of political parties.”

This leads to a grim conclusion: The problem with politics isn’t Washington but the electorate. Members of Congress, most of whom come from safely gerrymandered districts, are behaving in a perfectly rational way when they avoid cooperation with the other party and instead try to build support within their own tribe.

Elected officials and professional partisans then reinforce the tribal tendency in the electorate with overheated rhetoric, perpetual campaigns, negative ads and increasingly partisan media outlets. “The individuals who hold more hostility are then given the green light to hold these more hostile positions,” Westwood explained.

So does he see a way out of this tribal cycle of hatred? “Sadly, no.”

Fixing Washington becomes more complicated if the problems here are also deep in the American electorate.

Democrats = criminals
Republicans = criminals

She has become the Dorian Gray of politics,

there's actually an election, correct?

Even a Canadian woman Tami is smarter than the goofball looniator politard crankloon.

Ricky...you spelled " stupid " wrong...rj

Why so much hate?