Bush & Clinton Most Admired in America

[jaguarr]

Who hates Nader!?!?!?

Gotta be Morg. I'm sure of it. It's always Morg.

jag

 

[Malice]

Gotta be Morg. I'm sure of it. It's always Morg.

jag

Ahh...Morg Again....
*growls*

 

[LuiECuomo]

Funny, I think it might be the best thing for this country.

(Shudders) I'm afraid not.

 

[Obi-Ron]

No, I'm talking about Hillary. Now THAT would be a shame.

Yeah I'm not too crazy about her either.

 

[kedrell]

To me she's Josef Stalin in a dress and with a little bit less facial hair.

 

[The Senator]

(Shudders) I'm afraid not.

I beg to differ. She's a nice woman, even better in person.

 

[SuBe]

To me she's Josef Stalin in a dress and with a little bit less facial hair.

 

[LuiECuomo]

I beg to differ. She's a nice woman, even better in person.

She's definitely not. She's incredibly conniving and twisted.

 

[The Senator]

She's definitely not. She's incredibly conniving and twisted.

No, I think she's a wonderful person with innovative ideas and an excellent sense of reality.

 

[LuiECuomo]

I think she's a terrible person who would run this country to the ground and make us look like fools to our enemies. Yes, even moreso than the way Bush has done.

 

[Obi-Ron]

She's not my favorite candidate, but I must say I find it annoying the way the "objective" print media (newspapers) is using the most ridiculous photos of her they can find.

 

[The Senator]

I think she's a terrible person who would run this country to the ground and make us look like fools to our enemies. Yes, even moreso than the way Bush has done.

I think she'd bring a level of dignity and respect to our country which the international community hasn't paid us in five years.

 

[LuiECuomo]

How so?

 

[The Senator]

How so?

Well, no matter what I write or believe, I cannot convince you, nor do I want to try. The purpose of this little game was to counter your outrageous attacks. "She'll run the country into the ground!" "She's twisted and conniving!" Please. That's an outright moronic thing to say, and you know it. You'd counter me if I said Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Duncan Hunter or Ron Paul would run the country into the ground, too. You refuse to acknowledge that there's a chance that things might go along just swimmingly. The reason why I don't make outlandish claims like that is because I'd be eating my words years from now if the reverse came true.

Other posters, when they attack a candidate, at least have the gull to write why they believe what they believe with supporting evidence. You just write short, biting statements which are designed to monger fear and hatred towards a politician you don't like, for whatever reason you dislike her. People who dislike Hillary Clinton have an irrational hatred for her, which they can't seem to get across intelligently. They blurt things out like "she's a commie!" or "she's a *****," but is there a reason why she's those things? My problem isn't that you dislike her, it's that you won't tell us why you dislike her, other than a few jabs.

So, you want me to give evidence that she'll do an absolutely perfect job? I can admit that there is no evidence that she will be a good leader. You can't admit that there might be evidence that she'll be a good leader. There's no evidence of any kind; it's all relative to what you believe will happen. Unfortunately, you can't seem to convey what you believe in without making some sort of exaggerated, one sentence attack.

Since I believe Senator Clinton has done an amazing job for my homestate, I think her successful record as a Senator will be reflected in her Presidency. I think she has the charm and the know how when it comes to dealing with foreign affairs, but I also think she's a hawk, and she'll know how to act in terms of an international crisis. I support her position on health care, I understand her Iraq strategy, and I mostly agree with the economic plan she unveiled today. Does that mean she's my top choice for President? No, but I would rather have her in office than most of the other candidates currently running, due to her record of success back at home and tough nature.

There are my reasons for supporting her. Where are your reasons for opposing her?

 

[Malice]

She's not my favorite candidate, but I must say I find it annoying the way the "objective" print media (newspapers) is using the most ridiculous photos of her they can find.

Welcome to real life..
They do that to all.
Just depends on the paper.

 

[LuiECuomo]

Well, no matter what I write or believe, I cannot convince you, nor do I want to try. The purpose of this little game was to counter your outrageous attacks. "She'll run the country into the ground!" "She's twisted and conniving!" Please. That's an outright moronic thing to say, and you know it. You'd counter me if I said Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Duncan Hunter or Ron Paul would run the country into the ground, too. You refuse to acknowledge that there's a chance that things might go along just swimmingly. The reason why I don't make outlandish claims like that is because I'd be eating my words years from now if the reverse came true.

Other posters, when they attack a candidate, at least have the gull to write why they believe what they believe with supporting evidence. You just write short, biting statements which are designed to monger fear and hatred towards a politician you don't like, for whatever reason you dislike her. People who dislike Hillary Clinton have an irrational hatred for her, which they can't seem to get across intelligently. They blurt things out like "she's a commie!" or "she's a *****," but is there a reason why she's those things? My problem isn't that you dislike her, it's that you won't tell us why you dislike her, other than a few jabs.

So, you want me to give evidence that she'll do an absolutely perfect job? I can admit that there is no evidence that she will be a good leader. You can't admit that there might be evidence that she'll be a good leader. There's no evidence of any kind; it's all relative to what you believe will happen. Unfortunately, you can't seem to convey what you believe in without making some sort of exaggerated, one sentence attack.

Since I believe Senator Clinton has done an amazing job for my homestate, I think her successful record as a Senator will be reflected in her Presidency. I think she has the charm and the know how when it comes to dealing with foreign affairs, but I also think she's a hawk, and she'll know how to act in terms of an international crisis. I support her position on health care, I understand her Iraq strategy, and I mostly agree with the economic plan she unveiled today. Does that mean she's my top choice for President? No, but I would rather have her in office than most of the other candidates currently running, due to her record of success back at home and tough nature.

There are my reasons for supporting her. Where are your reasons for opposing her?

Please. Your replies to my comments were just as long as mine, so you can't possibly use that argument.

First of all, Clinton would make this country look like a joke to our enemies in the Middle East, where they look down on women, especially those in positions of power.

Secondly, she has changed her position so many times on Iraq, it's frightening. I don't think she has the balls to be a commanding military leader, which is what we need right now.

Thirdly, she's practically a Marxist. You admire her economic plan, you say? And you think this is a GOOD thing?

Fourth, she's an anti-Semite. For all the a-holes out there who think that Republicanism is the party of racists, then do your research on this topic.

 

[The Senator]

Please. Your replies to my comments were just as long as mine, so you can't possibly use that argument.

Yes, I can. I already told you-- I did it to counteract/ mock your short, baseless attacks, because I felt they didn't deserve to stand out on their own.

First of all, Clinton would make this country look like a joke to our enemies in the Middle East, where they look down on women, especially those in positions of power.

She wouldn't be any more of a joke than the guys who want to keep our forces in Iraq indefinitely. The terrorists or fascists or whatever catch phrase you want to call them actually broke the glass ceiling before we did, too. Benazir Bhutto was the first female prime minister of Pakistan, and was considered a powerful diplomatic force among most Arab nations. Using her gender and how its viewed abroad as a reason to vote against her isn't a good reason at all. It's like saying not to vote for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon. And if you think Hillary will be looked down upon internationally, just wait until Romney gets the Presidency.

Secondly, she has changed her position so many times on Iraq, it's frightening. I don't think she has the balls to be a commanding military leader, which is what we need right now.

She did change her position. But I don't care what position(s) she had; I care about the position she has now. I agree with her strategy in Iraq, to keep a training force in the country while setting a firm debate for withdrawal. Plus, I think she has balls of steel. She's shown this time and time again, from countering attacks on her record from the Republican and Democratic parties, to her record as both a Senator and First Lady of the United States. She can also be placid, tranquil and humorous, which is also good when it comes to the diplomatic approach to foreign relations. She has the ability to be the Margaret Thatcher of our country, though more in terms of personality than politics.

Thirdly, she's practically a Marxist. You admire her economic plan, you say? And you think this is a GOOD thing?

Wow. Someone disagrees with you? This must be the most shocking development in your life.

Yeah, I admire her economic plan. It makes sense and it adds up. Economic policy isn't my forte, but from what I understand of it, it leaves everything addressed which I feel needs to be addressed, and offers a few insights into how to successfully fix our economy, which has been severely damaged and mangled over the past eight years.

You throw Marxism around, but once again, I don't see you telling me why you think her economic policy is Marxist. More senseless fear mongering, if you ask me.

Fourth, she's an anti-Semite. For all the a-holes out there who think that Republicanism is the party of racists, then do your research on this topic.

Not going to address this

 

[LuiECuomo]

You throw Marxism around, but once again, I don't see you telling me why you think her economic policy is Marxist. More senseless fear mongering, if you ask me.

Why is she a Marxist? Ever hear her quotes about taking things away from people for the "common good?" She wants to punish people for being wealthy.

 

[The Senator]

Why is she a Marxist? Ever hear her quotes about taking things away from people for the "common good?" She wants to punish people for being wealthy.

No, she wants to help people who have a higher tax burden when they shouldn't, which makes sense, considering we have millions of people in this country who can't afford to support themselves due to the amount of money they pay in taxes per year. Her plan isn't Marxism; in fact, it barely skims the meniscus of Marx's philosophy . I suggest you read up on your Marx before you make nonsensical claims like that.

 

[The Senator]

Also, here is her economic stimulus proposal, which she unveiled today. Like I said, it barely skims the meniscus of Marxism.

COMMERCE, Calif. - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton unveiled a $70 billion economic stimulus package Friday aimed at making it easier for millions of people to pay their mortgages and home heating bills.

The five-part plan is designed to help homeowners hurt by the housing foreclosure crisis, help families having trouble paying their energy bills and support people who have lost their jobs, according to a material released by her campaign. Clinton also was urging the government to invest in "green collar jobs" to stimulate the economy and improve the environment, her campaign said.

If the economy continues to worsen, Congress should provide an additional $40 billion in direct tax rebates to working and middle class families, Clinton said.


The proposal, Clinton's campaign said, would provide 37 million Americans with energy assistance. Hundreds of thousands more families would get help to avoid foreclosure, according to the proposal.

According to the campaign, the plan includes:

* Establishing a $30 billion housing crisis fund to help states and localities deal with the fallout of foreclosures. The federal money could be used to ease the effects of vacant properties with anti-blight programs and helping local housing authorities buy and rent out vacant properties.
* Setting a 90-day moratorium on subprime mortgages of at least five years, or until housing lenders have converted mortgages into loans families can afford. The proposal also would increase the portfolio caps at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
* Providing $25 billion in emergency energy assistance for families facing rising heating bills. While 37 million families are eligible for energy assistance, only 5.6 million, or 16 percent, are slated to receive any aid this winter, the campaign said. She is proposing immediate grants to all 37 million eligible families.
* Providing $10 billion to extend unemployment insurance for those struggling to find work while supporting families.


Providing $5 billion in energy efficiency by doing such things as giving tax credits to encourage purchases of low emission vehicles and efficient appliances windows and other clean technologies. She also proposes funds to train and put to work people making public buildings more energy efficient.

 

[LuiECuomo]

You ever heard of the Fair Tax? That's something that would solve the tax problem, which is one of the primary reasons I support Huckabee. I'd even be a bit impressed if Clinton supported this policy. And don't tell me to do my research if you haven't done enough of your own. There are countless articles around where Clinton paraphrases Marxist ideals. Here's one, for example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/29/AR2007052900859.html?nav=rss_nation

 

[The Senator]

You ever heard of the Fair Tax? That's something that would solve the tax problem, which is one of the primary reasons I support Huckabee. I'd even be a bit impressed if Clinton supported this policy. And don't tell me to do my research if you haven't done enough of your own. There are countless articles around where Clinton paraphrases Marxist ideals. Here's one, for example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/29/AR2007052900859.html?nav=rss_nation

Someone who says "we're all in it together" isn't a Marxist. Again, you throw the word around, as if you know what you're talking about.

Yeah, I heard of the Fair Tax. I need to do more research on that, which I admitted in a thread on the very topic.

 

[Malice]

Honestly for years I have waffled back and forth on a "progressive" tax or a "flat" tax...I simply dont know which we should have...damn, this is one of those things that over the years I simply have not been able to decide on.

 

[Malice]

Marxist!

 

[Malice]

Marxist!

Who me?