The Clinton Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Overanalyzing? Hmph. There wasn't much to analyze at all Jman. From what I've read and heard it sounds like she hasn't done anything remarkable as a First Lady. At least not remarkable enough to pick up any red phones. :o

They were here public schedule... obviously there wasn't much to analyze! They were documents showing who she met with and where she traveled publicly. Her private schedule may say otherwise... but there's no need to release that stuff anyway, since it doesn't tell us much about her. It just tells us where she went and who she met with, if that.

Besides, she didn't release her schedule... the National Archives did... so it's not like her campaign was using this as a way to tout her 'experience' as first lady...
 
jmanspice said:
Besides, she didn't release her schedule... the National Archives did... so it's not like her campaign was using this as a way to tout her 'experience' as first lady...

Well her campaign better release something soon because her so-called "experience" platform will crumble if she becomes the party's nom later. McCain will trounce her 10 ways to Sunday on the topic of political longevity and national service alone.

She has yet to prove why she is more experienced than anyone else vying for the Oval Office.
 
Well her campaign better release something soon because her so-called "experience" platform will crumble if she becomes the party's nom later. McCain will trounce her 10 ways to Sunday on the topic of political longevity and national service alone.

She has yet to prove why she is more experienced than anyone else vying for the Oval Office.

Hey, I never said I was voting for her on the so-called 35 years of 'experience' she claims to have. She did a lot for upstate New York when I lived there, and she matches my political ideology almost perfectly. I'm voting for her because I like her politics. The only 'experience' argument she has is resume length... which, in some ways, is important... though she didn't do much on a national level in the Senate.
 
Honestly? I don't think Obama has the ruthlessness to do something like that. He has shown class and dignity whenever he's lost a contest to Hillary--no one can take that away from him. If he loses, I believe he'll concede and get in line with the rest of the party and support her.

However, I don't put it past Hillary to run third party. In fact, I've read several places that suggest she'd consider it--just to so-call "vet" him into the ground. Her chances at running again in 2012 are slim so it's not like she'd have any future political aspirations to protect.
 
Honestly? I don't think Obama has the ruthlessness to do something like that. He has shown class and dignity whenever he's lost a contest to Hillary--no one can take that away from him. If he loses, I believe he'll concede and get in line with the rest of the party and support her.

However, I don't put it past Hillary to run third party. In fact, I've read several places that suggest she'd consider it--just to so-call "vet" him into the ground. Her chances at running again in 2012 are slim so it's not like she'd have any future political aspirations to protect.

I don't think either one of them will run an independent bid. Obviously, all this tension leads people to discuss all possibilities... no one wants to just give up the presidency, after they've gone so far. But I think Hillary knows that she can get away with going to the convention... but that her political career and legacy will be destroyed if she does something as malicious as this.

Doesn't mean I won't vote for her if she runs... but I don't endorse the idea in the least bit, and I think the party will do everything in its power to ensure that she's 'rewarded' in the end (most likely, they'll give her a top leadership post in the Senate or something to sway her).
 
Honestly? I don't think Obama has the ruthlessness to do something like that. He has shown class and dignity whenever he's lost a contest to Hillary--no one can take that away from him. If he loses, I believe he'll concede and get in line with the rest of the party and support her.
I wouldn't say that he shows class and dignity everytime. He played rather dirty with Michigan because it didn't go his way.

But over all, he has shown a lot more grace than her. By far. If he does lose I really don't see him going third party but go behind it for the sake of party unity like you said.

However, I don't put it past Hillary to run third party. In fact, I've read several places that suggest she'd consider it--just to so-call "vet" him into the ground. Her chances at running again in 2012 are slim so it's not like she'd have any future political aspirations to protect.
I can't see a Clinton running third party. The Clintons are like a Democratic establishment for crying out loud like the Kennedys.
 
I think there might possibly be one foregone conclusion though: If she is *given* the nomination under some silly strange circumstances, she can kiss the African American vote buh-bye. I have a feeling that all of this drama has really disenfranchised that particular segment of the Democratic voters...I just sense that her popularity is falling fast with that group.
 
I think there might possibly be one foregone conclusion though: If she is *given* the nomination under some silly strange circumstances, she can kiss the African American vote buh-bye. I have a feeling that all of this drama has really disenfranchised that particular segment of the Democratic voters...I just sense that her popularity is falling fast with that group.

That's difficult to peg, really. I know a lot of African Americans who love Obama and Hillary, but want to see 'someone like them' in the White House. I know a few who love Obama and hate Hillary too. I think the African American vote will be split if she wins without winning either the popular vote, the delegate vote (if it comes down to super delegates, this may be a disaster), or both.

I've said that I think she has every reason to go to the convention... but even I must admit that if she isn't the true winner, she probably shouldn't be the nominee...
 
Meh, I think the African-American vote will end up voting for Clinton if she ends up getting the nomination.

The Republicans aren't going to take the time and effort to sway them to vote Republican and the Democrats will still use it as a group to take advantage of for votes and ignore them afterwards. Sorta like what the Republicans do with the evangelicals.
 
I'm loving how people think there's some sort of huge secret hidden in Clinton's personal documents.

News networks overanalyzed her schedule as First Lady a few days ago, because she was in the White House six times when Bill met with Monica Lewinsky.

They think that the papers she wrote when she was First Lady will reveal something 'shocking' about her politics.

They think that the thesis she wrote in college will tell us something we didn't already know about her.

And now, they think her tax returns are going to give us something downright juicy which will destroy her campaign.

These are all personal documents which shouldn't matter one way or another. Because Obama released his tax returns, doesn't mean Hillary is withholding vital information. It's just another chance for Obama to attack her for something that doesn't matter.

You hit the nail on the head Jman.
icon14.gif
 
Well, if Hillary is a monarch, then Obama is a racist. Hillary's church preaches divine right; and Obama's church preaches hatred towards white folks. Looks like they both have their religious issues.
incorrect............show sermons, every Sunday, that state kill all the white folks. Make sure you include '98 and prior to that.


It's just another chance for Obama to attack her for something that doesn't matter.
:pal::pal:oh, yeah...poor Hillary. Because, god forbid, she did not initiate snape and nape tactics in the Primary. Heavens, no. It's that evil media, always beating up on her...sniff!
 
incorrect............show me sermons, every Sunday, that state kill all the white folks. Make sure you include '98 and prior to that.

Here are some racist quotes by Rev. Wright:

And they will not only attack you if you try to point out what's going on in white America, the U.S. of KKK A!

Why they be callin' the president's home the "White House" if they didn't intend for Whitey always livin' there? It be time we done deconstructed all the language of the White Man and see that it was all created just to keep the Black Man down.

Obama knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich, white people; Hillary would never know that, Hillary ain’t never been called a ******!

Obama’s soul is with black people & God. And that’s easy to say because the rich white people aren't with the people or God.

And it doesn't matter when Rev. Wright said his racist comments. He said them. And if Hillary is a monarch for attending her church, then Obama is a racist for attending his.

EDIT: The first part of the last quote (about white people causing global warming) was commentary from someone else. The second part is from Wright.
 
:pal::pal:oh, yeah...poor Hillary. Because, god forbid, she did not initiate snape and nape tactics in the Primary. Heavens, no. It's that evil media, always beating up on her...sniff!

I certainly did not say that she hasn't done anything dirty in this campaign.

But Obama's just as guilty of stooping to her level.

He complained about her campaign sending out mailings in NH and other super Tuesday states. So what did he do to prove he was better than her? He sent out mailings in Ohio and Texas. He complained that Hillary was running negative attacks on his experience and the organization of his campaign. So what did he do to prove he had just as much experience as she did? He demanded that she release her private documents to the public.... you know, tax returns, which say nothing about experience or campaign organization.

He keeps complaining that no one wants to focus on the issues, but he's doing just as poor a job of focusing on the issues as she has.
 
Wright said some crazy things but he was "right" about 911 comments imo. America sticks its nose where it doesn't belong, Palestinians being killed without merit, then we get hit... Now we are upset? Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
Wright said some crazy things but he was "right" about 911 comments imo. America sticks its nose where it doesn't belong, Palestinians being killed without merit, then we get hit... Now we are upset? Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Yeah, God forbid we feel bad because three thousand people were obliterated by terrorists.

Anyone who thinks that the U.S. deserved to be attacked are on equal footing with the terrorists, in my opinion.
 
I don't remember him saying the "US deserved to be attacked"

Link?

I saw a clip where he basically made a point about the innocent Palestinians being killed for years and nobody gave a crap about their situation. Americans cared about 911 lives lost, but what about all the lives lost from America interfering and being alligned with Israel?

That is equally terrible.
 
I don't remember him saying the "US deserved to be attacked"

Link?

So.... people have to say these things outright in order for it to be true?

He didn't directly say that the U.S. deserve to be attacked.

But he ran through every single U.S. foreign policy disaster and then said 9/11 was the result of those policies. Hereby heavily implying that the United States deserved to be attacked.

I saw a clip where he basically made a point about the innocent Palestinians being killed for years and nobody gave a crap about their situation. Americans cared about 911 lives lost, but what about all the lives lost from America interfering and being alligned with Israel?

That is equally terrible.

The Palestinians didn't deserved to be kicked out of their homeland.

But, they've proven just how innocent they are... you know, by sending rockets into Jewish neighborhoods, by bombing marketplaces and buses. By sponsoring state terrorism and killing innocent Jewish men, women & children.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict isn't black and white. The Palestinians are just as whole-heartedly terroristic as the Israelis or the U.S.

But to go beyond the conflict itself.... every U.S. President since Carter has worked to try and reach a settlement in that region, with the end goal being a permanent Palestinian state. But the Palestinians and the Israelis have yet to reach an agreement. We've started the process; it's up to them to carry it out. We don't deserve to die because they can't get their act together.
 
The U.S. sides with Israel who kicked them out furthering the conflict imo...But anyways:

But he ran through every single U.S. foreign policy disaster and then said 9/11 was the result of those policies.
And...? Wright=right on something. (wrong on 90% else lol)
Hereby heavily implying that the United States deserved to be attacked.

That doesn't imply "deserved" imo. I suppose it is how you interpret it. I never once thought he meant "deserved" as much as part of the "cause" of attack.

To me it is reprehensible actions from the U.S. to continually support Israel, killing innocent Palestinians and then acting surprised when they strike back. The U.S. in part did deliver 911 to us.
 
I certainly did not say that she hasn't done anything dirty in this campaign.

But Obama's just as guilty of stooping to her level.

He complained about her campaign sending out mailings in NH and other super Tuesday states. So what did he do to prove he was better than her? He sent out mailings in Ohio and Texas. He complained that Hillary was running negative attacks on his experience and the organization of his campaign. So what did he do to prove he had just as much experience as she did? He demanded that she release her private documents to the public.... you know, tax returns, which say nothing about experience or campaign organization.

He keeps complaining that no one wants to focus on the issues, but he's doing just as poor a job of focusing on the issues as she has.
Dude, how long was he to suffer "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune". Better to "take arms against a sea of troubles (Hillary's trash talk,et al)".

And, I think we can agree that Hill has never been called a n*****.
 
And, I think we can agree that Hill has never been called a n*****.

No, but she's been called b****, c***, t*** and other hateful things... sometimes by members of this forum...

Additionally, Wright implied that Hillary never had to 'suffer' like Obama has.

Which is interesting to me, considering the two came from the same social class, received practically the same college education... and they both worked their way to get where they are now. The only difference is how they became Presidential candidates, really (Hillary was the wife of the former President, Obama gave a speech watched and liked by millions).
 
No, but she's been called b****, c***, t*** and other hateful things... sometimes by members of this forum...

Additionally, Wright implied that Hillary never had to 'suffer' like Obama has.

Which is interesting to me, considering the two came from the same social class, received practically the same college education... and they both worked their way to get where they are now. The only difference is how they became Presidential candidates, really (Hillary was the wife of the former President, Obama gave a speech watched and liked by millions).
Wright's a jerk........period. The man was speaking from his gut, from his experiences. But, one, two three wrongs don't make it right (no pun intended).


That's why I say, we should be better than all this #$%#!
 
You come across as a feminist sometimes for some reason, lol.

Come on, there is definitely a difference at least in terms of getting into the race and how they got this far.

Hillary is only as far as she is in politics from association to her husband by name Bill Clinton. If it wasn't for that, she would not have attained senator and furthermore would not even be in the race for President.

With Obama, he certainly had a lot bigger mountain to climb. It wasn't that long ago that she was favored by double digits over him. He has come a long way and was not placed in the priveledged position that Hillary carried in. It's amazing we are now talking about Hillary catching up to him, when technically he was out of the race before it began :o
 
You come across as a feminist sometimes for some reason, lol.

I believe that all people, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religious affiliation, should be treated fairly and equally. There is no reason, under any circumstances, for people to refer to Hillary Clinton as a ***** or a **** or a **** simply because they disagree with her.

Come on, there is definitely a difference at least in terms of getting into the race and how they got this far.

Hillary is only as far as she is in politics from association to her husband by name Bill Clinton. If it wasn't for that, she would not have attained senator and furthermore would not even be in the race for President.

With Obama, he certainly had a lot bigger mountain to climb. It wasn't that long ago that she was favored by double digits over him. He has come a long way and was not placed in the priveledged position that Hillary carried in. It's amazing we are now talking about Hillary catching up to him, when technically he was out of the race before it began :o

Barack Obama went to Harvard Law. Hillary Clinton went to Yale Law.

They both came from the same class, and eventually spent their teenage years in the same city.

Upon graduation, Obama worked as a 'community organizer,' representing low-income persons in inner city Chicago. Hillary Clinton went on to represent children and served on the board at Wal-Mart.

Here's where the paths split:

Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in one of the most heavily-Democratic districts in Illinois. He had a primary challenge... if I remember correctly... but once he won the nomination, it was smooth sailing for him into the state legislature.

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, married Bill. Bill ran for governor of Arkansas. You wanna know something interesting? Bill wasn't re-elected to a second term because Hillary refused to take his last name. That was the biggest issue in voters' minds during that election season, despite Clinton's accomplishments in education and tax reform.

So she had to 'submit to her husband' and take his last name in order for Bill to win another term two years later.

During Bill's presidency, Hillary wanted a far more active role than previous first ladies. Even then, she was criticized for refusing to 'submit to her husband.' She focused on health care reform as her major stepping stone... and was not only criticized over the policy itself, but was lampooned and viciously attacked by the right-wing media because she was so noticeable during her husband's campaign. That's when she gained her reputation as being a *****-- because she took an active role in her husband's administration, and Rush Limbaugh told everyone that she was evil and maniacal.

Then, the Clinton impeachment scandal hit... and Hillary continued to be slammed because she refused to leave Bill. They psychoanalyzed her for over a year and a half...

Then she runs for the Senate in New York, where she's referred to as a carpetbagger... nevermind the fact that New York's Democratic Party sought her out and asked her to run. She's still referred to as a carpetbagger there... despite the fact that she's accomplished a lot for the state.

Meanwhile, Obama was re-elected to the state legislature... ran for Congress, but lost his primary... but immediately returned to the state legislature. Mind you, when he ran for Senate, he had a tough primary... but after he won the nomination and the Republican candidate fell apart, Obama sailed smoothly into the United States Senate.

But before he became a Senator, he gave a stirring keynote address at the 2004 convention. Which was where the media instantly fell in love with him. I remember watching MSNBC's coverage of the keynote address, and Chris Matthews said that he felt 'Obama could be the first black president of the United States.' Even then... the media was talking about the first black president held within Obama...

And after Obama was elected to the Senate, he was followed more by the media than any other freshman senator that year! He went to Kenya, and the media followed it. He tacked his name on to ethics reform, and the media followed it. He wrote a book, and the media followed it. Then he floated around the idea of running for President... and the media jumped on his bandwagon almost instantaneously.

So I don't see where Obama has had it exceptionally hard in his life because he's black. Because when I look on his career, I see where Obama ran in predominantly African American districts when he ran for the State Senate. Four years ago, the media fell in love with him because he gave a good speech. They began floating around the idea of the 'first black president.' They got caught up in the concept, as Ferraro put it, of an African American candidate who transcends race.

Obama has been given a free pass this whole election cycle. If he was any other candidate, questions about his past drug use, his pastor, and his 'strange heritage' would have derailed him long ago.

Meanwhile, Clinton has been scrutinized over and over again, sometimes directly because of her gender. Sometimes it's for things which shouldn't have been criticized in the first place.... such as her MLK/ LBJ comments, or Bill's remarks that Obama is "articulate."

Let's not start the 'who had it worse' game, because Obama has had it quite easy, not only in this election campaign, but throughout his life since college.
 
I believe that all people, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religious affiliation, should be treated fairly and equally. There is no reason, under any circumstances, for people to refer to Hillary Clinton as a ***** or a **** or a **** simply because they disagree with her.



Barack Obama went to Harvard Law. Hillary Clinton went to Yale Law.

They both came from the same class, and eventually spent their teenage years in the same city.

Upon graduation, Obama worked as a 'community organizer,' representing low-income persons in inner city Chicago. Hillary Clinton went on to represent children and served on the board at Wal-Mart.

Here's where the paths split:

Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in one of the most heavily-Democratic districts in Illinois. He had a primary challenge... if I remember correctly... but once he won the nomination, it was smooth sailing for him into the state legislature.

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, married Bill. Bill ran for governor of Arkansas. You wanna know something interesting? Bill wasn't re-elected to a second term because Hillary refused to take his last name. That was the biggest issue in voters' minds during that election season, despite Clinton's accomplishments in education and tax reform.

So she had to 'submit to her husband' and take his last name in order for Bill to win another term two years later.

During Bill's presidency, Hillary wanted a far more active role than previous first ladies. Even then, she was criticized for refusing to 'submit to her husband.' She focused on health care reform as her major stepping stone... and was not only criticized over the policy itself, but was lampooned and viciously attacked by the right-wing media because she was so noticeable during her husband's campaign. That's when she gained her reputation as being a *****-- because she took an active role in her husband's administration, and Rush Limbaugh told everyone that she was evil and maniacal.

Then, the Clinton impeachment scandal hit... and Hillary continued to be slammed because she refused to leave Bill. They psychoanalyzed her for over a year and a half...

Then she runs for the Senate in New York, where she's referred to as a carpetbagger... nevermind the fact that New York's Democratic Party sought her out and asked her to run. She's still referred to as a carpetbagger there... despite the fact that she's accomplished a lot for the state.

Meanwhile, Obama was re-elected to the state legislature... ran for Congress, but lost his primary... but immediately returned to the state legislature. Mind you, when he ran for Senate, he had a tough primary... but after he won the nomination and the Republican candidate fell apart, Obama sailed smoothly into the United States Senate.

But before he became a Senator, he gave a stirring keynote address at the 2004 convention. Which was where the media instantly fell in love with him. I remember watching MSNBC's coverage of the keynote address, and Chris Matthews said that he felt 'Obama could be the first black president of the United States.' Even then... the media was talking about the first black president held within Obama...

And after Obama was elected to the Senate, he was followed more by the media than any other freshman senator that year! He went to Kenya, and the media followed it. He tacked his name on to ethics reform, and the media followed it. He wrote a book, and the media followed it. Then he floated around the idea of running for President... and the media jumped on his bandwagon almost instantaneously.

So I don't see where Obama has had it exceptionally hard in his life because he's black. Because when I look on his career, I see where Obama ran in predominantly African American districts when he ran for the State Senate. Four years ago, the media fell in love with him because he gave a good speech. They began floating around the idea of the 'first black president.' They got caught up in the concept, as Ferraro put it, of an African American candidate who transcends race.

Obama has been given a free pass this whole election cycle. If he was any other candidate, questions about his past drug use, his pastor, and his 'strange heritage' would have derailed him long ago.

Meanwhile, Clinton has been scrutinized over and over again, sometimes directly because of her gender. Sometimes it's for things which shouldn't have been criticized in the first place.... such as her MLK/ LBJ comments, or Bill's remarks that Obama is "articulate."

Let's not start the 'who had it worse' game, because Obama has had it quite easy, not only in this election campaign, but throughout his life since college.

I wasn't really commenting in regards to those words being used for women, I agree that is wrong when it happens. It is also wrong when people drop the N word on Obama of course.

Otherwise-

Clinton "earned" her spot as a candidate through her name. If she was not married into it with the Clinton name, she wouldn't be where she is.

Obama got to where he is by gaining support on his own merit.

That to me says a lot.

Clinton was having it HANDED to her. SHE was projected to be the easy front runner and Obama wasn't even considered a contender. People simply smiled and overlooked Obama at first. He then goes on to win 12 states in a ROW. Now he is ahead.

To me even if there was a way for Hillary to gain the nomination without winning popular/delegate votes... What Obama has done to get where he is, simply remarkable and what Hillary has done, forgettable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"