I'm having trouble sleeping. Too afraid of Hillary.
I'm having trouble sleeping. Too afraid of Hillary.
You should be afraid, very afraid. 😛
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
Herman Cain was my favorite. 😛
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
Now that's a list of 3 Phi Beta Kappas not to mention the compassion they exhibit for a wide variety of the population. The dream ticket would be Palin & Huckabee.
Clinton would probably be like Lincoln compared to Obama.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
Herman Cain was my favorite. 😛
He was a crowd pleaser for sure.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
Herman Cain was my favorite. 😛
He was a crowd pleaser for sure.
He says some pretty crazy stuff so I hope he runs just to watch him during the GOP primaries. They will be the best comedy on TV. 
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
More than some of the GOP lunatics like Palin, Perry or Huckabee? I could list more but I think you get the point. 😉
Herman Cain was my favorite. 😛
He was a crowd pleaser for sure.
He says some pretty crazy stuff so I hope he runs just to watch him during the GOP primaries. They will be the best comedy on TV.
The GOP is cutting back the number of prez. debates this election cycle. Too bad. Then John Stewart announces he's leaving the Daily Show. Looks like a serious reduction of comedy to watch on TV.
Man that is a shame as it is my favorite part of the campaign coverage. Probably a smart move by the GOP as it reduces the exposure of the candidates and less chance of them putting their foot in their mouths. Doesn't take much for a random soundbite to sink a candidates chances.
Yeah shame about Jon Stewart but we still have Bill Maher.
One must tread lightly when asking Hil questions. If she feels the line of questioning
is unworthy that temper starts to flare up.If you say so, Sybill.
________________________________________________
Hillary doesn't take questions unless there are pre-submitted in writing and approved.
If a reported is not on the approved list, they are not allowed to enter her speeches.Got a source for that?
BTW, Hillary is a private citizen, just like you. You don't answer questions, but you expect her to answer questions? Another mule boy double standard. 😛
[Edited on 2/11/2015 by jkeller]
She's expected to run for office. You are making the left look stupid. Please stop posting, you are not helping.
__________________________________________________________
Hillary and her campaign's handling of the media is well known and widely reported.
if you missed it you should question your information sources.
I answer questions worth answering. Much of the crap the liberals have posted here isn't worth my time, nor anyone elses.
Now, just because liberlas are all in mourning over their main source of news, Jon Stewart's Daily Show you need not worry long.
There are many comedians willing to get that paycheck.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
Avery general statement that means nothing.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
Avery general statement that means nothing.
_________________________________-_________________________
Spelling eludes you as well.
While you at it, please detail for the audience hillarys' professional and government accomplishments.
The Republican Governors have been well documented and they have all won elections while hillary couldn't even get her own party's nomination.
Spelling eludes you as well.
While you at it, please detail for the audience hillarys' professional and government accomplishments.
The Republican Governors have been well documented and they have all won elections while hillary couldn't even get her own party's nomination.
You use that tirade to nominate yourself spelling police?
This thread just keeps on giving.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
Avery general statement that means nothing.
_________________________________-_________________________
Spelling eludes you as well.
While you at it, please detail for the audience hillarys' professional and government accomplishments.
The Republican Governors have been well documented and they have all won elections while hillary couldn't even get her own party's nomination.
Spelling was fine. I didn't put a space between "A" and "very". Oh you are so anal.
Hillary was elected to the Senate. Many governors give up their position to run for Senate. Very few Senators run for governor.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
Avery general statement that means nothing.
_________________________________-_________________________
Spelling eludes you as well.
While you at it, please detail for the audience hillarys' professional and government accomplishments.
The Republican Governors have been well documented and they have all won elections while hillary couldn't even get her own party's nomination.
Spelling was fine. I didn't put a space between "A" and "very". Oh you are so anal.
Hillary was elected to the Senate. Many governors give up their position to run for Senate. Very few Senators run for governor.
_______________________________________________________________________
Hillary was elected to the Senate where she accomplished nothing.
She spent most of her time running for the presidency and failed to get the nomination of her party.
If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that might scare me a little.
Then you must understand how Democrats are scared of all of the crazy candidates the Republicans offered in 2012 who will basically be the same crazies they offer up once again this time around.
________________________________________________________________
Any of the Republican Governors would be far better for the country than the democrats only option who has no resume and no experience.
Avery general statement that means nothing.
_________________________________-_________________________
Spelling eludes you as well.
While you at it, please detail for the audience hillarys' professional and government accomplishments.
The Republican Governors have been well documented and they have all won elections while hillary couldn't even get her own party's nomination.
Spelling was fine. I didn't put a space between "A" and "very". Oh you are so anal.
Hillary was elected to the Senate. Many governors give up their position to run for Senate. Very few Senators run for governor.
_______________________________________________________________________
Hillary was elected to the Senate where she accomplished nothing.
She spent most of her time running for the presidency and failed to get the nomination of her party.Two doorknobs walk into a bar. The first doorknob says...
(scroll up for the rest of the joke)
______________________________________________________________
And yet not one liberal can cite any Hillary accomplishment or her professional experiences.
Other than of course her incompetence running at The State Department which led to the murder of our ambassador and 3 other Americans by Islamic Extremist Terrorists and the subsequent closing of that Embassy.
One must tread lightly when asking Hil questions. If she feels the line of questioning
is unworthy that temper starts to flare up.If you say so, Sybill.
________________________________________________
Hillary doesn't take questions unless there are pre-submitted in writing and approved.
If a reported is not on the approved list, they are not allowed to enter her speeches.Got a source for that?
BTW, Hillary is a private citizen, just like you. You don't answer questions, but you expect her to answer questions? Another mule boy double standard. 😛
[Edited on 2/11/2015 by jkeller]
Everybody needs to be patient and give Hil some breathing room.
She's still trying to decide where she stands on issues, so we need to just back off
until she makes up her mind.
NY Times rips Hillary a new one:
Call Off the Dogs
FEB. 14, 2015 - Maureen Dowd - The New York Times
WASHINGTON — I’LL pay for this column.
The Rottweilers will be unleashed.
Once the Clintons had a War Room. Now they have a Slime Room.
Once they had the sly James Carville, fondly known as “serpenthead.” Now they have the slippery David Brock, accurately known as a snake.
Brock fits into the Clinton tradition of opportunistic knife-fighters like Dick Morris and Mark Penn.
The silver-haired 52-year-old, who sports colorful designer suits and once wore a monocle, brawled his way into a Times article about the uneasy marriage between Hillary Clinton’s veteran attack dogs and the group of advisers who are moving over from Obamaland.
Related Coverage
Emerging Hillary Clinton Team Shows Signs of DisquietFEB. 10, 2015
Hillary hasn’t announced a 2016 campaign yet. She’s busy polling more than 200 policy experts on how to show that she really cares about the poor while courting the banks. Yet her shadow campaign is already in a déjà-vu-all-over-again shark fight over control of the candidate and her money. It’s the same old story: The killer organization that, even with all its ruthless hired guns, can’t quite shoot straight.
Squabbling competing factions helped Hillary squander a quarter-of-a-billion dollars in 2008.
As Nicholas Confessore and Amy Chozick chronicled, the nasty dispute spilled into public and Brock resigned last week from the board of a pro-Clinton “super-PAC” called Priorities USA Action — whose co-chairman is Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager — accusing the political action committee of “an orchestrated political hit job” and “the kind of dirty trick I’ve witnessed in the right-wing and would not tolerate then.”
He should know.
•
Running for Daylight (Obama, Not Brady) JAN 24
The former “right-wing hit man,” and impresario of “dirty tricks,” as Brock has said of himself, made his living in the ’90s sliming Anita Hill as “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty” and breaking the Troopergate story, which accused Arkansas state troopers of setting up liaisons for Bill Clinton and spurred Paula Jones’s 1994 sexual harassment lawsuit.
He has tried to discredit anyone who disagreed with his ideological hits (myself and reporters I know included). And that’s still the business he’s in, simply on the other side as a Hillary zealot. (His conversion began in 1996 when he published a biography of Hillary that was not a total hit job and that began the thaw.)
Just as Bill Clinton was able to forgive another architect of the vast right-wing conspiracy, Richard Mellon Scaife, once Scaife was charmed by Hillary in person and began giving money to the Clinton foundation, so, too, was Bill won over by Brock’s book, “Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative,” and Brock’s Media Matters and Correct the Record websites, which ferociously push back against any Hillary coverage that isn’t fawning.
With the understood blessing of the Clintons, Brock runs a $28 million cluster of media monitoring groups and oppo research organizations that are vehicles to rebut and at times discredit and threaten anyone who casts a gimlet eye at Clinton Inc.
As Confessore and Chozick wrote, he uses a fund-raiser named Mary Pat Bonner, whose firm has collected millions of dollars in commissions — a practice many fund-raising experts consider unethical.
Everyone wants to be at the trough for this one because Hillary is likely to raise, and more important, spend more than $1 billion on her campaign.
It's a democracy for dollar bills, and every dollar bill gets one vote. Hillary is but a symptom of that.
The Clinton crowd is trying to woo Brock back into the fold because he’s good at getting money and knows how their enemies think. The Clintons appreciate the fact that Brock, like Morris, is a take-no-prisoners type with the ethical compass of a jackal. Baked in the tactics of the right, Brock will never believe that negative coverage results from legitimate shortcomings. Instead, it’s all personal, all false, and all a war.
This is a bad harbinger for those who had hoped that Hillary would “kill off the wild dogs,” as one Obama loyalist put it, and Bill would leave behind the sketchy hangers-on in the mold of Ron Burkle and Jeffrey Epstein.
Hillary’s inability to dispense with brass-knuckle, fanatical acolytes like Brock shows that she still has an insecure streak that requires Borgia-like blind loyalty, and can’t distinguish between the real vast right-wing conspiracy and the voices of legitimate concern.
Money-grubbing is always the ugly place with the Clintons, who have devoured $2.1 billion in contributions since 1992 to their political campaigns, family foundation and philanthropies, according to The Old (Good) New Republic.
David Axelrod, the author of a new memoir, “Believer,” wrote that Hillary’s past gurus, Morris and Penn, were nonbelievers — mercenary, manipulative and avaricious. He told Politico’s Glenn Thrush that he would have advised Hillary not to cash in with her book and six-figure speeches.
Axelrod reiterated to me that Hillary’s designated campaign chairman, John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s last chief of staff who left his post as an Obama counselor on Friday, “has the strength and standing to enforce a kind of campaign discipline that hasn’t existed before.”
Someday, they should give their tin cup to the Smithsonian. It’s one of the wonders of the world.
Troubles Mounting for Hillary:
The Wall Street journal:
HILLARY CLINTON’S COMPLEX CORPORATE TIES: Among recent secretaries of state, Hillary Clinton was one of the most aggressive global cheerleaders for American companies, pushing governments to sign deals and change policies to the advantage of corporate giants such as General Electric, Exxon Mobil, Microsoft and Boeing. At the same time, those companies were among the many that gave to the Clinton family’s global foundation set up by her husband, former President Bill Clinton. At least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her tenure donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to a Journal analysis of public and foundation disclosures.
As Mrs. Clinton prepares to embark on a race for the presidency, she has a web of connections to big corporations unique in American politics—ties forged both as secretary of state and by her family’s charitable interests. Those relationships are emerging as an issue for Mrs. Clinton’s expected presidential campaign as income disparity and other populist themes gain early attention. James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus report.
Plus: The Clinton Foundation said that if Hillary Clinton runs for president, it will consider whether to continue accepting contributions from foreign governments, a step that would be aimed at avoiding the appearance of conflicts of interest.
–Compiled by Rebecca Ballhaus
CBS News:
By Ali TejaniCBS NewsFebruary 20, 2015, 1:58 PM
Clinton Foundation defends foreign fundraising
After the Clinton Foundation announced it would reconsider its acceptance of contributions from international governments only if Hillary Clinton runs for president, the The New York Times editorial board urged Clinton not to wait.
The editorial, published Friday, suggested that reinstating the foundation's 2009 ban on donations from international governments would "reassure the public that the foundation will not become a vehicle for insiders' favoritism, should she run for and win the White House," given the "substantial overlap" between foundation contributors and Clinton campaign bundlers and donors. At this point, there has been no allegation of a conflict of interest between the foundation and the as yet undeclared Clinton campaign.
The editorial was a response to the Clinton Foundation's statement Thursday, which read, "Should Secretary Clinton decide to run for office, we will continue to ensure the Foundation's policies and practices regarding support from international partners are appropriate, just as we did when she served as Secretary of State."
While Clinton served as secretary of state, starting in 2009, the foundation had imposed restrictions on raising new money from international governments, in order to address potential conflicts of interest between the foundation and the Obama administration. But the Wall Street Journal reported this week that the foundation had lifted those self-imposed restrictions and that governments like Saudi Arabia and Oman had contributed millions to the foundation. This raised concerns about conflicts of interest, given Clinton's expressed interest in another presidential bid.
Do Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton have an Obama problem?
Following the Journal's report, Republican groups questioned the ethics of accepting the foreign donations and called on the foundation to return them. "The for sale sign is still up, and as long as the Clinton Foundation continues to take foreign money, Hillary's conflict-of-interest problem is just going to keep getting bigger," argued a blog post on the website of the Republican National Committee.
The Clinton Foundation has been accepting money from several foreign nations since 2013, according to the Wall Street Journal. Foundation Spokesman Craig Minassian defended the organization's acceptance of foreign donations, and said to the Journal in a statement, "The Clinton Foundation is a philanthropy, period." He added that the foundation has "strong donor integrity and transparency practices," which include disclosing all donations on its website.
The Washington Post reports that the Clinton Foundation has raised almost $2 billion since 2001, for philanthropic programs to empower women and girls, fight disease, and address other global needs.
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.
[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
With the amount of money spent in politics these days, it is a slippery problem for everyone.
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
With the amount of money spent in politics these days, it is a slippery problem for everyone.
You have a point. But with the absence of a challenger, the Clintons shouldn't have a
problem raising boatloads of money without bending any rules.
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
Sex...really, alloak? That was Bill & not Hillary? How many years ago for Bill? Bill will be quite the asset on the campaign trail should Hillary run. And to this day, Bill's popularity & skill set surpasses most anything the GOP can march out as candidates.
Sex...really, alloak? How petty!
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
Sex...really, alloak? That was Bill & not Hillary? How many years ago for Bill? Bill will be quite the asset on the campaign trail should Hillary run. And to this day, Bill's popularity & skill set surpasses most anything the GOP can march out as candidates.
Sex...really, alloak? How petty!
____________________________________________________________________
Yes, adultery and a sitting president lying under oath are all good with the liberals.
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
Sex...really, alloak? That was Bill & not Hillary? How many years ago for Bill? Bill will be quite the asset on the campaign trail should Hillary run. And to this day, Bill's popularity & skill set surpasses most anything the GOP can march out as candidates.
Sex...really, alloak? How petty!
Totally avoids the fundraising part.
That seems to be a persistent problem for the Clintons. Always tangled up in some kind
of fundraising question. That's been their history, if it's not sex it's money.[Edited on 2/22/2015 by alloak41]
Sex...really, alloak? That was Bill & not Hillary? How many years ago for Bill? Bill will be quite the asset on the campaign trail should Hillary run. And to this day, Bill's popularity & skill set surpasses most anything the GOP can march out as candidates.
Sex...really, alloak? How petty!
Totally avoids the fundraising part.
To be fair, you brought up the sex angle.
