Conservatives tout anti-Hillary book

[Makaho 2.0]

Just because a Liberal han't won in over 40 years doesn't mean they won't win. I guess you forgot an ULTRA LIBERAL John Kerry received 48% of the vote.
LIBERALS stand on PRINCIPLE and if that means losing election after election then so be it. People will eventually come around. What do Republicans stand for? Nothing, I know so many Conservatives who are disgusted with this Administration it's unheard of.

48% still equated to an azz kicking. He lost!

Until the Democratic party gets the ultra-left kooks in check, they will never win again. A liberal will never win in this country....because, although the liberals are the "loudest" and most vocal, that does not mean their message resounds with the majority. The election results proved that. The silent majority always wins at the polls.
BTW, this admin aint running again, so unless the dems run a moderate from the south they will lose again.....period.

 

[lil_j]

A liberal will never win? Thats an opinion my friend, not a fact. And if you think 48% compared to 51% is an azz kicking.............well errrr nevermind. I'm done arguing with you.

 

[AAMU Alum]

KB,

Different rules apply to who says what. Rove, Cheney, Limbaugh, DeLay, Falwell, Reed and other right wingers get away with some of the most ridiculous statements. Just look at Durbins and Rove's statements. Durbin is forced to apoligize and Rove, the white house and right wingers basically are saying Phug yall. I don't recall anyone on the left coming out to defend Durbin. Look at the propaganda machine (Fox News/Right Wing Talk Radio) that has come out to qualify what Rove said.

Co-sign. The hypocrisy of this administration, and the repubs/neocons is at an all-time high. Yet, they continue to get a free pass. :smh:

Fortunately, many Americans are removing the scales from their eyes, and are now beginning to see the right wing extremists for what they are.

 

[lil_j]

They demonized her because you don't say such a thing without proof. That is something really serious.

Ummm..........

*The Bin Ladens being flown outta the country when all other aircraft were grounded

*All the attackers from Saudi Arabia.

*FAA records being destroyed right after 9-11

*Unical oil pipeline in Afghanistan.

*Project for the New American Century

*The precision Collapse of World Trade Center 7

The list goes on, but it doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to put 2 & 2 together. The reason I listed all that is because there is plenty of evidence to draw a logical conclusion that Bush had something to do with 9-11. Just look at the facts. What I listed is only the tip of the iceberg. Not to stray away from the argument, but what evidence did Rove have that Liberals were not ready to prepare for war after 9-11. The last time I checked the vote in the Senate was 98-0 giving Bush the authorization to go after the terrorist.

 

[Killer Bees]

Ummm..........

*The Bin Ladens being flown outta the country when all other aircraft were grounded

*All the attackers from Saudi Arabia.

*FAA records being destroyed right after 9-11

*Unical oil pipeline in Afghanistan.

*Project for the New American Century

*The precision Collapse of World Trade Center 7

The list goes on, but it doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to put 2 & 2 together. The reason I listed all that is because there is plenty of evidence to draw a logical conclusion that Bush had something to do with 9-11. Just look at the facts. What I listed is only the tip of the iceberg. Not to stray away from the argument, but what evidence did Rove have that Liberals were not ready to prepare for war after 9-11. The last time I checked the vote in the Senate was 98-0 giving Bush the authorization to go after the terrorist.

I think Rove is referring to liberal organizations like the ACLU who wanted to give that American Islamic terrorist a right to a trail by jury. There is a huge difference between that and Durbin comparing our troops to Nazis.

 

[lil_j]

This is one person that will Defend Senator Durbin. The GOP saw an opportunity and twisted Durbins statements to imply that he was comparing our troops to Nazis. In his own words; Dick Durbin

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

He was reading an FBI report which descibed the actions of interrogators at GITMO. (Which I might add are not all soldiers). The implied question is
If you had been told that prisoners had been found in this state in one of Hitlers, Saddam's or Stalin's jails, would you have believed it? Can the Gop answer that truthfully? The incidents in which he described are FBI documented facts. This isn't an indictment against the troops, but the leadership who authorizes such actions. The GOP has completly twisted this man statements and slandered his character.

 

[Makaho 2.0]

A liberal will never win? Thats an opinion my friend, not a fact. And if you think 48% compared to 51% is an azz kicking.............well errrr nevermind. I'm done arguing with you.

Remember this from elementary school?

The Alligator mouth is trying to eat the bigger number.....
51% > 48%

Bush won by over 3 million votes. And the numbers in every election prove what I said about liberals. The last liberal we had in office was JFK and it was a different world back then. The majority of people in this country simply do not follow the liberal agenda. Unless the Dems go with moderate from the south, they will lose again.......period.

 

[staggalee83]

Hillary Clinton is the savior now ...............OH GAWD. :look:

HILLARY CLINTON WILL NOT WIN ...............NO MATTER HOW FUZZY, CUDDLY, FEELING's SHE GIVES DEMO's. :xeye:

 

[JSU/99]

Hillary might not win, but it won't be for the reasons you guys have been stating. You guys are making a mistake is you think the demographic of the last election will hold for this one. The next Republican candidate won't have Bush's personal strengths nor will he have the war as a backdrop. If you think Bill Frist or John McCain or George Allen can duplicate Bush's electoral success you're sadly mistaken. Same thing goes for Mitt Romney and George Pataki.

 

[staggalee83]

Hillary might not win, ...................

THEN WHAT's THE POINT?............To complain after the election is over that people are too dumb to understand ..............AGAIN ...............FOR THE THIRD TIME...............watching the REPUB's yelling SCOREBOARD BYOTCHES.

Dude .....re-read what I said in my first post and tell me why it won't be like that.

 

[JSU/99]

The majority of people in this country simply do not follow the liberal agenda. Unless the Dems go with moderate from the south, they will lose again.......period.

Narrow thinking. Its hard to win as a current senator, which all of the losing Dems have been(except Dukakis who was too ethnic). Its hard because anyone with a long Senate tenure will inevitably have numerous questionable and inconsistant votes. That's why Dole and Kerry were easy targets. Yes, both Dem presidents over the past 35 years have been southern governors. Now tell me how many Republican Senators have become President over the past 50 years.

 

[JSU/99]

THEN WHAT's THE POINT?............To complain after the election is over that people are too dumb to understand ..............AGAIN ...............FOR THE THIRD TIME...............watching the REPUB's yelling SCOREBOARD BYOTCHES.

First of all I said might not because she could face a strong challenge in the primaries from someone like Mark Warner.

Second, You guys are way off base if you think Hillary can't win. She's not the easy target you guys think she is. Almost all of the negatives against her are more than a decade old. And some of those "negatives" aren't so negative now. The 93 healthcare debacle? Sure it was bad then, but with the current frustration over healthcare of today, she might be appluaded for trying to do something about the problem over a decade ago. The main scandal people think of when they think of the Clintons is the whole Lewinsky mess. And Hillary came out better, not worse for that.

Don't underestimate her chances. There's a good reason why Guiliani and Pataki want no part of her in NY. A big senate re-election win combined with a mediocre Republican candidate(very likely) could equal a win for her.

 

[J C]

I think Rove is referring to liberal organizations like the ACLU who wanted to give that American Islamic terrorist a right to a trail by jury. There is a huge difference between that and Durbin comparing our troops to Nazis.

KB, the ACLU is defending Rush Limbaugh in keeping his medical records private. They defend conservatives as well as liberals when it comes to the constitution. I consider the ACLU more libertarian than liberal. :alicia:

The sad thing about Rove's comments is he's dividing the country over an issue (Iraq) when he needs to be pulling the citizens together. Suppose liberals stop sending their young men and women to fight a war that they considered to be unjust and only conservatives volunteered for the arms forces. That proposition would leave the country up the creek. The war is being fought on two fronts, forward and rear. If you have been paying attention to the polls, you will see slippage in support for the war. Lindsey Graham (SC) made a valid comment during last week Senate hearings.

 

[Makaho 2.0]

Narrow thinking. Its hard to win as a current senator, which all of the losing Dems have been(except Dukakis who was too ethnic). Its hard because anyone with a long Senate tenure will inevitably have numerous questionable and inconsistant votes. That's why Dole and Kerry were easy targets. Yes, both Dem presidents over the past 35 years have been southern governors. Now tell me how many Republican Senators have become President over the past 50 years.

99, you still don't get the gist of what I'm saying do you. What does the Republican senate factor have to do with anything? I don't care who the Reps run. If Hillary gets the nod, then McCain, or Jeb Bush could win. Hillary has toooo many points of attack if she gets the Dem nod.
Look at the last two Dem presidents we have had.....

Carter won as a result of all the baggage Gerald Ford had from Nixon and him resigning.
Clinton won because he had charisma and Ross Perot attacking Bush H. like a pitbull on a poodle......Clinton parlayed himself as a centrist and used his charm to win the office.......he got re-elected because Bob Dole had all the appeal of a rattlesnake.....isht, I was a republican and didn't vote for Dole.

My thinking is not narrow by any means. What the modern day democratic party is doing now days by allowing the ultra-left wing kooks to run amok in their party is what I consider narrow thinking.

You must first get elected to govern, unless they cut the kooks out of the mix, then they will continue losing......period.

 

[staggalee83]

First of all I said might not because she could face a strong challenge in the primaries from someone like Mark Warner.

Second, You guys are way off base if you think Hillary can't win. She's not the easy target you guys think she is. Almost all of the negatives against her are more than a decade old. And some of those "negatives" aren't so negative now. The 93 healthcare debacle? Sure it was bad then, but with the current frustration over healthcare of today, she might be appluaded for trying to do something about the problem over a decade ago. The main scandal people think of when they think of the Clintons is the whole Lewinsky mess. And Hillary came out better, not worse for that.

And you think people that live in this MUD SLINGING WORLD is gonna give her a shoulder to cry on because she's the scorned woman. Sorry, but that don't mean shat in this world of the POLITICAL BIG DOGS. The only thing that matter is who has the power when it's all over. Heck, if anything they will tear her apart starting with this. Remember, they tried to get her to tell what she knew and when. She runs for President, she won't be able to stay quiet under the guise of FAMILY PRIVACY, STANDING BY HER MAN, ETC. They will pound her

After the last 2 elections .............you still don't get it. THIS IS PRESIDENTIAL POLITIC'S. NOTHING IS FORGOTTEN .............ASK KERRY IF HIS NAM, MEDAL THROWING AWAY EPISODE WAS FORGOTTEN .........FROM 35 YEARS AGO. :smh:

And as far as Hillary Clinton is concerned, NAME 1 THING SHE HAS IMPLIMENTED AS FIRST LADY, SENATOR, ETC.......IN THE WORLD OF POLITICS.........(Besides the "It take's a Village" childrens book). FORGET WHAT A LIGHTING ROD SHE IS.

The only thing she has done is got elected in a TONY SECTION of NY as a CELEB REP. HOW HARD IS THAT? :smh:

Don't underestimate her chances. There's a good reason why Guiliani and Pataki want no part of her in NY. A big senate re-election win combined with a mediocre Republican candidate(very likely) could equal a win for her.

As far as her chances ................don't you remember, PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF NY DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ARSE ABOUT WHAT COMES OUT OF THAT PLACE.

If Hillary is the Demo nod, that will only tell people 1 thing .............DEMO's didn't listen to a thing people outside of LA, SAN FRAN, and NY said. :smh:

Shat ........I calling it now ........(AND DON'T GET ME WRONG ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST HER)............BUT............Hillary will be the biggest loss the Demo's will ever be put through if she get's the nod. And that's a shame. :nod:

 

[JSU/99]

Makaho,

I think you're the one not getting it. All along you've been implying that it takes a southern democratic governor to win the presidency. That's what i meant about your thinking being too narrow. In the same paragraph you showed that their victories had less to do with them being southerners and more to do with the circumstances of the times and the mood of the voters. That's what all of these elections eventually boil down too. So you can't just assume that it will take a Southern governor to win in 08.

83,

No smart Republican would try and use the Lewinsky mess to tear Hillary down. As far as the majority of the public is concerned the scandal boils down to this: Bill cheated, lied and the Repubs took it too far by impeaching him. I can't see any scenario in which Hillary could look bad from that.

And the Kerry analogy doesn't work here. Kerry's past was basically unknown to the majority of the country. So all of the Swift boat stuff, while 35 yrs old, was new to most of the country. That's why it was effective. When it comes to Hillary, she's been in the public eye for about 14 years now. There's nothing about her that hasn't been repeated in public a million times already. What makes you think the Public wants to hear about Whitewater for the 1 billioneth time?

Like I said, her biggest liabilities are the fact that she's a woman and a former first lady. That's what makes her a hard choice for Democrats. But that doesn't mean she can't win. This next election will be wide open. No Reoublican candidate out there has Bush's ability to hold almost 100% of his party while also picking off a sizable share of moderates. So the demographics that were at play in this election won't be in the 08 elections.

 

[staggalee83]

OK man .....................Hillary for President.
Keep thinking they won't use any and everything against her in a presidential run. I hope your eye's open to the true nature of politics .........NATIONAL POLITICS soon. This "cinderalla" stuff ain't gonna work. Her feeling's won't be spared.........because some leader in Iran, China, or anywhere else ain't gonna spare her feelings either. :nod2:

But if you want to make yourself believe ............go for it.

 

[Makaho 2.0]

His thinking is why the Dems have been getting their azzes handed to them lately. Personally, I hope the Dems continue to maintain the status quo.

They are their own worst enemy right now. By telling me "I don't get it" when your side has been getting kicked to sleep tells me a lot about their mindset.

I could really care less....continue on your same path of ineptitude.

 

[JSU/99]

OK man .....................Hillary for President.
Keep thinking they won't use any and everything against her in a presidential run. I hope your eye's open to the true nature of politics .........NATIONAL POLITICS soon. This "cinderalla" stuff ain't gonna work. Her feeling's won't be spared.........because some leader in Iran, China, or anywhere else ain't gonna spare her feelings either. :nod2:

But if you want to make yourself believe ............go for it.

I see Makaho isn't the only one missing the point. There's a difference between using past scandals against her as a strategy and that strategy actually working. Sure they can use anything they want against her. And they probably will. But that doesn't mean it will resonate with the voters.

 

[JSU/99]

His thinking is why the Dems have been getting their azzes handed to them lately. Personally, I hope the Dems continue to maintain the status quo.

They are their own worst enemy right now. By telling me "I don't get it" when your side has been getting kicked to sleep tells me a lot about their mindset.

I could really care less....continue on your same path of ineptitude.

I must admit your strategy of avoiding the issue at hand and focusing on a general theme is very Bush-like. Unfortunately what works for him doesn't neccessarily work for you. It'll be the same way in the 2008 election. The weak Republican field will have a hard time using the "Bush" method to win in 08. There won't be 9/11 and Iraq looming over the next election. There won't be same-sex amendments cluttering the ballots, bringing out evangical conservatives in 08. Finally, the next Republican candidate won't have Bush's momentum and political skill. So if you're still confident after hearing those factors, so be it. As of now your bst candidate, John McCain, won't even make it out of the Republican primary.

 

[lil_j]

LOL, they don't get it. They keep saying Hillary has too many points of attack. Care to list the many points of attacks since there are so many? I highly doubt that the Right can. Fact is that they don't have anything against her besides unwarranted hate. I love the fact that the Right is underestimating her. :emlaugh:

 

[staggalee83]

I see Makaho isn't the only one missing the point. There's a difference between using past scandals against her as a strategy and that strategy actually working. Sure they can use anything they want against her. And they probably will. But that doesn't mean it will resonate with the voters.

OK dude .................Just like I said.

I'm one of those people that will never be smart enough to understand the National DEMO point of view. :emlaugh:

Have fun watching Hillary. :tup:

 

[Makaho 2.0]

These guys just don't get it. Which is why they have gotten their azzes kicked the last few election cycles.

This country did not elect a Liberal male to it's highest office. So how in the L do they think this country will elect a Liberal female?

Keep keeping on with the "Keeping On"!

 

[AAMU Alum]

83,

No smart Republican would try and use the Lewinsky mess to tear Hillary down. As far as the majority of the public is concerned the scandal boils down to this: Bill cheated, lied and the Repubs took it too far by impeaching him. I can't see any scenario in which Hillary could look bad from that.

99,

See the word I italicized. You made a very good point, but that word in particular comes into play. The repubs will indeed try to use Bill's pecadillos against Hilary (as if the two are related,) but the sad thing about too many people in this nation, is that they will fall for it. As I type, I'm listening to News and Notes w/Ed Gordon on NPR, and one of his guests Michael Myers is talking about how the repubs/neocons are "duping" the voters in this country...and he's right.

 

[lil_j]

I'm still waiting for someone to list the points of attack against Hilliary since their are so many. Anybody?


Link to her voting Record: Have at it :wavey:
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=WNY99268