This latest bold faced lie and exaggeration of herself and her role in the world has clinched her defeat, in my opinion.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/25/obama-backers-attack-clinton-for-exaggerating-dangers-of-bosnia-trip/

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4

Hillary Lies ALL the time.Nothing New.
Lied about 9/11.Said Daughter Chelsea was jogging around the
World Trade Towers the morning of 9/11.
In fact she was sleeping.
I think Hillary could win big in Pa.
Then mabye take Indiana and N.Carolina.
That would give her the lead in Popular Vote.
I don't want the Bama,to win,because he's an outted " Seperatist ".
He's NOT Foolin Us Whites,No Mores.
I meanie...any more.

Tell us when a CLinton is NOT lying, then that will be news.

For Hillary to Revamp her image and also her Favor among voters.
It's been said of her,and I firmly believe that She'll Literally DO
ANYTHING to win her way to the White House...Again.

All she need do is Regularly appear on Fox News.
Do Greta,and Hannity and O'Reilly factor.
Redo them every month.
This wood boat affirm her mettle,as well cut the muster.
Says I.

I read this story elsewhere, for the life of me I cant see the big deal, a small lie, so what.

Good old George told you guys Saddam had WMDs, and you bought it, that was a fucken major lie.

I read this story elsewhere, for the life of me I cant see the big deal, a small lie, so what.

Good old George told you guys Saddam had WMDs, and you bought it, that was a fucken major lie.

The difference is that Republicans and Conservatives don't believe in government and they think the government is the enemy, so when somene from the government lies to them, they are not suprised, even when it is someone from their own party.

Liberals and Democrats, on the other hand, believe in government and believe in Democracy, so they do not like being lied to, especially by someone who is supposedly on their side.

So you are pro lying, as long as you see it as a "small" lie? And lets not mix this up with the WMD thing. Bush thought they had them, so did a lot of people. Being wrong does not make you a liar. I am quite sure Hillary didnt really think she had to run from the plane under Serbian Sniper fire. That is not something that you just happen to forget didnt happen.

So you are pro lying, as long as you see it as a "small" lie? And lets not mix this up with the WMD thing. Bush thought they had them, so did a lot of people. Being wrong does not make you a liar. I am quite sure Hillary didnt really think she had to run from the plane under Serbian Sniper fire. That is not something that you just happen to forget didnt happen.

If thats the case why could Clinton not believe she was under sniper fire ?

Whats the difference.

The difference is that Republicans and Conservatives don't believe in government and they think the government is the enemy, so when somene from the government lies to them, they are not suprised, even when it is someone from their own party.

Liberals and Democrats, on the other hand, believe in government and believe in Democracy, so they do not like being lied to, especially by someone who is supposedly on their side.

We think the government is ful of liars because it is. Just look at the two Democrat frontrunners. Both are having a hard time keeping all of their lies straight. Look at George Bush, says he is for freedom for all the people of the world yet doesn't have the balls to stand up to China over Tibet. There is a reason politician has become a dirty word in our society, and it is not just some sterotype. If you want to have faith in government go ahead. I wil put my faith in my own abilities and the abilities of those I associate myself with.

If thats the case why could Clinton not believe she was under sniper fire ?

Whats the difference.

What is the difference? If you have ever been under fire you would know it is not something you tend to forget about. Unless you are trying to say she had been under fire so many times she can not recall at what airport in what country she was under fire at and which she was not.

What is the difference? If you have ever been under fire you would know it is not something you tend to forget about. Unless you are trying to say she had been under fire so many times she can not recall at what airport in what country she was under fire at and which she was not.

Ive been under fire many times, couldnt tell you exactly were and when each event occured, that said, Bush didnt know if Saddam had WMDs or not, he assumed he had, the lying comes down to scale then.

Good old George told you guys Saddam had WMDs, and you bought it, that was a fucken major lie.

True. I didn't buy it, but a whole lot of other (brainless) people did.

I read this story elsewhere, for the life of me I cant see the big deal, a small lie, so what.

It's a problem when this person who is running for president doesn't even try to get her story straight, and repeats her "misstatements" over and over again.

What'll happen if she gets into the White House? More of the same, I suspect, and after Mr. Bush et al I've had plenty, thank you very much.

True. I didn't buy it, but a whole lot of other (brainless) people did.



It's a problem when this person who is running for president doesn't even try to get her story straight, and repeats her "misstatements" over and over again.

What'll happen if she gets into the White House? More of the same, I suspect, and after Mr. Bush et al I've had plenty, thank you very much.

I think she is finished anyway, so it probably wont come to it.

I think she is finished anyway, so it probably wont come to it.

From your mouth to [insert deity of choice]'s ears. :)

The people want change, Obama is the only hope for it, the other two, well,
one is the same old same old, the other will do anything to get elected.

Ive been under fire many times, couldnt tell you exactly were and when each event occured, that said, Bush didnt know if Saddam had WMDs or not, he assumed he had, the lying comes down to scale then.

So do you believe Mrs. Clinton has been under fire so many times she can't recall when and where they all happened? I don't. I don't believe she has heard a shot fired in anger in her whole life.

True. I didn't buy it, but a whole lot of other (brainless) people did.



It's a problem when this person who is running for president doesn't even try to get her story straight, and repeats her "misstatements" over and over again.

What'll happen if she gets into the White House? More of the same, I suspect, and after Mr. Bush et al I've had plenty, thank you very much.

Yes,thats the true bottom line.That Hillary is so casual with Lying
and given a free ride from the press.That's where this little conundrum
went wrong for her.She { Hillary } is NO longer the Liberal Favorite.
I think even the Liberal media has thoroughly exhausted themselves
over the years,COVERING for these Clintons.I just learned Via Dick
Morris the other nite that Chelsea is a Little liar,in waiting ta boot.
Her mommy was handed a Lie,obviously handed to her from Chelsea
that She { Chelsea } was Jogging the morning of 9/11 in the vicinity
of the Fallen Towers.Which needs to be examined.

So do you believe Mrs. Clinton has been under fire so many times she can't recall when and where they all happened? I don't. I don't believe she has heard a shot fired in anger in her whole life.


Actually the real story about this latest Hillary outting is a
dynamic of narrative.
She is on the outs.The major media no longer wants her to
keep her hat in the ring.She's a troublemaker,NOW for the Liberals.
Which is a real Hoot.
I think we're actually seein History made.
A Spoiled brat,Priviledged Carpetbagger,who just casually plays
her own Media,via Spin doctors,who are in short supply,and
dwindling.
Of course her rival,may well be far worse.
I think Obama may be a Louis Farrakhan,in waiting.
Why else would he be reluctant to wear a Flag lapel pin.
And also the Pledge of Allegiance.

I have had bullets flying past me and if someone didn't tell me to duck I would never figured it out.
Ive had been on live fire exercises when I was in the reserves.

I guess that is the Canadian Military for you.

The people want change, Obama is the only hope for it, the other two, well,
one is the same old same old, the other will do anything to get elected.
somehow i think throwing grannie under the bus isn't the change people want.

somehow i think throwing grannie under the bus isn't the change people want.

Euthanasia eh.

A buddy of mine (recently retired Army Apache pilot) was Air Mission Commander (AMC) for the helicopter air cover provided to Mrs. Clinton during her visit to Bosnia.

He and I spoke on the phone the other day when this story broke.
He snorted at her account of the day.

Doug reported that the visit was a boring, routine day-long dog & pony show, and that there were no threats to Mrs. Clinton and her entourage whatsoever.

No sniper activity in the nearby hills, no threats of violence, nothing.


That she lied, again, is no big story.
That she believes the voting American public is so incredibly stupid as to believe her lies is also nothing new.

I find nothing interesting here worth debating.

The Hills initial arrival was by C-17 Transport carrier with somethin
in the neighborhood of 4,000 troops in the Area.
She did travel by Hellicopter,but not for that embellishment.
Not a single shot was heard or fired.
Lest one furgit :

Democrats Lie
Republicans Talk Turkey

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/7763/hillarysbosnianexperientv1.png (http://www.allforums.net/)

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1903/hillarysbosniansniperru4.png (http://www.allforums.net/)

and to make things worse she trys to pass it off with an aw shucks "C'mon guys, we make mistakes, I made a mistake, lighten up!" comment, like we are just supposed to laugh it off that she made up a big lie about being under sniper fire and runnin goff the tarmac wit her daughter. Like I said before, having bullets zinging past you while you run for cover is not something that you would forget. She is caught in a big fib and now the cover she used to get from the media is gone and she can not understand why they have turned on her. The media has never pointed out a lie by the clintons before. Just watching her "C'mon guys, we make mistakes, I made a mistake, lighten up!" comment shows that it cought her off guard to have to defend one of her lies.

Good old George told you guys Saddam had WMDs, and you bought it, that was a fucken major lie.
Pssstttt..... Paul ...... over here.... come here.
Bill Clinton told us the same things. Sssshhhhhh.

and to make things worse she trys to pass it off with an aw shucks "C'mon guys, we make mistakes, I made a mistake, lighten up!" comment, like we are just supposed to laugh it off that she made up a big lie about being under sniper fire and runnin goff the tarmac wit her daughter. Like I said before, having bullets zinging past you while you run for cover is not something that you would forget. She is caught in a big fib and now the cover she used to get from the media is gone and she can not understand why they have turned on her. The media has never pointed out a lie by the clintons before. Just watching her "C'mon guys, we make mistakes, I made a mistake, lighten up!" comment shows that it cought her off guard to have to defend one of her lies.

Yup,That's the Clinton way.
Just laugh it off.
Remember how Slick Willy thought it SOOOOOOOO funny when
Sandy Berger got caught sneakin Classified Documents in his
pockets.

The difference between what GWB said and what HRC said is the difference between telling something based on false and telling a bald faced lie.

George Bush based his assertion that Saddam Hussein had WMDs on information gathered and reported by major intelligence gathering organizations of not only the United States but of European nations. In retrospect the information was found to be wrong.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, knew she was lying on all the occassions in which she said she had come under sniper fire. She told the lie in order to make it seem she was much more adept in the field of foreign diplomacy than Barack Obama. It was a lie told to bolster her foreign policy credentials.

This is not the first lie Ms. Clinton has been caught in. Lies slip from her tongue all too easily. She lies about important things and she lies about mundane things.

She lied about being named after Sir Edmund Hillary.

She lied about her involvement with the Whitehouse Travel Agency firings.

She lied about where Chelsea was on the morning of 9/11.

She lied about being the first person to call the events in Darfur genocide.

She lied about helping bring peace to Northern Ireland.

She lied about helping start the federal Children's Health Insurance Program.

Hillary Clinton is an inveterate liar.

Might be more accurate to say the Democrats have d-o-n-e themselves in... again. To pull their party together at this point seems highly unlikely. Too bad. It would be nice to have an election where there actually was a 'worthy opponent' for a change.

*********************************

If McCain vs. Obama, 28% of Clinton Backers Go for McCain

If McCain vs. Clinton, 19% of Obama backers go for McCain

March 26, 2008, PRINCETON, NJ -- A sizable proportion of Democrats would vote for John McCain next November if he is matched against the candidate they do not support for the Democratic nomination. This is particularly true for Hillary Clinton supporters, more than a quarter of whom currently say they would vote for McCain if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105691/McCain-vs-Obama-28-Clinton-Backers-McCain.aspx

Might be more accurate to say the Democrats have d-o-n-e themselves in... again. To pull their party together at this point seems highly unlikely. Too bad. It would be nice to have an election where there actually was a 'worthy opponent' for a change.
It's interesting how often the Democrats manage to completely fuck up their chances. McCain looks better and better for me every day...if he'd just reverse his damn Iraq stance, I'd be willing to vote for the guy, maybe. But staying in Iraq is complete anathema to me: I'm tired of the economy being fucked due in no small part to our horrific debt.

It's looking more and more like I'll be casting a vote for the Libertarian Party candidate...if either of the two major parties wants me as a voter, they really need to clean up their acts. Oh well, it's not like my vote counts or anything, since I live in a solidly blue state.

It's interesting how often the Democrats manage to completely fuck up their chances. McCain looks better and better for me every day...if he'd just reverse his damn Iraq stance, I'd be willing to vote for the guy, maybe. But staying in Iraq is complete anathema to me: I'm tired of the economy being fucked due in no small part to our horrific debt.

It's looking more and more like I'll be casting a vote for the Libertarian Party candidate...if either of the two major parties wants me as a voter, they really need to clean up their acts. Oh well, it's not like my vote counts or anything, since I live in a solidly blue state.

McCain's running mate may be the deciding factor. Due to his age, there's no doubt they're looking hard for a younger VP candidate. Wonder who it'll be?

Well well congratulations all you Republican warriors. Youve managed to jump on the band wagon, and may I say, done a reasonable job of character assassination on the said Clinton candidate.

Now, what about this other dude who stands in the way of more glory glory war mongering, cant we get summit going on him.

McCain's running mate may be the deciding factor. Due to his age, there's no doubt they're looking hard for a younger VP candidate. Wonder who it'll be?
Some retired General with a chest full of medals that sparkle in the camera lights, and no doubt you guys will be drooling all over the ballot card.

Well well congratulations all you Republican warriors. Youve managed to jump on the band wagon, and may I say, done a reasonable job of character assassination on the said Clinton candidate.

Now, what about this other dude who stands in the way of more glory glory war mongering, cant we get summit going on him.

LOL @ Paul. Have you been listening, dear? The Democrats have pretty much assassinated their own character this year! All we're doing is sitting back and watching them self-destruct. Just like in year's past.

If you think the messes Obama and Clinton have gotten themselves into is a result of anything 'Republican warriors' have done, you're even more naive than I thought.

LOL @ Paul. Have you been listening, dear? The Democrats have pretty much assassinated their own character this year! All we're doing is sitting back and watching them self-destruct. Just like in year's past.

If you think the messes Obama and Clinton have gotten themselves into is a result of anything 'Republican warriors' have done, you're even more naive than I thought.

Believe me SMW when I tell ya this. One thing I aint, is naive.
Clinton made a fool of herself, so what, she's finished anyway.

Obama may be the only hope left for America, not much of a choice, vote for him or vote for more Republican spending on war, erosion of human and Constitutional rights, the US being marginalised in the world more due to one sided Foreign Policy.

Clinton may be done but Geo Bush is GAY. This site is hysterical :D

http://gaygeorgewbush.tripod.com/

Believe me SMW when I tell ya this. One thing I aint, is naive.
Clinton made a fool of herself, so what, she's finished anyway.

Obama may be the only hope left for America, not much of a choice, vote for him or vote for more Republican spending on war, erosion of human and Constitutional rights, the US being marginalised in the world more due to one sided Foreign Policy.

If Obama is our only hope, we're in BIG trouble, Paul. Fortunately, that's not true. Nor is it true our only other choice is a Republican clone who's vowed to carry out all of the current administration's policies. Just isn't true. You shouldn't believe everything the libs feed you. Most of it is garbage, thrown out there in an effort to draw attention away from the lousy choices they've made for their own party's candidates.

If Obama is our only hope, we're in BIG trouble, Paul. Fortunately, that's not true. Nor is it true our only other choice is a Republican clone who's vowed to carry out all of the current administration's policies. Just isn't true. You shouldn't believe everything the libs feed you. Most of it is garbage, thrown out there in an effort to draw attention away from the lousy choices they've made for their own party's candidates.

Ah now SMW, I stopped believing political propaganda long long ago.

Mr McCain has vowed to continue with Bush's policies in his so-called
'war on terror'. These policies clearly are not working at present.

Mr McCain has vowed to push russia from the G8 group. For what reason ?

Mr McCain has strongly hinted at military action against Iran.

Apart from giving russia the heave ho, McCain needs to talk Bush talk to swing hardline right wingers to his cause.

Ah now SMW, I stopped believing political propaganda long long ago.

Mr McCain has vowed to continue with Bush's policies in his so-called
'war on terror'. These policies clearly are not working at present.

Mr McCain has vowed to push russia from the G8 group. For what reason ?

Mr McCain has strongly hinted at military action against Iran.

Apart from giving russia the heave ho, McCain needs to talk Bush talk to swing hardline right wingers to his cause.

Maybe you should actually read McCain's point of view (http://www.johnmccain.com/undecided/whymccain.htm)instead of listening to reports from his opponents. I don't like the idea of continuing the war in Iraq anymore than the next person, but his rationale is sound and he's right about one thing... he IS the most experienced person to handle the situation. I shudder to think of the possible ramifications to WORLD peace if we just pull out to satisfy a campaign promise to end the war without giving thought to the consequences.

America faces a dangerous, relentless enemy in the War against Islamic Extremists - We face an enemy that has repeatedly attacked us and remains committed to killing Americans and the destruction of our values. This election is about who is best prepared to lead and defend our nation and its global allies as Commander-in-Chief from day one. This election is about making sure we have the experienced leadership to guide us to victory in this war, protect the nation against future terrorist attacks, and support our troops and first responders who are on the frontlines of the war. This election will decide whether we choose to fight or announce surrender. It will decide whether we have a president who dangerously weakens U.S. security or strengthens it; whether we will flinch and retreat or fully engage the enemy on multiple fronts. We need decisive leadership with the vision and experience to guide our country and the world through this challenge. Having a courageous Commander-in-Chief who is willing to lead us in this war, rally our democratic allies and defeat our enemy to secure a broader peace is what's at stake in this election.

Believe me SMW when I tell ya this. One thing I aint, is naive.

Paul, I truely hope you are naive because if you aren't you are as dumb as a stone. Republicans aren't the ones assassinating either Clinton or Obama. The two of them are assassinating each other. The Republicans are simply sitting back, enjoying the show.

The Democrats are following the same script they follow every four years, a script that leads to self destruction.

It is great reading a European perspective on our elections but if you want to comment on them it might behoove you to do a bit of reading about what is actually happening. You seem so anti-Republican that you ascribe every evil in the world to them.

congratulations all you Republican warriors. You've managed to jump on the band wagon, and may I say, done a reasonable job of character assassination on the said Clinton candidate.

Yes, they have. And they have by no means neglected Obama either. Don't forget the hatchet job the dishonest pukes from the Right are trying to pull on him.

But then, it's what they do. It's all they have. They're like a cross between lemming and a rabid attack dog that salivates and snarls on command as soon as any of the (thoroughly dishonest) ReichWing talking heads concoct the latest bullshit criticism (Obama's preacher being a prime example) of the Democratic candidates.

The hypocrisy is truly off the charts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Situation; The radical black separatist and closet revolutionary, Jeremiah Wright, the "spiritual adviser" to Obama made some statements that were divisive and/or hateful and/or racist.

Reaction from the ConservaZombie faction; "Aha!, it is an inescapable conclusion that Obama and Wright are like two peas in a pod philosophically. Obama believes exactly the same things and holds the very same views as Reverend Wright. Ergo, Obama must be divisive and racist and he hates the USA!".

Situation; The kindly and patriotic (and white) man of God, Rod Parsley, the "spiritual adviser" to McCain, made some statements that were divisive and/or hateful and/or racist.

Reaction from the ConservaZombie faction: "Aww.....McCain only called Parsley a "spiritual adviser", he didn't actually state for the record that he was his spiritual adviser. Huuuge difference. And I don't care what the videotapes show, the Reverend Parsley has never in his life said anything the slightest bit incendiary or hateful or racist. And besides, McCain doesn't actually like these religious nutcases who have vowed their support for him, he's just cynically using them to gain votes from the religious people in America. So there!".

ya, and dems say the opposite about both men, welcome to politics.

Maybe you should actually read McCain's point of view (http://www.johnmccain.com/undecided/whymccain.htm)instead of listening to reports from his opponents. I don't like the idea of continuing the war in Iraq anymore than the next person, but his rationale is sound and he's right about one thing... he IS the most experienced person to handle the situation. I shudder to think of the possible ramifications to WORLD peace if we just pull out to satisfy a campaign promise to end the war without giving thought to the consequences.

Like I said, I dont make my judgements on some propaganda bullshit.
I tend to make my own mind up, which seems a somewhat rare thing around here.

Paul, I truely hope you are naive because if you aren't you are as dumb as a stone. Republicans aren't the ones assassinating either Clinton or Obama. The two of them are assassinating each other. The Republicans are simply sitting back, enjoying the show.

The Democrats are following the same script they follow every four years, a script that leads to self destruction.

It is great reading a European perspective on our elections but if you want to comment on them it might behoove you to do a bit of reading about what is actually happening. You seem so anti-Republican that you ascribe every evil in the world to them.

I am anti-Republican, what right thinking person wouldnt be after 8 years of that war monger and his cronies in power.

Its all about voting for a certin party with you guys, to keep the other side out at any cost, with a few exceptions, were posters think for themselves,
all in all tow the party line, whatever that line happens to be.

I am anti-Republican, what right thinking person wouldnt be after 8 years of that war monger and his cronies in power.

Its all about voting for a certin party with you guys, to keep the other side out at any cost, with a few exceptions, were posters think for themselves,
all in all tow the party line, whatever that line happens to be.

Paul, Do you realize the silliness of the above post? You post that you are anti-Republican and in the next breath accuse us (you guys) of being all about voting for a certain party. You have just admitted you would vote for the Democrats BECAUSE THEY AREN'T REPUBLICANS. Talk about voting a party line.

You seem unable to fathom that some of us honestly think John McaCain is the best of the three choices we have been given. Barack Obama has just been adjudged the most liberal member of Congress. That is not something that endears him to people of a conservative bent. He has also sat in a church pew for over twenty years listening to his personal preacher and personal friend spout anti-American crap without a word of protest.

Hillary Clinton is a proven liar and someone who like Obama is far to the left of the general electorate. One of her prime desires is to institute national health care, something that many of us are against.

Both Obama and Clinton are left wing, populists,. I personally don't like populists and I despise left wing, populists, yet you think that I should vote for one of them to avoid being accused of blindly voting the Republican ticket.

Get real, Paul and stop trying to tar everyone who is going to vote for McCain as some brain dead zombie whose only goal is to pull the Republican lever on election day.

Paul, Do you realize the silliness of the above post? You post that you are anti-Republican and in the next breath accuse us (you guys) of being all about voting for a certain party. You have just admitted you would vote for the Democrats BECAUSE THEY AREN'T REPUBLICANS. Talk about voting a party line.

You seem unable to fathom that some of us honestly think John McaCain is the best of the three choices we have been given. Barack Obama has just been adjudged the most liberal member of Congress. That is not something that endears him to people of a conservative bent. He has also sat in a church pew for over twenty years listening to his personal preacher and personal friend spout anti-American crap without a word of protest.

Hillary Clinton is a proven liar and someone who like Obama is far to the left of the general electorate. One of her prime desires is to institute national health care, something that many of us are against.

Both Obama and Clinton are left wing, populists,. I personally don't like populists and I despise left wing, populists, yet you think that I should vote for one of them to avoid being accused of blindly voting the Republican ticket.

Get real, Paul and stop trying to tar everyone who is going to vote for McCain as some brain dead zombie whose only goal is to pull the Republican lever on election day.

I'll give you the first bit, I can see that myself.

However, whats makes McCain so special.
All politicians tell lies, thats what makes them politicians.

Im sure all 3 sit in church on a Sunday morning listening to their preacher.

The difference being, McCain will continue were Bush left off, more or less.
Were has 8 years gotten America or the World for that matter-fucken nowhere.

The only difference betwwen is their ideas on taxation. That is all I vote for, to keep tax raisers out of office. As far as ther est of the stuff goes, none of them will change anything.

The only difference betwwen is their ideas on taxation. That is all I vote for, to keep tax raisers out of office. As far as ther est of the stuff goes, none of them will change anything.
That's really deep. I think you're pretty much right... People saying "McCain has strongly hinted at war with Iran!", well neither Obama nor Hillary will "rule it out"... They're all ruthless panderers.

Paul, While John McCain is not my ideal candidate I feel he is better than either of the two Democrats. I am pro-NAFTA. I am anti-national health care. I am anti-higher taxation and pro-tax cuts. I am pro a strong national defense. John McCain is closer to my positions than either Obama or Clinton.

Of course in your opinion that makes me somehow brain dead because after all, John McCain is a REPUBLICAN.

Paul, While John McCain is not my ideal candidate I feel he is better than either of the two Democrats. I am pro-NAFTA. I am anti-national health care. I am anti-higher taxation and pro-tax cuts. I am pro a strong national defense. John McCain is closer to my positions than either Obama or Clinton.

Of course in your opinion that makes me somehow brain dead because after all, John McCain is a REPUBLICAN.

Whens the last time you voted Democrat, and who was the candidate ?

That is a problem with these liberals, if you are not with them then you are a brain dead zombie. It is just not possible for someone to think about the issues and come away siding with the republicans for some reason.

I voted Democrat just a few weeks ago. The candidate's name was Kay McGinn. She lost but she got my vote.

That is a problem with these liberals, if you are not with them then you are a brain dead zombie. It is just not possible for someone to think about the issues and come away siding with the republicans for some reason.

So basicly as long as your taxes are kept low, the Gov can wage war in foreign lands-nice one.

I voted Democrat just a few weeks ago. The candidate's name was Kay McGinn. She lost but she got my vote.

sorry I will rephrase that.
Who is the last Democrat Presidential Candidate you voted for ?

So basicly as long as your taxes are kept low, the Gov can wage war in foreign lands-nice one.

That is about it.

sorry I will rephrase that.
Who is the last Democrat Presidential Candidate you voted for ?

I was first eligible to vote in a presidential election in 1964. During the intervening years I have not found a Democrat whose platform I prefered to his Republican opponent's.

Had I been able, I would have voted for Truman.

Since Republicans are generally more in tune with my political philosophy why on Earth would I vote for a Democrat? If there were an election in which the Democrat was more in alignment with my political philosophy I would have no hesitation in voting for him/her.

I was first eligible to vote in a presidential election in 1964. During the intervening years I have not found a Democrat whose platform I prefered to his Republican opponent's.

Had I been able, I would have voted for Truman.

Since Republicans are generally more in tune with my political philosophy why on Earth would I vote for a Democrat? If there were an election in which the Democrat was more in alignment with my political philosophy I would have no hesitation in voting for him/her.

Thank you.

Paul, I truely hope you are naive because if you aren't you are as dumb as a stone. Republicans aren't the ones assassinating either Clinton or Obama. The two of them are assassinating each other. The Republicans are simply sitting back, enjoying the show.

The Democrats are following the same script they follow every four years, a script that leads to self destruction.

It is great reading a European perspective on our elections but if you want to comment on them it might behoove you to do a bit of reading about what is actually happening. You seem so anti-Republican that you ascribe every evil in the world to them.

What if The Dems are hog-tied and have no clear winner come
Convention time.Therefore a Brokered convention.No longer in
back,smoke-filled rooms.
The CW holds that Gore may be the answer.Of course,he'd be on top of
the ticket.

Gore/Obama
Gore/Clinton

You seem unable to fathom that some of us honestly think John McaCain is the best of the three choices we have been given.
This may be somewhat off-topic, but is there any reason you have to vote for a Democrat or a Republican? I've been losing interest in voting for my previous favorite of the three, Obama, and if it comes down to it and I can't, in good conscience, vote for him, I'm not tossing a vote to McCain just because I don't like the other guy. I'll be voting Libertarian if I don't like either of the bowls of shit the major parties serve us.

This may be somewhat off-topic, but is there any reason you have to vote for a Democrat or a Republican? I've been losing interest in voting for my previous favorite of the three, Obama, and if it comes down to it and I can't, in good conscience, vote for him, I'm not tossing a vote to McCain just because I don't like the other guy. I'll be voting Libertarian if I don't like either of the bowls of shit the major parties serve us.

Well then cast a write-in vote for Daffy Duck.
You've as mush did the same in regards to a Religion and God.

Well then cast a write-in vote for Daffy Duck.
Can't. 22nd Amendment.

Can't. 22nd Amendment.

Isn't it kinda neato Goofy,that Slick Willy is THE only President
who seems to favor the idea'r of more than 2 terms or Modifying the
current term limit.
Which makes sense.
Liberals suck worse than Lemmons.Which is what they are.

Borg,

I've voted for third party candidates in the past, (Libertarian), but this time around rather than make a statement with my vote I will use it to try to see that neither Hillary nor Barack becomes President.

Further Debunking the 'War Zone' Myth

Thursday, March 27, 2008; A08



The Clinton campaign has cited newspaper accounts, including one in The Washington Post, to bolster the senator's claim that her now-famous March 1996 trip to Bosnia was the first visit to a "war zone" by a first lady since World War II. She is overlooking a trip to Saigon by Pat Nixon at the height of the Vietnam War as well as a trip by Barbara Bush to Saudi Arabia two months before the Persian Gulf War began.

THE FACTS

Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate. The Clinton camp has circulated a March 26, 1996, quote from a Post article describing Clinton's Bosnia trip as "the first time since Roosevelt that a first lady has voyaged to a potential combat zone." The article went on to say that "other first ladies have visited troops abroad but never in front-line positions," citing the examples of Bush and Nixon.

How these factoids got into the Post story is unclear, but they offer a somewhat misleading picture of the relative risks being run by the three first ladies. By almost any measure, the Nixon trip to Saigon in July 1969 should surely count as the most dangerous of the three visits. Unlike Bosnia in March 1996 and Saudi Arabia in November 1990, South Vietnam was an actual, not "potential," war zone in the aftermath of the 1968 Tet offensive, said retired Army Lt. Col. Gene Boyer, the Nixons' chief helicopter pilot.

"This was a combat mission," Boyer said yesterday, noting that more than 2,000 U.S. helicopter pilots were shot down and killed in Vietnam. "There were no front lines. Everything outside of Saigon was a war zone."

The picture at right shows Boyer grabbing Pat Nixon's arm to pull her out of the way of the tail-rotor blades after landing his helicopter on the lawn of the presidential palace in Saigon. He had just flown the first lady to a field hospital north of Saigon to visit wounded American servicemen. "We saturated the air with a lot of helicopters and other stuff, which decreased the risk. It was a very secret mission. We went in determined that nothing would leak."

Boyer had spent three or four days in Saigon before the Nixons' arrival, planning the trip and assessing the risks. The itinerary was changed at the last moment, just in case word had leaked out to the Viet Cong. To reduce the risk from machine-gun fire, Boyer made almost vertical landings and takeoffs from above 1,500 feet.

In the meantime, Clinton's claims about a "corkscrew" landing in Tuzla, Bosnia, have been challenged by the pilot who commanded the C-17 that flew her from Ramstein Air Base in Germany. Speaking in a radio interview on the "Rusty Humphries Show," retired Air Force Col. William "Goose" Changose said that he did not undertake any kind of "evasive" maneuver on the approach to Tuzla, and that the only reason the descent was a little steeper than normal was because there were hills around.

"Not only were there no bullets flying around, there wasn't a bumblebee flying around," Changose recalled.

THE PINOCCHIO TEST

There would seem little more to debunk about Clinton's adventures in Bosnia. But it is worth correcting the record about Pat Nixon's visit to Vietnam in July 1969. I have already assigned the maximum four Pinocchios to Clinton for her Tuzla tale.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/26/AR2008032602920_pf.html

This may be somewhat off-topic, but is there any reason you have to vote for a Democrat or a Republican? I've been losing interest in voting for my previous favorite of the three, Obama, and if it comes down to it and I can't, in good conscience, vote for him, I'm not tossing a vote to McCain just because I don't like the other guy. I'll be voting Libertarian if I don't like either of the bowls of shit the major parties serve us.

Ditto what Frogger said, Borg. I've also voted for third party candidates in the past. But while it felt good while I was in the booth marking my ballot, I felt rather left out when the election results started coming in... like I'd wasted my vote. The last few elections, I admit to voting more against a specific candidate than for the one I chose.

Like I said earlier, it would be wonderful for both parties to come up with what the majority of Americans could consider 'worthy opponents' for a change. Don't hold your breath til that happens, though. You could turn as blue as Illinois.

;)
SMW

Well well congratulations all you Republican warriors. Youve managed to jump on the band wagon, and may I say, done a reasonable job of character assassination on the said Clinton candidate.

Now, what about this other dude who stands in the way of more glory glory war mongering, cant we get summit going on him.
LOL - you're unbelievable, Paul.

http://www.lucianne.com/routine/images/03-27-08.jpg

I felt rather left out when the election results started coming in... like I'd wasted my vote.
;)
SMW
__________________________________________-

Id don't think a vote is ever waisted when its counted. It shows support for idea's you believed in.

Hillary lied. Bold faced without even blinking. One doesn’t “forget” being under fire.

As for the dubbyas lie about WMD's, he may not have known whether they had them or not, but he certainly knew they had no way to deliver them to a range of more than a couple hundred miles. He knew that they were no threat to us or any of our allies.

As for the dubbyas lie about WMD's, he may not have known whether they had them or not, but he certainly knew they had no way to deliver them to a range of more than a couple hundred miles. He knew that they were no threat to us or any of our allies.
Well, I disagree with your last sentence, but all in all, that was a pretty reasonable post, Echo.

LOL - you're unbelievable, Paul.

Yeah right. You cant seriously be considering voting for that McCain dude.

I like him more than either Obama or Hillary. Not that that's saying much.

I like him more than either Obama or Hillary. Not that that's saying much.

So to you is he the best of 3 evils, or do you like his policies ?

Yeah right. You cant seriously be considering voting for that McCain dude.


I am not only considering it, I am going to do it. He's not my favorite candidate but I prefer him to either of the other two.

So to you is he the best of 3 evils, or do you like his policies ?
Besides his foreign policy, I do like his policies. But I'd say least of 3 evils - which is why I will not be voting for him in November.

McCain being a conservative and as well as a Republican, how do you guys feel about intervention in the economy, especially over the mortgage crisis ?

McCain being a conservative and as well as a Republican, how do you guys feel about intervention in the economy, especially over the mortgage crisis ?
I'm not sure. I'd let the economic experts handle that one... In general I would prefer very little interference in the economy, but that certainly doesn't mean NO interference at all.

As far as the mortgage crisis, I believe McCain has said that anyone who has been taken advantage of should be helped by the government, others no. Sounds logical to me.

I'm not sure. I'd let the economic experts handle that one... In general I would prefer very little interference in the economy, but that certainly doesn't mean NO interference at all.

As far as the mortgage crisis, I believe McCain has said that anyone who has been taken advantage of should be helped by the government, others no. Sounds logical to me.

While flicking thru the channels today I stopped at CNN.

Talking about intervention in the economy.

Clinton wanted intervention now.

McCain hadnt commited himself.

And I turned over before Obamas thoughts on the matter haha.

Bush threw some bucks at the problem last month, didnt seem to do much good tho.

Well my family hasn't gotten our check from the economic stimulus plan yet... We got the letter that said we will get one though.

Well my family hasn't gotten our check from the economic stimulus plan yet... We got the letter that said we will get one though.

Sooner the better I hope.

The thing about this particular issue which seems obvious to me is that no matter who becomes Pressie, they cant inject their policy until at least Jan 09which will be too late for some people.

I just thought that consrvatives would frown at Government intervention in the economy, no matter who was doing it.

I just thought that consrvatives would frown at Government intervention in the economy, no matter who was doing it.
Most conservatives know that some intervention is necessary.

Bosnia footage found (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/26/121420/881/486/484625).