aldoushuxley said:
Honestly I have no wish to see Hillary the socialist as president,
Please indentify what policies specifically Hillary has implemented or proposed that would categorically switch America's economic system from capitalist to socialist-based if you are going to use this qualifier. kthxbye.
Untimely said:
Those republicans, always looking for some glossy shill who can take their bullshit lies, memorize them, recite them, and make them sound believable.
Actors are the perfect frontmen for their asinine policies.
Kinda like all those overly-liberal actors? I'm pretty sure there are more well-known liberal actors than conservative ones.
alpha22 said:
we all know he is going to be the next president...you can see and hear the fear in the dumbocrats...look at all the people attacking someone who hasnt even joined the race ....all the HATE on the left will be your downfall in 2008....IAM WITH FRED...
alpha22 said:
....after FRED WINS the Nomination.... i cant wait to see the first debate when fred shakes hands with hillary and she will look like a little girl standing next to him and then she will try to act tough next to a man...
Ok, I really don't like Hillary, and it kinda sounds like you don't either, but beyond that, I have no clue what you just said.
Untimely said:
Wow....Sometimes I want to believe that FTR writes his columns, gets drunk, and adopts the persona of illiterate right-wingers just to incite controversy.
But I don't think anyone could really make this stuff up.
aldoushuxley said:
Honestly I have no wish to see Hillary the socialist as president,
Please indentify what policies specifically Hillary has implemented or proposed that would categorically switch America's economic system from capitalist to socialist-based if you are going to use this qualifier. kthxbye.
I'll give you some pretty damn socialist-sounding quotes by her:
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"...because an uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact. So what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. and that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground. The same with energy. You know, we can't keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil and the need to deal with global warming and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God's creation and just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
She also worked as a law clerk for a lawyer for the US Communist Party. That doesn't necessarily tell you her position, but I doubt she would have done that if she were opposed to communism.
This is all just from a few minutes on Google. I'm sure there's much more evidence that she at the very least leans toward the socialist/communist side of things.
No one is going to try to pass legislation turning the US into a socialist country all at once. That doesn't mean there aren't socialists in government trying to move the government in that direction.
aldoushuxley said:
Honestly I have no wish to see Hillary the socialist as president, I would much rather have Obama as president if it was to be a democratic president. As for a republican president I would like Mcain, but I know that will not happen.
thrash242 said:
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
"...because an uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact. So what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. and that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground. The same with energy. You know, we can't keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil and the need to deal with global warming and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God's creation and just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
So a concern for the common good = socialism/Marxism? I mean, "the common good" is a pretty common political tradition. In fact, it's one of the central tenets of republicanism too - the idea of sacrifice, of being bonded to the collective whole. I dunno. I'm not convinced. But I'm a lefty schmuck.
It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society.
Now, there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets, but markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed.
This is the new Republican collective attack on Hillary. It is quite simply, a load of shit. Lemmings like Thrash242 buy right into it.
Unless you think "free markets" refers to socialism.
Ok maybe socialist was harsh, but the woman is rife with controversy and childishly refuses to admit she voted for the war in Iraq. It would be so much better if we had the saner and less contradictory democrat candidate like Obama.
aldoushuxley said:
Ok maybe socialist was harsh, but the woman is rife with controversy and childishly refuses to admit she voted for the war in Iraq. It would be so much better if we had the saner and less contradictory democrat candidate like Obama.
Not just harsh, but pretty damn stupid.
Of course Hillar is controversial. Go look up FTR's "Fuck Hillary Clinton" thread, part of this very series. He dumped on her from a great height.
But your current president is a big-spending socialist, if we're judging by government as a share of total spending, or by public debt accumulation.
Necessary Roughness was great! Thompson was all, You're fired," at the end, talking to the Dean guy, after he'd gotten plowed by the players just after they won the game. Man, man I wish I could get me some of the Bakula-Sinbad grid-iron glory right now. If I could any amendment I wanted to, it'd be that anyone who was in Necessary Roughness would automatically get to be president.
Oh, and Kathy Ireland was my dream girl for oh so many youthful years.
Yeah I know Dubyah has wracked up a huge debt. When will we get a president that tackles that issue, the debt, in my opinion the single thing that will make or break our country in the next twenty to fifty years. All be I think the war was a necessary if distasteful evil and I would prefer if we could get the closest thing to a resolution there. Of course it is costing us way to much to fund this war, I do not see how we can keep it up with out completely crippling our nation in the next twenty years, just like after Vietnam our country took a leap into the economic shitter. Honestly I feel that the heart of any government and its successes are based on its economic policies, and the US just isn't doing so well.
Fuck you, not Ronald Reagan the man gave amnesty a chance, prevented the cold war and was a strong leader when our nation was in desperate need of one. Who would you rather have had at that time? Ted Kennedy? Dukakis? Jesse Jackson? Jimmy Carter he was the right man for the job. I agree about Thompson, but you are way out of line dissing Reagan the way you did.
balekoner said:
Fuck you, not Ronald Reagan the man gave amnesty a chance, prevented the cold war and was a strong leader when our nation was in desperate need of one. Who would you rather have had at that time? Ted Kennedy? Dukakis? Jesse Jackson? Jimmy Carter he was the right man for the job. I agree about Thompson, but you are way out of line dissing Reagan the way you did.
montestruc said:
I was thinking he was horrid until FTR pointed out how lazy he is. Like lazy in a government official is a bad thing. I don't think he will be energetic enough to get us into another war, keep him well fed and get him a mistress or three and he will leave us the hell alone.
Sounds like a plan to me.
Not likely, Monte. Fred is just as much a warhawk as the rest of the GOP cabal. I dont trust Fred for one minute. Thats why its so important to take away the Republican Party from the neocons. Ron Paul is the only one who is not a neocon and offers something different.
aldoushuxley said:
Yeah I know Dubyah has wracked up a huge debt. When will we get a president that tackles that issue, the debt, in my opinion the single thing that will make or break our country in the next twenty to fifty years. ...
Well, we could always repeal the 22nd Amendment, then reelect Clinton, or possibly Carter - the only two living ex-presidents to have actually reduced the National Debt.
Or, at least don't elect a Republican. They haven't done so well lately.
Good synopsis, FTR. But I've heard all of this for weeks from Thom Hartman and Stephanie Miller on their radio shows.
You might want to expound on what Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was like. This guy advocated "necklacing" political opponents by filling a tire with gasoline, putting it around a victims head and lighting it on fire. He called it a "beautiful thing". Not to mention that he was also a communist, America-hating dictator. What on Earth was Fred Thompson having to do anything with this guy?!
Neocon conservatives are burying their heads in the sand for this Fred guy. For example, every right-wing talk-host from Rush to Hannity condemns the McCain-Feingold bill (and imo, rightly so) as unconstitutional abridgement of first-amendment protected speech. Fred Thompson supported it.
Fred Thompson also supports CFR which is the spearhead for the NAU. Bush has been getting flak from both conservatives and progressives over this NAU business. Fred is following in Bush's footsteps. Its hard to really find ANY difference between Fred and Bush, besides that Fred can act like a strong leader on TV.
Fred must be exposed. We must take away the GOP from neocons!
Rafi
Santa Monica, CA
January 2003
JUL 09, 2007 05:30 PM