As we all know, NAFTA was supported by Republicans and signed in by Bill -- who is still a Democrat's Darling --popular with his party. So Hillary's problem has little to do with differences between Clintons and Obama on policy issues (they're both liberals) - and more to do with her being a woman and vulnerable to lose in the fall because of her bad history and her bad press, I suspect.
I haven't thought of her in such negative terms as a person --as the media and comedians have --blaming Bill's infidelities on her alleged coldness and lesbian tendencies, etc. (which tendencies are fictional, I believe. I think she really IS some Tammy Wynette standing by her man! But baking cookies would have been good for her image! ) I just think she is too liberal on the social issues and wants socialism --wants gov't to have the power. She said that. "We are going to take away the power of the...." health care industry, I believe it was. The WE was the federal government --taking away the power of the people, in my opinion.
The Republicans are just waiting to bring out the fact that Obama has these real estate and investment items in his history that show him to be another shady, self-serving, free-enterprising dirty capitalist with questionable ethics like the Clintons--or at least financial ties to people of dubious character.
When all sides get through with negative campaigning, there will be no heroes left. If Obama and McCain are smart enough, they will stay above the fray --even if their parties and supporters don't --because they both have skeletons hanging out of their closets.
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
8 comments:
Tell me something... It's still "We the People" right?
If there's a new way.. I'll be the first in line.. but it better work this time..
When Hillary says, "We're taking the power away from....," we sounds like Gov't --not WE, the People.
We need to be guided by principle and not power-grabbers --power-seekers --change agents who want to lead us to their view of utopia --without observing great principles. People who would say anything to get the vote of the masses who vote for promises of taking from the havemores to give to the havelesses. That's why I'm leery of non-Christians in gov't. Their principles are suspect and unknown.
If you think the Health Care Lobbyists, HMOs and AMA are "the people" you've lost your mind.
I once had a political friend --who leaned right on social issues --but left in her party affiliation.
She was a political animal --classic.
Lots of confidence, charisma, a dominant personality in any group--and claimed Christian faith. But she believed in taking every advantage of money that could be claimed in her office -- go to conferences and skip out of meetings to go shopping--eat at the fanciest restaurants because it was paid for as part of her political office -- always saying, "Come on --I deserve it!" And she thought nothing of lying to excuse a child from school --or herself from duty -- and was self-justifying all the way.
yet, and here's the irony --claimed to be a Christian.
When it was time to rise on the political ladder, she renounced her pro-life views and stated, that she "trusted the women and their doctors to make the right decisions." She would stab a friend in the back who veered from her control.
Politicians can be very honorable--or very deceiving. The challenge is to discern the truth about them.
Actually, I have not lost my mind, Ano Nymous.
I think we need autonomy, freedom and competition in healthcare --and we won't get it with gov't control. Just more rules, expense, and regulation --and higher taxes burdening all.
Right now we need tort reform and you'd see a big reduction in healthcare expense. Lawyers and lawsuits are the reasons behind the high costs. The lobbyists and the AMA and the HMO's all want that tort reform for honorable and good reasons. The greed of the lawyers is driving up the price of medicine. Anyone with an unfortunate situation can sue his doctors for their dissatisfaction and get a sympathetic settlement --usually out of court because lawyers are so expensive and juries are so gullible. ("If a guy is suffering, the doctor's malpractice insurance can afford to pay for it.")
Yes, corporate heads are also greedy -but they do provide a lot of healthcare jobs --and decent pay for their many many employees --
Granted, the doctor I know well has to pressure some of the insurance companies to pay for the care he orders.
but when Hillary says WE --I know she means federal bureaucrats.
I hope there will be a battle of negative ads exposing all of these frauds and criminals. Only through transparency and objective reporting will these thugs be defeated. I will provide a brief summation of the information that will derail the big "3".
McCain:
1. Violated the 1st Amendment by banning political speech with mcCain-Feingold
2. Brokered a back-room deal (to avoid scrutiny) to give amnesty to illegals and allow continuous illegal trespass on American soil.
3. Direct illegal involvement in the Keating-5 scandal
4. Improper relationship with a lobbyist. He made calls on behalf of her clients and illegally influenced legislation pending under his committee.
Obama:
1. Held racist and Marxist views as a young man and wrote about them in his books and other writings.
2. Was given a sweetheart real estate deal with indicted criminal Rezko.
3. Rezko received money for the real estate purchase from an Iraqi who made huge sums of money off the U.S war and occupation. Obama says he is against the war, but receives money to buy his house from those who profit from it.
Hillary:
See my post at: http://dillsnapcogitation.wordpress.com/category/hillary-clinton/
But wwe are stuck with one of the big 3 so whom do you recommend? What is your solution, Johnny?
Cynthia McKinney - The Champion of the Green Party (PBUH)
Post a Comment