Obama definitely should not have Hillary as his running mate. It could be hazardous to his health. There are so many mysteriously dead people surrounding Bill Clinton and his presidency. He has underworld connections through the drug kingpin of Arkansas and his little brother's drug problems. "Things happened" in the Clinton years --too many things to seem coincidental.
How badly does Hillary want to be president? VERY badly. Enough to have hubby arrange something? Who can say with authority that it couldn't be possible?
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
7 comments:
We can all be so lucky if Bill Clinton "arranged" something for Obama, since Obama is an obvious Muslim infiltrater who hates America. I mean the guys name is Obama.. that suspiciously rhymes with Osama.. a little too close for my tastes. I mean the guy doesn't wear a pledge pin on his uniform and apperently while a student in Indonesia was visited by the prophet Mohomed in a prophetic dream and told to one day run for president so that he could ultimately slay the great satan and behead the kafirs with the sword of rightous islamic justice! "Can I get a Alahu Ackbar?" Imagine being born with a middle name like Hussain! How many pounds of anthrax did you sell to your cousin Sadam Hussain Osama, or Obama... Whatever...
OK, Steve, I think you are being sarcastic here.
I even feel sorry for Ted Kennedy having a brain tumor. We Christians don't want to see anyone assassinated or ill, etc.
I found Hillary and Obama's public images --and Michelle's, too, to be quite likable. I wouldn't wish them ill or dead.
However, I read a lot of books about clintons--for which none of the authors have been sued for libel that I've heard. And there were a lot of mysterious deaths --and many by shotgun-to-the-head suicide [Yeah, right!] How depressing were the clintons, anyway?? and a few died by plane crashes, secret service personnel who knew a lot about the president --and Ron Brown, just before going to court about campaign finance illegalities of the Clintons --if memory serves me correctly. Vince Foster's suicide occured before HE was to go to court to testify re: the clintons. I think much of this was in his first term with an eye to the 2nd --or if in the 2nd, with an obligation to help Hillary's political future.
by the time they got to the sex scandals, they dared not "disappear" any of those people, or it REALLY would have looked suspicious --and hurt hillary's chances, too. he owed her --BIG TIME!
Despite their likability, I don't trust any liberal democrat to lead the country --despite the flaws alleged about GOP. As for the WMD issue --I believe still that it was concensus to believe that Sadam had WMD --and that's why we went --feeling our oats after settling down Afghanistan for awhile. But now we want to send the GITMO boys back to Afghanistan to start up where they left off -terrorizing everyone who is not letting the Taliban run their country.
The taliban and other terrorists are ruthless--as Sadam was --as Osama is. I believe democrats underestimate the danger and will not keep us safe.
And Democratic policies incur the sense of justified wrath of Islamic terrorists with Dems' advocacy of general immorality as "rights." (As though murder and terrorism weren't worse sins, even in God's sight--or at least equal --very grieving to God.) They think Allah wants Islam to rule the world with Shia law.
It is in our national interests to stabilize Iraq--and we have begun to do that with the surge. We ought not quit our presence there for years --unless the sunnis and shia are humming happily together and friendly to us.
All the economic health and wealth in the world in the USA can't compensate for national INsecurity, enemy attacks, damage to our way of life by terrorism.
I think both parties should pull together and consider what social policies are best for culture --and what priorities for spending are necessary to impact world peace.
The best message for all nations is that of Jesus Christ.
"All the economic health and wealth in the world in the USA can't compensate for national INsecurity, enemy attacks, damage to our way of life by terrorism."
When Adolph Hitler invaded Poland and the Soviet Union, I don't think he anticipated that the rest of the world would turn against him the way they did. And history reveals how such a hyper aggresive offensive nation invading foreing policy can eventually backfire. So how secure are we when we've invaded another sovereign state on mere pretense and made enemies of the entire muslim world - witness Bush's rebuff by the Saudi's when he came begging for more oil...
The WORLD thought the WMD were there and would be used against us and that Osama and Sadam could certainly join forces against their common enemy, us. You didn't have to be Osama's friend to celebrate 9/11 in the middle east.
Moreover, even after 9/11, Saudis and GWB were hand-holding buddies, walking through the flowers --literally. ALso, the Saudis feared Sadam and his designs on his neighbors. (My neighbor who worked there for the US companies in Saudi Arabia says that the Saudis feared Sadam and were glad for our invasion of Iraq. He was there.)
Furthermore, the issue about the oil may be simply financial. The Saudis are getting rich at our expense and don't give a rip if it hurts our economy. that's not Bush's fault. Middle easterners are known as shrewd in the marketplace, willing to haggle and make people pay the highest prices. Nothing really wrong with deceit.
bottom line --all the Middle-eastern Muslims may hope to see the downfall of all the other nations, kneeling to their version of God. Muslim "manifest destiny." "kill the infidel" and so on.
There was little U.S. rush to judgment against invading Iraq --until the WMD weren't located and all the Monday morning quarterbacks (mostly democrats with high hopes) had their say. But we all know that Sadam had advance notice of our coming and much time to get rid of the WMD --and top Iraqi officials said he DID get rid of them --sent them in truck caravan to Syria --and MAYBE IT WAS INTENTIONAL on our part to give advance warning.
Sadam had finally agreed to comply with inspectors at the 11th hour. But would that have settled anything? We would inspect, not find the WMD --and he'd bring them home after the inspectors left. He'd go on where he left off, continuing to plot against and terrorize Kurds, Kuwait, and Shia --also threatening the US and Israel. He had two diabolical sons to follow in his footsteps.
We liberated Iraq from monsters--and MANY of them agree --and voted. Even Sunni eventually voted and participated in the new gov't --but naturally, they aren't used to majority rule when they are in the minority.
We were all watching our tv's, scared that these WMD would be used on our troops as they went in. Maybe Bush wanted to get Sadam without losing our troops to the WMD --so that's why we warned Sadam we were coming if he didn't get rid of them--so he just sent them out of country --and we went in as promised because he was johnny come lately in compliance--and we didn't trust his word --and we believed rightly that Sadam needed to be deposed. He was a bigger threat to world peace, we believed, than our invasion of Iraq.
BTW, we really are much better in motivations than Adolf hitler --and Bush can't compare with him for pure evil.
The WORLD thought the WMD were there and would be used against us and that Osama and Sadam could certainly join forces against their common enemy, us. You didn't have to be Osama's friend to celebrate 9/11 in the middle east.
Moreover, even after 9/11, Saudis and GWB were hand-holding buddies, walking through the flowers --literally. ALso, the Saudis feared Sadam and his designs on his neighbors. (My neighbor who worked there for the US companies in Saudi Arabia says that the Saudis feared Sadam and were glad for our invasion of Iraq. He was there.)
Furthermore, the issue about the oil may be simply financial. The Saudis are getting rich at our expense and don't give a rip if it hurts our economy. that's not Bush's fault. Middle easterners are known as shrewd in the marketplace, willing to haggle and make people pay the highest prices. Nothing really wrong with deceit.
bottom line --all the Middle-eastern Muslims may hope to see the downfall of all the other nations, kneeling to their version of God. Muslim "manifest destiny." "kill the infidel" and so on.
There was little U.S. rush to judgment against invading Iraq --until the WMD weren't located and all the Monday morning quarterbacks (mostly democrats with high hopes) had their say. But we all know that Sadam had advance notice of our coming and much time to get rid of the WMD --and top Iraqi officials said he DID get rid of them --sent them in truck caravan to Syria --and MAYBE IT WAS INTENTIONAL on our part to give advance warning.
Sadam had finally agreed to comply with inspectors at the 11th hour. But would that have settled anything? We would inspect, not find the WMD --and he'd bring them home after the inspectors left. He'd go on where he left off, continuing to plot against and terrorize Kurds, Kuwait, and Shia --also threatening the US and Israel. He had two diabolical sons to follow in his footsteps.
We liberated Iraq from monsters--and MANY of them agree --and voted. Even Sunni eventually voted and participated in the new gov't --but naturally, they aren't used to majority rule when they are in the minority.
We were all watching our tv's, scared that these WMD would be used on our troops as they went in. Maybe Bush wanted to get Sadam without losing our troops to the WMD --so that's why we warned Sadam we were coming if he didn't get rid of them--so he just sent them out of country --and we went in as promised because he was johnny come lately in compliance--and we didn't trust his word --and we believed rightly that Sadam needed to be deposed. He was a bigger threat to world peace, we believed, than our invasion of Iraq.
steve said...
"All the economic health and wealth in the world in the USA can't compensate for national INsecurity, enemy attacks, damage to our way of life by terrorism."
When Adolph Hitler invaded Poland and the Soviet Union, I don't think he anticipated that the rest of the world would turn against him the way they did. And history reveals how such a hyper aggresive offensive nation invading foreing policy can eventually backfire. So how secure are we when we've invaded another sovereign state on mere pretense and made enemies of the entire muslim world - witness Bush's rebuff by the Saudi's when he came begging for more oil...
Mere pretense??
You must have a rather short memory. The UN gave saddamm 10 years to disarm after the resolution of the first gulf war. throughout this whole time he continuously dodged and manouvered against the UN weapons inspectors. It was clearly shown before the second war, by the inspectors, that saddam had long range missiles. One of the items he was supposed to dismantle. Diplomacy has two methods. the carrot and the stick. We tried the carrot with Saddamm for over a decade. We used the stick. You bring up WWII as an example of what happens to invaders. What you fail to realize is that if the treaties drawn up after WWI had been actually enforced some of the greatest attrocities of Germany and Japan could have been nipped in the bud. An unenforced treaty is not worth the paper it is printed on. While war is evil, sometimes a nation must go to war to prevent an even greater evil from happening.
Post a Comment