Hillary has some thoughts
ABC Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton accused the Bush administration of squandering the balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility that she said her husband created as president.
Clinton said she doesn’t support a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq nor does she support leaving our troops there for an open-ended period. Instead, she said the U.S. should encourage the Iraqi people to take more control of their security and let them know American troops won’t be there forever.
There is an idea! I wonder why no one thought of that?! Oh that’s right, it is the plan!
“We need a much stronger commitment to the underlying values of America,” Clinton said, adding that the U.S. needs to follow the rule of law in setting its foreign policy.
What does that mean? Should we sacrifice ourselves so France will be our friend? No thanks!
Clinton was equally outspoken on the economy. She told several thousand spectators that her husband, former President Bill Clinton, was able to balance the budget while at the same time creating 22 million jobs. But she said that fiscal responsibility has been lost of late.
“Borrow and spend, borrow and spend, that’s all we’ve done the last four years,” Clinton said. “This has been the only time in history that our president has taken us to war and cut taxes at the same time. It doesn’t add up.”
Clinton said it’s difficult to deal with free trade and currency issues in countries like China when we are borrowing billions of dollars from them to handle our deficit.
“It’s hard to ask our banker to be accountable,” Clinton said.
Well Hillary, can you please explain how it is that we cut taxes, have not cut spending, yet the revenues are greater than they ever were in you co=presidency AND the deficit is dropping faster than we were promised?
Asked about Bush Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Clinton said she’s eager for the Senate confirmation process to be played out. She did say there is one question she thinks Miers should be asked.
“Please tell us one thing you disagree with the president on,” Clinton said to loud applause from the crowd.
And that would tell us what? How exactly does that tell us anything about her qualification for the SCOTUS?
October 26, 2005 - 08:56 AM on October 26th, 2005
Don’t confuse Hillary with facts. She just intends on dictating if she is elected.
October 26, 2005 - 09:24 AM on October 26th, 2005
“Please tell us one thing you disagree with the president on”
I’ll give that one. Otherwise she can go back to Clearwater.
October 26, 2005 - 09:32 AM on October 26th, 2005
And if the answer is; “I don’t like his landscaping practices”, that would satisfy you? Disagreeing with anyone is not a qualification nor a pre-requisite for determining the qualifications of a potential Jurist. What amazes me is that it was Hillary that wants the answer. Wasn’t it loyalty that people died for during her 8 years?
October 26, 2005 - 09:39 AM on October 26th, 2005
The wicked Witch of the west is running in 2008 and will have her flying monkeys with her:razz:
October 26, 2005 - 09:39 AM on October 26th, 2005
Don’t forget about Susan McDougal’s jail time.
October 26, 2005 - 09:46 AM on October 26th, 2005
2, Z, what if the things Miers disagreed with W on were all the nice things W says about Bubba Clinton in public?
October 26, 2005 - 09:53 AM on October 26th, 2005
5- Oh that is right! The hero! She went to jail so as not to testify against him. Didn’t her hubby die?
October 26, 2005 - 10:01 AM on October 26th, 2005
7, Yes, he did, but before he could finish cooperating.
October 26, 2005 - 10:02 AM on October 26th, 2005
8-:wink:
October 26, 2005 - 10:55 AM on October 26th, 2005
Clinton was equally outspoken on the economy. She told several thousand spectators that her husband, former President Bill Clinton, was able to balance the budget while at the same time creating 22 million jobs. But she said that fiscal responsibility has been lost of late.
Bush has been fiscally irresponsible with the prescription drug boondoggle. But I have to laugh every time somebody talks about how Klinton’s wonderful economy and peace “dividend”.
Bush has the misfortune of being the President stuck with the mess Klninton left. The Klinton economy was a bubble, fueled by speculation and the internet tech revolution. Don’t forget that Klinton also inherited a rising economy from Bush I, fueled by cheap, abundant oil. Klinton did NOTHING to keep that oil supply cheap and available, mostly ignored the growing terrorist threat, and instead went to war in Kosovo where we had NO U.S. interests and were not attacked or threatened in any way (and to help the Muslims to boot!).
Klinton left a falling economy, an impending terrorism crisis that exploded on 9/11, and the perception amongst our enemies that America was a degenerate paper tiger ripe for attack.
I don’t care one bit about his philandering, and I think looking back now maybe it was a mistake to constantly attack Klinton over that because perhaps it distracted him from managing things like the terrorism threat.
But when Bush came into office it was like the aftermath of a huge party. The food and drink were gone, the good times were over, and all that was left was the cleanup and to pay the bill. That is what we are doing now.
Hillary and others should shut their yaps about Klinton’s “legacy”, because it is a sorrowful, shameful display of malfeasance.
October 26, 2005 - 11:01 AM on October 26th, 2005
10- Robert good points. She forgets that because of that surplus he built up, we had companies fleeing our shores, Heintz comes to mind. We taxed companies off our shores. We taxed people out of discretionary spending money. We taxed people out of jobs.
October 26, 2005 - 11:18 AM on October 26th, 2005
Peejz…please, please do not fall for that Clinton “surplus” propaganda…. THERE NEVER WAS A SURPLUS.
They moved money around from the SS trust fund, and cooked the books, and everyone knows it.
don’t believe anything that ooozes from that carpet-bagging bitche’s mouth.
October 26, 2005 - 11:26 AM on October 26th, 2005
Well, there were some surpluses due to Gingrich and Co controlling the spending. But the surpluses came from SS(using those funds rather than borrowing) and from taxing the people at such a high rate that in 1999, we started to see the levy breaking.
October 26, 2005 - 12:11 PM on October 26th, 2005
6. That would be a start. The hearings should be interesting and informative.
October 26, 2005 - 12:18 PM on October 26th, 2005
14, what does that have to do with Miers’ qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice???
A SCJ is to be interpreting the law as it applies to the case before the SC, not making up law, not following law not legislated by the US Congress, and DEFINITELY NOT ACTING ON WHAT THE SCJ PERSONALLY AGREES WITH OR NOT ABOUT THE PRESIDENT.
October 26, 2005 - 01:38 PM on October 26th, 2005
The hearings have a lot to do with Miers’s qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice. If she can’t convince the Judiciary Committee and 50 Senators to vote for her, then she is gone. She wouldn’t be the first nominee to fall.
October 26, 2005 - 01:56 PM on October 26th, 2005
16, Z, you did a shiloh to my 15.
October 26, 2005 - 02:43 PM on October 26th, 2005
Considering the President’s MBA from Harvard and his proven ability to do strategic planning, I have to wonder if Harriet Meiers is a smoke screen. What will the American public’s reaction be if the Dems go ape over Meiers not having a judicial record, etc etc and therefore not qualified, only to have President Bush then nominate Janet Rogers Brown, or Priscilla Owens? The public would have a canary if the Dems then started to argue about the second nominee not being qualified after blowing off the first one. Especially if the second one is an African American female. Let the Dems burn up a ton of good will with the public over Meiers and see how they have to react to an Owens, Brown, or Luttig nomination. Justice Stevens isn’t exactly a spring chicken either. He could end up stepping down or dying before the 2008 elections too. He’s over 80 and those elections are over 3 years away. A lot can happen to an octogenerian in 3 years. This could very easily be an ambush in the making.
October 26, 2005 - 04:53 PM on October 26th, 2005
18-We think more alike than not!:wink: