Members ThePrinceOfSunspear Posted January 5, 2014 Members Share Posted January 5, 2014 (edited) No one said the "Clinton's are racists" We said that they were using racial tactics and making some very suspect remarks (and frankly it was only Bill Clinton that people were talking about). And the only time I was really angry at Bill Clinton was during South Carolina. I never called him racist. No one I know of called him or Hillary that. Neither did anyone in the media so stop with that. You're trying to revise the 2008 campaign on the Democratic side. Yes it was a hard fought and at times ugly bitter primary but it never reached the point where either side was never going to vote for the other candidate. And Hillary Clinton gave such an incredible speech at the convention that year that any ill will I had towards her husband vanished by the time then Senator Obama was the formal nominee for president.... As for your weak attempt to bring Edwards into this I think DRW50 has already addressed it perfectly but I'll just reiterate.... John Edwards is not even mentioned in the Democratic Party and he will never be a factor in the Democratic Party. Edwards doesn't have a cult following and worshipping his every move and statement blindly. John Edwards is not a contributor to MSNBC or CNN. John Edwards is not out there attacking the head figured of the Republican Party on a daily basis like Mama Grizzly does to President Obama. Lastly I think 99.9% of Democrats and humanity in general was completely sickened by what he did to Elizabeth (may she RIP). Case Closed Edited January 5, 2014 by ThePrinceOfSunspear 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Max Posted January 5, 2014 Members Share Posted January 5, 2014 (edited) I already acknowledged that Edwards is an outcast, but you conveniently left out the fact that Ted Kennedy (who did things that are far worse that what Edwards did), John Kennedy, and Bill Clinton are worshiped by today's Democrats. You can talk about Mark Sanford, Newt Gingrich, and David Vitter if you wish, but none of those men command anywhere near the admiration and respect in their own party as do those Democratic perverts. (And if you'd like to talk about Sarah Palin, she's only loved by the Tea Party, not by the entire GOP.) I never said that you personally called the Clintons racists, but I certainly remember other liberals doing so. Do you remember how much Hillary was attacked when she made the idiotic statement that she was the candidate of "hard-working Americans, white Americans" (which was a hell of a lot more brazen than Palin's "real Americans" remark)? http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/08/clinton-touts-support-from-white-americans/#comments http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/sohillary-clintons-stopped-hiding-her-racism/ http://www.thenation.com/blog/how-does-hillary-clinton-feel-about-white-racist-vote# However, I certainly do agree with you on the point that Democrats would have been united behind her had she been the 2008 nominee. After all, few, if any, liberals seemed to mind when Biden used race-bating tactics and told a black audience that the GOP would put them back in chains. Edited January 5, 2014 by Max 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ThePrinceOfSunspear Posted January 5, 2014 Members Share Posted January 5, 2014 I'll be honest with you I don't have the time right now to read all those articles in depth to see if the author actually calls Bill or Hillary Clinton a "racist". From what I recall, not a single person in the mainstream media actually said that Bill Clinton or his wife was a racist....unless you're including any every lightweight out there who has a blog online or a column for one small website or the other and I'd assume it was a very very small percentage of people who actually used that term. As for the other Democratic icons you mentioned....Hillary didn't have cancer (at least that we know of) and she definitely didn't die while Bill was in office having his affair. Most importantly of all Hillary forgave him and frankly it didn't affect Bill Clinton's performance as President. Considering the absolutely slow (and I use the word slow just as a sign of respect cuz other words pop into my head when I think of Dubya) who inherited the White House after him I'd say that his dalliance with Monica means little and less with every passing day. JFK is revered for what he did as President. Not because of his private life matters. Yes I've heard about his affairs (who hasn't?) but he was dealing with a lot as President and he wasn't the first President and nor was the last to ever have an affair. I respect him cuz of the times he was living in and his ability to handle the issues of those times. I'll admit that I know absolutely nothing about Ted Kennedy and whatever acts you're referring to.....but as others have said the man was the Lion of the Senate and dedicated practically his entire life to public service. So until I know more about Ted Kennedy I will continue to remember him fondly. RE Biden: I don't know if Biden apologized but he only said what a lot of black people feel deep down. The only problem is that he's in the public spot light. But don't kid yourself. There's a large swath of the Republic Party that IF they had the power would love nothing more than to deport all the illegal immigrants and return to the good ole days of Antebellum slavery. And I believe that 100%. We just saw what that idiot from Duck Dynasty said about the African American's he knew growing up "didn't mind" being chains or something to that effect recently. So yeah I had no problem with Joe Biden's statement and I honestly laughed so hard when he said it cuz oddly enough it is the truth and absolutely hysterical when you think about the year and age we're living in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted January 5, 2014 Members Share Posted January 5, 2014 Bill Clinton did nothing wrong. Everyone except republicans saw they had no business asking him what they asked him, why they were asking him, and the true motivation for the impeachment. GOP and chains? Here is the problem with the GOP on this issue: Biden is working with what the GOP gives him. If one were to look at the GOP and see SC wanting the confederate flag, that Duck Dynasty idiot and his comment and how every elected republican ran to protect him, all the racists that go to Tea Party rallies, the intermittent reports about how some republican somewhere used monkey references to deride Obama, and on and on and on, it is not difficult to tar the GOP as the party of racists. (and when it comes to the Tea Party, it is) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 6, 2014 Members Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Meanwhile, the "Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association" is pushing for an "uprising" to make clerks violate the law about marriage licenses in Utah. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/utah-same-sex-marriage-opponents-call-for-uprising What does any of this have to do with the Constitution or peace? Edited January 6, 2014 by DRW50 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted January 6, 2014 Members Share Posted January 6, 2014 What really chaps my azz is this "Well you all never call out Democrats" crap that still seems to be the consistent theme by some in this thread. MHP actually said how sorry she was at something that was taken in a negative light. When was the last time ANY far right wing celeb apologize for the truly evil and hateful things they have said...and continue to say...about any progressive? I also continue to see the racial hatred of our current POTUS. All I've ever asked is that he be judged fairly (there is plenty factual material that he can be blasted on) but all i still seem to read in this thread is THE most hateful things about the man without one shred of proof. Then if he isn't gone after, well then let's attack his family, because "well no one said anything about the far left when they attacked Bush's family" which by that disgusting reasoning makes it ok. Those persons in this thread feel not only do they speak for an entire segment of our society, they don't want to even consider what someone with a differing opinion might be saying. They just come in, make really silly comments based on lies and their own personal hatred, and then want to call out anyone who won't agree with them. Hopefully this year we will get rid of many of these elected officials (and I haven't heard one word about voter laws past by Republican-led state houses that makes it almost impossible for minorities to vote) and get some people in there, regardless of the party, who will actually work towards the betterment of our country. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ThePrinceOfSunspear Posted January 8, 2014 Members Share Posted January 8, 2014 It's really unfortunate though that this year the Republicans might actually make gains in the Senate as well as retain the House....unless the economy is firing on all cylinders, the Affordable Care Act continues to improve and gets even significantly better, and there's another big debt ceiling fight which ends badly for the Republicans I see little possibility of the Democrats doing very well this election year. Much as I've come to dislike most of Politico because of their obvious desire for a return to the glory days of Republican dominance, I can't help but acknowledge that the deck is pretty much stacked against the President and unless he's got a few hidden surprises and a lot of factors break his way, 2014 is looking like 2010 all over again... The worst part though is that it may change Hillary Clinton's mind about running for President. Much as I want her to do so, its going to be very difficult to run as a Dem if the economy is still in the doldrums and the President's approval continues to drop... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Max Posted January 8, 2014 Members Share Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) Prince, please note that I plan to respond to your more lengthy post, as well as to the posts written by Qfan and Roman. However, I have just been too busy lately, and all these posts require long responses on my part, so I haven't had time to respond yet. Regarding the following post: There was little chance of Dems ever re-gaining control of the House in 2014, even if conditions were optimal. If I am not mistaken, a political party (that controls the White House) has never re-gained the House majority during the sixth year of a presidency. I'm sure that some liberals will blame gerrymandering as the sole reason for the GOP majority, but I would be shocked if the total popular vote for GOP House candidates doesn't exceed that for Dem candidates in 2014 (which was not the case in 2012). The GOP will certainly make gains in the Senate, but the odds are 50% at best of them re-taking it. Of course, they should be able to flip all the seats in AK, AR, LA, MT, NC, SD, and WV, but winning election's isn't the GOP's strong suit. I'm especially worried about Tea-Party extremists getting the nominations in AK and GA (a seat currently held by Republicans). I know that Dems would like to take out McConnell, but I think he narrowly survives (because KY voters' desire to see a GOP senate is stronger than their dislike of McConnell). If Scott Brown actually runs in NH, I think he will have a greater than 50% chance of winning that seat. The GOP seems to be delusional about VA, however: actually, Mark Warner could be beaten (though it would be hard), but Bush associate Ed Gillespie is not the person who could do it. It's possible that Hillary could change her mind about running, but (barring any major health problems) I highly doubt it, because 2016 is the last possible chance that she has to run. Yet, the problem (as you stated) is that 2016 looks like it may be a problematic year for the Democrats. (This is why I am so perplexed as to how some of Hillary's die-hard supporters can be so sure that she will win.) But two years is a long time in politics, and a terrible 2014 won't necessarily spell doom for liberals in 2016. Edited January 8, 2014 by Max 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted January 8, 2014 Members Share Posted January 8, 2014 Hllary will win because the republican have nobody except Chris Christie, who cannot win. Every cycle the media tries to make something happen for some random republican: Rick Perry was going to be a force, Tim Pawlenty was a major player, Fred Thompson was going to be the new Reagan, Bachmann, Palin, Rudy, and then they continually tout Paul Ryan as some great intellectual. A more politically inept bunch was never found. The republicans currently have nobody that has any realistic chance of getting elected except for Christie, who has polls but everything else going against him. I am sure they are praying for Jeb Bush vs Christie in the primaries, and would take either vs Hillary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ThePrinceOfSunspear Posted January 8, 2014 Members Share Posted January 8, 2014 Re the House there was a time last year (after the debt ceiling fiasco & the government shutdown) that things were looking VERY good as far as Dems retaking the House. But you're right about the historical precedent. No party has ever regained the majority during the 6th year. I'll be satisfied tho if they can net half the amount needed and then if/when Hillary runs in 2016 it will be a tidal wave of Democratic voters ready to retake the House. As for the Senate I'm pinning my hopes on the Kentucky race. I have a feeling that its going to be very very close. Its hard to get a read on how well Allison Lundergan Grimes is doing as a candidate but from what I hear she's okay and is raising a lot of money so I think she'll be very competitive. The Georgia race is also going to be interesting. West Virginia I'm not too sure about but we'll see. Scott Brown is playing with fire in New Hampshire...if he runs and loses his entire political career is over I think. So I wonder if he's really willing to do that or be patient and run for president in 2016. Ultimately he knows he'll be labeled a carpetbagger in NH and he might not even make it past the primary....decisions decisions... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted January 10, 2014 Members Share Posted January 10, 2014 Interesting turn of events in the Christie story. What should have been a tiny local kerfuffle has turned into a story of a vindictive and petty Governor and team. His claims of not knowing anything are pretty flimsy. This bridge stuff was first around weeks and weeks ago, does he mean to say in all this time he never looked into what happened? Who believes that or that his entire top team just all happened to be petty and spiteful individuals and this has nothing to do with him? Even if that is true it sort of shows you he is incapable of picking people for his office. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ThePrinceOfSunspear Posted January 10, 2014 Members Share Posted January 10, 2014 I don't believe he knew nothing but I'm equally as certain that there is not a shred of evidence linking him to this cruel, vicious, and petty act of political revenge. His press conference was very good from a PR perspective but it all seemed fake to me....the big guy acting like a wounded animal.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 15, 2014 Members Share Posted January 15, 2014 And this is the type of silly nonsense that makes me reluctant to identify with either party. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/dems-hit-golden-globe-e-cigarettes-102215.html?hp=r6 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members juppiter Posted January 16, 2014 Members Share Posted January 16, 2014 I don't think it is silly nonsense. THere has not been enough research on e-cigs. They are advertised as safer than traditional cigarettes but there is no proof of that. They are not regulated by any entity. There is an epidemic of teenagers using them. I am personally a smoker but I get this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 16, 2014 Members Share Posted January 16, 2014 It's not so much as whether they're safe as why this is a big Congressional issue. It reminds me of hysteria about violent video games, or Janet Jackson's nipple, or music lyrics. It's Nanny State-ism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.