Take off the gloves! Hillary 2008!

In an exchange with Alan Greenspan on the Senate floor.

Bam!

In other news, Condi made it pretty clear this weekend that she will not run for President or any other public office.

well, Condi would never make it in anyway.. too, well.. let me be nice and just not say anything.

neither would Hillary.. too controvertial.


if we want a female pres, we should look to someone more capable and honest...

how about Oprah? she likes giving things away.. plus, her State of the Union address would be a bit more interesting. (i can't help but think of her trying to get guests in for that.. lol)

but seriously folks, my only opinion is that male/female doesn't matter.. honesty and a soul hungry for healing America's wounds (on the homefront moreso than abroad) are at the top of my list. unfortunately, the only way to get someone like that is to look to thrid-party.. but the Republicrats have become very efficient at slapping blinders on the American public.. and blocking the path for third-party delegates.

sorry.. didn't mean to rant.. forgive my semi-jack.

Capable and honest???? And Hillary isn't??

Very confused here.

*

I remember I read once in a men's magazine (Esquire or something) where men were asked if they would vote for Hillary for president.

The most common response? "No way! With those thighs? Are you kidding?"

Take your healing if you wish... I'll take safety at the top of my list. September will be 4 years w/o another attack on American soil. Even if you don't like him congrats are in order for President Bush. I'll take safety vs more attacks on our soil and the world in love with us tyvm.


Sure, sure... last I checked the Dems weren't lining up in favor of a 3rd party. How about at least attempting to appear just a teeny bit unbias there.

[SATIRE] Aren't all Hillary supporters confused? [/SATIRE]

We got the same period of protection from Clinton and Carter.

Hillary is so on game right now it's spooky. Even I'm impressed and I've always loved her.

I'll repeat this again and again until it starts getting through. Safety is one thing, to be sure. But, not at the expense of civil liberties.

I find that amusing considering there hasn't been a single foiled attempt at an attack. If there had been the propoganda machine would be shouting about it from the highest mountain.

Let's see... you have always loved her... and EVEN YOU are impressed. Exactly how is that supposed to be a surprise? Not picking a fight, just cureous why you worded it that way.

Now if I on the other hand were somehow impressed, which I am not, then that would be something to take note of.

Oh, and about the Clinton/Carter comment surely even you recognize that 911 changed everything. How about a little honesty and tell us whether you thought it was even possible to go for almost 4 years without another attack on our soil after 911. I know that I didn't think it was.

Whether you love or hate President Bush, you have to give him at least a little credit for that fact. Go ahead, it won't hurt... much.

Attempt to divert attention away from something positive if you wish, but the fact remains.

Who’s to say that attacks have not been foiled without us knowing? Doesn't matter anyway, there has been no attack in almost 4 years on US soil. That is a fact.

What I find amusing is how utterly painful it is for you to praise President Bush for anything. I disliked President Clinton as much as you dislike President Bush but I sure think that some positive things came about because of his presidency and am not afraid to say so.

That is a different issue altogether Paolo. I am interested to hear what tops your list between safety and healing. Please choose between those two and elaborate.

Yes, I thought it was possible. The only action of this administration to deter terrorist activity is linked to starting an unjust war in a sovereign nation and creating terrorist training grounds where none existed before.

At the same time he has placed the country in financial dire straits with an enormous debt. As a result, his 2006 budget proposal now will require that Veterans pay an additional $250 "user fee" and doubles the prescripton drug copay for Veterans. In my new home state of North Carolina that will affect 792,646 Veterans. All this during a time of war keeping America "safe".

America is not safer under George Bush. Bush let the attacks happen in his watch. Half of the intelligence memos he received while President directly spoke about circumstances like those on September 11 and Bush was more worried about old Cold War crap. He was trying to relive his father's greatness and was asleep at the wheel. I'm just grateful he's only had the chance to fuck up once while President.

I like Hillary so much that it takes a lot for her to impress me, yet she does. Perhaps it isn't a powerful statement, but it is to me.

That's a rather leading question, Billy. Your earlier post inferred that "safety" trumps all, and I just don't buy that. Further, I don't think that you can de-couple the issue of preserving civil liberties from the discussion of appropriate measures by which to protect the homeland. I'm not big fan of Hillary - OR - W, so my interest is clearly in preserving the very foundational freedoms the US has come to take for granted. I think 9/11 is being co-opted to justify massive power grabs, such as the Patriot Act and increased Pentagon power. Maybe your sentiments about GW are correct, but at what cost?

As for ranking or prioritizing safety vs healing, I think there are too many interdependencies to objectively rank them as such. Both are important for a number of reasons, both similar and distinct. From my perspective, increased national unity will have a correlary impact on overall national security.

It takes a lot for her to impress you ay? LOL I can say that in ernest, you on the other hand it isn’t much of a stretch.

Here you go again, trying to divert the attention from something that is a fact. I will not go into all of the ways that Clinton and Carter screwed up, further taking attention away from what was stated.

Any way you slice it... almost 4 years w/o an attack on US soil IS A GOOD THING. Set aside your partisan arguments for a teeny weeny second and say well done. Otherwise you simply come across as a far far left wing radical who cares more about making President Bush look bad then the safety of your fellow Americans.

Now that I think about it, maybe not and this is the reason you lost the election in the first place. Vote for me because I hate Bush too was your mantra if I am not mistaken. The Democratic party is headed down a dark deep hole with this Destroy President Bush at all cost mentality. He was elected because the majority of Americans have safety at the top of their list, not warm fuzzy feelings from the rest of the world.

I probably shouldn't even point it out either. All that it does is continue to drive the democratic party into oblivion giving them no chance at the Oval Office in 2008 which works for me.

On that note... go ahead... pile it on... don't hold back... tell us all once again why you hate President Bush with all of your being and how we all should join you. Please please... do it... I give you a hearty TY ahead of time for the 2008 election.

Come on Paolo, I never said that safety trumps all so please do not speak for me. I did say in direct response to Cybin that Safety comes before healing. That is what I was addressing.


That is such a cop out… come on my friend, surely this question isn’t too tough for you. Which is it… safety of healing? You cannot choose both.

Hmm, why not?

You know I loves ya Billy, but I don't like being baited with leading questions. From a purely Maslovian perpective, of course safety needs have to be met before love, self-esteem or self-actualization needs. What I am saying is that, in this present culture and administration, you can't tweak one without affecting the other. And, to say I put "words in your mouth" is kind of an over-reaction to my use of the term, "inferred," dontcha think?

It was not a leading question at all. Cybin made this statement, “honesty and a soul hungry for healing America's wounds (on the homefront moreso than abroad) are at the top of my list”. I disagree and said so. I want to know where you stand given those two choices.

To answer a direct question by diverting the subject to something else then not answering the original question is certainly an effective tactic to get around having to answer the original question but the question still remains. Given the choice between safety and healing which is at the top of your list? I know all about the Maslovian perpective but alas, I was not asking you that. I want to know what you think my friend. Which do you consider more important?

Cybin was clear, healing is at the top of his list. I was also clear, safety is at the top of my list. How about you? Do I have to get Vinny to make a lil visit to you to get an answer to that question? Hehe

Upholding our civil liberties is the ultimate safety. That's why so many have given their life to do so.

If I had to choose one over the other it would be civil liberties hands down.

Please pay attention Rose. Cybin's choices are Safety or Healing. Civil liberties is not part of what he posed. I would be interested in hearing your answer to the question though.

Healing WHAT? American wounds?

Bush has opened many, many wounds thanks to this war.

We got attacked. Are we still healing? Should we be?

Shouldn't we be finding out where Osama Bin Laden is?

Safety or healing? I don't understand what they have to do with each other at all. Cybin's post did NOT make sense.

exactly.. the word i used wasn't Republi<i>cans</i>, it was REpubli<i>crats</i>. it's my way of referring to both Republicans and Democrats at the same time. sorry for the confusion.

also, as far as safety vs. healing goes.. all this additional safety we've been granted with has two results:

1) the American public has been made more aware of security threats, as well as having fun with our asthetically pleasing "color coded safety" bars..

2) the American public has had their civil rights intruded upon. seriously, go take a look at the "Patriot Acts". in my opinion, they're not very patriotic. really, the things that our government is doing are spooky..

-

as far as Hillary goes.. i'm not saying she's a complete moron, but i am remembering how she moved to NY just to be able to rise to her current position of power. she doesn't care about any of us, she cares about power..

you know more people like her too.. commonly known as "gold-diggers". the successful ones manipulate their target into handing over their assets willingly, before they realize what's really going on. maybe not an evil person, but not very nice either..

not to mention, imagine the "sin taxes" Hillary would love to instill!!! LOL...

-

ok, now i'll move on to the rest of the thread...

No offense to Cybin, at all, but I completely agree. I don't think it's an apples-to-apples premise.

Billy - I believe I have answered the question without any evasiveness, whatsoever. It would be like asking me to prioritize air vs. water. I need both to live. Take away one, and the question is irrelevant.

oopsies Cybin, please accept my apology. I read that wrong. Thanks for pointing that out.

There is not a doubt in my mind that you understand the answer to your own question.


Again, the question I posed had nothing to do with anything President Bush has or hasn't done. Objectively what is higher on your list of priorities, safety or healing?

As much as you and Paolo want to divert the question, you still have not answered it. Which is ok, just say that you do not want to answer it. The information that you added is irrelavent to the question.

Ok Paolo... hehe... buddy ole pal... maybe I missed it in there somewhere but I don't see a direct answer to my question. Nobody is taking one away either. Just prioritizing the two.

Let's try one more time. Give me a one word answer that is either safety or healing. Which of the two is on the top of your list? Mine is safety, Cybin's is healing. It really isn't a hard question.