Hillary's Resume

[CanadaJohn]

No, the primary reason he got caught is because of the Watergate Scandal. He and his re-election campaign were at the heart of that.

His re-election campaign was, yes. He's the first and last President who's been hounded and driven from office for inappropriate activities by those trying to get him elected/re-elected.

 

[Peter King]

His re-election campaign was, yes. He's the first and last President who's been hounded and driven from office for inappropriate activities by those trying to get him elected/re-elected.

I am going to have to disagree with you that one, he could have been very embarrassed by the break an and the illegal actions of his re-election committee but would have been able to put it behind him after some time. He was hounded and driven from office because of the coverup in which he was an integral part.

And whether or not he was aware of the break in before it happened is and will always remain somewhat of a mystery. I wasn't there and without evidence to the contrary I have to give Nixon the benefit of the doubt, it is innocent until proven otherwise.

Nixon was incredibly lucky to become president. He had the good fortune that the 2 best candidates to keep him from becoming president were assassinated (John F. and Robert Kennedy). There is always the chance Nixon would have won but he would have had a real battle on his hand.

 

[DDD]

Peter King (Does your real King knows you are using his title? ) beat me to it. That is her resume.

Now just vote for her, okay?

 

[Woodman909]

Nobel words from Nixon on his second inauguration but how did he live up to these words?

With betrayal to his oath of office, with betrayal of the voters, he lied, the cheated, he covered up and did all kinds of reprehensible things. He went against the separation of powers to thwart the investigation into his crimes.

Fact is Nixon betrayed his country, his god, his voters and the values he speaks of in his inauguration. The criminal Nixon even said in that speech for the entire nation:



And he did everything to break the law, not restore respect for it. Clinton was impeached for lying about his sex life, Nixon did a whole host of crimes and was not impeached. He was even pardoned by his successor and did not pay for the crimes he committed.

Carter might not have been the greatest president in the world, but compared to a president who went against what was legal and decent, Carter has to be respected a whole lot more than Nixon.

Please take the presidential ratings discussion SOMEWHERE ELSE!

 

[Woodman909]

clueless is too harsh, Barbara Bush is a loving mother and wife so it is logical that she says her husband and son are two of the finest presidents the US has ever had. But that does not mean she is right, her husband was a 1 term president who lost to democrat who had already cheated on his wife once before even becoming president.

Her son was a president that was both loved and hated at the same time. After 9/11 he had the highest approval ratings in history but he did not go out like that. He went out with a rating of about 30% but it has gone up a bit now to about 45%. Compare this for example to president Clinton, his latest approval rating is around 68%.

A 2007 Rasmussen poll saw Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt (both of them), John F. Kennedy, John Adams, James Madison, Ronald Reagan and Eisenhower as the top 10 presidents in the view of the public.

Both Bushes came nowhere near the figures of the best presidents.

A vision critical/angus reid poll asked people how the last 12 (including the current president) stack up.

1. JF Kennedy
2. Reagan
3. Clinton
4. Eisenhower
5. Truman
6. Carter
7. H.W. Bush
8. Obama
9. Ford
10. Lyndon B. Johnson
11. George W. Bush
12. Nixon

So let's just say it is a mother's love for her son and husband that colors her views slightly because most polls/objective sources do not agree with her.

This is not part of or relevant to the discussion as presented in the OP. Feel free to bring it somewhere else.

 

[Peter King]

This is not part of or relevant to the discussion as presented in the OP. Feel free to bring it somewhere else.

It was the simple reply to some other posters story.

 

[CanadaJohn]

I am going to have to disagree with you that one, he could have been very embarrassed by the break an and the illegal actions of his re-election committee but would have been able to put it behind him after some time. He was hounded and driven from office because of the coverup in which he was an integral part.

And whether or not he was aware of the break in before it happened is and will always remain somewhat of a mystery. I wasn't there and without evidence to the contrary I have to give Nixon the benefit of the doubt, it is innocent until proven otherwise.

Nixon was incredibly lucky to become president. He had the good fortune that the 2 best candidates to keep him from becoming president were assassinated (John F. and Robert Kennedy). There is always the chance Nixon would have won but he would have had a real battle on his hand.

JFK barely beat Nixon in 1960 and it is believed that his father arranged for the buying of the election with voter fraud but Nixon refused to challenge the results. JFK is like Marilyn Monroe - far more famous and admired in death than in life.

 

[Jack Hays]

JFK barely beat Nixon in 1960 and it is believed that his father arranged for the buying of the election with voter fraud but Nixon refused to challenge the results. JFK is like Marilyn Monroe - far more famous and admired in death than in life.

Good afternoon, CJ.:2wave:

It is often overlooked that one reason JFK went to Dallas is that Texas was trending away from the Dems in run-up to 1964.eace

 

[CanadaJohn]

Good afternoon, CJ.:2wave:

It is often overlooked that one reason JFK went to Dallas is that Texas was trending away from the Dems in run-up to 1964.eace

Good afternoon 2M

Absolutely right - it is debatable whether or not Kennedy would have won reelection had the assassination not occurred.

 

[Woodman909]

It was the simple reply to some other posters story.

Understood. Did not mean to single you out, just trying to stem the tide....

 

[Peter King]

Understood. Did not mean to single you out, just trying to stem the tide....

No problemo. I think Hillary is a special woman. She has stood by her man, built her own political career and has had a very successful career and will be the frontrunner of the democratic candidates and I am not sure they will find a republican who will be able to stand up to her.

 

[Woodman909]

No problemo. I think Hillary is a special woman. She has stood by her man, built her own political career and has had a very successful career and will be the frontrunner of the democratic candidates and I am not sure they will find a republican who will be able to stand up to her.

Oh, yeah, she's special all right. :roll:

 

[Fenton]

No problemo. I think Hillary is a special woman. She has stood by her man, built her own political career and has had a very successful career and will be the frontrunner of the democratic candidates and I am not sure they will find a republican who will be able to stand up to her.

She's human ??

I mean of-course your description of her implies that she's human, although her actions prove otherwise.

Hillary Clinton looked into the faces of the Parents receiving their dead sons after a terrorist attack on our Libyan Consulate and LIED.

She chose to perpetuate the " it was all the video's fault " cover up so she could protect her political aspirations and CONTINUES to lie and with hold pertinent information that would give those grieving families answers as to why their Son's had to die that night.

It's kind of hard to believe she still has supporters, I mean there are suckers born every minute but what's truly twisted about her Presidential aspirations and those who support it is the fact that they are willfully ignoring glaring evidence that she's incompetent and that's she cruel.

 

[Peter King]

She's human ??

I mean of-course your description of her implies that she's human, although her actions prove otherwise.

Hillary Clinton looked into the faces of the Parents receiving their dead sons after a terrorist attack on our Libyan Consulate and LIED.

She chose to perpetuate the " it was all the video's fault " cover up so she could protect her political aspirations and CONTINUES to lie and with hold pertinent information that would give those grieving families answers as to why their Son's had to die that night.

It's kind of hard to believe she still has supporters, I mean there are suckers born every minute but what's truly twisted about her Presidential aspirations and those who support it is the fact that they are willfully ignoring glaring evidence that she's incompetent and that's she cruel.

Hillary Clinton lied? Wow, a secretary of state/government official who lies. That must have been the first time that a Secretary of State has lied :roll:

Hillary could have given the best information she had at the time. Last time I checked the truth of Benghazi is being investigated and has been the source of a lot of partisan republican rumor mongering. The truth will still have to be determined.

You dislike Clinton but that put you in the minority of US citizens who look favorably on her. And as for what is and is not competence we will most likely completely disagree. I think she is very competent and has proven that.

 

[Woodman909]

Actually I think it's called "It Takes a Meme For a Conservative to Think"

yet another 'stellar' contribution.

 

[Fenton]

Hillary Clinton lied?
Wow, a secretary of state/government official who lies. That must have been the first time that a Secretary of State has lied :roll:

Hillary could have given the best information she had at the time. Last time I checked the truth of Benghazi is being investigated and has been the source of a lot of partisan republican rumor mongering. The truth will still have to be determined.

You dislike Clinton but that put you in the minority of US citizens who look favorably on her. And as for what is and is not competence we will most likely completely disagree. I think she is very competent and has proven that.

You'll beleive anything that suites your ideology, regardless of whether or not there is any truth to it.

Its the difference between people like you and people like me. I use the truth to shape my ideology, not the other way around which also means I don't have to offer up ridiculous justifications like " all State Department Secretaries lie ".

We've had enough of incompetent liars running our Country. By 2016 it wall be evident even to the most partisan that voting based on plattitudes and manufactured narratives is simply a bad idea.

 

[Peter King]

You'll beleive anything that suites your ideology, regardless of whether or not there is any truth to it.

Its the difference between people like you and people like me. I use the truth to shape my ideology, not the other way around which also means I don't have to offer up ridiculous justifications like " all State Department Secretaries lie ".

We've had enough of incompetent liars running our Country. By 2016 it wall be evident even to the most partisan that voting based on plattitudes and manufactured narratives is simply a bad idea.

And there we agree with each other, I too think that you will believe anything that suites your conservative ideology, even if it devoid of any truthfulness.

I think it is conservatism that is very ideology driven. I think that the 2000 and the 2008 race were not that filled with platitudes or manufactured talking points. Once that lead to a pure and positively driven message and once it lead to a whole heap of issues (Florida, hanging chads, butterfly form). The elections after that, the 2004 one was driven by fear mongering and total deceitfulness and 2012 was decided by the public still buying into the message of change, especially the minorities and women.

The 2004 one was driven by fear of terrorist attacks and good old lies. The (maybe somewhat) boastful claims of one Vietnam veteran who was being attacked on his service to his country while the man who he ran against was spared the dangers of Vietnam instead of joining up like Kerry did.

And what might have been a possibly wrong message from the State Department just after the Benghazi attack still fades in comparison with the lies about the Bush administration that was used as the reason for the Iraq invasion. If there ever was an administration that was driven by partisan ideologies and manufactured narratives.

Let us be honest, both sides think the other side is full of platitudes and manufactured/false narratives and that will not change in 2016 and future elections.

 

[Woodman909]

Ten pages, about 92 entries and only one reasonably significant accomplishment has been submitted. Interesting.