The first ________?

[TheGoverness]

"Is"

..

That depends on what your definition of "Is" is. [emoji12]

 

[PoS]

I mean don't get me wrong, I hate Donald Trump too, but Hillary irks me in such a way that I sometimes get so filled up with rage.

I'm kinda neutral towards her. The one advantage I can see if she becomes POTUS is that she's got Bill by her side and he was a damned good president.

 

[Fiddytree]

I'm kinda neutral towards her. The one advantage I can see if she becomes POTUS is that she's got Bill by her side and he was a damned good president.

He was one of the rare instances where he peaked in his second term. Of course, this was helped in that his first term was partly weak sauce.

 

[AlbqOwl]

He was one of the rare instances where he peaked in his second term. Of course, this was helped in that his first term was partly weak sauce.

It was also because he had Newt Gingrich leading a group of reform minded Republicans along with about 33 blue dog Democrats who supported making necessary reforms for some very positive results. If he and Hillary hadn't so dismayed both parties in his first two years as President--that's when he overwhelmingly lost the substantial majorities of Democrats he had in both the House and Senate remember?--the Contract with America would not have enjoyed the tremendous enthusiasm that it had.

As Bill was more interested in being loved than in being authoritarian, he didn't easily give in to the Republican proposals, but eventually came around. He strongly resisted a balanced budget but finally signed off on one. He vetoed welfare reform three or four times before he finally gave in and signed that. All of that saved his Presidency in spite of the disastrous dot.com crash.

Newt's freshman class of reformers and the Contract with America during the last six years of the Clinton administration is the last time we had a Congress who made good on their campaign promises.

 

[Fiddytree]

It was also because he had Newt Gingrich leading a group of reform minded Republicans along with about 33 blue dog Democrats who supported making necessary reforms for some very positive results. If he and Hillary hadn't so dismayed both parties in his first two years as President--that's when he overwhelmingly lost the substantial majorities of Democrats he had in both the House and Senate remember?--the Contract with America would not have enjoyed the tremendous enthusiasm that it had.

As Bill was more interested in being loved than in being authoritarian, he didn't easily give in to the Republican proposals, but eventually came around. He strongly resisted a balanced budget but finally signed off on one. He vetoed welfare reform three or four times before he finally gave in and signed that. All of that saved his Presidency in spite of the disastrous dot.com crash.

Newt's freshman class of reformers and the Contract with America during the last six years of the Clinton administration is the last time we had a Congress who made good on their campaign promises.

Yes, but one must also look toward the management style change from Clinton's first two years. That was perhaps one of the biggest qualitative changes to his administration, the GOP insurgency notwithstanding.

Given that you are a Trump supporter, you may want to read up on that period of 1993-1995. It may give you serious pause.

 

[Sweden]

The 'First Lady' thing is in itself an absurdity and has no place in a self-respecting democracy. Almost as ridiculous in modern times as having a Queen. So Mr Clinton should remain as he is, a money grabbing sleazeball.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Not "Claim" but insinuation... If I'm wrong, and you acknowledge now that hillary is more dishonest, corrupt and surrounded by controversy and shady deals than any other past party nominee, then just say so. If you don't acknowledge such, then how about posting an example to substantiate you insinuation?

Look Frank, we all know you aren't stupid, so why not just admit that you don't give a damn if:

1. she is a proven politician who is corrupt
2. she lied and did in fact breech national security by sending top secret documents through her private email server as SOS.
3. she created and exclusively used her private email server to hide her government communications from the State Department and the public.
4. she withheld and tried to destroy selected emails as SOS, violating federal law.
5. she accepted bribe money through the Clinton Foundation
6. her, her husband and family used the Clinton Foundation charity to get rich.
7. she accepted bribe money through gross over payment for private speaking engagements.
8. she lied to the American people by blaming an internet video for the deaths of 4 Americans.
9. she lied about opposing SSM during her NY senate campaign.
10. lied about being under attack from snipers when she landed in Bosnia.
11. lied about supporting and advocating for NAFTA as first lady.

Stand up for who you are and what you believe, and admit that you don't give a damn about Hillary's complete lack of honesty and integrity, and will support her in spite of everything I just listed, because she has that all important "D" behind her name.

.

As I said...I do not do "believing."

You asked me to substantiate some claims that I made.

I am still waiting for you to quote and link to the CLAIMS I made...and I will either substantiate them...or repudiate/withdraw them.


So...if there actually are no claims that I have made...just say that there are none...and we are done with this diversion.

 

[Frank Apisa]

I don't mind if people want to bow out and ignore, it is when amidst that ignorance they have the audacity to tell ret of us how we should live, or which leader is the best for us.

You have to admit it is the height of arrogance to knowingly be out of touch and still insist you are right.

That IS something you do...and it is good to see you are trying to cure it.

 

[Frank Apisa]

That's so arrogant. You just bragged you don't pay attention to anything that you disagree with. To me that spells low or no information voter.

But it's a good thing. Now when you tell us something we know you haven't researched it unless its Hilary propaganda.

I still don't understand being so proud of that.

There are lots of things you do not understand.

There are also lots of things you invent...and pretend you understand.

Hey...it happens.

 

[Frank Apisa]

I'm reading 'stop confusing me with information that disagrees with my preconceived notions'.

Yeah, that sounds like the way you would interpret that.

But considering you post the stuff you post...it is understandable. You just do not have a firm grip on what is actually going on.

None of this, however, has anything to do with the topic of the thread.

Bill Clinton will be Mr. President to most people.

 

[Grim17]

As I said...I do not do "believing."

You asked me to substantiate some claims that I made.

I am still waiting for you to quote and link to the CLAIMS I made...and I will either substantiate them...or repudiate/withdraw them.


So...if there actually are no claims that I have made...just say that there are none...and we are done with this diversion.

So to sum things up, you don't give a damn how corrupt, dishonest, or inept Hillary is, you blindly support her.

I wish you were an anomaly, but unfortunately there are millions more just like you who pledge their blind support for the woman based solely on the "D" behind her name.

 

[Frank Apisa]

So to sum things up, you don't give a damn how corrupt, dishonest, or inept Hillary is, you blindly support her.

I wish you were an anomaly, but unfortunately there are millions more just like you who pledge their blind support for the woman based solely on the "D" behind her name.

So to sum up: You can find no claims you want me to substantiate...so instead, you are going to paraphrase what I said to suit your distorted view of how people make decisions in an election of this sort.

I get it.

Inventing stuff is much easier to refute than dealing with what a person actually says.

I wish there were fewer people who did that...but I notice lots of conservatives here in this forum who do that.

On topic: Mr. President is the title I would use if I were addressing former president Bill Clinton...even after his wife is elected president.

 

[Grim17]

So to sum up: You can find no claims you want me to substantiate...

Nope, just your insinuation that Hillary is just as dishonest and corrupt as every other nominee a party has put forth for president.

 

[blarg]

If Hillary does win as the first female president, what do you think Bill's title should be?

First man?

First gentleman?

we could go feudal style and go wiht 1st lord

 

[AlbqOwl]

Yes, but one must also look toward the management style change from Clinton's first two years. That was perhaps one of the biggest qualitative changes to his administration, the GOP insurgency notwithstanding.

Given that you are a Trump supporter, you may want to read up on that period of 1993-1995. It may give you serious pause.

I don't need to study up. He had to change his management style to deal with the GOP insurgency. To his credit he did bend to the will of the Congress, and that literally saved his presidency and legacy, but he didn't do it without resistance. He did not personally want the reforms pushed on him. But the Congress didn't easily take no for an answer as they do now--we had a much more competent Senate then than we do now. And he benefitted from that.

In short Bill Clinton was willing to work with a GOP controlled Congress sufficiently well to get some good things done. Compare that with a Barack Obama who refuses to even talk to members of Congress, let alone look for any form of compromise. Instead Obama mostly rules by fiat and assumes role of king rather than President, servant of the people. He simply is not as smart to see a good thing as Clinton was. As a result he will go down in history as one of the worst.

Clinton, a great President? No he wasn't because he lacked any personal vision or innovation to make things better. He had to rely on and take credit for the vision and efforts of others. But an adequate President, yes he was. Better than some for sure.

And I fear Hillary could be even worse. I don't want to have to call her Madam President married to Mr. President.

 

[bubbabgone]

Well, I never...I'll just have to walk out of here in a huff...

With your panties in a bunch?

 

[humbolt]

With your panties in a bunch?

So much so I had to put my socks on my ears and one of my shoes on a stick just to make up for it. I mean, if you're gonna walk funny with the panty thing anyway...

 

[bubbabgone]

That's so arrogant. You just bragged you don't pay attention to anything that you disagree with. To me that spells low or no information voter.

But it's a good thing. Now when you tell us something we know you haven't researched it unless its Hilary propaganda.

I still don't understand being so proud of that.

I guess when their only gun fires blanks they have to depend on the noise.

 

[bubbabgone]

So much so I had to put my socks on my ears and one of my shoes on a stick just to make up for it. I mean, if you're gonna walk funny with the panty thing anyway...

[video]https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=minister+of+sllly+walks&view=detail&mid=C01C2B8F3A038D8BF47EC01C2B8F3A038D8BF47E&FORM=VIRE[/video]

 

[Frank Apisa]

Nope, just your insinuation that Hillary is just as dishonest and corrupt as every other nominee a party has put forth for president.

Well...next time you ask me to substantiate my assertions...

...you really should have some assertions to offer.

 

[Fearandloathing]

I guess when their only gun fires blanks they have to depend on the noise.

Post of the day.

It's noise all right. If you don't know the content you're simply pissing at a hurricane.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Post of the day.

It's noise all right. If you don't know the content you're simply pissing at a hurricane.

Joke of the day seems a more appropriate description of his post to me.

 

[TheGoverness]

Joke of the day seems a more appropriate description of his post to me.

I beg to differ, Frank.

 

[Frank Apisa]

I beg to differ, Frank.

You don't have to beg.

This entire discussion is a joke.

For some of you people, anyone who does not think Hillary Clinton is the lowest form of human matter...has to be devoid of brains and logic.

Meh.

The comeuppance for you guys will be Election Day night...when you find that the majority of Americans think you are all wet.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Well...next time you ask me to substantiate my assertions...

...you really should have some assertions to offer.

You seem to think that denying and attacking me is somehow going to get you out of this, but, sorry, it won't.

Trust me Frank, I won't be asking you to substantiate anything, but that is one really STRANGE post. Why the **** should I be ready to submit anything to you since you have stated in really big letter that YOU NEVER even look at anything that hasn't been produced by Hilary and her morons. It would be a huge waste of time and bandwidth.

What you now need to absorb, is that your opinion is now absolutely worthless. Anything you have to say is propaganda from Clinton Corp.