Hey Democrats, if it's OK to ...

If it's OK to talk about Romney's dog in the 80s, why isn't it OK to talk about Clinton's girlfriend in the 90s?

It is OK. Please.....talk about Clinton's girlfriend. In fact, please insist that every nutjob in the GOP does the same.
 
If it's OK to talk about Romney's dog in the 80s, why isn't it OK to talk about Clinton's girlfriend in the 90s?

Both tactics are stupid. The only reason the poser Rand Paul brought up Lewinsky is because Bill Clinton is coming to Kentucky to stump for Democratic candidates, and Paul is afraid of Bubba's fundraising power. So following the modern day GOP template, instead of winning with superior ideas, Paul went into the gutter.

Clinton has to come to Kentucky because Obama is too unpopular.

Your attempt to use a tu quoque fallacy to justify Rand Paul's strategy is indicative of the faux Right's inability to be the better man.

"Better man?"

rdean couldn't go 5 minutes without mentioning Romney's dog.

BTW, in the 1980s, it was very common for people to drive with their dogs in the back of their trucks. Heck, people put their KIDS in the back of a truck. You still see people driving with their dogs like that today, though its much less common. I saw it the other day, in fact. Despite the Chevy Chase-like imagery, strapping a dog in a cage on the top of a car is multitudes safer than letting Bowser roll around in the back of the truck barreling down the highway at 60 mph.
 
If Hillary were running for the GOP (God forbid) and we reminded voters that her husband is a womanizer, chances are that would work against her. If she runs in 2016, she will no doubt run for the democrats, and unfortunately given the liberal/progressive nature of democrat voters, this may actually help her!

Sanford, Vitter, and Gingrich are okay though because they repented.
 
If Hillary were running for the GOP (God forbid) and we reminded voters that her husband is a womanizer, chances are that would work against her. If she runs in 2016, she will no doubt run for the democrats, and unfortunately given the liberal/progressive nature of democrat voters, this may actually help her!

Sanford, Vitter, and Gingrich are okay though because they repented.

Gingrich wasn't ok on so many levels.

Who are the first two again?
 
If Hillary were running for the GOP (God forbid) and we reminded voters that her husband is a womanizer, chances are that would work against her. If she runs in 2016, she will no doubt run for the democrats, and unfortunately given the liberal/progressive nature of democrat voters, this may actually help her!

Sanford, Vitter, and Gingrich are okay though because they repented.

Gingrich wasn't ok on so many levels.

Who are the first two again?

Mark Sanford (R) South Carolina of Applachian trail fame

David Vitter (R) La of wearing Diapers fame
 
I think bringing up Bill's infidelity HELPS Hillary because people tend to react poorly when people attack the victim.

I swear, if Republicans turn out to be stupid enough to lose in 2016, I don't think their is much hope left for the party.

They lost - TWICE - to a black guy named Barack
And now if they lose to one of the most polarizing people on the planet (I mean heck - she had really high negatives as a FIRST LADY! How often does THAT happen?) I just give up on 'em.
 
I think bringing up Bill's infidelity HELPS Hillary because people tend to react poorly when people attack the victim.

I swear, if Republicans turn out to be stupid enough to lose in 2016, I don't think their is much hope left for the party.

They lost - TWICE - to a black guy named Barack
And now if they lose to one of the most polarizing people on the planet (I mean heck - she had really high negatives as a FIRST LADY! How often does THAT happen?) I just give up on 'em.

It's hard to beat Santa Claus.
 
I think bringing up Bill's infidelity HELPS Hillary because people tend to react poorly when people attack the victim.

I swear, if Republicans turn out to be stupid enough to lose in 2016, I don't think their is much hope left for the party.

They lost - TWICE - to a black guy named Barack
And now if they lose to one of the most polarizing people on the planet (I mean heck - she had really high negatives as a FIRST LADY! How often does THAT happen?) I just give up on 'em.

It's hard to beat Santa Claus.

Yeah he's fictional, just like your belief that everyone voted for Obama to get free stuff.
 
I think bringing up Bill's infidelity HELPS Hillary because people tend to react poorly when people attack the victim.

I swear, if Republicans turn out to be stupid enough to lose in 2016, I don't think their is much hope left for the party.

They lost - TWICE - to a black guy named Barack
And now if they lose to one of the most polarizing people on the planet (I mean heck - she had really high negatives as a FIRST LADY! How often does THAT happen?) I just give up on 'em.

It's hard to beat Santa Claus.

I have in my house. We don't (and never have) done the Santa thing.
 
I think bringing up Bill's infidelity HELPS Hillary because people tend to react poorly when people attack the victim.

I swear, if Republicans turn out to be stupid enough to lose in 2016, I don't think their is much hope left for the party.

They lost - TWICE - to a black guy named Barack
And now if they lose to one of the most polarizing people on the planet (I mean heck - she had really high negatives as a FIRST LADY! How often does THAT happen?) I just give up on 'em.

It's hard to beat Santa Claus.

Yeah he's fictional, just like your belief that everyone voted for Obama to get free stuff.

No, I never said that, but that is a contributing factor that Democraps tend to encourage as often as possible.
 
It's hard to beat Santa Claus.

Yeah he's fictional, just like your belief that everyone voted for Obama to get free stuff.

No, I never said that, but that is a contributing factor that Democraps tend to encourage as often as possible.

And Republicans are Santa Clause for corporations.

BOTH sides lavish the goodies (at taxpayers expense) on their supporters to insure re-election. The only difference is WHO the checks are made out to my friend.

IMHO Campaign finance reform is the most important step to regaining fiscal responsibility in this country.
 
Yeah he's fictional, just like your belief that everyone voted for Obama to get free stuff.

No, I never said that, but that is a contributing factor that Democraps tend to encourage as often as possible.

And Republicans are Santa Clause for corporations.

BOTH sides lavish the goodies (at taxpayers expense) on their supporters to insure re-election. The only difference is WHO the checks are made out to my friend.

IMHO Campaign finance reform is the most important step to regaining fiscal responsibility in this country.

If you say so.

The GOP tries to help businesses create more jobs. I can see why the Dems hate that, because a well off middle-class is an independent middle-class. What does a secure and profitable voter base need Democrats for?
 
15th post
No, I never said that, but that is a contributing factor that Democraps tend to encourage as often as possible.

And Republicans are Santa Clause for corporations.

BOTH sides lavish the goodies (at taxpayers expense) on their supporters to insure re-election. The only difference is WHO the checks are made out to my friend.

IMHO Campaign finance reform is the most important step to regaining fiscal responsibility in this country.

If you say so.

The GOP tries to help businesses create more jobs. I can see why the Dems hate that, because a well off middle-class is an independent middle-class. What does a secure and profitable voter base need Democrats for?

Yeah. The GOP helps create more jobs in China, Mexico, and any 3rd world shithole where labor costs are low, environmental controls are nil, and worker abuses are ignored. That's why the rich are doing very well here in the US, and the middle class is ever shrinking.
 
The left wants the middle class to be pushed down to 'dependent' status. The wealthy are just relatively better equipped to protect themselves from what the left wants to do to them. The middle class is more vulnerable, and the poor are already firmly plugged into the democrat matrix.
 
If Hillary were running for the GOP (God forbid) and we reminded voters that her husband is a womanizer, chances are that would work against her. If she runs in 2016, she will no doubt run for the democrats, and unfortunately given the liberal/progressive nature of democrat voters, this may actually help her!

I think you're right. What a backassward country we've become!

:eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom