Hillary Clinton Is Just To Damn Old

[rightwinger]

someone mentioned she will SELECT a young person as Vice President.

well remember when Bush Sr. did that? and Remember when McCain did that with not only a former Governor but a WOMAN to boot

They ripped them to shreds . Democrat if they didn't have double standards they'd have none at all

Problem is Republicans picked young and dim witted

 

[jon_berzerk]

hillary clinton=old and busted

She has to appear before Congress AND Gowdy TWICE in the next year and he IS going to squeeze her. Add to that the race? Get your shovel ready.

--LOL

the best they gots

--LOL

 

[Wildman]

it's scary but she is running...

...and i hope she runs herself to death before November 2016

 

[Stephanie]

Stop her? Are you kidding? Hell I WANT her to run. One year in and she drops dead from a stroke. And the dem's have NOBODY.
RUN HER! RUN HER HARD!

Ehh... They would have the vice president....

Hillary is going to probably pick a youthful vice...

Anyway this is the lamest attempt at trying to find a fault in the a Democratic candidate from a guy who is supporting a complete no hoper due to a deranged complex....

This thread is just funny.

I think Hillary will drop dead during the primaries.

Or maybe you will drop dead from your meltdown about Hillary here. Go figure...

the only meltdown we've been seeing is from you dear. Go vote for her and be done with it

Soo funny when you try to act so above it all, dear...

ok, carry on with your nasty self

 

[Sarah G]

someone mentioned she will SELECT a young person as Vice President.

well remember when Bush Sr. did that? and Remember when McCain did that with not only a former Governor but a WOMAN to boot

They ripped them to shreds . Democrat if they didn't have double standards they'd have none at all

Problem is Republicans picked young and dim witted

They may pick young and dim witted again with Rubio.

 

[Wildman]

I hope Republicans run on a platform of Hillary is old and ugly

never happen Mr. Jello !!

 

[timslash]

Yep, and it's one of the main reasons why she shouldn't run!
Liberalism is bad, liberal views mixed with conservative views(Like Hillary's) is bad too.
And Hillary's so-called "democracy" will be the end...

 

[Wildman]

GOP women will secretly vote for them, just to stab at the men they know and dislike...

when you pile you really do pile it high and wide.

........ ...........

 

[Kondor3]

...Hell, voters have been wasting their votes for over a half century now. So, that boat don't float. And, voting for "the lesser of two evils" is just stupid, dumb, and nothing more than a cheap excuse to aid and abet the crooks that have sold us out. Try preaching that dumb sermon to someone that doesn't know any better. I was born during the day, but it wasn't yesterday. Voters need to wake up and smell the coffee before there is no more coffee to smell. It's laughable and pathetic to hear people say "lesser of two evils", and "wasting votes". What exactly has voting for professional politicians gotten anyone over the past half century or so? Look at where we are now, and the sad shameful state of this once great nation. Yet, voters continue to play the game, and by doing so, they aid and abet the ones doing the damage. Go figure.

You are both right and wrong.

But you do not change people's minds by calling them stupid,right?

They're not going to change regardless. And, I call it like it is. What do you call it when voters continue to do the same thing, yet expect a different result? Do you have a better word for it? If so, what is it?

Pragmatism.

That word doesn't explain the repetition over a long period of time.

Irrelevant, if the condition has persisted for that same time frame.

 

[Kondor3]

The ones talking about age are beside themselves because she actually got into the race. I know, it's scary but she is running and there's nothing much you can do to stop her.

What is there to commend here above all others?

I mean... given her scandal-ridden past and all.

The Baby Boomers have had three of their own in office (Bubba, Shrub and Obumble) and have dominated the landscape for a quarter-century.

Time for some new blood and some new ideas and some new energy, to begin moving us forward again.

I'm a Boomer myself, and I'm fine with the idea of the Next Gen folks taking-up the reins, to see if they can do any better (they can hardly do any worse).

 

[Sonny Clark]

...Hell, voters have been wasting their votes for over a half century now. So, that boat don't float. And, voting for "the lesser of two evils" is just stupid, dumb, and nothing more than a cheap excuse to aid and abet the crooks that have sold us out. Try preaching that dumb sermon to someone that doesn't know any better. I was born during the day, but it wasn't yesterday. Voters need to wake up and smell the coffee before there is no more coffee to smell. It's laughable and pathetic to hear people say "lesser of two evils", and "wasting votes". What exactly has voting for professional politicians gotten anyone over the past half century or so? Look at where we are now, and the sad shameful state of this once great nation. Yet, voters continue to play the game, and by doing so, they aid and abet the ones doing the damage. Go figure.

You are both right and wrong.

But you do not change people's minds by calling them stupid,right?

They're not going to change regardless. And, I call it like it is. What do you call it when voters continue to do the same thing, yet expect a different result? Do you have a better word for it? If so, what is it?

Pragmatism.

That word doesn't explain the repetition over a long period of time.

Irrelevant, if the condition has persisted for that same time frame.

It certainly is relevant. It's relevant because voters continue to do the exact same thing, yet expect a different result. It's a pattern, a habit, a routine, and it's stupid to continue knowing the results.

 

[Wildman]

Shouldn't that read...

Hillary Clinton Is Just Two Damn Old

NO.., dumbass, it should read TOO ******* old to be of any good use.

 

[DarkFury]

The ones talking about age are beside themselves because she actually got into the race. I know, it's scary but she is running and there's nothing much you can do to stop her.

What is there to commend here above all others?

I mean... given her scandal-ridden past and all.

The Baby Boomers have had three of their own in office (Bubba, Shrub and Obumble) and have dominated the landscape for a quarter-century.

Time for some new blood and some new ideas and some new energy, to begin moving us forward again.

I'm a Boomer myself, and I'm fine with the idea of the Next Gen folks taking-up the reins, to see if they can do any better (they can hardly do any worse).

Just add Carter/Clinton and Obama to that list. This is the last decade of boomers. NOT the dope smoking hobo's of Hillary's era. WE last group {decade} of boomers are far MORE conservative then those dirty nasty stupid stinking hippy's right before us.

 

[Kondor3]

You are both right and wrong.

But you do not change people's minds by calling them stupid,right?

They're not going to change regardless. And, I call it like it is. What do you call it when voters continue to do the same thing, yet expect a different result? Do you have a better word for it? If so, what is it?

Pragmatism.

That word doesn't explain the repetition over a long period of time.

Irrelevant, if the condition has persisted for that same time frame.

It certainly is relevant. It's relevant because voters continue to do the exact same thing, yet expect a different result. It's a pattern, a habit, a routine, and it's stupid to continue knowing the results.

Voters do not expect a different result.

They merely continue to attempt to limit the damage.

They are very practical about it and cognizant of what they're doing.

Pragmatic, indeed.

And, they remain pragmatic, so long as the condition persists - for decades, or generations.

Change the conditions, and the voters will respond in kind.

Open up the field, so that it is practical for more parties to participate and to win, and you'll see a far more intelligent pattern to their voting.

They're (we're) not stupid people - merely pragmatists, when viewed collectively, in this context.

And - as I said - you can 'call em at you see em' all you like - but you don't win friends and influence people by calling them 'stupid' to their faces.

Politics 101.

"Thus endeth the lesson."

Absorb it, and exploit that knowledge, or remain consigned to the fringes.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

How is Hillary going to stand up to Cruz in the debates? Over the years she often claims that "She Didn't Recall" events of which were questioned of her. and who doesn't remember back in the 90's when she used the excuse "I Dont Recall"?, I believe that was during a white-water grilling. Even at that young age, most of us recall our first day in school.

Rush had a great parody song for her "I don't recall" statements back in the 90s.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

I can just see the debates when the liberal networks are televising.

Director: Camera 2 on Secretary Clinton. Back up....farther... Farther! Unfocus the lens!

 

[Sonny Clark]

They're not going to change regardless. And, I call it like it is. What do you call it when voters continue to do the same thing, yet expect a different result? Do you have a better word for it? If so, what is it?

Pragmatism.

That word doesn't explain the repetition over a long period of time.

Irrelevant, if the condition has persisted for that same time frame.

It certainly is relevant. It's relevant because voters continue to do the exact same thing, yet expect a different result. It's a pattern, a habit, a routine, and it's stupid to continue knowing the results.

Voters do not expect a different result.

They merely continue to attempt to limit the damage.

They are very practical about it and cognizant of what they're doing.

Pragmatic, indeed.

And, they remain pragmatic, so long as the condition persists - for decades, or generations.

Change the conditions, and the voters will respond in kind.

Open up the field, so that it is practical for more parties to participate and to win, and you'll see a far more intelligent pattern to their voting.

They're (we're) not stupid people - merely pragmatists, when viewed collectively, in this context.

And - as I said - you can 'call em at you see em' all you like - but you don't win friends and influence people by calling them 'stupid' to their faces.

Politics 101.

"Thus endeth the lesson."

Absorb it, and exploit that knowledge, or remain consigned to the fringes.

Sorry, it still doesn't float. Look at what the voters have done in the past, then look at the results. And, look at how many times they've had chances to stop playing the game. Yet, in spite of everything that has taken place, they still go to the polls and do the exact same thing, time and time again. So, yes, it's stupid and uncalled for. Would it be stupid for a person to continually attempt to stand flat footed in front of a limo and try to jump over the entire length of it, over and over and over, knowing that's it's humanly impossible to do so?

 

[Kondor3]

..Just add Carter/Clinton and Obama to that list.This is the last decade of boomers. NOT the dope smoking hobo's of Hillary's era. WE last group {decade} of boomers are far MORE conservative then those dirty nasty stupid stinking hippy's right before us.

Carter is of the previous (or Korean War -vintage) generation. Clinton, Bush and Obama are all Boomers - with Obama being a borderline so-called late Boomer.

What is clear is that we need new ideas and new faces and new energy and new commitment to help our Republic move forward in the right direction.

On both sides of the aisle.

Today's 30 and 40 year-olds are mostly the children of the Early Boomers and it is to them that we should be looking, as we ease them into leadership roles.

Some of them are Ready for Prime Time already, with others not far behind.

Late Boomers... Early Next-Gen'ners... lots of cross-over there... whatever... the point is, we need new faces and new ideas and new energy.

And we're not gonna get that from Hillary or Biden or Boehner or McCain or any of that lot.

After giving an un-tested rookie the keys to the White Hosue for two terms, and watching him screw things up on both the domestic and foreign fronts, we need to turn to people with actual experience in governing - but with enough youth and passion left in them, to have avoided becoming as jaded as Hillary and her peers. We can do better. We should insist on better. And we can do that in the Primaries. But we won't. Far too many Sheeple, for that to work.

 

[Statistikhengst]

How is Hillary going to stand up to Cruz in the debates? Over the years she often claims that "She Didn't Recall" events of which were questioned of her. and who doesn't remember back in the 90's when she used the excuse "I Dont Recall"?, I believe that was during a white-water grilling. Even at that young age, most of us recall our first day in school.

She is not going to have to do that. He is not going to be your party's nominee.

 

[rightwinger]

Republican Presidential Candidates

Ron Reagan age 69 in 1980
Bob Dole age 73 in 1996
John McCain age 72 on 2008


Hillary Clinton age 68 in 2016


Republicans......Hillary is TOO OLD to run for President