I think hillary will steps down as secretary of state...

[Lumpy 1]

Hillary is worried about her own legacy. She has several pots on the fire diplomatically that could ensure her place in history

- Israel/ Palistine peace negotiations
- Potential regime changes in N Korea and Cuba
- Iranian disarmament
- Iraq and Afghanistan

Why would she leave and let someone else get the credit? She knows better than to break out in 2012.....a failed bid would end her political career

Ah.. credit for what....

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama's numbers would have to get much worse. If he gets into low 30% approval ratings with a very high strong disapproval Rating. Then maybe.

but Like I said, she wants to be president. Not to lose the election, and trying to unseat your parties sitting president in the primary is not an easy sell.

Frankly, now that Hillary has seen how difficult a president's job is THESE DAYS, as opposed to when her husband was in the White House, she may not even want the job at all. Only someone who hasn't been there, done that, would want it now.

These days?

The Republicans ran investigations on the Clintons for the entire time they were in the White House. From Whitewater to Vince Foster to Monica....they kept the Clintons tied up in court the whole time

What I meant was the shear size of the bureaucracy, number of registered lobbyists, Internet chatter 24/7 creating small or non-issues, the ridiculous bickering, all the while trying to maintain a modicum of polite leadership amid the constant concern for trying to deal with the crisis du jour together with ongoing crises. As we all know, it's all laid right at the President's doorstep, no matter who might be in power. Either that person must try to completely insulate him/herself from the insanity and let the handlers deal with each issue off to the side, or step right out into the middle of the arena and arm him/herself for the incoming onslaught. Every single day.

But you did forget to add the investigation of the Clinton Christmas Card list, which Republicans spent about 8 weeks on (more time than they spent investigating the Abu Ghraib incidents).

 

[Lumpy 1]

Frankly, now that Hillary has seen how difficult a president's job is THESE DAYS, as opposed to when her husband was in the White House, she may not even want the job at all. Only someone who hasn't been there, done that, would want it now.

These days?

The Republicans ran investigations on the Clintons for the entire time they were in the White House. From Whitewater to Vince Foster to Monica....they kept the Clintons tied up in court the whole time

What I meant was the shear size of the bureaucracy, number of registered lobbyists, Internet chatter 24/7 creating small or non-issues, the ridiculous bickering, all the while trying to maintain a modicum of polite leadership amid the constant concern for trying to deal with the crisis du jour together with ongoing crises. As we all know, it's all laid right at the President's doorstep, no matter who might be in power. Either that person must try to completely insulate him/herself from the insanity and let the handlers deal with each issue off to the side, or step right out into the middle of the arena and arm him/herself for the incoming onslaught. Every single day.

But you did forget to add the investigation of the Clinton Christmas Card list, which Republicans spent about 8 weeks on (more time than they spent investigating the Abu Ghraib incidents).

Abu Ghraib.. Yup.. Democrats sure proved how much they cared about the soldiers there.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Abu Graib, Glenn Beck was the only right wing radio host to condemn the brutality and illegal behavior there.

When will you freaks understand you don't mistreat prisoners of war?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Abu Graib, Glenn Beck was the only right wing radio host to condemn the brutality and illegal behavior there.

When will you freaks understand you don't mistreat prisoners of war?

Freaks.. which freaks?

I don't recall anyone being in favor of mistreating POW's...

 

[rightwinger]

These days?

The Republicans ran investigations on the Clintons for the entire time they were in the White House. From Whitewater to Vince Foster to Monica....they kept the Clintons tied up in court the whole time

What I meant was the shear size of the bureaucracy, number of registered lobbyists, Internet chatter 24/7 creating small or non-issues, the ridiculous bickering, all the while trying to maintain a modicum of polite leadership amid the constant concern for trying to deal with the crisis du jour together with ongoing crises. As we all know, it's all laid right at the President's doorstep, no matter who might be in power. Either that person must try to completely insulate him/herself from the insanity and let the handlers deal with each issue off to the side, or step right out into the middle of the arena and arm him/herself for the incoming onslaught. Every single day.

But you did forget to add the investigation of the Clinton Christmas Card list, which Republicans spent about 8 weeks on (more time than they spent investigating the Abu Ghraib incidents).

Abu Ghraib.. Yup.. Democrats sure proved how much they cared about the soldiers there.

Yes they did

They showed how much they respect soldiers who do not engage in torture, how they respect soldiers who were not involved but had their honor soiled by abusive soldiers

 

[Lumpy 1]

What I meant was the shear size of the bureaucracy, number of registered lobbyists, Internet chatter 24/7 creating small or non-issues, the ridiculous bickering, all the while trying to maintain a modicum of polite leadership amid the constant concern for trying to deal with the crisis du jour together with ongoing crises. As we all know, it's all laid right at the President's doorstep, no matter who might be in power. Either that person must try to completely insulate him/herself from the insanity and let the handlers deal with each issue off to the side, or step right out into the middle of the arena and arm him/herself for the incoming onslaught. Every single day.

But you did forget to add the investigation of the Clinton Christmas Card list, which Republicans spent about 8 weeks on (more time than they spent investigating the Abu Ghraib incidents).

Abu Ghraib.. Yup.. Democrats sure proved how much they cared about the soldiers there.

Yes they did

They showed how much they respect soldiers who do not engage in torture, how they respect soldiers who were not involved but had their honor soiled by abusive soldiers

You make a good point..

Tell me how you feel about the liberal media and the Democrat Party using it as a political tool then, insisting on showing all the pictures, distributing misinformation.. etc, when they knew, full well, that it put our soldiers in ever more danger..

 

[rightwinger]

Abu Ghraib.. Yup.. Democrats sure proved how much they cared about the soldiers there.

Yes they did

They showed how much they respect soldiers who do not engage in torture, how they respect soldiers who were not involved but had their honor soiled by abusive soldiers

You make a good point..

Tell me how you feel about the liberal media and the Democrat Party using it as a political tool then, insisting on showing all the pictures, distributing misinformation.. etc, when they knew, full well, that it put our soldiers in ever more danger..

It happened..

Those were American soldiers. We are an open society, hiding the truth never works. It only gets worse when the truth eventually gets out.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Yes they did

They showed how much they respect soldiers who do not engage in torture, how they respect soldiers who were not involved but had their honor soiled by abusive soldiers

You make a good point..

Tell me how you feel about the liberal media and the Democrat Party using it as a political tool then, insisting on showing all the pictures, distributing misinformation.. etc, when they knew, full well, that it put our soldiers in ever more danger..

It happened..

Those were American soldiers. We are an open society, hiding the truth never works. It only gets worse when the truth eventually gets out.

.. well okay then...

 

[washamericom]

Abu Graib, Glenn Beck was the only right wing radio host to condemn the brutality and illegal behavior there.

When will you freaks understand you don't mistreat prisoners of war?

Freaks.. which freaks?

I don't recall anyone being in favor of mistreating POW's...

you know. abu ghraib was the turning point in the decline of the beginning of the war and the piling on of the democrats to sellout their own president. a few misguided soldiers treated the iraqi combatants like the oregon cops treated rambo in first blood, and used it as a tool to beat bush instead of saddam. as it turns out.... they were right, no harm done.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Abu Graib, Glenn Beck was the only right wing radio host to condemn the brutality and illegal behavior there.

When will you freaks understand you don't mistreat prisoners of war?

Freaks.. which freaks?

I don't recall anyone being in favor of mistreating POW's...

I remember you freaks trying to limit the damage, as you are trying to do now.

Lumpy1, you are not the mainstream, just a wack to the right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Abu Graib, Glenn Beck was the only right wing radio host to condemn the brutality and illegal behavior there.

When will you freaks understand you don't mistreat prisoners of war?

Freaks.. which freaks?

I don't recall anyone being in favor of mistreating POW's...

you know. abu ghraib was the turning point in the decline of the beginning of the war and the piling on of the democrats to sellout their own president. a few misguided soldiers treated the iraqi combatants like the oregon cops treated rambo in first blood, and used it as a tool to beat bush instead of saddam. as it turns out.... they were right, no harm done.

you know, abu graib and Katrina were the turning of the Bush presidency, when Americans from the right to the left realized they had been sold out by trimmers like wash and lumpy. Go to, freaks.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Freaks.. which freaks?

I don't recall anyone being in favor of mistreating POW's...

you know. abu ghraib was the turning point in the decline of the beginning of the war and the piling on of the democrats to sellout their own president. a few misguided soldiers treated the iraqi combatants like the oregon cops treated rambo in first blood, and used it as a tool to beat bush instead of saddam. as it turns out.... they were right, no harm done.

you know, abu graib and Katrina were the turning of the Bush presidency, when Americans from the right to the left realized they had been solid out by trimmers like wash and lumpy. Go to, freaks.

solid out by trimmers like wash and lumpy. Go to, freaks.

I'm fairly sure you insulted wash and me... I think if you're going to insult people you should at least make more sense...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lumpy go back and read what you posted. You talk sensibly, please. Yes, I insulted you and wash, because you were making talking points, not discussing reality and the reasons for what happened.

 

[washamericom]

Lumpy go back and read what you posted. You talk sensibly, please. Yes, I insulted you and wash, because you were making talking points, not discussing reality and the reasons for what happened.

instead of seeing it as an isolated incident, you chose to use it as a vehicle to use against america, to quantify your own stupid views of a lovey dovey world, you sided with saddam the monster, instead of your own country, gullible enough to believe that there were no WMD (cause the u.n. easter egg hunt couldn't find them.... "we can't come in here to look? okay... we'll go to the next site...thanks".)
saddam would still be here, working on ways to destroy human decency, if it were up to people like you, idiot.

 

[JakeStarkey]

wash, it is stupid remarks like that which isolate you from the mainstream. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I said from the beginning, that if we were going to invade Iraq, we should follow General Shenseki's estimate for troop numbers not those of the amateurish Rumsfeld. And we know that Shenseki was correct. The WMD program had been downsized. No, SH would have fallen from the strangling UN sanctions.

You are a reactionary wing nut fool hiding behind uber patriotism for your jingoism. You are not mainstream, period, and you surely do not love America.

 

[washamericom]

wash, it is stupid remarks like that which isolate you from the mainstream. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I said from the beginning, that if we were going to invade Iraq, we should follow General Shenseki's estimate for troop numbers not those of the amateurish Rumsfeld. And we know that Shenseki was correct. The WMD program had been downsized. No, SH would have fallen from the strangling UN sanctions.

You are a reactionary wing nut fool hiding behind uber patriotism for your jingoism. You are not mainstream, period, and you surely do not love America.

well spoken... congratulations on your brand new b.a. in poly-sci. i love america just enough to respond to the likes of you, and more than enough to be glad that we (us. uk and a few others...never the swiss for some reason) got saddam. so too is the first generation in iraq to not be oppressed by a monster, i'm glad he's gone. also "strangling u.n sanctions" is an oxymoron, but they feed people in times of crisis.
and, i guess we'll see how isolated i am in november, in the mean time, you may enjoy this short movie i made, not just for you. cheers mate

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSqP7303QE0]YouTube - when victory comes alive[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

wash, it is stupid remarks like that which isolate you from the mainstream. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I said from the beginning, that if we were going to invade Iraq, we should follow General Shenseki's estimate for troop numbers not those of the amateurish Rumsfeld. And we know that Shenseki was correct. The WMD program had been downsized. No, SH would have fallen from the strangling UN sanctions.

You are a reactionary wing nut fool hiding behind uber patriotism for your jingoism. You are not mainstream, period, and you surely do not love America.

well spoken... congratulations on your brand new b.a. in poly-sci. i love america just enough to respond to the likes of you, and more than enough to be glad that we (us. uk and a few others...never the swiss for some reason) got saddam. so too is the first generation in iraq to not be oppressed by a monster, i'm glad he's gone. also "strangling u.n sanctions" is an oxymoron, but they feed people in times of crisis.
and, i guess we'll see how isolated i am in november, in the mean time, you may enjoy this short movie i made, not just for you. cheers mate
[/url]

Here is the appropriate response to you above, which you will believe is two words: non-sense.

You are not mainstream, and those who think like you are a very small percentage of the electorate. So America is not too worried about you at all. The GOP will take the House (not the Senate), but I guarantee none of them will being listening to you and you mates.

 

[washamericom]

wash, it is stupid remarks like that which isolate you from the mainstream. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I said from the beginning, that if we were going to invade Iraq, we should follow General Shenseki's estimate for troop numbers not those of the amateurish Rumsfeld. And we know that Shenseki was correct. The WMD program had been downsized. No, SH would have fallen from the strangling UN sanctions.

You are a reactionary wing nut fool hiding behind uber patriotism for your jingoism. You are not mainstream, period, and you surely do not love America.

well spoken... congratulations on your brand new b.a. in poly-sci. i love america just enough to respond to the likes of you, and more than enough to be glad that we (us. uk and a few others...never the swiss for some reason) got saddam. so too is the first generation in iraq to not be oppressed by a monster, i'm glad he's gone. also "strangling u.n sanctions" is an oxymoron, but they feed people in times of crisis.
and, i guess we'll see how isolated i am in november, in the mean time, you may enjoy this short movie i made, not just for you. cheers mate
[/url]

Here is the appropriate response to you above, which you will believe is two words: non-sense.

You are not mainstream, and those who think like you are a very small percentage of the electorate. So America is not too worried about you at all. The GOP will take the House (not the Senate), but I guarantee none of them will being listening to you and you mates.

i'm pretty sure nonsense is just one word, and don't speak for "america", makes you sound silly. the country is politically divided right now. i think you mean "your mates"
and my site gets a million hits a year, how bout you?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You sound silly when you pontificate, so I am not worried about it. The country is politically divided, but your belief group is very small not mainstream and will have little effect. Let's move on.