Bill Clinton...

[Vertnut]

...has been the voice of reason lately. Anyone else notice this? His latest appearances on TV have impressed me. He says he still backs Barry, but admits he likes the Palin family and admires her for her run at the VP slot. You can tell he's tired of all this, and feels like he was used by the Dems the last eight years, only to be 'dissed by the party when it came to Hillary. I kind of feel for him. The Dems really did shit on the Clintons...

[White trash wagon]

...has been the voice of reason lately. Anyone else notice this? His latest appearances on TV have impressed me. He says he still backs Barry, but admits he likes the Palin family and admires her for her run at the VP slot. You can tell he's tired of all this, and feels like he was used by the Dems the last eight years, only to be 'dissed by the party when it came to Hillary. I kind of feel for him. The Dems really did shit on the Clintons...

Although I never voted for Clinton, I always felt he did a pretty decent job in office. He had the morals of a pole-cat, but that really had no effect on his overall performance. Even die hard right wingers have to admit that 1992-2000, was not a bad time in America.

[Magnimike1]

Although I never voted for Clinton, I always felt he did a pretty decent job in office. He had the morals of a pole-cat, but that really had no effect on his overall performance. Even die hard right wingers have to admit that 1992-2000, was not a bad time in America.


I like alot of his time spent in office, with the exception of his gun policies.

[FSON]

I agree with the Clintons, both Billary and Hillbilly, that the U.S. armed forces should be run wholly by homosexuals.

[line-em-up]

Clinton was a great president as far as I'm concerned. I know many hate him, but that's their right. My dad thought Clinton was horrible and couldn't wait for W to get in there. He's changes his tune now. I get a kick out of that.

[Vertnut]

Although I never voted for Clinton, I always felt he did a pretty decent job in office. He had the morals of a pole-cat, but that really had no effect on his overall performance. Even die hard right wingers have to admit that 1992-2000, was not a bad time in America.
I didn't care for him, and his 8 years were really full of non-accomplishments. Things here at home were OK, but foreign policy and our military suffered. I never hated the man, like so many left-wingers do Bush. Hell, I don't/won't hate Barry if he gets elected, either. These guys are our President, and regardless of the party, we should hope the country does well under them, though many liberals don't feel that way...

[Mustangman_2000]

I didn't care for him, and his 8 years were really full of non-accomplishments.

I strongly disagree with that statement. Don't have time for a lengthy retort right now as the phone won't stop ringing.

[black01gt]

Holy shit! I think I've logged onto the wrong site.

With Clinton on Letterman, it was comforting to hear someone finally say "we can get through this". What!! No fear and gloom?

[line-em-up]

I strongly disagree with that statement. Don't have time for a lengthy retort right now as the phone won't stop ringing.

It's a shame that the balanced budget that he worked on while in office has been blown away.

[1fastdem]

It always amazes me personally that when we remove the passion of the moment how we look back on past politicians as generally well intentioned and doing some good things but flawed people. How we can look at their tenure and discuss positives and negatives. Clinton (economy was strong), Nixon (foreign policy, no democrat could have talked to China or removed our troops from Vietnam), the list goes on and on. If only we could do that now on a national level and really talk about the issues.

The top reason I voted Obama in the primaries (and wanted McCain to be the Rep candidate) was I felt if Hillary was the Dem. nominee and anyone else was the Rep nom. the resulting fall election would too partisan. Too filled with mudslinging. And no one would really talk about the issues. I though to myself, "If Obama and McCain are the ones, we'll really have a choice over policy, a election about substance." At first both candidates were trying to tone done the attacks. And I still held out hope.

Now I can only hope the debates refocus the conversation.

Sorry for the tangent I went on.

[bcoop]

I though to myself, "If Obama and McCain are the ones, we'll really have a choice over policy, a election about substance."



I'm sorry, but LMGDAO! What exactly, has Obama shown with substance. Because I've paid far more attention to this election campaign, than any other in the past. And I have yet, to hear a single thing containing any substance, coming out of Obama's mouth. You're dellusional, if you think otherwise.

[FSON]

It always amazes me personally that when we remove the passion of the moment how we look back on past politicians as generally well intentioned and doing some good things but flawed people. How we can look at their tenure and discuss positives and negatives. Clinton (economy was strong), Nixon (foreign policy, no democrat could have talked to China or removed our troops from Vietnam), the list goes on and on. If only we could do that now on a national level and really talk about the issues.

The top reason I voted Obama in the primaries (and wanted McCain to be the Rep candidate) was I felt if Hillary was the Dem. nominee and anyone else was the Rep nom. the resulting fall election would too partisan. Too filled with mudslinging. And no one would really talk about the issues. I though to myself, "If Obama and McCain are the ones, we'll really have a choice over policy, a election about substance." At first both candidates were trying to tone done the attacks. And I still held out hope.

Now I can only hope the debates refocus the conversation.

Sorry for the tangent I went on.

Tell us, what in the world did Clinton have to do with the favorable economy when he was president?

[1fastdem]

I'm sorry, but LMGDAO! What exactly, has Obama shown with substance. Because I've paid far more attention to this election campaign, than any other in the past. And I have yet, to hear a single thing containing any substance, coming out of Obama's mouth. You're dellusional, if you think otherwise.

You can't tell me this campaign is not a disappointment to you, too. You can't tell me you were not hoping to hear more about issues than we are. If this is the election that you have paid more attention to than in the past, you can not say you would not like to hear both candidates talk about the issues with answers.

I would like both candates run ads talking about their policies. I have posted their policies on different issues a couple times. Heck, my signature below is off McCain's policy. But the only place I can see their plans is searching a PDF file in their sites. Sure, I agree Obama has talked in big sounding speaches and, to quote Rove, McCain has run ads that "are, you know, beyond the 100 percent truth test." Rove also said both are guilty of "going too far."

And if you read my little rant my disappointment is about that nothing of substance is coming from either candidate. IMO.

[01WhiteCobra]

He is just trying to loosen up Palin.

[1fastdem]

Tell us, what in the world did Clinton have to do with the favorable economy when he was president?

IMO the biggest thing the gov. should worry about is the national debt and a balanced budget. The debt carries the longest impact of any financial decisions by our gov, both pres and leg. And I guess McCain thinks Clinton did okay and I'll let him answer for me...
"A McCain Administration will provide the leadership to achieve bipartisan spending restraint equivalent to that in the 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement between a GOP Congress and a Democratic President." - John McCain's economic plan, Bi-partisan Fiscal Discipline, page 5.

[And honestly I don't think any the government has the level of impact directly on the economy that the public thinks it does. I don't blame Bush particularly for this mess. The guys on Wall St. are smart, sometime too smart. They have hundreds of people looking for any edge to make money. The best react and exploit a loophole or advantage that no one else saw. The big players make millions when a share moves from 8.25 to 8.27. We expect our politicians to be expert everywhere but they are not. They just don't have the knowledge to forsee the future. But I do expect them not to screw it up as I feel they are now]

Can you see my reasoning?

[Mustangman_2000]

He is just trying to loosen up Palin.

There is a great opportunity for a witty retort to that remark, but I'm not smart enough to think of one.

[01WhiteCobra]

There is a great opportunity for a witty retort to that remark, but I'm not smart enough to think of one.

Dude, it's Clinton. The last thing that went through his mind was whether she had the skillz to be VP.

[Vertnut]

I strongly disagree with that statement. Don't have time for a lengthy retort right now as the phone won't stop ringing.
He did get some welfare reform done, but pretty much tap-danced over health-care (a BIGGIE!), education stunk, and still stinks), and really let the militar down. We forget one thing about the Gulf War...it never ended. We had a 10 year "cease-fire" before going back in, but never stopped.

[1fastdem]

pretty much tap-danced over health-care (a BIGGIE!)

I disagree with the above point. They (yes they - Bill and Hillary) took a swing and a miss. In fact the health care proposal was probably the most ambitious thing they ever did. It failed for more reasons than there is time to recount. But you can't say they 'tap-danced'. In fact it nearly ruined his first term.

[Vertnut]

I disagree with the above point. They (yes they - Bill and Hillary) took a swing and a miss. In fact the health care proposal was probably the most ambitious thing they ever did. It failed for more reasons than there is time to recount. But you can't say they 'tap-danced'. In fact it nearly ruined his first term.
As much as you like to argue semantics, it was a huge issue that he ran on, that he and Hillary did nothing about. I personally think it haunted Hillary in her bid for the presidency. It was a major failure for both, and probably will be her cross to bear for years to come.

[1fastdem]

As much as you like to argue semantics, it was a huge issue that he ran on, that he and Hillary did nothing about. I personally think it haunted Hillary in her bid for the presidency. It was a major failure for both, and probably will be her cross to bear for years to come.

I agree with everything you wrote in this post.

1st he ran on it
2nd nothing was passed
3rd it was a major failure
4th I think it still haunts her. Both in policy and the way she attacks her opponents in a political race.

But she chaired the group and they rolled out a sweeping proposal that was DOA. Almost everyone lined up against it. [It wasn't a great proposal. IMO.] They tried and failed. They staked their momentum from their election on this proposal. And lost it all.

It is not semantics. I try to be careful how I say things.

[Sgt Beavis]

Welfare reform and a balanced budget. He actually shrunk the size of the federal government.

From a fiscal aspect he makes GW look more liberal that Jimmy Carter.

Personally I think I would be OK with Obama as President IF the Republicans had control of Congress. Clinton was able to work with the Republicans and get things done he could never do with his own party.

But the Republican's aren't in control and they aren't going to get control back for at least another two years.

[99MustangGT]

I watched him on the Daily Show this week and he was really good!!

[Vertnut]

Welfare reform and a balanced budget. He actually shrunk the size of the federal government.

From a fiscal aspect he makes GW look more liberal that Jimmy Carter.

Personally I think I would be OK with Obama as President IF the Republicans had control of Congress. Clinton was able to work with the Republicans and get things done he could never do with his own party.

But the Republican's aren't in control and they aren't going to get control back for at least another two years.
Hmmm. Balanced budget included smoke and mirrors: If we decimated the military as he did, we could do well, too.

[White trash wagon]

Hmmm. Balanced budget included smoke and mirrors: If we decimated the military as he did, we could do well, too.

Actually the decimation of the military was the result of George Bush Sr. When the Soviet Union fell, Bush made the largest cuts in defense spending in 35 years as part of the so-called "peace dividend". When Clinton got into office, he just continued what Bush began.

[Trip McNeely]

...has been the voice of reason lately. Anyone else notice this? His latest appearances on TV have impressed me. He says he still backs Barry, but admits he likes the Palin family and admires her for her run at the VP slot. You can tell he's tired of all this, and feels like he was used by the Dems the last eight years, only to be 'dissed by the party when it came to Hillary. I kind of feel for him. The Dems really did shit on the Clintons...
I couldnt agree more. He keeps in touch with Bush Sr. a lot, and does a lot of charity things with him. I also feel as though hes trying to distance himself quietly from Obama, and hell even his wife. lol!

[Vertnut]

Actually the decimation of the military was the result of George Bush Sr. When the Soviet Union fell, Bush made the largest cuts in defense spending in 35 years as part of the so-called "peace dividend". When Clinton got into office, he just continued what Bush began.
...on a larger scale.

[FSON]

On WBAP last night they were talking about clinton rewriting fanny and freddy to reduce requirements for low income people to buy homes.
He wanted these highly successful semi private groups to give more money to the disadvantaged. To do so, many of the restrictions where discarded with very little proof of income. Voila, oooo la, la, esta aqui, bayyybeeee.

[Vertnut]

On WBAP last night they were talking about clinton rewriting fanny and freddy to reduce requirements for low income people to buy homes.
He wanted these highly successful semi private groups to give more money to the disadvantaged. To do so, many of the restrictions where discarded with very little proof of income. Voila, oooo la, la, esta aqui, bayyybeeee.
Everyone needs to understand that THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRATS DO! They specialize in entitlement programs that "level the playing field" for all people. :cool:

[FSON]

Everyone needs to understand that THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRATS DO! They specialize in entitlement programs that "level the playing field" for all people. :cool:
To do so, many of the restrictions where discarded with very little proof of income?
"Entitlement" here is a sugar coated word.

[Vertnut]

To do so, many of the restrictions where discarded with very little proof of income?
"Entitlement" here is a sugar coated word.
That sugar-coating works on the most bitter pills, huh? ;) Remember, there were many 100% loans that required nothing more than good credit, and employment verification. No docs, no down payment, no W2's, ...nada.

[aggie97]

It always amazes me personally that when we remove the passion of the moment how we look back on past politicians as generally well intentioned and doing some good things but flawed people. How we can look at their tenure and discuss positives and negatives. Clinton (economy was strong), Nixon (foreign policy, no democrat could have talked to China or removed our troops from Vietnam), the list goes on and on. If only we could do that now on a national level and really talk about the issues.



It's because History is written with respect by educated people who are reporting facts to learn from, and the media reports on what they think is news now so they can sell commercials. The problem is that people don't learn from history, and they are brainwashed by Television...and believe it. Americans are too lazy to read and remember what history has taught us both financially and as a republic....so we are making all the mistakes all over again. Our world is being ruined by opinion and personal agendas...not strengthened by patriotism and intelligence.

Personally, I think all of today's media needs to hang from the closest tree....but that is just me.

[Denny]

To do so, many of the restrictions where discarded with very little proof of income?
"Entitlement" here is a sugar coated word.
At least you didn't deny the usage of the word, as it is correctly used there.