The Clinton Bashing Is Heating Up. I Won't Fall For These Smear Tactics.  

One thing that I know a Clinton administration will do is restore our relationships with our former allies.

When Bill Clinton use to go on foreign trips your rarely saw major protests.

We had excellent relations with our European allies. George Bush basically told them if your not with us, then you are against us.

That is not the way to be diplomatic. France has the largest Muslim population in Europe. We should have worked with them in our war againt terror. Instead we dismissed them as quote "The Old Europe".

So they said OK, you handle it on your own. Tell me what you think about the results so far.

We lead leadership from the most powerful person on the planet. And right now we don't have it.

Just look at how incompetant Condalesa Rice is. She has made over a dozen trips to the Middle East. She hasn't accomplished one thing. Things have gotten worse.

Being the President is a serious job. We can't let smear tactics affect our elections.

Lloyd

Cannot bash Condoleeza since she is dealing with higher ups while the lower downs are doing their dastardly deeds. Anyway it is a process. Also they probably shared their women with Clinton. We could debate this for a long time. We need someone that is diplomatic and firm and indeed considers the populations of the countries that we deal with. Results in the desert are really a no win thing. Too much is at stake and too many are doing evil deeds. Again, I hope the best person wins this time in a smooth running election and the world can heal from the evil deeds done by the few.

"France has the largest Muslim population in Europe. We should have worked with them in our war againt terror."

First off, are you unaware of what results from the French approach to dealing with muslims? Did you not read about the massive riots that went on for weeks in France? Are you unaware that the French people threw out the government that allowed this to happen? Would you want what happened in France to happen in the USA? Why would we take their advice?

Second, are you unaware that General Tommy Franks, in his book "AMERICAN SOLDIER" praised the French military for its coperation and assistance in the war on terror?

Hello redyellowblackdog (1201)

You wrote:

"First off, are you unaware of what results from the French approach to dealing with muslims? Did you not read about the massive riots that went on for weeks in France? Are you unaware that the French people threw out the government that allowed this to happen? Would you want what happened in France to happen in the USA? Why would we take their advice?"

We agree on a few things here. I watched the massive riots that went on in France. And it still flares up now and then.

I was of the opinion that the French should have responded more sternly to the chaos.

I'm on the same page with you in regards to the new French leader.

I actually agree with the majority of his campaign positions.

France will never reach it's potential with a 35 hour work week and a guaranteed 20 to 30 day vacation plan.

Plus they need to be able to fire employess that don't contribute to the bottom line of the company they work for.

As for your comment as Bill being unable to keep his pants on, that goes to the general perception that he didn't do a good job because of the Monica Lewisnky situation.

You and I both know that things were better for Americans under the Clinton administratio.

If you disagree, then tell me how things are better now.

Lloyd

You assume I am unaware and show your hostility, I see things differently and some uprising would be a good thing in this country to fix some wrongs. However the public is not seemingly made of that stuff anymore that made this country great.
The Tommy guy can write anything he wants and unless you cross reference it and study it well you cannot be sure it is fact.
Again, mean spiritedness is not necessary in a discussion where our views which can vary on almost every point.

I believe the time is ripe for the 1st woman President of the United States. Times are changing. The leaders of Germany and Liberia are both women.

Hillary is officially the favorite to win the Presidency. She leads the pack and if you get a chance to watch the Democratic debates, please do so.

She is strong on all the issues. She has the organization and she has the best consultant money can buy, her husband, ex-President William Jefferson Clinton.

Lloyd

related resource: buy leads

I see thanks very much.

I'm not going to go back to Arkansas and dig up any records. Here are the facts.

What did we have under the Clinton administration? Lowest rate of unemployment and inflation in 25 yrs.

$600 Billion in deficit reduction. Which in the end was a saving of over 1 trillion dollars. This being the first time since Harry Truman.

He signed the Family and Medical Leave act for over 42 million people so they can take time off for family matters withoug losing their jobs (which comes in really handy for parent of special needs kids which are frequently hospitalized).

He ordered for the first time ever the Justice Department to crack down on dead beat dads and federal employees, too.

Cut by 25% White House Staff and eliminated 272,000 federal jobs not needed.

$1.3 Billion increase in Veteran Benefits ( how does this compare to Bush's complete and utter disregard for their benefits as of now?)

He increased by 65% Breast Cancer research. Increased Adoption and Foster Care Plans by $600 Million ( as both an Adoptive parent of special needs children and an advocate for foster children.

These are all facts.

Lloyd

Unemployment is golden under Bush thanks to trickle down tax reforms and Bush has pledged 10 billion dollars for AIDS research and aid to Africa.

Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of our current President.

BUT, Clinton was riding on the coattails of both President Reagan and the first President Bush - 12 years worth of what was basically sound economics.

It takes several years to actually see the effects of a new president's policies. Unfortunately the person who moves into the White House loves to CLAIM they are the one responsible for everything that is occurring in the country from the day thay took office.

No President has ever been 100% bad for the country. Even our current President has had his moments; few as they may have been.

BUT, I do not want criminals in the White House again and just because they have not been tried and found guilty; does not mean they didn't commit the crimes. Too many people were aware of them when they occurred, even if the more outspoken ones have been silenced.

You wrote:

"Clinton was riding on the coattails of both President Reagan and the first President Bush - 12 years worth of what was basically sound economics."

Here are some of the real facts:

President Clinton put in place a three-part economic strategy of fiscal discipline, investing in people, and opening markets abroad.

He created Largest Surplus in History:

The $123 billion surplus in 1999 was the largest dollar surplus in history, even after adjusting for inflation.

The surplus, which was expected to be about 1.4% of GDP, was the largest surplus as a share of the economy since 1951.

1999 was the second year in a row of surplus, marking the first back-to-back surpluses since 1956-57.

That is the first time in U.S. history that we experienced seven years in a row of fiscal improvement.

During those years, America paid down $140 billion in public debt, the largest debt pay-down ever.

The debt held by the public is $1.7 trillion lower than was projected when President Clinton took office.

As a result, in 1999 alone, interest payments on the debt were $91 billion lower than projected.

Lloyd

"These are all facts. Lloyd"

Lloyd, I hope you never ever ask yourself how it is that the German people were able to tolerate a monster like Hitler because you have just given an example of how it happens.

Speakeasy pointed out some of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that the Clintons are first class felons. You responded not by pointing out how that could not be possibly true but by giving examples of how much the Clintons had done economically for the USA.

This is exactly the same as what happened in Germany in the 1930's before WWII. Hitler did pull off what at the time seemed like economic miracles. The people did truely love him for it. If he had died in 1938, his memory would still be revered. So, let's not let history repeat itself. Just because someone can accomplish what might seem like economic miracles is not reason to tolerate a criminal.

The democrats need to remember history and nominate someone honest.

When it comes to economic issues, you need to look at the last 5 years of Clintons term in office PLUS the first THREE years of Bush's. It takes that long for new policies to actually show effects (trickle down).

Economics aren't everything. Reports showed a threat from Al Queda back in the Clinton Administration; but, they were ignored. When Bush took office, the threat had been considered a "non threat" for so long that it was not at thetop of the list of things for him to be briefed on and take action on. Before he had a chance to truly form an independant threat assessment - we all knew they were a threat (9/11).

Personally, I don't care that Bill was cheating on her and she either approved of his infidelities or she was so "blind she didn't know what was going on". That was their personal choice and really only affected them.

But, when their actions proved that they were corrupt and criminals in Arkansas; that made them criminals. They were NOT convicted or even brought to trial because of the witness tampering and "accidental deaths". So they have NOT paid the penalty for their actions. (I would actually respect them more if they had served time and paid for their crimes.)

If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, I will vote for ANY ONE that is put up to run against her. If she is not nominated, I will vote for the most qualified candidate regardless of what party they belong to.

"There is none so blind as he who WILL not see."

related resource: personal care

redyellowblackdog (1200) 9 hours ago
"These are all facts. Lloyd"

Lloyd, I hope you never ever ask yourself how it is that the German people were able to tolerate a monster like Hitler because you have just given an example of how it happens.

Speakeasy pointed out some of the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that the Clintons are first class felons. You responded not by pointing out how that could not be possibly true but by giving examples of how much the Clintons had done economically for the USA.

This is exactly the same as what happened in Germany in the 1930's before WWII. Hitler did pull off what at the time seemed like economic miracles. The people did truely love him for it. If he had died in 1938, his memory would still be revered. So, let's not let history repeat itself. Just because someone can accomplish what might seem like economic miracles is not reason to tolerate a criminal.

The democrats need to remember history and nominate someone honest.
+ - !

Hello redyellowblackdog. It's nice to meet you here at MyLot. I have to disagree with some of your premises.

I think it's a streach to compare the Clintons to Adolph Hitler.

You are right that he used the ecomonic conditions to fire up the German people.

Bill Clinton never played one class of people against another.

He bought people of all colors, faith and nationality into his administration.

Do you remember Secretary of State Madeline Albrite. I think she might have been the first woman Secretary of State. I might not be 100 percent sure, but I think she might have been.

His personal lawyer was a Black attorney named Vernon Jordan.

He chose Cohen as his Secretary of Defense. I think he might have a Jewish backround.

What I'm saying is that the comparison is not a good one.

Now as far as people winding up dead in accidents and crashes, I don't think that they would be able to pull these things off with all the scrutiny they have always been under.

That's just my opinion, but you might know more since you are a Arkansas native.

Why were you so appalled at Bill Clinton being elected not once, but twice?

The American people weren't that appalled at all. They would have voted for him again if they could have.

Just an opposing point of view. We can still be friends.

Lloyd

I am apalled for the same reason I am apalled that Bush was reelected.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

All that reelction proves in both these cases; is one of two things:

1) the American people who actually get up off their butts and vote are very gullible and naive OR

2) the elections were rigged

Neither scenario bodes well for the country's future.

Hello speakeasy. You wrote:

I am apalled for the same reason I am apalled that Bush was reelected.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

I totally agree with you. The first election was so rigged, that it was actually blantant.

You had Jewish people voting for Pat Buchanan. In the real world that would have never happened.

The election was a fraud and Bush has proven to be even a bigger fraud.

I'm old enough to know the Presidents. I rembember John F. Kennedy as a child. I rember Lyndon Johnson, the President who replaced him after he was assacinated.

I remember Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace.

I remember Gerald Ford, who I actually liked.

I remember Jimmy Carter, who I think is doing a better job as a ex-president than he did as a President.

I remember Ronald Regan, who I didn't support, but I admire now.

I remember George Prescott Bush, famous for saying "No New Taxes" and breaking his promise.

I remember William Jefferson Clinton, the best President of my lifetime. I truly enjoyed his presidency.

And now we have George W. Bush.

All I can say is that he is definately the worse of all the Presidents in my lifetime.

And I experience them all.

Lloyd

I can honestly say we agree on two of the Presidents; Jimmy Carter is doing much better as an ex-president than he did as President and George W. is the worst of the batch.

We appear to be about the same age, if you remember Kennedy's assasination as a child. A lot of the rest that you stated was just plain fact - about Johnson, Nixon, and Ford. In my opinion, Reagan was the BEST of the Presidents in this era and even he made some serious mistakes in his Presidency. Clinton - the only thing I "personally" think he did right was he KEPT HIS PROMISE to the best of his ability to the gays; with his "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He could not do more at the time but this did take some of the pressure off of the ones who were already serving in tne military and those who wished to serve.

Clinton's past is too checkered for me to ever accept him or his wife. You stated that you didn't really think he could have gotten away with those things with the "spotlight " on them. HE OWNED THE MEDIA IN THAT STATE. They did not dare report anything that Clinton and his people had not approved. Like I said; I do not believe that they did it themselves they had others do it for them, and they had plenty of people that either OWED them or FEARED them. Papers and documentation were shredded or destroyed in "fires". People were intimidated and "died in accidents".

Before moving to Arkansas; I would not have believed this was possible either. But, I personally saw a LOT of corruption among government officials in that state and I heard about a lot more. I was there with the military and I saw a sergeant who was beaten up and had drugs planted on him BY the local police because his wife was having an affair with one of them. He was also told that if he ever went near his wife again; they would see to it that he was arrested again and that he WOULD commit "suicide" while he was in jail.

The military did NOTHING. All they did was transfer him away from that base for his own safety.

I do not know if the entire state was like this or not; or if the state has improved since then. But, when Clinton was governor, you would have thought the capital and surrounding cities were being run by "Al Capone" and his cronies; it was that bad.

People who went walking in the woods and found toxic dump sites, stills, or drugs; were commonly found dead in dumpsters behind local businesses. No investigations were done. We just wondered what they were unlucky enough to have stumbled over.

And, like I said, Hilary is the "brains" in this couple.

"I think it's a streach to compare the Clintons to Adolph Hitler."

Hitler was a criminal. The Clinton's are unconvicted criminals. Their crimes are different. That is the only difference.

You are completely correct about the Clintons being "inclusive" in their administration, but that is totally irrelevent to the Clinton's connections to drug dealers, Chinese gun runners, and assorted other criminals.

Whether or not the Clinton administration is better or not than Bush's does not matter. A crook is a crook and should not be President. In the end, bad will always come from having a crook like either of the Clintons in the Presidency.

Do you truely not understand that no matter how talented a criminal should not be President? Do you truely not understand that pointing out Clinton's flaws is not an arguement for Bush?

I think the reason that the conservatives are bashing Hillary is because their candidates aren't up to speed.

They had their chance and look what they've done.

Ronald Regan asked Jimmy Carter during a debate, are your better off now than four years ago.

Can you really say that things are better today than when the Republicans took over?

Think about that a be honest to yourself.

Lloyd

I'm not gonna sit here and debate nitpicky stuff....

I don't like a single candidate....

I don't think the US is ready for a female president, I don't care what the democrats think, or the republicans think,

I want a candidate that I can believe in, one who will turn this country around...

adn one of the reason Clinton had such a surplus in the budget is that he 'borrowed' from the Social Security fund, and Bush has refused to do that...

There are to many IOU's sitting thre now which is why the Social Security is bankrupt, its why my 12 year old in spite of being hands down qualified for benefits can't get it....my husband makes less than 70K ayear, her needs aren't considered, and well, we make less than 200.00 a month to qualify for her....

But yet a president and any government official is given a pension.....Politics are corrupt, I don't have a good thing to say about either democrats OR republicans this year....

And God help us if Hillary is elected....Don't like her.....I don't buy this 'faith bit' that got her through her husband's infidelity.

I've read about the Clinton's back from Arkansas, and I read about corruption in Poliitcs, on all levels, needless to say my opinion changed from that moment on about Politics.....

So if you want your eyes opened to the corruption in Politics read a book called "The Boys on the Tracks"

Moch

I'm going to repeat a previous post.

President Clinton put in place a three-part economic strategy of fiscal discipline, investing in people, and opening markets abroad.

He created Largest Surplus in History:

The $123 billion surplus in 1999 was the largest dollar surplus in history, even after adjusting for inflation.

The surplus, which was expected to be about 1.4% of GDP, was the largest surplus as a share of the economy since 1951.

1999 was the second year in a row of surplus, marking the first back-to-back surpluses since 1956-57.

That is the first time in U.S. history that we experienced seven years in a row of fiscal improvement.

During those years, America paid down $140 billion in public debt, the largest debt pay-down ever.

The debt held by the public is $1.7 trillion lower than was projected when President Clinton took office.

As a result, in 1999 alone, interest payments on the debt were $91 billion lower than projected.

Borrowing from Social Security could have never acheived these goals.

Lloyd

Thanks for the "big AMEN!!!" Everything I wrote I really believe. I did say it was just my opinion, but I do believe it.

Glad to know that someone understands my point of view.

Thanks.

Lloyd

I'd gladly replace the carpets in the Oval Office. Take a look at this and tell me what you think.

The Cost of Iraq War calculator is set to reach $378 billion March 31, 2007, halfway through fiscal year 2007.

The Cost of Iraq War calculator is occasionally reset based on new information and new allocations of funding.

The numbers include military and non-military spending, such as reconstruction.

Spending only includes incremental costs, additional funds that are expended due to the war.

For example, soldiers' regular pay is not included, but combat pay is included.

Potential future costs, such as future medical care for soldiers and veterans wounded in the war, are not included.

It is also not clear whether the current funding will cover all military wear and tear.

It also does not account for the Iraq War being deficit-financed and that taxpayers will need to make additional interest payments on the national debt due to those deficits.

Instead, we could have paid for
57,787,508
children to attend a year of Head Start.

Instead, we could have insured
261,254,948
children for one year

Instead, we could have hired
7,561,059
additional public school teachers for one year.

Instead, we could have built
3,928,435
additional housing units.

Now you tell me what you would rather spend our tax dollars on.

Lloyd

thats because they did not care. bill was very popular and doing a great job and they did what they did in hopes of bringing him down ,and the fact that he was doing to good drove them crazy.

The name of the person that Monica Lewinsky confided in was Linda Tripp. She secretly recorded their telephone conversations and release the information.

With friends like that, who needs enemies?

You are so right when you say that elections are all about the money, but both sides spend like crazy.

It is a sad fact that only 35% of Americans turn out to vote.

I can't wait to pull the lever in the next Presidential election.

Lloyd

Obaman isn't ready yet. Gulianni has too much personal baggage. I just don't like Edwards. Al Gore is having too much fun being a celebrity. McCain is part of the current problems and can't be part of the solution.

And the rest of the candidates are just unelectable.

So Hillary is the logical choice.

The next time the Democratic candidates have a debate, please watch it. You will see that she has all bases covered.

Lloyd

Whitewater was just an attempt to remove a popularly elected Democratic President.

It was almost like a feeding frenzy. The rest of the world must have been looking at the U.S. like we were out of our minds.

It's going to be hard to remove the affairs of the candidates out of the picture, because the Republicans made it a mainstream thing to do.

Now they have to live with it in regards to Rudy Guliani, Newt Gingrich and McCain. All of these so called conservative family value candidates all have marital baggage.

Lloyd

Wow. That's my second "Amen". Is my post turning into a spiratual thing?" lol

Thank you for the compliment. I truly believe what I wrote, even though it was just my opinion.

Lloyd

well its my opinion as well and i thank you for putting into words what i feel as well.