Does a president Hillary represent 8-years of something new or 28-years of a Bush-Clinton dynasty?
Isn't time for something really new?
2007-02-22 16:13:20 · 16 answers · asked by Joe M 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hillary is a change, but I dont know if it is in the right direction. People say Bush is bad, wait till you see what she does. Hillary has always identified herself with GOP more than Democrats.
2007-02-22 16:17:12 · answer #1 · answered by jasonpickles 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
She'll make some changes that are very important in the area of foreign policy. She has already talked about one of my main concerns and that is the alienation of our Allies and others around the world. She recognizes that while we police a civil war terrorists are forming new cells around the world. She will work to restore our reputation around the world by bringing in other nations as equal partners in a real fight against terrorism. I think she will set up a central terrorism force and committee with our Allies. We suffer from fragmented intelligence between countries and incomplete disclosure between agencies. That must be changed if the world is to get a grip on terrorism. She understands that we need our Allies to stand next to us and not behind us waiting for us to tell them what to do. She understands two words George Bush doesn't even have a minor relationship with - diplomacy first. She's a hawk, and so is Bush, but she's a hawk with a brilliant mind and a real grasp on foreign relations.
A dynasty? Well, it ends here for the Clintons, I don't know if I'd call two Clintons as President a dynasty. Some people do feel that way. I don't. I feel, as a country, we should make use of the best people/resources and experience available to us, especially when in trouble. I feel that Hillary Clinton is the best candidate out there right now and is more than capable of handling the extremely touchy world of Middle Eastern politics and the challenges of terrorism.
2007-02-23 00:33:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
That's not the least bit funny, the blogbaba remembers Clinton fondly, even if he did enact NAFTA and GATT. To cast asperations on Hillary, and make the blogbaba wonder if supporting her is the right thing to do shows two things.
One is you asked the right question, and it might just have been the best one I have read yet.
Two, the blogbaba just went from a Hillary supporter to undecided.
Props Joe M, I'll keep my eye open for something better.
2007-02-23 00:32:06 · answer #3 · answered by blogbaba 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Clinton's partnered with George H.W.Bush through the offices of the national security council in a little Iran contra arms and cocaine trafficking operation in Mena, Arkansas
Hillary Clinton's law firm was helping launder the local share of profits through state housing agency securities and investments.
It's funny you say bush Clinton dynasty because that is exactly what it is.
Police state Rudy is coming! police state Rudy is coming! The red herring is a black man and a women for president. Rockefeller finances all the candidates!! Rockefeller finances the UN! You don't have a choice!!
Good luck and God Bless
2007-02-23 00:42:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Hillary has already been president for 8 years, directing Bill
2007-02-23 00:20:49 · answer #5 · answered by Ibredd 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hillary, who is also largely funded, and embraces many of the PNAC policies would not be any different than Bush as far as Foreign policy goes.
And as Americans have come to realize the aspirations of the PNAC are very,very expensive both in lives and treasure.
The PNAC neoconservatives and the DLC neoliberals believe that the Constitution is a hindrance to their joint goals for a New American Century. They see it as necessary to restrict American civil rights in order to further their fascist corporate agenda. They believe that the American People are too ignorant to govern themselves.
2007-02-23 00:18:49 · answer #6 · answered by dstr 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No one can bring this country around faster then Hillary---Yes 8 more years.
2007-02-23 00:42:02 · answer #7 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You sound like the communist dictators around the world. They think both Clinton and Bush are the same.
2007-02-23 00:24:55 · answer #8 · answered by a bush family member 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
28 more years. We do need someone with a different affiliation. Unfortunately, I don't see anyone "new" on the horizon.
2007-02-23 00:30:00 · answer #9 · answered by Matt 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
She is a historical figure that has come and gone.
We need someone new, fresh, and with experience to handle what might come at us - and be able to "stand up" for the best interest of our country. We don't need someone who is in it just for their own self etificatation.
2007-02-23 00:24:26 · answer #10 · answered by INFOMINDSOLUTIONS 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋