I'm surprised you are asking this question here.
Comparison:
Hillary Clinton: Possible involvement in Whitewater scandal...thorough investigation performed by several independent groups...result: It was found no ethical or financial wrongdoing took place.
Dick Cheney: Possible Haliburton scandal...investigation was ordered on suspicion that Cheney was getting kickbacks from ensuring government contracts for Halibutron and other companies he has ties to...result; not possible. Cheney moved all of his corporate holdings to Dubai so that they could not be audited.
Clinton Sex: Involvement in the Lewinski scandal...two consenting adults had sex out of wedlock (which is a moral issue, not a legal issue)...result; the Clintons worked hard to keep their family together.
Republican Sex: Several republican party members are caught involved with incriminating evidence that they are soliciting white house pages (under-age boys) for sex (an illegal circumstance which is rapidly punished if you are a citizen)...result; the whole circumstance is rapidly swept under the carpet and we haven't heard anything more in the news for months.
The point that people here are claiming that Hillary is a bad choice only proves that they are examining the smear campaign or they are allowing for their own prejudices to lead their choices. When an official is running for office, what should be examined is their record. Not their rhetoric, not their platform, not their promises.
Honestly, haven't the last seven years been bad enough? Do we really need another 40,000 dead? Do we really need another 3 point jump in unemployment? Do we really want fuel prices and global temperatures to keep going up? People always swear that the democrats are going to screw us financially.
When Clinton took office there was a multi-trillion dollar deficit, trickle-down economics had ruined the DJIA, and there was a ten percent unemployment rate. By the time he left office, we had a budget surplus, the DJIA had seen eight years of continuous growth, and the unemployment rate had dropped to 3.9%.
Now that Baby Bush is here, we have a deficit again, unemployment has been bouncing around 6%, and the market has been fluctuating wildly.
Yet people are willing to smear someone else on heresay, unproven claims, and the fact that she would be the first female president? I know there are a lot of stupid people out there...I just wish they wouldn't harm the smart ones as they are going down the tubes.
2007-06-19 06:35:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dominus 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
What are you smoking? Hillary detests Obama and will do everything she can to covertly sabotage him. She is not conceeding on Sat, she is SUSPENDING, refer back to the RFK comment a few weeks ago, she is prepared to be the stand in, just in case. She then also has the ability to resurrect her issues at the convention and she can try to coerce superdelegates to join her, she is keeping her delegates. Her delegates are her currency, she can put a price on her support. She is already basically demanding the VP slot. It is like the end of the horror movie when the monster has been skewered, shot and drowned and the heroine takes a deep breath and turns her back and suddenly the monster is going for the heroines throat. Incidentally the release, she is prepared to SUPPORT Obama, not ENDORSE Obama. Two entirely separate things.
2016-05-19 21:36:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There will be smears on both sides. The basis for democracy is the belief that people can see through the nonsense and pick the best leader.
I hope it is not Hillary, but I have nothing against her personally. I can't support someone who supports capital punishment and terminating pregnancies by methods that kill the unborn, and it doesn't take a smear to advise me that she supports both.
Still, you are right as far as your question goes. There will be smears against Hillary (and everyone else).
http://www.yaktivist.com
Polite Discussion, Respectful Disagreements regarding nonlethal pregnancy termination technology, death penalty alternatives, nonlethal weapons.
2007-06-19 06:15:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by Yaktivistdotcom 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Uh, they've been doing that already for 15 years. I'm surprised she hasn't been attacked so roughly yet. Actually, I'm not surprised, because most Republicans WANT Hillary to get the Dem nomination because it will ensure a Republican win in '08.
It's not about smear. She's too divisive a figure, with too many skeletons in her closet, and too much of a career politician. If Dems are stupid enough to nominate her for president, they will surely lose the general election.
2007-06-19 06:06:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Frank 6
·
10⤊
0⤋
What do Dems do wrong, in 2004 they put that BOOB Kerry up there instead of Edwards. Now they are putting Hillary up there (another BOOB) instead of promoting Edwards (smarter than Hillary and a self made man), and not giving Richardson enough Media time (he's also smarter and more experienced than Hillary). The problem that we have here is that some people cannot think for themselves, whoever the MASS MEDIA promotes that's who they jump on
2007-06-19 06:15:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by kato outdoors 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
We need to get over this left/right paradigm. All these candidates are picked by the CFR. It's a fixed race. We lose on either end. Hilary will put the nail in the coffin of America.
Ron Paul in 08. The only candidate not out to kill American sovereignty.
2007-06-19 06:16:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by KickThemAllOut.com 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yeah, poor little 'victim' Hillary. She is releasing some of her own 'smears' against herself (the ones she can defend) to gain sympathy and prove she can 'take it'. Great tactic. Too bad Dick Morris, who created this tactic (for Bill) when he worked for the Clintons disclosed that bit of info. Great scam!
2007-06-19 06:44:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Cherie 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You can't dress her up and take her out in public...
People already know who she is....
"It's all about "fairness," says Hillary. And "fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies.""
"We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices.... Government has to make those choices for people"
(From the book "I've Always Been A Yankee Fan" by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 20 - Hillary to Rep. Dennis Hastert in 1993 discussing her expensive, disastrous taxpayer-funded health care plan)
"I am a fan of the social policies that you find in Europe" Hillary in 1996" From the book "I've Always Been A Yankee Fan" by Thomas D. Kuiper, p. 76 - Hillary in 1996)
You know, I'm going to start thanking the woman who cleans the restroom in the building I work in. I'm going to start thinking of her as a human being -Hillary Clinton
(From the book "The Case Against Hillary Clinton" by Peggy Noonan, p. 55)
2007-06-19 06:06:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cookies Anyone? 5
·
10⤊
1⤋
Carl Bernstein (who has a book out about Hillary) is hardly a conservative.
2007-06-19 06:07:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Got a light Leo? 3
·
8⤊
0⤋
No way, I am conservative and I HOPE she wins the democratic nomination.
The liberals couldn't pick a better candidate.....to ensure Republican victory.
2007-06-19 06:22:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sleeck 3
·
1⤊
1⤋