on and talking to Edwards,saying that the debate promoters should eliminate Kucinich and Obama! In the same breath saying thanks to KOO KOO Kucinich and Big ears Obama???
2007-07-16 11:58:10 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
ABSOLUTELY....consider the clinton legacy of bill...nothing has changed except the gender.
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
2007-07-16 12:33:37 · answer #1 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd on Saturday criticized rivals John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who were overheard discussing among themselves their hope of limiting the number of Democrats in presidential debates.
The private exchange was picked up by several broadcasters on an open microphone after an NAACP forum in Detroit on Thursday. All the Democratic contenders took part in the program, including Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.
"I'd remind them that the mike is always on," Dodd told reporters on Saturday after addressing a state convention of Utah Democrats.
"Celebrity and money are not going to decide this race," he said. "People take some offense at it in these early primary and caucus states."
Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, and New York Senator Clinton had agreed that the debates would be more meaningful if there were only a handful of candidates.
"We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group," Edwards said, and Clinton agreed.
"Our guys should talk," Clinton said, complaining the format had "trivialized" the discussion.
2007-07-16 14:16:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
guy, won't be able to you human beings step remote from the partisanship for a 2nd. authentic...in case you suspect in abortion, gay marriage, gun bans, extreme taxes to pay for entitlement classes, and you have not got faith in God..then this is not hassle-free to back something a Rep administration does. on the turn side...whilst you're against abortion, gay rights, gun bans, and you do have faith in God...then this is not hassle-free to accept as true with something a Dem administration does. despite the fact that, what all and sundry of you desires to attain is that there are places interior the international that would desire to supply a rats a** approximately democrat v. republican and/or liberal v. conservative. In some places, there is in simple terms one vast distinction that concerns...muslim or non-muslim. In those places muslims are allowed to stay and non-muslims are decapitated. Our enemies are a fabricated from this ecosystem. sure, republicans have been in workplace whilst 911 happened. sure, there have been extra assaults in the process the Clinton years. sure, Clinton's inactivity confident OBL that the U. S. replaced into vulnerable and ripe for attack (by utilising OBL's own admission). sure, Al-Qaida declared conflict on the U. S. in 1992. sure, Reagan might desire to've paid extra interest to threats exterior of the U.S.. sure, Carter replaced into thoroughly impotent against Iranian terrorist. sure, Bush, Sr. screwed the pooch royally by utilising leaving Saddam in power after booting him out of Kuwait. sure, Bush, Sr. screwed up even worse by utilising inciting the Iraqi human beings to overthrow their dictator and sat back and watched them get slaughtered attempting to take his advice. Why won't be able to y'all see that this is not gay marriage, this is not abortion, this is not entitlement classes. in simple terms positioned...this is not in simple terms some water cooler subject remember utilized by utilising the two side to devalue the different. each and every administration from Carter up has a hand in this. all of them DROPPED THE BALL!! till we'd supply up the partisan bickering and seem at this risk with worry-unfastened experience and readability, the two one among that are lost interior the bickering, have been doomed. era...
2017-01-21 05:59:50 · answer #3 · answered by berney 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That was great!!!!
And just as soon as Hillary & Edwards betrayed their fellow Democrats------here comes Osama & Kucinich up to lick Hillary's boots.
Obama & Denny are both "little sick boot lickers".
I wonder just how "far" Edwards, Obama, and Kucinich would go, to get our next president, Hillary, to pick one of them as her VP????
2007-07-16 12:04:07 · answer #4 · answered by wolf 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Kind of like the Republicans wanting to get Ron Paul removed from future debates. I think the old guard from both parties don't want American people to get too excited about new ideas that are different from the traditional party platforms.
2007-07-16 12:06:42 · answer #5 · answered by wooper 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Too bad they didn't pick up the mic afterwards and knock those 2 upside the head with it.
2007-07-16 12:05:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
No more so than Bush, when he got caught with his mic on doing the same thing numerous times.
its happened to all of them. Big deal
2007-07-16 12:02:29 · answer #7 · answered by Myles D 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
You're presuming that she has any true colors. I'd like to see evidence of that.
2007-07-16 12:02:33 · answer #8 · answered by open4one 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
she didn't say who she was going to eliminate, and like it or not, she is going to be the next president, sad but true
2007-07-16 12:01:53 · answer #9 · answered by PD 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I don't believe she mentioned WHO, but they certainly conspired.
2007-07-16 12:03:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋