Comments on: Clinton legacy is one of dishonor and disgrace

By: grandmasix

grandmasix — Tue, 13 May 2008 16:55:16 +0000

I have come to the conclusion that the entire government, in total, are inter-related and that that inbreeding has severely inhibited their thought process, and that they have no concept that there are people out here who are hungry or ill and don’t care. As the dispatcher said to the women who was threatened by a knife wielding assailant; “i don’t really give a s___
what happens to you.”

By: twotraps

twotraps — Tue, 13 May 2008 16:16:06 +0000

Totally agree, the discretion thing says a lot. So why are people still supporting them, and the prospect of more scandal. When is enough? Its not an endorsement of Obama or anyone else, its just a question to the fierce supports of the Clintons, how do you look the other way on issues of character, discretion etc. I just think the country can do better than the Clintons….but no amount of scandal seems to tip them over!

Maybe, at a minimum, it will make the news that the civil suit for campaign fraud will start soon. I know its silly and happened a long time ago, and that Mr. Paul was a convicted crook…but it made it to court, the Clintons are involved and it might actually qualify as news. Pretty funny actually, two crooks go to court to argue who was ‘less wrong’!!

By: Curmudgeon

Curmudgeon — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:59:51 +0000

Confession: I hate Bill Clinton, and have no large amount of love for his wife. His personal life was not the issue for me (I didn’t marry him, after all); it was his lack of discretion, his disrespect for his business partner (a marriage of political convenience is still a partnership), and his willingness to lie, and to defame others, to protect his legacy. The financial scheming, FBI files, and ‘lost’ documents were just symptoms of a larger problem. Look at how many people fell on their swords to protect his reputation, and look at their tactics to destroy the reputation of others. What do you think would have happened to Monica, if she hadn’t kept the dress? She would have been trashed, just like the others. The Democratic party, in showing support and standing behind him, paid dearly…with their credibility.
Frankly, he tarnished the dignity of his office (not to mention what he probably did to the carpet), and made it that much easier for GWB to waltz in with his “Aw, shucks, I’m too stupid to lie” routine. And look where we are now. Do I think Al Gore would have been a better President than GWB? Absolutely. But, the same could be said for the kid who bags my groceries, so that’s not a ringing endorsement.
So, in a way, I blame Bill, at least partially, for a lot of the evils we’re suffering today. I just use a different path of logic.

By: Willis_Leon_Johnson

Willis_Leon_Johnson — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:39:25 +0000

twotraps,

Next they will require you to ‘define’ whatever words they need ‘defined’.

It’s not because they do not understand the definition of the word in question, but because they have no solid ground to complain from so they need a strawdog to deflect from their problematic positions.

Facts are irrelevant.

Enjoy your time here, and when they start claiming that you are of lesser intellectual capacity, feel free to report the offender.

It’s a good place for discussion usually, so have fun.
Willis

By: twotraps

twotraps — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:25:36 +0000

Class of 52…my goodness! I guess I could have been more specific, and qualified just what I call ‘disgrace’ or ‘dishonor’. I think if Regan did all that, the legacy should be called out on it. So should Obama endure all the required scrutiny. One point, and I’ll try to narrow it down…is that between the two democratic candidates, one has a trail of scandal and questionable decisions topped off by the Lewinsky deal. The other, has not had enough time on the job to get into trouble yet! So, between the two, I find it fascinating that the public has not had enough of the Clinton crap. So, yes, all the past presidents, including Bush should be held accountable. Sadly they are not.

We could take a simple decison gone wrong…since I feel that it sums up the Clinton thinking. When Hillary’s brothers each had the Cash-for-Pardons idea going…are we to believe Hillary did not know? Her brothers acted alone? Bill didn’t tell Hillary later, maybe over dinner, what they were up to? Once it was done with one of them, I think $400K was involved, she was pressured to get the money ,I mean…the ’success fee’ returned. My feeling is that she does not fear scrutiny, the media or the law…or she may have thought to herself…’Should I do this? Will anyone find out? Will the media get it? Does this reflect well on me? Can I say I didn’t know?
We could keep going here, but I would ask you how long you would last at your job, or in your company, lying or misspeaking, not being properly prepared for major presentations (checking your facts, like sniper fire) and more or less cintinuously abusing your position for your own personal gain? You might not last long, its a terrific, self-correcting measure found in real life that you would be more accountable to the people and larger organization around you. More or less, you would be punished or fired. Not Hillary, No Fear, No Consequences.

By: Willis_Leon_Johnson

Willis_Leon_Johnson — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:22:42 +0000

Oh golly. More re-written history.

” Ronald Reagan in support of Central American dictators ”

Excuse me for bringing up some facts.

Teddy kennedy and friends were supporting the communist dictators in central America.

President Reagan was supporting those damned pesky rebels that wanted to live in peace and free from fear of reprisals by an oppressive, murderous government.

provable FACT gene, don’t even try to go there unscathed.

By: bullishfrog

bullishfrog — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:21:49 +0000

Classof52, please be a little more specific on how Ronald Regan was responsible for the murder of thousands of Central Americans.

By: Classof52

Classof52 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:11:35 +0000

Twotraps referring to the Clintons writes: “Its very simple, they are a national disgrace and should be in jail.

I am always bemused by those who condemn Bill Clinton for what was perhaps some untruths about his private life which affected nobody but his family, and at the same time completely excuse the activities of Ronald Reagan in support of Central American dictators who with his help murdered thousands of their own citizens as well as American nuns. Which of the two activities is really immoral? It appears that twotraps is motivated by ideology rather than the truth.

By: twotraps

twotraps — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:22:00 +0000

I understand I’m a little late to this discussion….but if anyone is reading…pretty intersting that almost everyone is willing to overlook the crap the Clintons have pulled! Try to find a supporter that will actually admit later that some of the lies were pretty bad and actually…they ought to be in jail….you will never find that person. Its sick and sad, and a reflection on the fat part of the curve that is a big voting block in this country. Its what the Clintons have usually counted on to get through…inside deals with people that count (with money), and voted in by people that get nothing in return.

Its very simple, they are a national disgrace and should be in jail.

By: Chancho

Chancho — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:56:13 +0000

by Joseph, i just realized today was the National Day of Prayer! Howl-a-lou-yah, and on yer knees, bruddah.

Such an eerie coincidence with the 5 year anniversary of MISSION ACCOMPLISHED, and all.

Like Rose said: “I hope we have matured as a nation to realize we want leaders who are honest, have Christian family values and morals to bring dignity to our country.”

Somebody please put in a few large-ish prayers or emails to the Big Guy to stop the madness. I seem to be on the spam/unsafe list so i never get any response.