why that was nice

[elementxero 10+ year member]

omg im dying over here!//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif

Hey I'm glad that had a payoff because my self respect just plummeted during the formulation of that post.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Wow, you must not know how the US government works then. The president does not make laws, there is still a Congress. If Hillary got elected she would have to get Congress to vote to implement health care and all of her social programs, something that is unlikely to happen.

you're kidding right. we have the most liberal congress ever right now. the balance of power would have to shift to the republicans in congress or she'll do anything she wants. people are not going to vote republican after bush. pay attention before making accusations about someone else not knowing.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

They are an inseparable political entity.
You cant have one without the other.

i hope so. she is going to be the next president regardless of the republican that gets the nomination. my opinion.

 

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

you're kidding right. we have the most liberal congress ever right now. the balance of power would have to shift to the republicans in congress or she'll do anything she wants. people are not going to vote republican after bush. pay attention before making accusations about someone else not knowing.

This is most definitely not the most liberal congress ever, the Senate is at 49-49-2 and the House has a 31 seat advantage for Dems, there have been many times in history where the Congress was hugely democratic in both teh House and Senate, thus more liberal, learn history.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

you're kidding right. we have the most liberal congress ever right now.

uh for congress to actually be conservative you would need to get rid of all the democrats and about 95% of the current republicans. Lets not forget who was signing all of the checks bush wrote - the GOP controlled congress who still have a large presence in both houses.

 

[43de 10+ year member]

I wonder if this accounts for the change in value of the dollar...

$1 120 years ago ≠ $1 today...

 

[Audio Master 10+ year member]

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/ca18_cardoza/bush_administration_breaks_record.html

bush sets record the most times a president can **** up in one term:wow:

 

[DDeitz 10+ year member]

what you believe matters not. reality and facts do matter. look it up and research her a little. she may as well call herself stalinist.

well then i guess the real question is...whos better hitler or stalin?

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

This is most definitely not the most liberal congress ever, the Senate is at 49-49-2 and the House has a 31 seat advantage for Dems, there have been many times in history where the Congress was hugely democratic in both teh House and Senate, thus more liberal, learn history.

those 2 are independants that align themselves with the democrats. tell me. how many times has the president been a democrat and the congress been a democrat majority as well? learn common sense.

 

[DBfan187 5,000+ posts]

Vote for Pedro

 

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

those 2 are independants that align themselves with the democrats. tell me. how many times has the president been a democrat and the congress been a democrat majority as well? learn common sense.

Many times my friend, many times. Again you might want to actually learn some history before you speak.

 

[Rich B 5,000+ posts]

i hope so. she is going to be the next president regardless of the republican that gets the nomination. my opinion.

BREAKING: Clinton Announces Support for NAFTA Expansion
Fri Nov 9, 12:04 AM ET

Under intense pressure from opponents in the 2008 presidential race and a building national fair trade movement, Sen. Hillary Clinton tonight finally disclosed her position on a Bush administration-backed bill to expand the NAFTA trade model that passed the U.S. House today and is now moving to the U.S. Senate. Reuters is reporting that Clinton says she will vote for the Peru Free Trade Agreement - the first agreement in a package of corporate-crafted agreements to vastly expand the NAFTA trade model.

Clinton is citing the Peru deal's labor standards as justification for her support, despite the fact that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has told reporters it has received "assurances" that those labor standards are "unenforceable," and despite a Columbia University report showing how the Peru deal could actually weaken labor law enforcement.

The announcement, which flies in the face of polls showing the public strongly opposed to NAFTA-style trade policies, comes on the same day the New York Times reports that Clinton is being endorsed by NAFTA architect Robert Rubin, the CEO of Citigroup - a company that stands to reap financial rewards from the NAFTA model. Rubin's announcement came with a promise to raise Clinton more money from Wall Street.

This announcement could change the dynamics of the presidential race, considering recent headline-grabbing plant closings in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and considering the NAFTA expansion was opposed by two out of Iowa's three Democratic House Members, and both of New Hampshire's.

As my nationally syndicated newspaper column out tomorrow details, trade and globalization is taking center stage in the 2008 presidential campaign. Clinton's announcement will now specifically make job-killing, wage-destroying NAFTA-style trade policy a flashpoint in the race for the White House.

She looks to be way too overconfident in her chances to win.

This wont play well in middle america.

 

[Rmsanger 10+ year member]

The irony here is that they named her Lakshmi... This is one of the main Hindu gods whom that happen to be worshiping to at this very moment... Happy Diwali to any hindus on here. Lakshmi just happens to have 4 arms (see below).

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i hope so. she is going to be the next president regardless of the republican that gets the nomination. my opinion.

It's way too early to call.

I believe that this election, like the last couple, will ultimately depend on what happens with evangelical movement.

Will they turn out for Rudy or Mitt, an abortion supporting gay rights advocate and a Mormon respectively? Will the cracks currently surfacing in the movement become salient and cause fragmentation? Will Dobson really run a third party candidate?

Or will they coalesce around a figure that is capable of beating Hillary, as indicated by pat Robinson's recent endorsement of Rudy?

Given the current administration, this election should be in the bag for the democrats but they might have shot themselves in the foot by running the most polarizing woman in memory or a black man.

 

[HitManSE 10+ year member]

Parasitic twin my ***, someones been ****ing their sister.