No shit....

CLICK HERE

----edited to add-------

in case anyone doesn't understand what this link goes to:

this is the federal Election commission's website... a candidate must file here, prior to raising $0.01 for a campaign... also to be listed here the candidate must sign an affidavit to prove identity and intent for the election to the office listed...

It doesn't get any more official than this.
If you dig more on the site... this was filed late today washington time.

Damn Todrick.....

How did you find this site?

It looks like she is running. I didn't look carefully enough the first time. I thank you for posting this.

You are not one of her supporters are you?

LOL... believe it or not the story was broke by a Phoenix radio duo " Liddy & Hill " this afternoon(yes G Gordon Liddy's son)

as for Hillary

I'm on the fence...

I'm not really a fan of hers.

the whole "village to raise a child" thing is utter horse shit.

I do however think a woman president would be a good thing and think any of the other options are freakin scary.

Less of the evils.

I know we don't agree, but I think Bill was one of the greatest presidents of all time... his personal indiscretions aside... as a president the nation soared. I simply look at my income, now vs when he was president.

I do think Hillary was somewhat the brains behind the man while bill was in office... and also believe it was her plan from the day she said "I DO" to one day be The 1st female president.

Last but not least...

She is gonna give "Dubya" a run for his money...

if it came down to re-electing the Ignorant-Redneck-Warmonger-Texan that was best described by Dennis Miller as "20 gallons of dumb in a 10 gallon hat".... or electing Hillary...

I'm Voting Clinton

(not so much because I like her, but I simply hate Dubya that much)

You shouldn't. Bill is 100 times better than her. Read up on her. If you want a woman president.. she is not what you want. She is a woman filled with hate.

Hey Todrick... Is ths site real? It doesn't seem to be an actual FEC site. I could be wrong.

Give me more info....

yeah... i will read up on her, but i also wont vote for W.

yes... it is linked off the FEC.GOV site

http://www.fec.gov/finance_reports.html

click "Candidate Search:" about halfway down the page...

that opens

http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/fecimg/norcansea.html

doing a whois search it lists SDR Technologies as the host... looking at their site SDR.com they look like a legit solutions provider

the other kicker, Tom Liddy has a very good friend who works for the company that has done every FEC filing for the clintons.... the guy normaly gets back to him quickly but during their entire show today the guy did not answer his phone, and returned no calls... rather suspicious...

the DNC is "Declining comment"

Thanks man...

This is scary.

I don't think she could win. She is too polarizing. Too many people hate her.

That's if all this is true.

The radio station really found and announced all this?

yeah... and they were pointing out how strange it was that Drudge didn't have it... CNN, msnbc... no one.

Its an odd story.

Honestly though, I don't see Hillary being nearly as polarizing a bush... seriously, if it came down to Hillary vs. Dubya... I see no way we won't be calling Bill "the first gentleman"

I totally disagree. Most New Yorkers it has been said in polls recently, would not like to see her run (politicians love polls) And NY (mostly the city) is extremely politically liberal.

I don't think she could ever win.

she certainly has a better chance than Clark or dean

Well... Clark is her hand picked boy. He is also from Arkansas. They knew each other back when.

That's the plan... he will be her VP choice. She has deemed she needs someone who was military. He is an idiot she can control.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x8316.xml

just saw this one line of that poll:

Sen. Hillary Clinton beats Bush 51 -- 43 percent, compared to a 47 -- 47 tie June 26;

I also heard the same thing CCX. This poll was NY residents only. There was also a recent poll that stated most New Yorkers don't want her to run. Sorry, I don't have a link.

Regardless, a tremendous amount of people across the country don't like her. She would also be a great focal point for Republican donations.

She would never win. Besides... I'm sure there is an enormous amount of dirt about her that is being held back just for this purpose. She also has not done a damn significant thing as a NY Senator either.

Hillary couldn't win for one big reason. As much as anyone might hate to admit it, the country is not ready for a female president.

I think she would give George a good run for his money, but I still think that people won't have faith in her ability to control the military, CIA or Homeland security. A tremendous flaw in the Clinton Administration. They knew of Osama, and knew he was a threat. Yet they sat on their hands while the terrorists planned 9-11. Clinton could have delivered a severe blow to Al Quiada, but didn't. So we had things such as the attack on the USS Cole and ultimately 9-11.

One thing she does have in her favor, she has no love for the islamic crazies. She will have to convince alot of people that she has what it takes to be a Commander in Chief. She hates the military.

But I'm sure she will take care of you Todrick. There's probably some free money in there for you in the form of some government handout. You strike me as someone who likes other people to give you money.(refering to the begging webpage) No wonder you support her.

Hillary would be a foreign relations nightmare, especially in the Middle East. Scary thought! I might have to pull a Hollywood and jump ship to another country if she ever got elected. I'm also trying my best to overlook the remark about Bill being one of the greatest presidents of all time. I... just... cant... doit! A huge B/S to that one. Not trying to dig up a dead and beaten horse, but it's hard to ignore a comment like that.

Hilary is worse than any man could be.

You want a woman to be President? Start by actually finding a woman . . .

GW will win the next election in a landslide. Hilary will only succeed in fracturing the DNC, I believe, while the Republicans will rally 'round Georgie . . .

As I heard from someone who used to work in the White House under the Clinton administration, "You would sleep with other women, too, if your wife didn't like men."

Wow Graham, are you actually being serious? I figured you would be in support of Hillary on the Demo-ticket.

Of all the democratic candidates, I still like Lieberman the best. He sounds kinda like snagglepuss. Heavens to mergatriod...stage left!

She definitely does have a hatred of men. In Barbara Olsen's
"Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton" this is examined pretty well.

I'd love to be able to read her senior thesis from Wellesly College but no one can. In an unprecedented move it is until total lock and key. The reason for this is simple. If the public ever had access to it she would be ruined. The thesis is a homage to an avowed communist named Saul Alinsky. Alinsky wrote "Reville for Radicals" in 1947 and the sequel "Rules for Radicals" in 1971. Hillary is a staunch advocate and practioner of Alinsky's methods and philosophy.

I'd be interested to see what she does getting into things this late in the race. She's got alot of name recognition but the other Dems have been preparing for the race since the beginning of the year.

I hope she doesn't get much going, I just don't see her having the chance against Bush that Dean or Clark has. If she ran she'd cause Republicans to rally around Bush more than they will right now. Sure alot of Dems like Hillary but most Repubs hate her. I think alot of Republicans are on the fence right now with Bush and will vote against him if they have a Conservative Democrat to vote for. Then they could go back on 2008.

As for the presidential election itself, it all depends on who gets chosen out of the Democrats. It's hard to see things now with so many Dems running, it seems to be Dean of Clark right now but if Hillary jumps in then everything is up in the air.

I think Graham's right, she's just going to fracture the Party.

But then maybe Nader will run again and we could repeat the last election anyway.

That is most likely true as well, but this person was insinuating that she is a lesbian - you could tell by the way it was said.

Maybe she doesn't really want to run for the presidency, but since so many of her "supporters" want her to, that she is just making a half hearted attempt to please them?????? Just a thought...

Clinton a good president. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAH

ok im done
he was lucky thats IT!
he was a moron and anything that anyon ever says he did for this country is absolute crap. He did nothing but ride congress like a dirty whore and take all the credit for it. He used rhetoric to make everyone believe he was an amazing president and his little spin monkeys helped him. Now dont get me wrong bush isnt the brightest bulb in the batch but if clinton was still pres sept 11th would have been a whole lot worse than it was. Clinton was a liar a rapist a cheat and a scoundrel....I dont care who you are noone wants to be represented by that kind of "man." Clinton was by far not our worst president. He took his lack of usefulness and surrounded it with brilliant people. He was an oppurtunist and now hes going to turn around and run with his wife for pres in order to draw alot of support for himself again and you watch he'll be back in power in no time. hes a dirty rotten person and i cant stand him.

lol... you know, That would be funny if you had paid attention.

I don't support her, I thought I was clear about that... I do however hate W.

right thats why i said "leave his personal issues asside"

from my point of view... My salary increased 5 fold under clinton.... and has dropped by 80% since Bush took office... back to its pre-clinton position.

that is what I base my opinion of his presidency on... My bottom line, thats it.

Got to stop here and ask why is that? Has your site pulled in less money since GWB took office?

anyway, let's continue...

Damn dude, guess I'm not understanding this more clearly. Sound kinda like you're campaigning for her to me. :rolleyes:

Thats interesting, because I am making more money than I ever have. I have been able to buy a nice truck, and a house, and am more secure than I have ever been financially, all under Dubyas watch.

Hmm, it says "web designer" for your occupation in your profile. The whole web thing in the mid to late '90s was artificial, overhyped and unrealistic. Heck, people commented on it while it was all happening. In fact, I had several friends make fun of me for not jumping ship and getting in the "web flow". Well, I got the last laugh - my more traditional employment not only still exists, but I am making more now than I every have. Whatever short term gains they may have made over me in those couple of years have since eroded....

As much as they would like to take credit, presidents simply don't influance that micro a level of the economy (neither does congress) - at least not in a deliberate and planned way. Indeed, they typically screw it up, and the whole Web thing was going south before W took control.

If that's all your basing your guage of a president on, then you aren't with reality - you need to take a long, honest look at what was really going on in the late '90s...

I thought you might have insinuated that fact. I didn't want to be the first to bring up these allegations.

Yes, it is rumored she had a lesbian affair with her former Press Secretary Lisa Caputo who is a devout lesbian. She is also responsible for the questionable number of lesbian Clinton appointees during that administration. Namely Donna Shalala, the former Secretary of Health and Human Services. Janet Reno is also a feminist and supposed lesbian. The administration was also riddled with lesbians and homosexuals in middle management positions. I think it would be safe to say a Hillary administration would be rife with radical feminists, lesbians and homosexuals.

Most of whom would be socialists and marxists just like her.

Todrick..... You are silly for gauging politics on your wallet. You know the old expression.. "a fool and his money". Will this logic lead you to elect people who will never allow you to keep any money in the first place? Wake up.

...............

Kerensky.... You are clueless as usual. Dean, Kerry and the other Dems don't stand a chance against Bush.... regardless of his "so-called" low poll numbers. The majority of the electorate doesn't like any of the Dem candidates. Hillary smells a chance and will pounce. I think she actually plans on a Democratic Convention draft if she doesn't outright announce soon. She has until December officially.

Yes... Nader is going to run again.

...................

Graham.... You surprised me. I think you are right. Kudo's for some clarity on this issue.
...................

Aqua.... Always good to hear from you. You are wrong on one point. Hillary takes no side on the Islamists. If they are willing to give to her campaign, she will take it. She lied about $50,000 given to her Senate campaign from the American Muslim Council ( a now known terrorist front group and fundraiser). She lied on her FEC filing and got caught. She claimed it was a typo. She cannot be trusted in the least in the war against terrorism. She hates traditional America as much as the Islamists do.

A Hillary admin would be even much more adverse to confrontation on a foreign front than Bill's admin was. Hillary's battles are here in America. To her, middle class America is the enemy. That's who she will wage war against.

EDIT: Note that if the Republicans have any balls they would expose the amount of Islamic money that is going to be poured into the Democratic 2004 presidential campaigns and the DNC. They feel the Dems are on their side and they are right.

Even if Lieberman ends up the candidate?

um no, its cause I was director of IT for a dot.com during Clinton and now I'm not... simple as that... the economy tanked under Bush... or were you not paying attention.

Damn dude, guess I'm not understanding this more clearly. Sound kinda like you're campaigning for her to me. :rolleyes: [/QB][/QUOTE]

Ok, since you quoted it. I'll just cut and paste it...

Maybe a reading comprehension class is in order. I do not like Hillary. but honestly, I would vote for you before I voted for bush, Even though judging by this thread I think its obvious you have the attention span of a gnat

Yeah... Him too. He doesn't control where the DNC gets all it's cash from.

He also kissed up to the Clintons and their placating of Palestinian terrorism. The scene of Hillary hugging Arafat's wife that was released to the world didn't bother him all that much.

He is a Democrat and a politician well before he is a Jew. He's proved that.

no... its more than that.

but thats the simplest.

other issues I have(and just up front, I have no intention of debating all these issues, I am merely posting them to point out that I do indeed have valid reasons to dislike W)

-His past work experience hardly makes him qualified to be the leader of the country. basically a string a bankrupt businesses and poor business decisions.

-Became president after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes.

-Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.

-Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.

-Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.

-Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.

-First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.

-First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.

-After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history.

-Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history.

-In his first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.

-Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.

-Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.

-Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.

-Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.

-Signed more laws and executive orders circumventing the Constitution than any president in US history.

-Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.

-Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.

-Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.

-Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. (http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/)

-Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.

-most secretive and un-accountable presidency of any in US history.

-Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest', Condoleeza Rice has an Chevron oil tanker named after her).

-Had more states to simultaneously go bankrupt than any president in the history of the United States.

-Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world.

-Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.

-Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.

-First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission.

-First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board.

-Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.

-Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.

-Withdrew from the World Court of Law.

-Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.

-All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.

-Biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).

-Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.

-First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.

-Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).

-With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years.

-Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.

-First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea.

-Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.

-Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.

-So Far, Failed to fulfill his pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'.

-Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. So Far, no leads and zero suspects.

-In the 2 years following the 911 attacks he successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.

-At least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available).

-AWOL from National Guard and Deserted the military during a time of war.

-Refuse to take drug test or even answer any questions about drug use.

-All records of his tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to his fathers library, sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.

-All records of any SEC investigations into his insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.

-All minutes of meetings for any public corporation that he served on the board are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.

-Any records or minutes from meetings he (or Cheney) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public review.

so yeah, I only dislike him for a couple reasons. but the simplest and most cut and dry is the my personal finances

Hey Todrick....

Why don't you at least give a plug for the site you copied and pasted that stuff from. MOST OF IT IS BULLSHIT AND PURE PROPAGANDA..!!

Also.... The popular vote for president doesn't mean shit. You only have to win the electoral vote. It's been that way in America since it's inception. Why is this such a big deal? Do Democrats go to different schools or something?

the electoral college system is flawed... obviously...

"america" never elected Bush... and thats not right I have hated the EC since before Bush... its an antiquated system from days before technology had the means to come up with a better solution

The economy has been pretty good to me the last couple of years.

Todrick, I dislike Bush as much as the next guy, but that list of stuff you posted - a lot of it is complete BS, and obviously so.

Which points are untrue?

(I'm not trying to be snarky, this is a serious question. I see a lot of folks supporting Bush, but they never seem to come right out and say exactly why.)

Uhhh, yes, yes I am.

Here's to the popular vote, the most ridiculous wording on the planet:



Election Map Details

Yeah, Gore won the big major cities were most of the artsy fartsy, porno making, crime families, child molesters, abortion clinics, murderers, lazy welfare mothers, poor, minority, etc... reside. Yeah, they got the popular vote alright.

Yes. Wasn't it their intention to keep large concentrations of people in small geographical areas from having all of the political power? IE Large cities.

Artsy fartsy? I keep forgetting who I'm dealing with here. Someone uncouth and unsophisticated as yourself wouldn't know good "Art" if it jumped up and bit you on the ass.

I bet this is about as exquisite and imaginative as you get (nice costume by the way):



As for the rest of your comments, do you have something against the poor or the minorities of this country?

:rolleyes:

Umm, how about a hell yes! Especially the ones that 1)Do nothing for the economy 2)Are here illegally 3)Live off of the hard working taxpayer 4)Breed ignorance. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. Or at least I hope you do.

Sean, you ought to write for the NY Times, LA Times, or CNN.

Contrary to popular belief, not all minorities or poorer classes of this country: do nothing for the economy, are here illegally, live of the hard working taxpayer, or breed ignorance. The only ignorance here is your comment.

:rolleyes:

Not so fast my narrow minded friend! My point wasn't that all minorities or poorer classes fall under these catagories. However, I do have a problem with those that are sucking this country dry. As for ignorance, wouldn't it be ignorant to assume that I am not part of a minority?

Hey, Elf, you dummy...

When was the last time you saw a caucasian working in McDonalds, 7-11, or any other of the hundreds of "lower class" jobs.

Immigrants take those jobs and work hard at them because they actually BELIEVE in the American dream. Not like you proud mofo's that just sit and complain about how foreigners suck off of the government's tit. Ignorant fools like you only breed hate.

That's not what you said in your first comment on this subject (Off-His-Crib should take notes here). You stated:

"Umm, how about a hell yes! Especially the ones that 1)Do nothing for the economy 2)Are here illegally 3)Live off of the hard working taxpayer 4)Breed ignorance. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. Or at least I hope you do."

Note the word bolded here, "Especially":

Especially

\Es*pe"cial*ly\, adv. In an especial manner; chiefly; particularly; peculiarly; in an uncommon degree.

By using this word in your response, you infer that you dislike minorities Especially the ones that do nothing for the economy, blah, blah, blah.

Now for the second part of your enlightening post:

"As for ignorance, wouldn't it be ignorant to assume that I am not part of a minority?"

If you truely are part of this "Minority" that you earlier stated you hated, one would assume that you must hate yourself then. I had no idea you had self-loathing complex, my apologies.

:p

Um... Whoops. Got racism?

"And all of the other nazis moved away from him there on the group W bench"

A

Amazing how Clinton's prosperity seems to coincide with the timeperiod where the Republicans took control of the house and senate. It's also interesting how the economy was still doing pretty well right up until September of 2001. (although it had started to decline at the end of 2000. Which was under Clinton's watch.)

I am better off now, thank you very much.

You are? You're one of the few. Lucky you!

By the way, the split in the house is currently 229 Republicans, 205 Democrats, and 1 Independant.

The split in the Senate is 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats, and 1 Independant.

Plus a Republican President.

What's your excuse for the recession (nearly depression)? If you're going to take credit for the prosperity, then you also have to take credit for the situation as it stands now, even more so than then.

Come on, I'm waiting for your answer, girliemouth.

What recession? According to most economists the recession ended around November/December 2001. Some say April 02. Some say November 2001. The economy has been growing at a pretty steady rate since then. Sorry about everyones jobs, but jobs are always the LAST thing to make a comeback after any downturn. Common sense will tell you that. Companies have to make sure they are stable enough to hire new people before they can actually do it. At least, any responsibly run company. And if you think Gore wouldve kept the economy rolling along after 9/11 you are fooling yourself. The economy is fine, and it has been fine. The money you all made on the dot.com boom was phantom money. It was all money invested in companies that didnt do anything, a recipe for disaster. Blame your own stupidity for thinking you were all going to get rich on nothing. You wre all throwing money into a giant black hole. And when it became known that these internet/technology companies actually couldnt do anything with the money people invested, they tanked. I, myself, got into bonds. As you should do during any downturn. It happens all the time, like a cycle, oh wait, it is a cycle. After 9/11, that really turned out to be a smart move. In the long run, any Government in power really has little to do with affecting how an economy reacts. They can prod and nuzzle it in this direction or that, but the American economy works in cycles. 9/11 just made it more pronounced. Clinton was about as responsible for the Boom as Bush Jr. was responsible for the downturn.

Wow, this ignorance thing is showing up everywhere. No Caucasions working at McDonalds or 7-11 huh? That's an interesting statement. I guess the guy that served me my lunch along with his co-workers painted themselves white. Assuming that only immigrants and non-caucasions, like myself, only hold low positions is kind of racist don't you think? So by saying that I breed hate aren't you calling the kettle black. Oh, when did it become the American dream to work at McDonalds anyways? So

I'm not above admitting that I made a mistake in the word selection here.

Well whoop-dee fucking do, so your another IT guy(dime a dozen) who sold himself short in a short term market and now hates Bush because you didn't have the capacity to expand, or even to look ahead five years and ask yourself if your little world would still be there. I'm a programmer, I've made more money than I ever have in the past 15 years. (worked for three different companies) And it keeps getting better. Bet your ass one thing I won't do is publish some bullshit web page begging for others to pay my fucking bills so I can have a Harley and an Xterra. Gotta job yet? wanna get personal dude, I'll bite for damn sure...

Campaigning again. :rolleyes: Know what man, more power to you. I don't really care who you vote for...

Okay you win. Damn, Got me all figured out. And that being said, perhaps you should learn to ask if the customer wants fries with that order, Coke or Sprite, that type of thing. Stop whining about how everyone else has ruined Todrick's life but Todrick....never had a bad thing to say about you, used to like alot of things you had to say. Since you want to throw off the gloves now I think I'll just yield and bid you a good life asshole.

LOL... hey, you got personal with your first post... Notice i don't post much in the ALR anymore, its cause of assholes... assholes who resemble my Sig line.

That site was built on a whim, when i saw Savekaryn.com make her 30k... figured "why the hell not"... i updated it one time(2 days after creation) and never looked at it again until madman found it.... it was deleted over 6 months ago... since it served no purpose.

as for ruining my life... no one has, not bush... not me. I am quite content.

I do however think he is a horrible president... sorry if your only reaction to opinions you dislike is to lash out and make personal attacks... I would much rather debate civilly(like NYmadman and i were before you jumped in with the insults)

thanks for your concern...

Now I remember why I wasn't posting in the ALR

Does this mean I'm off your Christmas list and everything?

Hey man, you started this thread! I don't care about you or your life. I just stated the fact that I thought you struck me as someone who liked your government to take care of you. That and a couple comments about your pathetic begging website. As long as people like you want to start "yea let's elect Hillary threads" I'll go in and state my opinions too.

If you think the truth is an insult, you shouldn't air your laundry on the boards. But hey, you go right ahead tiger.

I guess I'll never get to go wheelin with the great Todrick.

What the living fuck are you spewing? Really? Can you actually claim that you are not racially bias after that statement? I see tons and tons of caucasians performing low paying jobs, McDonald's etc...... Pull your head out of your ass...

well that explains it... just go back and read... the thread was for info sake... i didnt even voice my opinion until asked... and then i stated clearly im not a fan of hillary

It's my condition. It's called cranial rectosis, and I'd like you to please stop staring.

PS...sometimes, dontcha just want to start a fight? Sometimes I go overboard, but it's all in good fun.

LOL!!! Cranial rectosis.!!!

I couldn't help myself. Such a big head in such a small hole and all.....

Actually it is called rectal cranial inversion.

It's obvious that you don't understand the basic ebb and flow of the economy. The standoff between the republican congress and the democrat controlled white house allowed the economy to do what it does best... determine it's own course. It's not so much that Clinton was to blame for the "Bush recession" but he could have stopped it by cutting taxes in his last year in office. Unfortunately, at the end of Clinton's term, the economy was slowing down after years of rapid growth. (A perfectly natural thing for it to do.) When Bush took office, he inherited a slowing economy which was driven into a mild recession when the 9/11 attacks took place. What has happened since then has been a modest recovery, but the recession was barely a recession, and given the economic definition of recession, its over.

Compare this recession to the one when Carter was president.

Carter 10+% interest rates 10+% unemployment 10+% inflation

Bush 4.75% interest rates 6% unemployment <1% inflation

Bush's leadership and economic policy may not be your cup of tea, but we are headed in the right direction.

And yes, I am one of the lucky few... the 94% of the population that has a job.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it girlieman!

Maybe they do in Pittsburg, but I see very little of that here. Ten years ago every single person working the cash register and assembling burgers at the Mickey Dee's near my house was a white, English-a-FIRST-language, high-school kid earning gas money after they got out of class for the day.

Now I practically have to speak Spanish to order my extra value meal. I'm not kidding, some of the 30 to 40 year old hispanic employees working the cash register speak very little english, if any at all. They get orders wrong all the time, and it's really annoying. I guess "No pickles on that, please" isn't something they teach in ESL classes. Whatever...

I'm not saying it's that way everywhere, but I see it locally every day. What are all the high school kids doing for gas money these days, anyway?

Actually the caucasians that I see get the order wrong too. I don't think the language barrier has anything to do with the incompetence level of McDonald's employees.

Andre:

I hate to attack you, because a) loved you in "Princess Bride" and b) you're dead.

But since you brought it on yourself, what we were discussing is NOT Jimmy Carter, but taking credit for an economy because of a Republican congress. You did it, not me. I was just correcting you.

By the way, how is this a MILD recession? This is worse than the recession that knocked off Poppa Bush. The Shrub is going to be the first President since Hoover to leave office with fewer jobs than when he started. Tell me how this is MILD except in Republican spin, chickenlegs.

It has already been explained why. Reread previous posts.

MBFlyerFan...

You do realize that your quote was parodying the way Republicans use dirty tricks to skirt the issues, right? Because I would hate to point out how hilarious it truly is that a conservative missed the point of that line and took it to heart.

BTW-previous posts have answered nothing. We were talking about taking credit for the boom of the 90's because of a Repugnican (whoops, typo)Congress, and I simply stated that if you take credit for that, then you have to take credit for the recession also. Cycles, schmikles. That's no excuse for 3 million people out of work since Bush took office.

When I lived in DC it was the same way. In fact, it's that way in every big city I've been in.

Wilma, I've already compared a mild recession to a serious recession. Thus the reason for my comparing Carter's recession to the "Bush recession"

I never claimed that the Republican controlled congress was responsible for the economic boom of the mid 1990's. I've attributed that boom to the fact that the Republicans in congress and the Clinton administration were gridlocked.

I can't help it if you don't read too well. It's a real shame that your ability to comprehend the written word is so diminished. You state in another thread that Fox breeds ignorance. Well, maybe it's true, maybe it's not. But research shows that Republicans tend to be more highly educated than Democrats. Democrats are ignorant enough already. You're living proof of that.

Do you own an Xterra?

Interesting. Where is this research? I've always heard the opposite. Or rather, I've heard the more educated one is, the more liberal they are. (no republican/democrat mentioning)

I haven't found info to completely back up my claim. I've always heard that Democrats are more likely to be blue collar, high school educated people, low income people, and highly educated college professors, whereas Republicans tend to be middle class, small business owner or corporate workers with a college degree.

Like I said, I haven't found the magic evidence to back up my claim just yet, but here's a Washington Post article about how the parties are changing and that more of the less educated, low income people are looking towards Republicans and more of the highly educated, rich people are looking towards the Democrats. The article indicates that this is a diversion from the norm.

I'm still searching....

I think the reality is that they both cover the spectrum. You have both idiots who are democrat and idiots who are republican, and you have both brilliant people who are democrat and brilliant people who are republican.

My guess is, if you had the resources to figure out everyone, it's probably about even.

(And probably, more accurate to use liberal and conservative rather than democrat and republican)

I do find it interesting that drama and liberals seem to have this unbreakable bond together.

Just like conservatives and comedy, eh?

If the results of the last two presidential elections tell us anything...

Those with no HS degree are far more likely to vote for the Dem
Those with HS degrees were about evenly split.
Those who have some college, a college degree, or a Masters degree were more likely to vote for the Republican
Those with a Doctorate were more likely to vote for the Democrat.

In the Bush-Gore election, 47% of college educated voters voted for Gore, while 49% voted for Bush.

The research I've done in the last hour indicates that the Democrats appeal to the highest educated, wealthiest individuals and the poorest, most uneducated individuals.

The Republicans appeal to the middle of the bell curve.

Conservative vs. liberal would probably be different, and there are no statistics that I could find on that.

But the statistics do show that more Republicans tend to have college degrees than Dems. I guess I'm right... yippee for meeee!

I bet Hosscat votes Republican...



Check it out....

Kind of like the unbreakable bond of republican and:

assumed, campy, conceited, contrived, faked, false, feigned, fraud, ham, hollow, insincere, melodramatic, ostentatious, overdone, phoney, playacting, pompous, pretended, pretentious, put-on, schmaltzy, shallow, and sham (just to name a few).

:p

Wow, you do know more than three adjectives. Maybe next you can form a coherent sentence.

I think all of those were used recently to describe former governer Grey Davis. They also apply to Jesse Jackson, Albert Gore, and Terry McAwful.

How about Jackass Jackson saying yesterday before the election was even over that everyone was disenfranchised, and he was going to sue. Then they asked him if he would still do this if Davis won and he said "No". What a dirtbag.

Let's not forget Richard Nixon, Ralph Reed, Lee Atwater, G. Gordon Liddy, Bill O'Liely, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter. (And I bet Rove falls under those soon enough)

...ba-dum-bum.

Here is what I honestly think. I am not saying this to be mean or cause an argument. when I apply PURE motives to liberals and conservatives, here is what strikes me.

Liberals: Seem to be academic types (Professors, students) who really want to help people and make things better. They tend to believe in the goodness of people and seem to trust a persons word maybe more than they should. In this respect, they come off as sometimes naive or letting thier righteousness cloud thier reality. Liberals tend to believe that those "less" fortunate than them need thier help whether these people want it or not. They tend to believe that the its the governments role to provide not just for thier safety, but for thier well-being, livlihoods, and general lifestyle. They tend to have more of a "world view" of things even if it is to the detriment of thier own country. They see themselves as citizens of the world rather than Americans. They believe that any problem can be solved by throwing money at it. They believe in more government programs and higher taxes. They tend to have a less strict view of what constitutes right and wrong. They tend to use class warfare as a political weapon.

Conservatives: Seem to be made up of more "Salt of the earth" type people. They have strong work ethics and a strong sense of morals. This moral code sometimes leads them to be close-minded and set in thier ways. They believe that the only way a person can truly be helped is to help themselves. Sometimes this can be to the detriment of those that actually need help, but it also means that they try to make it an environment where one can help themselves. (Liberals tend to use this against conservatives by telling minorities they are having things taken away from them. Conservatives think that the only way they will get ahead is to force them to become less dependant on Uncle Sam.) They believe that the government should do three basic things; keep the peace(enforce the laws), defend the population(from outside attack), and promote the general welfare of the populace(IE the general infrastructure). This does not mean be a welfare state. Conservatives do not believe that it is the governments job to provide or create jobs. They are sometimes portrayed as heartless, gung ho, flag-wavers who want to wear thier guns (preferably for shooting liberals and minorities).

Both liberals and conservatives care. Liberals are the permissive parent, conservatives are the strict parent. What it all comes down to is how do you want your child (The USA) raised. You cant be too permissive, and you shouldnt be too strict. But you do need to know when is the right time to be either. Right now we are a child that has been allowed to run wild, in a nieghborhood of wild children. Daddy needs to come home and lay down the law.

You could use a lesson yourself there sport (you forgot to type "time").

:rolleyes:

As for a coherent sentence, what word don't you understand?

Aside from that last sentence, I'd say that was a pretty good assessment.

Another quirk of mine - while I may be left-leaning, I have absolutely NO problem with the use of corporal punishment when it's warranted. And I have no problem with it used in schools - when it's warranted. My only request of the school would be to let me know immediately.

Oh well. Your rambling list of adjectives was fairly impressive. Care to give an example of each one?

Not to butt in, but...

assumed - the whole "Ron Brown conspiracy" crap.
campy - hmmm...I guess there's the Log Cabin group.
conceited - O'Reilly (I've seen him talk)
contrived - They HAVE WMD...we KNOW they do!
faked - Peabody...er...Polk Awards...er...not his. O'Reilly.
false - uranium
feigned - these trailers are WMD labs!
fraud - Watergate
ham - Rush Limbaugh
hollow - Cheney
insincere - Strom Thurmond
melodramatic - Pat Robertson
ostentatious - Jesse Helms
overdone - Clinton bashing, 3 years post
phoney - Phil Gramm
playacting - Dubya as a fighter pilot.
pompous - Ralph Reed (met him, too)
pretended - Bob Barr-CCC connection - NOT pretended.
pretentious - O'Reilly again
put-on - Defense of Marriage Act
schmaltzy - Nixon
shallow - Newt "here honey, I want a divorce" Gingrich
sham - Investigation into Whitewater....turns up nothing. Sham and waste of money.

OK, OK...some are potshots...

Nice try. Half of your 'examples' are just your opinion about individuals. Now you have ruined it anyway. I wanted Sean's examples.

hehehe...opinions? So liberals have opinions, but conservatives have facts? Uh huh... :rolleyes:

anyway. :p

Just make Sean come up with other examples.

I never said that. We all have our own opinions about things. I guess any example really would only be an opinion anyway.

I just read this again. I didn't forget any words idiot. "Maybe next you can form a coherent sentence.", makes sense without the word time in it sport. :rolleyes:

Of course. It's just sad that some people (be it conservative or liberal or whatever) are so convinced that their opinions are fact.

What this place is going to look like if it gets any uglier in here....

I don't know Moby. I can kinda see your point, and it's a good one. I just think it puts the school in an odd position of judge, jury, and deliverer of punishment. I'm sure there are some schools systems out there that would handle this properly. But I think some schools would use it as an enforcement tool. This could conflict with the accused's ability to due process.

Personally, I don't like the idea of someone else hitting my kid.(Doesn't matter there is no corporal punishment in our county) Suspend or expel them as they may, but there can be no lesson learned from from a principal hitting a kid with a paddle.

Other things can be used as deterants to bad behavior. Besides the afore mentioned alternatives, school priveledges and functions such as, games, and/or social activities could be denied. Perhaps a classroom setting change may bring people in line. Ultimately, the threat of being expelled from the school district completely will cause most parents to make sure their kids behave themselves.

That cop is winning that fight for sure. Wonder what the guy did.

That was from the Boston/A's game - when the fielders ran into each other, some A's fans started yell shit at the Bosox players.

Pretty stupid really, one fan was making gestures like, "Bring it on!" He would have gotten his ass whipped big time.

"Next" what? As it's written, it's a incomplete sentence. But I can see how it would look acceptable to someone who was home schooled, idiot.

:rolleyes:

I think Mobycat posted an excellent example. As a matter of fact, I've would have replied in very simular fashion. The only thing different would have been adding Pat Robinson's name...ur...dam Moby, you got that one too! Funny, I don't recall reading any examples from your orginal post on the subject.

:rolleyes:

Nah, he asked the cop to put him out of his misery. You're getting very, very sleepy.

HA!

I gotta tell ya...I still can't believe how stupid fans have gotten...

1. Did he not know everyone was going to see how idiotic he was being?

2. Did he really think he would have a chance against the player he was yelling at? Even if his friend jumped in, they'd have the entire Bosox to deal with.

(Sorry...not up on the Bosox players, so I don't know the name of the player they were yelling at...except that he was HUGE compared to these two twits.)

Oh...and what do you want to bet this guy is thinking of suing?

"HEY! Look at the picture! Isn't it obvious I wasn't putting up any resistance?!"

One of the worst problems of this country is the rush to litigate...and that really has nothing to do with political views...it has to do with a large group of lawyers who want to make a quick buck. (Sorry...I've probably just started another argument)

Huh? Maybe if you could comprehend more than one sentence at a time it would help you figure it out. The word next is not just an adjective dork. It can also be used as an adverb. The example here points this out. Look at the second example of the word next under adverb.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=next

When did it become proper grammar to start a sentence with the word but? I am no grammatical genuis. I really was just fucking with you. You had to try to make some brilliant comeback though about my grammar, and you were wrong. I win.

Yeah! Spoken like a true moderate!! I say SUE EVERYONE!

Come on, somebody fight me. hahaha

Anyway, getting back to the original subject. Apparently a political group submitted Hilary's name on thier own. Anyone can submit a person's name to be President, and then a number must be assigned to that candidate by the Feds whether that person intends to run or not. That's not to say she will not run, but that is apparently how she had her name submitted. My source was Sean Hannity's radio show. Take it for what its worth.

Since you are a liberal, shouldn't that say, "Come on, somebody appease me. hahaha."

Hahahahahaha...SHUT UP!