35 Years of Experience????

[Logical]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 7 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

Buehler, Buehler??

[ClevelandBronco]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 4 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

Buehler, Buehler??

We're to believe that she was the power behind the throne. To tell the truth, I do believe it.

[|Zach|]

I guess she has some amazing political machine that nobody can get in the way of.

At least thats what I hear around this forum.

Ask Kotter though, dude can't go 2 posts without talking about her.

[ClevelandBronco]

I guess she has some amazing political machine that nobody can get in the way of.

She's been thwarted on several occasions. Don't attribute overly dramatic positions to your opponents.

[|Zach|]

She's been thwarted on several occasions. Don't attribute overly dramatic positions to your opponents.
Thats all I read about Hillary...day in and day out...overly dramatic positions on her amazing political machine and what a terrible cold bitch she is. On and on...

[ChiefaRoo]

In her mind Bill would never of become President without her. She feels they were a team and maybe they in some ways were. Bill though is a much less dangerous person than Hillary because she is a driven socialist ideologue. Bill just wanted to lead, be liked and get laid.

[ClevelandBronco]

Thats all I read about Hillary...day in and day out...overly dramatic positions on her amazing political machine and what a terrible cold bitch she is. On and on...

I wasn't saying that she was overly dramatic, I said that you are, Zach, and that you'd like it if we were.

Sorry if I was somehow unclear.

[|Zach|]

I wasn't saying that she was overly dramatic, I said that you are.
And I am just relaying what is said about her on this board time and time again. Do you disagree with that?

Not my words\feelings.

[ClevelandBronco]

And I am just relaying what is said about her on this board time and time again. Do you disagree with that?

Not my words\feelings.

I don't catalog the board. I don't get to vote for anyone here, so I don't follow more than a handful of folks here.

I'd sooner ignore Hillary's handshake than accept it. And I'd never vote for her.

Maybe that puts Obama in my camp. Or me in his, depending on how you look at accepting a handshake from that — whatever it is.

[ClevelandBronco]

In her mind Bill would never of become President without her. She feels they were a team and maybe they in some ways were. Bill though is a much less dangerous person than Hillary because she is a driven socialist ideologue. Bill just wanted to lead, be liked and get laid.

I couldn't agree more. The guy would be a star in the Lounge here. And just that might have been enough for him.

[|Zach|]

I don't catalog the board. I don't get to vote for anyone here, so I don't follow more than a handful of folks here.

I'd sooner ignore Hillary's handshake than accept it. And I'd never vote for her.

Maybe that puts Obama in my camp. Or me in his, depending on how you look at accepting a handshake from that — whatever it is.
Ha, I don't even think you would have to catalog the board. I understand you can't talk for others but it is hard to get away from around here. It used to be that the Obama camp had no chance...literally no chance against the Hillary machine. You might as well have yelled the machine part in a long cave to add the drama. And even now it is cold bitch this...heartless bitch yada yada...

No person could possibly begin to live up the character that has been created for her.

I just don't like her as a candidate. I think she is really rigid and would be the kind of person that snubs her nose at a great idea just because it came from a republican. She is way too entrenched in Washington. There is no reason to have another Bush\Clinton in the Whitehouse.

I think she is a lot like George W. in a lot of respects. People who attract a lot of ire but at the base are not really bad people...in the least. They want good things for this country and its people.

[Jenson71]

I have 20 years of experience. Going on 21 this November.

[ClevelandBronco]

No person could possibly begin to live up the character that has been created for her.

Who created it? Who can't live up to it?

(She created it, and she can't live up to it.)

[ClevelandBronco]

Ha, I don't even think you would have to catalog the board. I understand you can't talk for others but it is hard to get away from around here. It used to be that the Obama camp had no chance...literally no chance against the Hillary machine. You might as well have yelled the machine part in a long cave to add the drama. And even now it is cold bitch this...heartless bitch yada yada...

No person could possibly begin to live up the character that has been created for her.

I just don't like her as a candidate. I think she is really rigid and would be the kind of person that snubs her nose at a great idea just because it came from a republican. She is way too entrenched in Washington. There is no reason to have another Bush\Clinton in the Whitehouse.

I think she is a lot like George W. in a lot of respects. People who attract a lot of ire but at the base are not really bad people...in the least. They want good things for this country and its people.

We all want good thing for this country and its people. We differ widely on how to accomplish those good things.

(BTW: Post more photos. You're a hell of an artist. I really enjoy your stuff.)

[jAZ]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 7 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

Buehler, Buehler??
The serious answer (FWIW), is that 35 years ago (1972) is when she started as a liberal political activist. She moved to Texas to work on George McGovern's campaign for President. She was talking about 35 years of experience trying to bring about "change" so she counts being a grass roots activist in that election as her first year of experience doing that.

If you look closely at what she was saying, she should get credit for what she's narrowly claiming. But not if she tries to claim 35 years of fiscal or military experience.

However, she's making an apples to oranges comparison (in her favor, convienently) by claiming 35 (as an activist) vs. Obama's 2 (in the Senate). Apples to Apples would be 35 vs. 24.

Obama first became a grassroots organizer after college in 1983. Only 11 years after Hillary started her activism.

Both were organizing for "change".

It's debatable whether the numbers 35 and 24 are at all relevant to anyone but Dem primary voters. And it's hardly debatable at that.

[bkkcoh]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 7 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

Buehler, Buehler??

Isn't that how long she was the puppet master for Bill?

[acesn8s]

Hillary seems to have a problem doing math.she has also claimed that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary after he climb the highest mountain but that didn't happen until after her birth.

[Frankie]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 7 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

Buehler, Buehler??
She's had a "career" (unlike, say, Laura Bush) much of which in sociopolitical activities. You don't have to be an elected official to have experience in the political field. Of all people, Dr. Doom, aka "Lgical" should logic into that conclusion. ;) Also, people tend to discount or ridicule her 8 years in the White House in which she is said to have been very involved in policies and/or had front row view of the process.

[jAZ]

Also, people tend to discount or ridicule her 8 years in the White House in which she is said to have been very involved in policies and/or had front row view of the process.
This is where she can rightly claim actual experience over Obama. I'd guess she has had as much policy experience in the WH as (if not more than) Condi Rice. Seriously.

And people on this board were ga-ga for a Condi4Prez campaign.

[Cochise]

Hillary seems to have a problem doing math.she has also claimed that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary after he climb the highest mountain but that didn't happen until after her birth.

And then after someone checked into the story she said she wasn't lying, it was her dead mother that was the liar.

[Chief Faithful]

And then after someone checked into the story she said she wasn't lying, it was her dead mother that was the liar.

Hillary had a mother?

[Cochise]

Hillary had a mother?

Something had to lay the egg.

[Mr. Kotter]

I guess she has some amazing political machine that nobody can get in the way of.

At least thats what I hear around this forum.

Ask Kotter though, dude can't go 2 posts without talking about her.

:spock:

It is the height of the primary season, but...in a search of my posts over the last seven days, 38 included the word "Hillary".....out of 170 posts in DC (don't know how accurate the search feature is though, so...)

But, it does appear I can go 4-5 posts without mentioning her. I suspect my Obama and McCain ratio....over the same period would be higher.

Dude save yourself the grief and put me on iggy. :rolleyes:

[Frankie]

And then after someone checked into the story she said she wasn't lying, it was her dead mother that was the liar.
I'm sure you are not lying either, despite the fact that her mother is still alive. ;)

[Frankie]

Something had to lay the egg.
See Mr. C, this is the point of my other thread.

[jAZ]

... it was her dead mother that was the liar.
ROFL

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FSlmpIFr2wQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FSlmpIFr2wQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[Cochise]

I'm sure you are not lying either, despite the fact that her mother is still alive. ;)

Well, whatever. I thought she died when they were president the first time but I guess it was her father.

The point is still that it was a bold-faced lie. In fact, what's funnier is that she had determined ahead of time to lie about it, and had her people check the spelling so that she would be ready to explain when she told the story why her name is spelled differently than Edmund Hilary's name is. So it is obvious that not only did she lie about it, but she took care to perform a cursory check of her lie ahead of time to try to keep people from shooting holes in it.

But this is Clinton politics. Lie, all the time, even when you have very little to gain from it and the truth is easily proven.

[jAZ]

In fact, what's funnier is that she had determined ahead of time to lie about it, and had her people check the spelling so that she would be ready to explain when she told the story why her name is spelled differently than Edmund Hilary's name is.
When was all this?

[Carlota69]

The serious answer (FWIW), is that 35 years ago (1972) is when she started as a liberal political activist. She moved to Texas to work on George McGovern's campaign for President. She was talking about 35 years of experience trying to bring about "change" so she counts being a grass roots activist in that election as her first year of experience doing that.

If you look closely at what she was saying, she should get credit for what she's narrowly claiming. But not if she tries to claim 35 years of fiscal or military experience.

However, she's making an apples to oranges comparison (in her favor, convienently) by claiming 35 (as an activist) vs. Obama's 2 (in the Senate). Apples to Apples would be 35 vs. 24.

Obama first became a grassroots organizer after college in 1983. Only 11 years after Hillary started her activism.

Both were organizing for "change".

It's debatable whether the numbers 35 and 24 are at all relevant to anyone but Dem primary voters. And it's hardly debatable at that.

Good answer. I like intelligent answers to questions instead of hateful bullshit. I am so on the fence about to vote for, and all this hate spewed at each other is distasteful and confusing. You are obviously voting for Obama, yet you didnt barf up hateful bile about Hillary. That, to me, is what the Obama campaign is about, even if everyone on the Obama train doesn't follow suit. You did. I can respect that.

[Cochise]

When was all this?

It seems self evident to me that's what happened. They were coming up with something for her to say as soon as she landed in Nepal, and they either prearranged the meeting with the real Hillary or whatever, and came up with some microphone fluff to go along with it.

[Carlota69]

But this is Clinton politics. Lie, all the time, even when you have very little to gain from it and the truth is easily proven.

Isnt that what politics in general is all about? Seriously, didn't Bush just get nailed for lying a ton of times? Isnt that what it takes to succeed in office? Lying your ass off? At least it seems that way to me.

Call me jaded, disenchanted and disgusted with ALL polticians (including our 'choices"), but to single one out is ridiculous.

[Cochise]

Isnt that what politics in general is all about? Seriously, didn't Bush just get nailed for lying a ton of times? Isnt that what it takes to succeed in office? Lying your ass off? At least it seems that way to me.

Call me jaded, disenchanted and disgusted with ALL polticians (including our 'choices"), but to single one out is ridiculous.

Why should we give people a pass for dishonesty just because dishonesty is widespread?

[Carlota69]

Why should we give people a pass for dishonesty just because dishonesty is widespread?

I'm not saying we should, but we do all the time. Bush is getting a pass from many on this board, yet lynch Hillary for whatever lies she has told to further her career.

I'm sick about all the choices becasue they are all dirty liars (IMO)--hence the problem with politics. I'm a jaded voter I suppose...

[Ultra Peanut]

Maybe she's counting her Wal-Mart experience (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4218509&page=1).

[StcChief]

she was SOH of the great state of Arkansas

[|Zach|]

We all want good thing for this country and its people. We differ widely on how to accomplish those good things.

(BTW: Post more photos. You're a hell of an artist. I really enjoy your stuff.)
Thanks, ZCPhotography.com

[|Zach|]

:spock:

It is the height of the primary season, but...in a search of my posts over the last seven days, 38 included the word "Hillary".....out of 170 posts in DC (don't know how accurate the search feature is though, so...)

But, it does appear I can go 4-5 posts without mentioning her. I suspect my Obama and McCain ratio....over the same period would be higher.

Dude save yourself the grief and put me on iggy. :rolleyes:
You rarely call her Hillary.

[Frankie]

Well, whatever. I thought she died when they were president the first time but I guess it was her father.

The point is still that it was a bold-faced lie. In fact, what's funnier is that she had determined ahead of time to lie about it, and had her people check the spelling so that she would be ready to explain when she told the story why her name is spelled differently than Edmund Hilary's name is. So it is obvious that not only did she lie about it, but she took care to perform a cursory check of her lie ahead of time to try to keep people from shooting holes in it.

But this is Clinton politics. Lie, all the time, even when you have very little to gain from it and the truth is easily proven.
1- How important is that "bold-faced lie" to our politics, and to our kids' future, economy etc., etc., etc. It's not like we were taken to a bloody, expensive and unnecessary war with it. Is it?

2- I'm not aware of this particular claim, but could it be that her mother actually told her this when she was a kid and it stuck in her mind? (Again, I refer you to the question in my other thread)

[Frankie]

But this is Clinton politics. Lie, all the time, even when you have very little to gain from it and the truth is easily proven.
So, let's see, if our leaders blatantly lose subpoenaed evidence in order to make the truth hard to be proven everything is hunkydory (sp) with you. Correct?

[Mr. Kotter]

You rarely call her Hillary.

Care to back up your hyperbole? :rolleyes:

[patteeu]

Isnt that what politics in general is all about? Seriously, didn't Bush just get nailed for lying a ton of times? Isnt that what it takes to succeed in office? Lying your ass off? At least it seems that way to me.

Call me jaded, disenchanted and disgusted with ALL polticians (including our 'choices"), but to single one out is ridiculous.

I missed it. What did he get nailed for lying about? Did he claim to be named after George Michael or something?

[Carlota69]

I missed it. What did he get nailed for lying about?

The report that came out last week about 900-some odd lies regarding the war.

[BucEyedPea]

The report that came out last week about 900-some odd lies regarding the war.

Oh! You're in for it now girl. You don't know the pandora's box you opened.
Now you're going to have to defend, link all 900-some of them while he parses each one. Hope you have a month to spend here full-time. :eek:

[Carlota69]

Oh! You're in for it now girl. You don't know the pandora's box you opened.
Now you're going to have to defend, link all 900-some of them while he parses each one. Hope you have a month to spend here full-time. :eek:

LMAO

[|Zach|]

Care to back up your hyperbole? :rolleyes:
You don't back up anything when I ask you two, but why even get into that mess.

You call her "the bitch" a lot for starters. No?

[Mr. Kotter]

You don't back up anything when I ask you two, but why even get into that mess.

You call her "the bitch" a lot for starters. No?

Sure I have. I think it is a term I hear many people call her in private and candid moments.....I consider it to be accurate, and have used it sometimes....along with "witch" references. I just think your implication that I've used it more than I use Hill or Hillary or HRC.....is disingenuous and wrong. Of course, you would focus on the times I do use it though.

FTR, I can't recall....off the top of my head, too many times you've asked me to back up anything, when I haven't. Can you remember a recent example? Usually I try not to seagull post, except sometimes on the weekends...or if I occasionally forget to "follow up." It's not intentional.

[|Zach|]

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=178853

[Logical]

I'm not saying we should, but we do all the time. Bush is getting a pass from many on this board, yet lynch Hillary for whatever lies she has told to further her career.

I'm sick about all the choices becasue they are all dirty liars (IMO)--hence the problem with politics. I'm a jaded voter I suppose...Carlotta, I agree with your point, and by the way I do not, and have not given George Bush a pass as you may know if you follow the BB.

[Logical]

The serious answer (FWIW), is that 35 years ago (1972) is when she started as a liberal political activist. She moved to Texas to work on George McGovern's campaign for President. She was talking about 35 years of experience trying to bring about "change" so she counts being a grass roots activist in that election as her first year of experience doing that.

If you look closely at what she was saying, she should get credit for what she's narrowly claiming. But not if she tries to claim 35 years of fiscal or military experience.

However, she's making an apples to oranges comparison (in her favor, convienently) by claiming 35 (as an activist) vs. Obama's 2 (in the Senate). Apples to Apples would be 35 vs. 24.

Obama first became a grassroots organizer after college in 1983. Only 11 years after Hillary started her activism.

Both were organizing for "change".

It's debatable whether the numbers 35 and 24 are at all relevant to anyone but Dem primary voters. And it's hardly debatable at that.

Thanks for the answer, I think it is a misrepresentation, but, it really only matters if you are an Obama supporter. I still support Ron Paul though he will never be our candidate. I hope he runs as an independent but I have my doubts.

[Carlota69]

Carlotta, I agree with your point, and by the way I do not, and have not given George Bush a pass as you may know if you follow the BB.

Thats cool. I do know that.

[patteeu]

The report that came out last week about 900-some odd lies regarding the war.

Oh, the report authored by the George Soros/Barbara Streisand funded lefties that rehashed all the false lies that we've already heard and debunked about Iraq. I see. Did you read any of the specific claims of the report or just the headlines and an article announcing it's conclusions?

[Carlota69]

Oh, the report authored by the George Soros/Barbara Streisand funded lefties that rehashed all the false lies that we've already heard and debunked about Iraq. I see. Did you read any of the specific claims of the report or just the headlines and an article announcing it's conclusions?

Yeah--the Barbra Streisand report--yeah that one...

Everyone lies (especially the Clintons) except dear Ol' Dubyah...gotcha....

Look, you are not going to change my views and I'm certianly not going to change yours...lets agree to disagree...

[Mr. Kotter]

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=178853

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4537443&postcount=105

What part of "I stand corrected" don't you understand? :shrug:

I simply took your word that you hadn't defended jAZ. And then conceded my mistake. The charge was withdrawn. I considered that the end of it. What was there to "defend" at that point?

Beyond that, I then repaid your silly personal assault with an in-kind insinuation--(sorry, turning the other cheek is something I've not been successful internalizing)...that led to another silly comment from you regarding meltdowns....as if there's something wrong with that important Planet staple of entertainment.

Anywho....I'm not innocent in any of this, to be sure. We've discussed our different perspectives on appropriate posting practices, and I thought had agreed to disagree....even if you disapprove of my style and manner. I know....I get it....you don't appreciate my silliness. Fine. No problem. However,I simply can't sympathize with your, IMO, over-sensitivity. I don't intend to rehash it--just wanted to point out, this is merely a continuation of our silly little feud.

Maybe ignoring each other would be a good choice at this point.

[BucEyedPea]

Yeah--the Barbra Streisand report--yeah that one...

Everyone lies (especially the Clintons) except dear Ol' Dubyah...gotcha....

Look, you are not going to change my views and I'm certianly not going to change yours...lets agree to disagree...

Don't let him fool ya' he never debunked them...only in his own mind.

[patteeu]

Yeah--the Barbra Streisand report--yeah that one...

Everyone lies (especially the Clintons) except dear Ol' Dubyah...gotcha....

Look, you are not going to change my views and I'm certianly not going to change yours...lets agree to disagree...

I see that you have very little idea of what you're talking about. That's OK, it was a pretty misleading report and it would be easy to be misled if you're a casual and/or non-skeptical observer.

I don't and never have made the case that GWBush never lies. I'm taking issue with a specific comment you made:

Seriously, didn't Bush just get nailed for lying a ton of times?

The answer is no, he didn't.

I understand that if you are already committed to believing that Bush lied "a ton of times" even though you have no idea what you're talking about that I'll have a hard time changing your views. That kind of faith-based opinion is hard to shake. I prefer dealing with provable facts myself. No offense intended. You're not the only person who's bought into that propaganda.

[patteeu]

Don't let him fool ya' he never debunked them...only in his own mind.

You've certainly never been able to back up anything along those lines. You believe strictly on the basis of faith in your sources. Sources who have made a living off of selling their anti-Bush points of view, I might add.

[ChiefaRoo]

You've certainly never been able to back up anything along those lines. You believe strictly on the basis of faith in your sources. Sources who have made a living off of selling their anti-Bush points of view, I might add.

Be nice to the girls Pat. Maybe they'll kiss. Hey Ho!!!

[a1na2]

WTFf is Hillary talking about? Far as I can tell she has been an elected official for just 4 years, so where is the rest of this 35 years coming from?

That's paramount to saying that you flew on a 767 so many times that you have 500 flying hours.

Being next to a politician does not give you experience. You might see more about the inner workings of any particular office but there is no way to claim that experience is your own.

Basically it's just another lie from the WWE.

[Frankie]

Oh! You're in for it now girl. You don't know the pandora's box you opened.
Now you're going to have to defend, link all 900-some of them while he parses each one. Hope you have a month to spend here full-time. :eek:
Of course Bush didn't lie about who he was named after. That makes it all good in the Righties' book.

[Frankie]

That's paramount to saying that you flew on a 767 so many times that you have 500 flying hours.

Being next to a politician does not give you experience. You might see more about the inner workings of any particular office but there is no way to claim that experience is your own.
I'm still struggling to figure out what "paramount to saying" something means, but the little ol' simpleminded foreign me thinks if someone auditted a bunch of college Chemistry classes as opposed to my one, that someone knows a lot more about Chemistry than I. Over and out.

[ClevelandBronco]

I'm still struggling to figure out what "paramount to saying" something means, but the little ol' simpleminded foreign me thinks if someone auditted a bunch of college Chemistry classes as opposed to my one, that someone knows a lot more about Chemistry than I. Over and out.

He may have meant "tantamount."

[a1na2]

He may have meant "tantamount."

Whichever.

If someone is claiming they have experience just because they were in the same room is what I'm getting to. Hilary has very little experience in elected office.

[ClevelandBronco]

Whichever.

If someone is claiming they have experience just because they were in the same room is what I'm getting to. Hilary has very little experience in elected office.

She's taken an interesting and singular course. I'd say that she's had a great deal of experience in several levels of government without having to answer directly to the electorate until just recently.

[a1na2]

She's taken an interesting and singular course. I'd say that she's had a great deal of experience in several levels of government without having to answer directly to the electorate until just recently.

Loose cannon?

It is my opinion that Hilary is unstable. I do not think it would be wise for us to have an unstable person with their finger on the nuclear button. She has an anger control problem and that in itself is a danger to the safety of the U.S.

[ClevelandBronco]

Loose cannon?

It is my opinion that Hilary is unstable. I do not think it would be wise for us to have an unstable person with their finger on the nuclear button. She has an anger control problem and that in itself is a danger to the safety of the U.S.

I don't share your trepidation. I haven't seen Sen. Clinton act in a way that I would characterize as unstable.

Still, I'd never vote for her. It just doesn't have anything to do with her personality.

On the other hand, if you're correct, some folks might want an unstable person at our helm to counterbalance the demonstrably unstable Pres. Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il.

[a1na2]

I don't share your trepidation. I haven't seen Sen. Clinton act in a way that I would characterize as unstable.

Still, I'd never vote for her. It just doesn't have anything to do with her personality.

On the other hand, if you're correct, some folks might want an unstable person at our helm to counterbalance the demonstrably unstable Pres. Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il.

I base my 'unstable' comment on her actions against the secret service while living in the WH as the first la... well what ever she was there as.

[Frankie]

Loose cannon?

It is my opinion that Hilary is unstable. I do not think it would be wise for us to have an unstable person with their finger on the nuclear button. She has an anger control problem and that in itself is a danger to the safety of the U.S.
Yeah Hillary will wake up one morning with PMS, reach out to the night stand next to her bed (past her psycho medication bottles) where that little red Nuclear button is and push it and start WW3. Yeah you are right. Forgive us all for not having the great wisdom and vision to realize that.