|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
By way, are we now afraid of Hillary's middle name too?
No. I tend to just stick with first & last names in general.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
By way, are we now afraid of Hillary's middle name too?
No. I tend to just stick with first & last names in general.
Surrre. That's why you keep editing the titles of the Guiliani thread. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
By way, are we now afraid of Hillary's middle name too?
No. I tend to just stick with first & last names in general.
Surrre. That's why you keep editing the titles of the Guiliani thread.
I don't think adultery is part of Rudy's official name just something he's done 
I probably wouldn't have stuck with it as long as I did but figured since you were going to work something like Obama's middle name I might as well work Rudy's adultery into his thread's title. I actually stopped doing that on my last Rudy Giuliani ™ post.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
The point is that, if you really believed that the thread titles should be nothing but a "[first and last name] in 08" you would change Guiliani's thread titles to that. At least I'm being consistent now, using everyone's full name. You're picking and choosing based on, surprise, their party affiliation. I hope Soros gives you a nice bonus for all your hard work...has he told you which democrat you are going to support yet?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
By way, are we now afraid of Hillary's middle name too?
No. I tend to just stick with first & last names in general.
Surrre. That's why you keep editing the titles of the Guiliani thread.
Busted again. 
Quote:
M E M said:
I don't think adultery is part of Rudy's official name just something he's done
I probably wouldn't have stuck with it as long as I did but figured since you were going to work something like Obama's middle name I might as well work Rudy's adultery into his thread's title. I actually stopped doing that on my last Rudy Giuliani ™ post
In the same spirit as your posts, I offer:
the Barack Hussein former junkie pothead linked to indicted fundraiser Obama topic
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
The point is that, if you really believed that the thread titles should be nothing but a "[first and last name] in 08" you would change Guiliani's thread titles to that.
At least I'm being consistent now, using everyone's full name.
You're picking and choosing based on, surprise, their party affiliation.
I hope Soros gives you a nice bonus for all your hard work...has he told you which democrat you are going to support yet?
Why G-man, I just said that I tend to use first & last names in general. If you feel the need to use middle names just to justify working Obama's middle name, don't expect me to jump through your partisan hoops. It just seems silly to me. I title my posts as I please. You do the same. The difference seems to be that you expect me to stick to your partisan flavored titles.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
In the same spirit as your posts, I offer:
the Barack Hussein former junkie pothead linked to indicted fundraiser Obama topic
Oh no, now you & G-man will say all sorts of nasty things about Dems from now on! What have I wrought? 
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
...don't expect me to jump through your partisan hoops....
You complained I wasn't being consistent with the use of last names. I made my practice consistent among all potential candidates. Only you could claim that consistency between candidates of all parties is partisan
Quote:
The difference seems to be that you expect me to stick to your partisan flavored titles.
gasp....
excuse me...I....giggle
Gasp....heh....gasp....okay.....I
Heh...heh...gasp....heh...okay....I've stopped laughing at that last one.
You, MEM, with the possible exception of your need to excise middle names since we found out that Obama's is "Hussein," are singularly incapable of posting in a thread without editorializing in the the title. While we are all guilty of it on occasion, you do it on pretty much every thread, over and over, and always in a "pro Democrat," "anti-republican" manner.
The Guiliani thread is only one of the latest of many, many, examples.
Seriously, I hope Soros is paying you by the keystroke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
G-man, you are really the last person that should be grumping about how someone titles a post. BTW, I'm not paid for my opinions nor do I have to accuse other posters that they're paid to be here.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Glad to hear that she's jumping in.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Jumping in? She's been "in" for at least two years. All she did today was stop treating us like idiots with her disingenuous "I haven't made up my mind" b.s.
Actually, on this front, I have to give some of the credit to Barack Hussein Obama. I think his surge in popularity made her stop playing games.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
Let's hear it for the infidel! He now declares a jihad against Hillary!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Maybe they'll start competing so fiercely they'll unearth adequate scandal to knock them both out of contention?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
That's what Edwards is probably counting on. That and a sale at Wal-Mart.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Maybe they'll start competing so fiercely they'll unearth adequate scandal to knock them both out of contention?
I have no doubt Hillary's got skeletons in her closet. The whole way Bill tried to handle the sex scandal belies a shady nature...and birds of a feather. That, and she just feels slippery. No real reason behind my opinion, just a hunch.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Did anyone catch the SNL skit last night of Darrell Hammond, as Chris Matthews, interviewing Amy Poehler as Hillary?
It was like the writers read this thread: Matthews could only ask pre-approved questions, he had to fawn over her at regular intervals and she kept answering questions by smearing Obama.
That says to me its not this republican partisans who see that side of her. Its also liberal to moderate SNL writers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
The media certainly doesn't fawn over Clinton. She's been pretty much a subject of intense scrutiny for over the last decade. The upside to that is that she'll be much more battle ready than some of the other candidates.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Why do you fear her middle name, MEM? It isn't like "Diane" or "Rodham" is Muslim.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
|
|
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308 |
She's trying to get video games banned. She will never get my vote.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
at least she isn't a member of al-qaeda like Obama!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
I dunno, remember that lip lock with Arafat's wife?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,295 Likes: 6
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,295 Likes: 6 |
By staff writers and wires
January 22, 2007 07:40am
Article from: Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
SENATOR Hillary Clinton holds a large early lead over other candidates in the race for the Democratic US presidential nomination, according to a national poll.
The former First Lady was the top choice for 41 per cent of the Democrats polled, The Washington Post reported today.
That was more than double the 17 per cent, second-place rating scored by Illinois Senator Barack Obama.
Former Senator John Edwards, the 2004 vice presidential nominee, placed third at 11 per cent, with former Vice President Al Gore at 10 per cent.
Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, the 2004 presidential nominee, came in at 8 per cent.
The poll was taken before Sen Clinton announced her candidacy at the weekend. Sen Obama entered the race last week and Mr Edwards jumped in last month.
The Post said hypothetical general election match-ups of Sen Clinton and top Republican candidates gave her a narrow lead over Arizona Senator John McCain.
She was "running about even" with former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.
Sen Clinton didn't mince words yesterday as she announced she was running for the White House, saying simply: "I'm in."
If she were to win in 2008, the White House would have been in just two families' hands for nearly a quarter of a century.
George Bush won office in 1998. Sen Clinton's husband Bill Clinton won in 1992 and then George W. Bush, son of the first president Bush, won in 2000.
While the US is a country of 300 million with enormous cultural diversity, political dynasties are a fact of life. Name recognition and a well-worn list of campaign donors give incumbents and their families an advantage.
Some are calling it a new aristocracy. President Bush even jokes about Bill Clinton being his father's other son - the two former presidents have grown close, particularly after their work as joint ambassadors to help co-ordinate relief in South East Asia after the 2004 Boxing Day Tsunami.
But the first thing Senator Clinton did yesterday was to put as much distance as possible between herself and Mr Bush.
"The stakes will be high when America chooses a new president in 2008," Senator Clinton said.
"As a senator, I will spend two years doing everything in my power to limit the damage George W. Bush can do. But only a new president will be able to undo Bush's mistakes and restore hope and optimism."
Her campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe predicted a rough campaign.
"She is going to fight for herself and she is going to have people around her who will fight," he said.
"They are going to play mean, nasty and dirty on the other side. You don't walk into a knife fight without adequate gloves."
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, another Democrat, is expected to declare he is running today. Republican Sam Brownback also announced his candidacy yesterday.
With Reuters and The Australian
*****
"You don't walk into a knife fight without adequate gloves." How does a campaign manager get to mix his metaphors so badly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,295 Likes: 6
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,295 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Did anyone catch the SNL skit last night of Darrell Hammond, as Chris Matthews, interviewing Amy Poehler as Hillary?
It was like the writers read this thread: Matthews could only ask pre-approved questions, he had to fawn over her at regular intervals and she kept answering questions by smearing Obama.
That says to me its not this republican partisans who see that side of her. Its also liberal to moderate SNL writers.
I don't see the controversy. I agree with your comment on the other thread: she like any other politician will act against her competitors regardless of party affiliation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
If, by "controversy," you mean that people being surprised that she would smear other potential nominees, I agree. Its just part of politics.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
As I said before, I'm sure she'll run a tough campaign.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289
2000+ posts
|
|
2000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289 |
I don;t think Obama will egt the nomination for this election, he's not got the network or the experience yet.
I think he'll be a good shot in 4 or 8 years provided he doesn't do anything stupid in the meantime.
Last edited by Steve T; 2007-01-22 10:56 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
Steve T said:
I don;t think Obama will egt the nomination for this election, he's not got the network or the experience yet.
I think he'll be a good shot in 4 or 8 years provided he doesn't do anything stupid in the meantime.
How about being on the ticket in '08 as VP?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
Sounds good if you want a muslim terrorist who is trying to destroy the country from the inside as Vice president.
Praise Allah.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35 |
It made me ill today, watching the liberal media fawn all over Hilary Clinton, when she formally announced her intent to run.
I especially got a kick tonight watching Nightline and seeing George Stephanopoulos (Clinton's former White House communications director) give his "objective" opinion of the Clintons, who brought him from nobody-status to an anchor position on ABC News.
All this gushing about the "first woman candidate".
Funny, how it barely made a blip on the liberal media's radar when Elizabeth Dole announced her candidacy in 2000. There have been several other lesser-known women who have campaigned with less visibility.
No, this is clearly the liberal media's darling, and any objective criticism of Hilary will have to come from somewhere else. It's Bill Clinton II the liberal media's promoting.
No one seems to notice that Hilary Clinton doesn't even have a political platform of specific issues she's running on. She just wants the power and status of being the first woman President.
And she's as unprincipled as her husband. An opportunist, who will say anything, and do anything, whatever it takes, to win.
I prefer a candidate who runs with a specific purpose, and has heartfelt issues that they unwaveringly defend and support. Such as Giuliani and the way he cleaned up New York, or Newt Gingrich's long-term vision for the nation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
|
|
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308 |
I think you say liberal to many times.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
It made me ill today, watching the liberal media fawn all over Hilary Clinton, when she formally announced her intent to run.
All this gushing about the "first woman candidate".
Funny, how it barely made a blip on the liberal media's radar when Elizabeth Dole announced her candidacy in 2000. There have been several other lesser-known women who have campaigned with less visibility.
There have been many female presidential candidates over the years:
Victoria Woodhull, 1872: The first woman to run for president, Woodhull was an Equal Rights Party candidate. Ulysses S. Grant won the 1872 election as a Republican.
* Belva Ann Lockwood, 1884 and 1888: Lockwood, who also ran on the Equal Rights Party ticket, eventually became the first woman lawyer to practice before the Supreme Court. In 1884, Democrat Grover Cleveland was elected president; in 1888, Cleveland lost to Republican Benjamin Harrison.
* Margaret Chase Smith, 1964: Smith, a Maine Republican, was the first woman to run on a major party ticket, entering primaries in New Hampshire, Illinois, Massachusetts, Texas and Oregon, among others. She withdrew after the first round of voting at the Republican National Convention. Sen. Barry Goldwater won the Republican nomination and lost in a landslide to the incumbent, Lyndon B. Johnson.
* Shirley Chisholm, 1972: The first black woman to run for president, Chisholm ran as a Democrat and received more than 150 votes at the Democratic National Convention. She was also the first black woman to serve in Congress; New York sent her to the House of Representatives in 1968. George McGovern won the Democratic nomination that year and lost to the incumbent, Richard M. Nixon.
* Patsy Mink, 1972: A congresswoman from Hawaii, Mink ran in the Oregon Democratic primary as an anti-war candidate.
* Pat Schroeder, 1988: Schroeder's headline-grabbing campaign never got off the ground after the Democratic congresswoman from Colorado could not raise enough money. The party's nomination went to Michael Dukakis and the election to Republican George H.W. Bush. Schroeder was first elected to the House in 1972, where she served for 24 years.
* Elizabeth Dole, 2000: Dole announced her presidential bid in January 1999 and dropped out of the race nine months later. Republicans eventually nominated George W. Bush, who defeated Democrat Al Gore for the presidency. Dole's husband, former Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan., was the Republican presidential nominee in 1996, when he lost to Bill Clinton. Mrs. Dole is now North Carolina's senior senator, elected in 2002.
* Carol Moseley Braun, 2004: The first black woman to serve in the Senate, Braun was one of 10 candidates to seek the Democratic presidential nomination in the last presidential election. Primary voters eventually tapped Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., as the nominee. He lost to George W. Bush.
With this in mind, the most "historic" aspect of Hillary's campaign is actually the fact that it marks, perhaps, the first time someone might actually sleep their way to the presidency.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
Hillary's a cunt....Praise Allah!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,877 Likes: 50 |
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
It made me ill today, watching the liberal media fawn all over Hilary Clinton, when she formally announced her intent to run.
I especially got a kick tonight watching Nightline and seeing George Stephanopoulos (Clinton's former White House communications director) give his "objective" opinion of the Clintons, who brought him from nobody-status to an anchor position on ABC News.
All this gushing about the "first woman candidate".
Funny, how it barely made a blip on the liberal media's radar when Elizabeth Dole announced her candidacy in 2000. There have been several other lesser-known women who have campaigned with less visibility.
No, this is clearly the liberal media's darling, and any objective criticism of Hilary will have to come from somewhere else. It's Bill Clinton II the liberal media's promoting.
No one seems to notice that Hilary Clinton doesn't even have a political platform of specific issues she's running on. She just wants the power and status of being the first woman President.
And she's as unprincipled as her husband. An opportunist, who will say anything, and do anything, whatever it takes, to win.
I prefer a candidate who runs with a specific purpose, and has heartfelt issues that they unwaveringly defend and support. Such as Giuliani and the way he cleaned up New York, or Newt Gingrich's long-term vision for the nation.
I think the fact that SNL just recently skewered her kind of indicates that she isn't fawned over. People on the far ends of the political spectrum really don't like her. I've seen negative stories run simultanously on Liberal & Conservative sites.
It's just silly saying Clinton doesn't have a platform, she does, you just don't like it.
On a personal note, I do like Libby Dole. So much so, we actually asked her for a donation for a local charity. (Signature on a card type of thing) Instead she sent us a large Libby for President wall poster that she signed that ended up breing in some big bucks. The GOP would do well in trying to get her to run again now that she's got some time in the government as an elected official.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1
We already are 15000+ posts
|
|
We already are 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
I don't think WB was saying Hillary has no platform. I think he was saying that she has never articulated a comprehensive set of principles, choosing, instead, to--dare I say it--flip flop.
Her ever changing views on the Iraq war are one example of that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,227 Likes: 35 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
I don't think WB was saying Hillary has no platform. I think he was saying that she has never articulated a comprehensive set of principles, choosing, instead, to--dare I say it--flip flop.
Her ever changing views on the Iraq war are one example of that.
Yes, exactly.
She's trying to "triangulate" on which way the political wind is blowing. I saw her interviewed on ABC News, and she absolutely refused to take a stand or commit herself to anything.
She made some vague posturing about universal healthcare for the surviving families of 9-11, but again made no specifics about providing care for even that tiny fraction of Americans.
Gingrich, in contrast, has a vision for the nation, honed from over a decade in Washington. Gingrich has his negatives as well, but at least he has a comprehensive vision for the country.
|
|
|
|
|
