Hillary Clinton!!! Surely not?

[Conky]

I know this is a Port Forum and I'm a UK resident. But it is Meaningless Drivel.

Now I understand George W, isn't too popular at the moment. I understand the need for change from time to time. I get the left wing right wing debate (Or in America, the slightly Right Wing versus the Ultra Right Wing!). I'm aware that the 'complete change' Democratic Candidate. Barack Obama, is looking a tad naive.

BUT HILLARY CLINTON!!!!



Is history now suggesting the Clinton administration was a good thing? Or maybe that she wasn't involved in it? Can a person really change, that much? Can you guys be certain you dont get him again?



Non of my business, of course, but my head is in danger of falling off, I'm shaking it in disbelief, that much!

Alan

[DRT]

I think a woman would be good as a President.

They can be so clinical when it comes to making decisions. From what I have seen on TV, GWB would be in a complete mind-boggling traumatic dilema is someone said "push the button now, Mr President". A woman, on the other hand, would push the button without hesitation, especially if someone told her she wasn't allowed to

Derek

PS: Yes, the Mrs and I have just fallen out and I am feeling bitter

[Conky]

I'll get the Box Room ready...

[DRT]

Thanks, she's quite a good house guest and will help Debs with the washing up

[Andy Velebil]

Unlike her husband, she's actually got some balls and probably would do a better job than GWB or her ex-president of a husband. Ohh and she doesn't smoke cigars

[Frederick Blais]

I don't think she can do worse than the Bush... I really like Bill, I don't mind if he gets into decisions... we can't say the same thing about Bush senior.

Anyway, her or anyone, it can't get worse in USA than it is atm.

[mosesbotbol]

I don't think she can do worse than the Bush... I really like Bill, I don't mind if he gets into decisions... we can't say the same thing about Bush senior.

Anyway, her or anyone, it can't get worse in USA than it is atm.

Bush Sr. told Bush Jr. not to go to Iraq, so much for that... I thought the Clintons weren't bad, but I don't want another dynasty president. 20 years of Bushes (8 jr, 8 sr as vp, and 4 sr) and this could be potentially 16 years of Clintons... Oh no...

[Conky]

I've got to say, you guys are a lot more tolerant of this idea, than I expected.
I'm willing to accept I'm looking from a distance, and I probably don't know enough.

Like many politicians who have a touch of longevity, they usually overstay their welcome, and by the end, are a spent force, riddled with policy failures and smells of alleged corruption and self-intrest. One can, at their lesiure, argue their place in History, but it will take some time to regain perspective.
In the short term, you normally need fresh faces, new ideas, and much needed re-invigouration.

To go with the wife of a tainted President, no matter how experienced, and system savvy, I find incredulous. Then again, what is life, if it isn't a collection of interesting twists and turns. Like the old joke goes, How do you make God laugh?...Tell him your plans!

Alan

[SEAN C.]

She's more phony to me than Bill ..and I can't stand Bill.
The choices for president keep getting worse and worse. It just goes to show you that any idiot with money and connections can be president. I don't know who I'll vote for, but there isn't a chance in hell it will be Clinton, Edwards, Obama, or Mitt Romney!

[Andy Velebil]

I dont think the choices are any worst than in the old days, its just we know more about them now thanks to the internet

[Luc]

Any Democrat is better than a Republican .
This being said , the next President of the U.S. of A will be

A- A woman
B- A black man
The leading Republican candidates are pro - homosexual which has the Republican party in an uproar . . .

[Conky]

Hillary Clinton's "amended" family tree

A professional genealogical researcher discovered that Hillary Clinton's great-great uncle, Remus Rodham, a fellow lacking in character, was hanged in Montana in 1889 for horse stealing and train robbery. The only known photograph of Remus shows him standing on the gallows. On the back of the picture is this inscription: "Remus Rodham; horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1883, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889."

Judy e-mailed Hillary Clinton @ NY.Gov for comments. Hillary's staff of professional image adjusters cropped Remus' picture, scanned it, enlarged the image, and edited it with image processing software, so that all that's seen is a head shot. The accompanying biographical sketch read as follows:

"Remus Rodham was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honour when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed."

(And that's how it's done, folks!)

[John Danza]

Hillary, or any Democrat for that matter, would be a disaster. Might as well turn the country over to being run by the U.N.

The only problem with GWB is that he's not conservative enough.

GO FRED THOMPSON!!

[Conky]

Hillary, or any Democrat for that matter, would be a disaster. Might as well turn the country over to being run by the U.N.

The only problem with GWB is that he's not conservative enough.

GO FRED THOMPSON!!

I hate these blokes that sit on the fence!

Hi, John, welcome aboard. I suspect I'm similar, Right Wing Instincts with Equal Opportunities.

Alan

[Luc]

Fred Thompson !! Fred Flinstone has a better chance .

[Conky]

I'm getting worried! Looks like you guys are seriously thinking of re-visiting the Clintons!

The world is a strange place...

Alan

[Overtired and emotional]

Alan,

Did you see Boris Johnson in yesterday's Torygraph on this point? Made interesting reading.

Where would the current hopefuls stand on a vintage port or other drink test? Do any of them enjoy a glass? I'll wager not.

Go back a couple of hundred years to Thomas Jefferson; he was no soak, but knew his wine and took the opportuntiy when ambassador to France to buy up stocks of Hermitage and other favourites to send back to Monticello.

Where are today's oenophiles in public life? Not to be seen. O tempora, O mores! Another symptom of the decline of society.

John

[Conky]

John,

that is my paper of choice, but I often overlook that page. I gave it a whirl, and that is pure Boris! He wants Hilary back because he wants Bill in charge? Oh dear. I think Politicians should have a human face, and there should be a place for the Boris's and Bill's of this world. Not so sure it should be as leader of the free world though.
What we need, and in our country too, is a person somewhat more attuned to the author of your quote, Marcus Tullius Cicero. A shrewd man, practical and political, with a leaning towards the right, tradition and personal responsibility. (On the downside, he was a Lawyer! , and yes I think you have mentioned your background)

Alan

[Jay P]

Conkey

What is it exactly that you have against Hillary? Or Bill for that matter? That she is a woman? That he slept around?

When I look back at the Clinton years, The only significant problem I see was the failure to intervene in Rwanda (not that the EU members did much either). What was the problem...ecomomic growth? Balanced budget? More personal freedom, liberty, and rights for US citizens? The "failure" to accecpt tourture as a means to accomplish goals? The "failure" to get into any vietnam repeats? Not s tough as Maggie?

Please make yourself clear, then we can respond to your rationale for why she should not be president.

Jay

[DRT]

Jay,

I have a feeling that Alan's reservations on the Clinton's will be on two fronts. Firstly, being a UK policeman, Alan's politics are likely to be just to the right of Ghengis Khan - secondly, here in the UK there is a general perception that the Clinton's are corrupt and survived as a result of good spin rather than integrity.

That said, I'm with you. I liked Bill and it is somewhat pleasing that a two term president of the US is remembered more for the stains he left on a dress that the stains of blood he has left around the globe.

Derek

[Conky]

I have to premise this rationale by saying it is in Meaningless Drivel! I believe what I'm about to type, but don’t take it too seriously.

Jay,

I think career Politicians are a strange bunch. I think a politician should hold public office because of what they believe in, not because of what Political Party they belong to. I also strongly believe we now have the technology to be purely democratic. For the general public to vote on all major issues, without the need for a handful of representatives.
So if you haven't dismissed me as a naive crank, I'll move on to the Clintons.
I don’t live in America, and therefore can’t judge the day to day impact the Clinton years had. I would presume it is generally accepted that they are the epitome of the savvy career politicians. So like many other examples, we don’t get off on the best of footings. What is essential from such people is honesty. I don’t mind any politician lying for reasons of National Security. I also think that a Politician should have a private life, and as long as he's not a serial adulterer,etc, we should follow the French example, where the odd indisgression is kept private.
Now Clinton is known as the great communicator, and I don’t fully understand how the Monika Lewinski affair blew up. It may have been grossly unfair that he was investigated, and pressurized into making a response to the allegations.
But...he did decide, for whatever motivation, to speak to the Country. He looked them in the eye and said 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'. That was a lie. He didn't have to say that. It was done for selfish personal reasons. Afterwards, he may have wriggled and squirmed, and debated the wording, but he lied to the nation.
Hilary didn't distance herself. She didn't condemn him. She clearly had political as well as personal motivations for her position when that happened, and her political ambitions since. Some may think it unfair, but I think that deeply flawed politicians and I think of the Clintons in that way should not be allowed to serve in the top posts. Where has the honour of resigning gone?
I can live with bad decisions, scheming, spinning, changing your mind, not fulfilling your promises, etc,etc.
But look me in the eye, and lie, well your credibility, and my respect for you, has flown away on the wind, never to return.

Alan

[Luc]

Alan ,
I think , regardless of the fact Hillary has her hubby's last name , the fact remains she's the front runner for the Democratic party and will stay there .Two reasons for this stand out :
1- Barack Obama is still wet behind the ears and the American public isn't ready for a Black man .
2- The Clinton connections and loads of cash

[Jay P]

Conkey

All in good fun but here goes:

I guess I would rather have a president who lied about his sexual misadventures than one who lied about more important things such as "America does not torture prisoners", or "Iraq blew up the world trade center, so we need to invade them".

I think that the Clintons, both of them, although admiditlly very savy politicians, generally have the good of the people in mind. I certainly do not believe this of GWB. Then we run into this whole seperation of church and State thing as well with GWB, and so many of the right wing politicians here...why do I have to worship at the president's church (or at all for that matter) to be a good American? I will admit that the founding fathers were all churchgoers, but for gods sake they wrote it right into the constitution! Thats why they came here in the first place!

I think that what went on between Bill and Hillary regarding Monica should be between them, as it would be for anybody else. Obviously a lack of morals on Bill's part. But is it a crime for a wife to not leave her husband over an affair? More importantly (when thinking about suitability to run a nation), despite 8 years of concerted, merciless, in your face from day one, the Clintons were never shown to have done anything wrong in terms of what to me matters in a politician: Using their political power for personal financial gain, or anything like that at all. Despite the literally hundreds of millions of dollars the right (and the national coffers) spent trying to prove wrongdoing, there was nothing there. And here's the catch. At what point did Bill use "Excutive privilage" to stop any of it? Never. Contrast that with GWB and Cheney, every single day!

Obama is currently a little niave to take the top post (maybe in 8 years, with a Kissengeresqe advisor in the background to help him with realpolitik). The republicans with their war in Iraq and "stay the course" rhetoric make me cringe...Imagine Maggie decided to invade the mainland after just scraping by in the Falklands, declaring all Latinos as threats. And the whole time the economy is falling to pieces, we are being crushed by the EU market and China, and people are still living in formaldehyde contaminated FEMA trailors outside New Orleans! Not doing so well in my book.

And I cannot even buy my Pogo-2 Mini Transat 6.5M due to the results of the lousy exchange rate! Bring on Hillary!

Jay

[DRT]

Has anyone checked Obama's passport and birth certificate? Are you sure that it's a b an not an s

Derek

[Conky]

Jay,

would it surprise you to know, I accept all your reasoning and criticism of Bush. I think he has been cavalier with foriegn policy, and to insular when it has come to enviromental issues.
I thought he would be good, at the onset of his Presidency, but I was wrong and it is time for a change.
I would accept he has been politically dishonest, for example, the juiced up case for invading Iraq was a political lie, not a bare-faced one.
I respect your democratic inclinations, and suspect if I were an American, I would have Republican ones.
The reason we respectfully and jovially disagree, is that my argument for the Clintons, in my opinion, still holds firm, within my acceptance of your thoughts on Bush. I would have thought you could have had the Clintons as advisors, but I'm not having that America doesn't have good credible democratic candidates without that credibility flaw.
Jay, I dont know what you do for a living, but if we were entering a business deal, and you clearly caught me out lying, over a minor issue that I staked my reputation on, would we be able to carry on? I would suspect not. If you agree, my primitive comparison takes care of Bill. Then you start to see were my previous derision comes from, when you see me post things like 'Surely not Hillary!' I also accept you may not join me on that family connection, that I find too interwoven.

And a last point, one that I am definitely right on and will have no countenance on it. My nickname is Conky and not Conkey!!!

Regards

Alan