jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (96 posts)

Will Hill/Should Hill Challenge Obama in 2012?

  1. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Weigh in with your votes and rationale.

    I am reminded of a classic Bush saying here.
    Fool me once, shame on you.
    Fool me twice....
    We won't get fooled again!

  2. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    I don't think she will.

    I really don't think she wants to see even a chance of Romney in there.......there goes America: Up in smoke.

    His advisors want war with Iran....ask him if any of his 5 sons will go and fight and die. No, they won't.

  3. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    So if she won't challenge Obama, do you think she will put herself in as Veep instead of Biden, thus strengthening Obama's 2012 ticket?

    1. vwriter profile image86
      vwriterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I would love to see Hillary run as Veep, I believe it would strengthen the ticket. However, I've always been a Hillary fan, so my view may be a little slanted in her favor.

    2. profile image0
      Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Do you really think she'd play second fiddle to Obama? She has far more experience than he does.

    3. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know...those righty's would have a field day with that...they are so hateful, it would be a mass character assassination on all women and black people.

      I don't think I can take any more hate. It's seeping into everyday life. Even the business people over the phone act as if they don't have to have any respect for you....and they are supposed to be at your service!

      This righty-talk guy; Boorst? was on Hannity's show, and he said Obama has been a worse tragedy for America than 9/11.
      Just let that sink in.....

      It's worse than hate...it degenerate. These are sick/twisted beings. And they have the microphone and the stage.

      If you ever watched "They Live"....I suggest you do it again. Hits Home.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 264973286#

      1. vwriter profile image86
        vwriterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I believe Hillary would be willing to play second fiddle to Obama, if they approach it, as doing the VP job in the name of the Democratic party. However, I have to agree with lovemychris that with the cruelty that the righty's will show, it would be rough to watch.

        However, Hillary has done a great job as Secretary of State, and everyone has got to see that she is capable.

        1. Petra Vlah profile image60
          Petra Vlahposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Since the role of the VP is mostly decorative and has little influence in the way the administration performs (except for Chaney's diabolic nature and interference), I believe Hillary is better suited for the secretary of state position

          1. Mighty Mom profile image90
            Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Very true. But she has announced she will not fill that role anymore after this year. Which leaves her open for ....?
            The Veep would put her in succession to run from an insider's position in 2016 and would definitely strengthen Obama's chances of another four years.

            Having never been one who drank the Obama koolaid, I just want to see Hillary Clinton assume the job that she could have/should have been doing incredibly well since 2008. And I also said at the time that it would have been awesome for Hillary to have reached across the aisle and chosen McCain as her running mate (this was obviously all before the primaries).

      2. profile image0
        Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        You should know, LMC, the Dems wrote the book on mass character assassination.

        worse tragedy for America than 9/11 Seems reasonable. I wouldn't call him Hitler like Hank, Jr. did but his presidency has been a tragedy.

        Are you better off than you were four years ago?

        What am I thinking? I ask that like I'll get an honest answer or one that doesn't smear Bush in some way.

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You know, it's hardly worth answering...you never listen!

          Yes I am better off! Obama gave ME a tax cut! ME......imagine that. 1st time EVER in 35 years of working.

          He is nice and smart and smiles a lot....yes, I like that better than the smirking chimp.  ooooooh, too mean? How's this: The Holocaust was a picnic compared to Bush. You like that?

          No Democrat would ever stoop so low as to say that. But you righty's stoop so low you have to look up to see ground.

          Pffffffft. Hate is the new GOP family value. Be proud.

          1. profile image0
            Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I personally don't hate anyone, LMC. not even your president Obama. I just think he's the worst leader this country has ever had.

            The Holocaust was a picnic compared to Bush.

            I have a Jewish step dad who helped free the prisoners of a concentration camp during WWII. The things he saw would scare the hell out of people like you, LMC. Bush in no way compares to the Holocaust. Neither does Obama.

            Given your stance on Israel, I would like you would hail the Holocaust as a good start, 14 million dead Jews later.

            1. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Sorry to shatter your self-image, but that last comment was hate-filled.

              And your GOP guy and you saying that Obama has been worse for America than 9/11 is hate-filled.

              For you to claim otherwise is a river in Egypt.

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                http://current.com/shows/countdown/vide … eal-boortz

                Notice Oliver North agreeing with him? The dude who shredded documents to hide his illegal black-ops "war" that infected American ghetto's with guns and crack cocaine?
                ooooh, he's sum patriot!

                http://current.com/shows/countdown/vide … ent-in-l-a

                Nice. Glad they caught Michelle Malkin in her LIE. Seems that's all she knows how to do. I'm shocked wink

              2. profile image0
                Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I was simply going by your own post, LMC. It's obvious you hate Israel and I'll stand by my comment, edited slightly below.

                Given your stance on Israel, I would bet you would hail the Holocaust as a good start, 14 million dead Jews later.

                Also, given your posts against Israel, I get the distinct impression you would have no problem seeing Israel as a burning, radioactive hole.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Zionists are the scourge of the Earth, for Jew as well as "dumb Goy". You can choose to side with Nazis, I do not.

                  If you apologists ever learn from a mistake, it will be a great day.

                  1. profile image0
                    Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    LMC, HOW DARE YOU SAY I CHOOSE TO SIDE WITH NAZIS!!!

                    I've seen the pictures of the concentration camps, I've read the books, and I've spoken with a man that helped liberate one of those camps. His description would literally make you throw up. Stories of bodies stacked five and six high like cords of wood along a wall and when they started removing the bodies for burial, finding a man still alive, BARELY. Stories of people that looked like skeletons with skin stretched over them so weak they weren't wearing clothes because it was too taxing on what little strength they had. The man who helped liberate that camp and who told me those firsthand stories was my JEWISH step dad, who I love dearly.

                    So, You can call me a lot of things, LMC, BUT DON'T YOU DARE SAY I SIDE WITH THE NAZIS!!! THAT WILL NOT STAND!!!

                  2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
                    uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    It would seem that you and many others are siding with Nazis.

                    http://whitehonor.com/white-power/the-o … -movement/

          2. FitnezzJim profile image88
            FitnezzJimposted 5 years ago in reply to this



            Avoiding the contoversy of this particular argument, I'll simply point out that there is a difference between 'not listening' and 'not agreeing'.

            1. profile image0
              Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Something tells me LMS doesn't listen or agree with anyone no matter how wrong she may be. Being open-minded to the fact she just might be wrong on something escapes her completely.

              I would hate to be one of her kids with her "it's my way or the highway" attitude.

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, you would hate to be my kid.

                I don't tolerate hate, bigotry and smearing people for the sake of fun.

                1. profile image0
                  Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Who was having fun, LMC? You're in no way open-minded to the fact you might be wrong about something. That's not hate or bigotry and I'm smearing you for the fun of it. It's the impression I have of your attitude toward life and everyone in it.

                  1. lovemychris profile image80
                    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    And since that's your impression, it's the truth, right?
                    And since it's the truth, YOU get to repeat it for fun!

                    back-handed smears, so you don't get banned.

                    Agreeing that Obama is worse than 9/11?  SMEAR! And it's NOT fun!

            2. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I have said a dozen times I am better off....he cares to ignore it, since he hates Obama.

              1. profile image0
                Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                One final time, LMC, I hate no one including Obama. AGAIN, I do think he's the worst president this country has ever and hopefully will ever have. It has nothing to do with his skin color but his Socialist ideology. You can believe that or not. I really don't care.

                YOU might be better off, LMC, but there's a lot of people out here that aren't. I'm one of them. You're probably happy about that but that's why I'll be doing something for the 2012 election I've never done before, actively campaigning to get someone, anyone, other than Obama in the White House.

                Again, I don't HATE Obama or anyone else, not even you. I learned it's a huge waste of one's time.

                Perhaps you should try learning the same lesson before your hate for Bush, Cheney, Conservatives, me, and everyone who doesn't agree with every little thing you say eats you alive.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  "there's a lot of people out here that aren't. I'm one of them. You're probably happy about that"

                  --SMEAR!

                  "Again, I don't HATE Obama or anyone else, not even you. I learned it's a huge waste of one's time.

                  Perhaps you should try learning the same lesson before your hate for Bush, Cheney, Conservatives, me, and everyone who doesn't agree with every little thing you say eats you alive."

                  Ahahaha!!!!!

                  YOU don't hate, but I do!

                  1. profile image0
                    Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    YOU don't hate, but I do!

                    Given what I've read of your posts, YES, I've gotten the very definite impression you hate. You hate Bush, Cheney, Conservatives, me, Jews, Israel, and life and it's eating you up inside. You want to take that as a smear? Fine. Do so. But I can assure you I DO take it as a smear when you equate me in any way whatsoever to a Nazi.

                    The funny thing is, when you smear me, I don't hate you, LMC. I pity people who let their hatred for others rule their lives. It makes them a mear shell of who they could be. That's sad. Really, really sad.

          3. American View profile image60
            American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            LMC,

            35 years of working and you claim Obama is the only one who gave you a tax break. You truly have shown you do not know history. I strongly suggest you do some serious research as to how many tax cuts and restructures that lowered rates in the last 35 years and both sides get credit for them. By the way, Obama did not lower your withholding tax rate. He lowered your SS withholding which in turn now has less funds going into the SS coffers.

            1. Mighty Mom profile image90
              Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I think they used the term tax RELIEF if I'm not mistaken (Bush Sr.)?

              1. American View profile image60
                American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                MM,

                Tax relief is what Obama called it. It was his way to hide the fact is was SS withholdings where he lowered the rate and not Federal.

            2. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Wrong! All I have to do is compare paychecks. A notable difference in fed with-holding now. FICA appears to be the same...at least for me.

              And I know Reagan and Bush did things in the tax code for lower-incomes. Difference is, in their public stance, it was "gimmee people" and "welfare queens"...always making people feel like they had to bow their heads in shame for being poor.
              Obama is different. He is not ashamed of poor people!
              I said it was largely symbolic, but you have no idea how it feels to be looked on as a human being, rather than a bum.

              1. American View profile image60
                American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                LMC,

                If you take an honset look at you paychecks by percentage and not flat dollars, you will see where ALL the tax withholding changes are. Of course the total dollars may be higher, after all you are making more per hour today than you did 30 years ago. If you are lucky, you make the same or more per hour than you did 3 years ago as the national per hour rate is down almost 10% in the last 3 years.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I am telling you..my fed with-holding is lower!
                  The FICA LOOKS the same, but I can easily check it....well, maybe not...I don't save paychecks year to year. But I'm telling you, the Fed with-holding was a NOTICABLE difference.

                  And the per hour rate of the middle and lower classes has been stagnant since the 1970's...you are NOT going to pin that on Obama.
                  And your side fights a living wage at every turn...poor poor corporations would have less profit: boohoo

                  At my job, we ALL went 6 years without a raise, to help the business, then we all got raises one year, and since then, we have remained at the same pay. That was years ago...don't even remember.

                  All know, is the boss lives quite large. Good for him, but we struggle.

                  Loved Obama's line: "How can you pull yourselves up by your boot-straps if you have no boots?"

                  ...something the Right NEVER understands. Just bashing poor people..that's their way. IMO IMO. Herman Cain: "If you're unemployed, it's your fault." audience: "Yay"!! Applause applause applause.

                  1. American View profile image60
                    American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    LMC,

                    I understand about stagnant pay more than anyone. I have been talking about it and have written several articles on it for more than 5 years now. But I am sorry, you cannot tell me you make the same per hour today as you did in 1981. Nor can you say you pay the same Percentage withholding today as you did in 1981.

  4. Greek One profile image76
    Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

    Will Hill/Should Hill, can Hill run
    Will Hill?Should Hill, have some fun?

    Will Hill/Can Hill ever be Prez?
    Not Hill/But Hil, Greek One says.

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f_VGYw26OAA/Tfm76MAmYSI/AAAAAAAAAHU/DMKxrvJT0Jo/s1600/cat-in-the-hat.jpg

    1. profile image0
      jami l. pereiraposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Great Poem! i voted up! ,awesome and beautiful , useful and interesting HAHAHA!smile but no , i hope not haha!

  5. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    I would love for Hill to run! She has experience AND leadership qualities.

    1. Jean Bakula profile image94
      Jean Bakulaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I think Hillary is a very intelligent and experienced woman. So far she has worked well with Obama, but she is out of the country often. She has much experience from her failed health care plan, but that doesnt mean it doesn't have "good bones". It's possible the best could be taken from that. The US is still very rich and we should not have starving children, homeless people and the like. I think corportations that move jobs to China should be greatly taxed, and those who keep jobs in the US should have incentives. I don't know if she would play second fiddle for Obama, but she could make the role and job her own as the first woman to hold the office. It's worth considering. I do not think any of the R's are good candidates. Romney is on top now, but isn't well liked by his own party, and as I said in a different post, wont own up to his own successful health care plan in MA because it's too much like Obamas. This shows a lack of strength of his own convictions. I would like all the hate to stop. I say with all honesty I don't usually hear D's saying such nasty things, or posting such outright lies. And if they did, the rest of the party would not blindly follow this lead.  I thought Mc Cain was too old and out of touch in the last election, and his choice of Sarah Palin was a poor one for VP. No, we aren't better off then 3 yrs ago, but did have some issues with 8 yrs of Bush. I know that's Obama's problem now, but it does not make them any easier to solve. He could start by bringing home our troops. We could have used them at home during all the floods and natural disasters. Obama could still succeed if he found better advisors, he surrounds himself wth the wrong people.

    2. American View profile image60
      American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      hillary would have no problem in defeating Obama if she was to run

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Hate to tell you, but I saw an article last week that claimed Hilary and some other guy are the masterminds behind Fast and Furious...and that convicted felon Darell Issa knows all about it..I'd say he controls the shots right now, given his position of power.

      2. profile image0
        Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this
  6. jamaicavillas profile image60
    jamaicavillasposted 5 years ago

    The trouble with this USA election thing is that SKY news bores us all to death in Europe, especially the UK, with endless hours of American politics that we don´t give a toss about. We liked Bush, he was a f*****g idiot and give us all a luagh. It just shows, any fool can be president of the US, now, that is democary in work.

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Democary? Bush is an idiot? Uhhuh.

  7. jamaicavillas profile image60
    jamaicavillasposted 5 years ago

    Sorru about the smelling mistakes!

  8. jamaicavillas profile image60
    jamaicavillasposted 5 years ago

    Old Ollie N bought some racy undies for his girlfriend and then told the commity for naughtyness that he bought them for his wife. Ooooh!

    1. Jean Bakula profile image94
      Jean Bakulaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No problem. Bush was good for comic relief, in a sick sort of way I miss him too!

    2. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Also spent tons of tax dollars on a personal security fence for his home.

      Cause you know, HE deserved it.

      Sit there and nod while that imbecile says that?......Like I said: SUM patriot.

      1. American View profile image60
        American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        LMC,

        Could you show me a credibile source on that story.

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          even worse:

          Oliver North, Fortunate Felon
          Published: July 06, 1989

          "Oliver North won't go to prison even though he lied to Congress, shredded White House documents and accepted a $14,000 security fence from an Iran-contra arms profiteer."

          http://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/06/opini … felon.html

          1. American View profile image60
            American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            OK, still waiting for the Bush security fence story

            1. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I said North, didn't I?

  9. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago
  10. uncorrectedvision profile image61
    uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago

    Speaking solely for myself and despite the decades of suffering it would bring to my sons and their, as yet unborn children,  I sincerely wish the Republicans had not ended the filibuster proof Democrat Senate and did not win, overwhelmingly, last November in all of those House races.  I wish you could continue to get exactly what Barrack Obama and the all powerful Democrat Congress was delivering.  Not as a lesson for Democrats and liberals but as a lesson for everyone else.

    It took 20 years for the economy to recover from the Great Depression.  Herbert Hoover was President for fewer than four of those twenty and yet is vilified.  Why is this?  Because those who control information control history and information has been controlled by liberals.  Liberals in classrooms and newsrooms have been telling us how despicable Hoover was and now how equally despicable is GWB.

    It is time for Democrats to own the Great Depression as their disaster.  Time for Democrats to own a contemporary economy that has stalled because of worthless policies.  It is time for Democrats to own the greatest economic disaster yet visited on any economy since Communism - the collapse of Social Security.

    Hillary's saving grace is the little touch of pragmatism sprinkled into her black heart by Dr. Frankenstein.  As for her competence, she is visiting Pakistan right now.  American troops are massing on the Pakistan border.  The Pakistani government teeters on the brink of collapse.  What does Hillary say,"We are going to push Pakistan hard."  Awesome, when it collapses and the ISI gain even more power, how long before the Taliban funnel nuclear technology and materials to groups in Afghanistan?

  11. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "Throw out everything you think you know about history. Close the approved textbooks, turn off the corporate mass media, and whatever you do, don't believe anything you hear from the government. The Rise of the Fourth Reich reveals the truth about American power.

    In this explosive exposÉ, the legendary Jim Marrs explores the frighteningly real possibility that today, in the United States, an insidious ideology thought to have been vanquished more than a half century ago is actually flourishing. At the end of World War II, ranking Nazis, along with their young and fanatical protÉgÉs, used the loot of Europe to create corporate front companies in many countries, worming their way into corporate America. They brought with them miraculous weapons technology that helped win the space race. But they also brought their Nazi philosophy based on the authoritarian premise that the end justifies the means—including unprovoked wars of aggression and curtailment of individual liberties—which has since gained an iron hold in the "land of the free."


    It's not these stupid KKK cliques, it's MUCH bigger! And your crowd is right with them! Corporate power.

  12. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Just consider it.....

    "The Master Plan - Arrival of the Bankers

    At the turn of the 20th century, a plan to slowly take over the government of the United States began to unfold. Many works have been written about the Nazi machine that instigated two world wars, though few have traced the footsteps of the foreign financiers and the actors we prefer to call “politicians.”

    A brief glance at shipping records, passenger manifests, and financial transactions on Wall Street indicates a pattern of deception which was masterminded by this same machine. The level of cooperation from government agencies and their elected officials was not only disgraceful, but blatantly treasonous.

    In his book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island,” [1] author G. Edward Griffin described the secret meetings which created the Federal Reserve in 1913. The architect of the plan, Paul M. Warburg, was a representative of the Rothschild banks in England and France and his brother Felix headed the Warburg banks in Germany and the Netherlands. Of significance is the fact that the first “official” media report about the Federal Reserve occurred three years later.

    In “Leslie’s Weekly,” [2] B.C. Forbes described the secret meeting between Republican Senator Nelson W. Aldrich and six of the most powerful bankers in the world. That this meeting had to be conducted in a secret, clandestine island location indicates the level of deception, concealment - and treason - at work."

    read the rest:

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio … bush19.htm

    1. profile image61
      ashleyfordposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      no one should challenge Obama, we should let him run a full 8 years. he's doing a great job.

      1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
        uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Perhaps we should just crown him emperor.  After all, liberals love Rulers.

      2. profile image0
        Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Ashley, given Obama's job performance, we should all challenge his every move. His performance the most inept of any man to be POTUS.

      3. American View profile image60
        American Viewposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Ashley needs to change meds

        1. Mighty Mom profile image90
          Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Well, I missed the Republican debate Tuesday night but am watching "lowlights" on The Daily Show as we speak.
          What I'm seeing (and hearing) is nowhere close to a "challenge."
          It's a circus sideshow.
          Second term on a silver platter....

        2. profile image0
          Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          AV, Perhaps the meds remark is too strong in this case. Perhaps she's just young, idealistic, and naive.

          MM, I've not seen any of the debates, highlights, or lowlights but I like Cain. As for that second term, don't be too sure. Perhaps you're too young to remember Reagan was down in the polls against Carter as close as 3 weeks before the election.

  13. Jean Bakula profile image94
    Jean Bakulaposted 5 years ago

    Hi Mighty Mom,
    The latest round of R debate was hilarious. Romney does have the distinguished look of the only adult at the table. But then when he got flustered and said he got rid of the landscaping company because finding out they employed Illegals was "bad for his campaign" really showed his "sincerity", lol. And when Romney was begging Anderson Cooper to save him it was funny too.  I'm with you, 4 more years for Obama. What a bunch of clowns. I don't get why they are pushing primaries ahead. They should try to slow down the process to see if they can attract a "normal" person as a candidate!

    1. Mighty Mom profile image90
      Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      LOL, Jean.
      Yes, I saw that precious Romney moment on The Colbert Report today.
      Guess old Mitt took a lesson from Meg Whitman, who likewise fired her illegal nanny (after many years of employ) so she could run for CA governor.
      Message to employers: You can hire illegal OR you can run for office, but you can't do both. roll

      And normal candidate... that's an oxymoron if ever there was one! lol

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Don't worry--he'll deny it all tomorrow wink

      2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
        uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        If I hired a roofer who hired illegals are they my employees or is the roofer?  Who broke the law? 

        Californians took a pass on Meg Whitman - I hope Jerry Brown does what he does best - wool gather while the state crashes and burns.

        California gets, like every other elective democracy, the system they deserve.


        The Whitman story was too complicated for Californians to fool.  All they knew was "she's mean" and mean people suck. 

        http://search.huffingtonpost.com/search … er_form_v1

        1. Mighty Mom profile image90
          Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Meg Whitman's story was not complicated at all. It's very simple:

          1. "I'll run California like a business" was a failure. We'd just had a businessman cum actor blaze in saying he would run CA like a business. Arnold grossly underestimated the entrenched bipartisanship of our legislature (100x worse than Congress).
          So Meg picked the wrong message at the wrong time.
          2. Given the abysmal state of our state's coffers, the OBSCENE amount of money Meg Whitman spent to try to buy the election -- the most any candidate has ever spent in history on a state level election -- didn't sit well.
          3. Nannygate -- had she handled this crisis with honesty and admitted she made a mistake, she would have scored points. Instead, she took the low road.
          4. The #1 reason Meg Whitman bombed is not complicated at all. She has the personality of a slug. She looks like a rumpled dishrag.
          Come on, Meg. It's an IMAGE BUSINESS. You are a billionaire. Have some work done on yourself. Or at least find a hair style(implants, extensions or a wig, maybe?)

          Go ahead and call me petty. I'm not speaking for myself here. I'm speaking for how shallow politics really is.

          But all's well that ends well...
          Meg Whitman is now where she can be effective, at the helm of HP.
          There's a symmetry here, in that Carly Fiorina, ousted from HP herself, also sought to run for office in CA but lost. At least, I find it interesting...

          1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
            uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            So genius Californians still don't comprehend the disproportionate power of their legislature and return Moonbeam believing that repeating the errors of the past are a good way of forging ahead into the future.  Awesome.  The worst part of it is that when the idiot liberals in California finally see their squandered state strike ground the resultant crater from their absurdity will ravage those of us with responsive and responsible state governments.

            If that fool Obama is still POTUS, which seems unlikely - but things change, than those states will be punished by being forced to pay for Californian lunacy.  Californians have no one to blame for the Governator or Moonbeam but themselves but they will whine until their fellow travelers in DC bail them out in a deal that will make the one for AIG look like pocket change.

            1. Mighty Mom profile image90
              Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              No, we comprehend it.
              We have no choice but to comprehend it.
              The problem didn't originate with the Governator, but even he was unable to tame the beast.
              It actually takes someone with an understanding of how government is run to fix this from the inside and stand up to the unions AND other bullies.

              It's not politics as usual out here in the Golden State.
              Mr. Moonbeam has morphed into the REAL Governator.

  14. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Ahhhhhh, and then The October Surprise......oh yes....these CONS have been at it for a LOOOOONG time.

  15. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "Before his death, Steve Jobs offered to help Obama with his 2012 campaign ads"

  16. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    It's not about who broke the law. It's about appearances and things that can be used against a candidate.
    What Romney said was not "shame on you for breaking the law."
    He basically said, "I have no problem with the fact you're breaking the law, but right now that's too big of a risk FOR ME because I'm running for office."
    No moral high ground. Just plain old political expediency.
    Typical Romney.
    There's no spine there.

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Just plain old political expediency.
      There's no spine there. 

      You mean like,"Pass my bill. Pass my bill now.  Pass it.  Now."  or do you mean,  "Don't bug me man, there are gonna be rapes"

      Political expediency to not investigate every employee of every contractor versus the expediency of pushing a "bill" not yet introduced in the House(where all financial bills must originate - if you follow the rules)

      or the expediency of "rape" talk to push that nonexistent bill?

      I'll take the lazy contractor over the inveterate scammer every day.

    2. uncorrectedvision profile image61
      uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Don't you mean used against a Republican candidate.  That pig Bill Clinton and his swine brother John Edwards were monstrous philanderers but that is ok because parading your wife and child(ren) in front of every camera available and put your family man image on constant display doesn't make you a hypocrite - unless you are a Republican.Democrats parade their family values around as loudly as Republicans but get the big white wash from the press every time. 

      Let's not even pretend that Romney hiring a contractor, who didn't bother checking out his employees in the glorious state of California(isn't that where Romney's evil, smaller than Gore's, mansion is?)  because to check them out thoroughly would be racist, is a big deal unless the press subjects Democrats to the same treatment.  They can't.  It is against their best interests to upset the Central Committee of the Democrat Party because it would mean cutting the budgets at Izvestia and Pravda.

      So Republicans are damned - no do or don't do - by a press who has clearly chosen sides.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Geez, cry a Repub river: Waaaaaaa!
        Last I checked, Clinton was impeached, Edwards is in a boat-load of trouble, and Dickles Chinless Cheney and Bubba Bush are sitting pretty.

        No indictments, no questions from the press, no nothing. Just disgruntled citizens wondering when people will care about Justice for them as well as Wall Street.

        We all know 96% of the press is owned by Righty's. And geuss what? It shows!

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
          uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          If Cheney and Bush committed a crimes why didn't Barry's Justice Department indict them?  Why didn't Democrats do something about it?  Is it a desire to be complicit in those crimes? Is it a lack of courage on the part of Democrats?  Is it ineffectiveness, complacency, complicity, collaboration - if the crimes are real and Democrats are the great defenders of us all, then why no charges?  Why no investigations?  Is it because the Democrat Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of Haliburton?  Is it because the Saudis are paying off Obama?  Surely you have a theory.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            As Pelosi AND Ron Paul have said....there has to be the political will to do it.

            I for one, think there will be now...thanks to OWS.

            1. uncorrectedvision profile image61
              uncorrectedvisionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              So you are saying the Democrats are spineless cowards unable to muster the will to bring villains to justice?

      2. Mighty Mom profile image90
        Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        With all due respect, UCV, you seem to be uncharacteristically shrill today.
        Post after post of "I know you are but what am I?" and "I am Teflon. you are glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks on you!"

        Listen to yourself, man.
        You're better than this.
        Take the fish out of the darned barrel so we can have an honest debate.
        roll

 
working