Clinton baits, wants a fight

FACT / AZ — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 02:20:33 GMT

The door to the idiots closet and self serving agenda was side stepped. No issue was addressed, only gutless finger pointing as like the DNC party play house in the Senate. How shameful and degusting this display. Where was there leadership, only points of conjecture. Mulling in the mud of their mis represented dialogue! A eith grade debate is better than this garbage exposed tonight!!

They keep up this dialogue, every idiot will vote DNC!

Clinton baits, wants a fight

FACT /AZ — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 02:25:11 GMT

Who wrote the Question's, this was not a debate of factual issues """Only A Finger Pointing Contest!!

More of this and we see why these Washington self serving Paper hangers fail this Nation!!!!!

Clinton baits, wants a fight

John S. Alexander, Edinboro, PA — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:22:02 GMT

Fact/AZ has no facts, your emotive claptrap shows you have no real reason to be on this site, but you make me chuckle everyday, thank you paperhanger for hanging your own brand of paper, I will use it to 'DRAW' my own conclusions, you hate dems, you hate washington, you must hate democracy because that is what I see going on, a not so perfect human construct that still is the best in the world.
Constructive critisism is good, ranting is emotion over reason, animals use emotion, people try to be reasonable, try that and see if your life gets better, blaming everyone else for how you feel is your own damn fault.

Clinton baits, wants a fight

jen — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:43:37 GMT

A couple of points about the debate.

Healthcare:
At this point, the details of each candidate’s proposed healthcare plan doesn’t really matter. The next president isn’t going to enact universal healthcare all by himself/herself. What matters is who do you think can really unite the parties to pass universal healthcare for the American people? I don’t think Hillary Clinton can do it.
(1)She’s already had her shot at it and she failed MISERABLY. She had 8 years (almost a decade) to achieve it under her husband’s administration, had all the support that anyone could want and she still couldn’t get the job done. (A)Her husband was president and would have signed anything she put on his desk, (B)The democrats had the majority in the congress and the senate, and (C)75% of Americans WANTED universal healthcare – and she still dropped the ball.
(2)In my entire life I’ve observed many presidential elections and I’ve never seen one candidate become such a lightening rod for the republicans like Hillary Clinton, and this is 10 months BEFORE the democratic nominee has even been selected. The republicans enjoy gridlocked government and are itching to restart all the old battles again, and if they can stifle universal healthcare again to get back at the Clinton’s they’ll do it.
Hillary Clinton IS polarizing. It doesn’t really matter who you decide to blame for that, it’s just a fact, and we shouldn’t have to pay for the bitterness between the republicans and the Clintons.

Why are we letting Hillary Clinton get away with running on her “experience” with FAILING? She failed at passing healthcare, yet she’s trying to convince everyone that she’s the person to pass healthcare this time around, because she’s got such great experience learning how not to do it the last time. Now Bill Clinton has also stepped in to muddy voter’s memories, by taking the blame for the failure of healthcare, a program that he previously touted as “his wife’s baby.” All of a sudden, Hillary apparently wasn’t there the day that her healthcare initiative fell apart. In attempting to make excuses for his wife, president Clinton just gave a perfect reason for why she shouldn’t be the nominee. If the republicans voted against healthcare just to stick it to him, they’ll do that again if Mrs. Clinton becomes president.

AMERICA – Don’t nominate Hillary Clinton.

Clinton baits, wants a fight

Paul Lee, Austin, Texas — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 16:34:30 GMT

Republicans are fractured, yet they will all unite if Hillary wins the primary. Hillary has now become our Nader. Instead of sucking away votes from the Dems like Nader, she will push away votes that could have gone to the Dems. Nader voters were egotistical in their cause and did not see the folly in their voting pattern in 2000 and Gore could have won. Now we are going to see Mitt, Rudy, or whoever take office and again we are going to be left wondering why we voted for someone we may personally like, but who adversely offends independents. I will, from here on out, call her Hillary Nader.

Clinton baits, wants a fight

JL — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 18:08:03 GMT

Just an FYI... it's "a lot" not "alot" as seen in the second paragraph.