Comments on: A Touch of Hyperbole?

By: rhbate

rhbate — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:50:14 +0000

FIGURES DON’T LIE – BUT LIARS CAN FIGURE

By: rhbate

rhbate — Thu, 29 May 2008 06:18:36 +0000

The most important reason I could not vote for Hillary is that she is a manifest liar. The second reason is that she lacks the necessary foreign policy experience, to wit, her experience in Bosnia. How could I respect a leader who is in a plane that makes a “corkscrew landing” all the while fighting off snipers and the only backup she has is her then twelve-year-old daughter, a guitar player and a comedian. She could have at least brought along a sax player.

By: R. Baker

R. Baker — Thu, 29 May 2008 03:09:52 +0000

Am I missing something? Isn’t it the elected/appointed delegates from the states and territories that determine the candidate that each party will put forward to run for the Office of President of the US in the general election? Since when does popular vote have anything to do with this process. If I recall correctly in past elections the individual who received the majority of convention delegate votes was selected as the party candidate. I would imagine that Senator Clinton understood the process when she declared her intentions to run for the nomination so many months ago. Now that she is apparently not going to have the majority of delgate votes she wants to change the rules. I say that the time to establish the rules is before the game starts. It is to late to change the rules after all the votes have been cast and the delegates elected. Seems to me once all the primary elections have been completed, whoever has the designated majority of elected/appointed delegates is the party candidate. At that point any individuals not meeting the designated number should gracefully withdraw.

By: Mary

Mary — Wed, 28 May 2008 21:50:38 +0000

Neil1785:
I would NEVER vote for John McCain so he can take away my right to choose.
Do not put words in my mouth. I am a supporter of the Democratic nominee–whoever that may be.
But, like it or not, it’s going to be Obama.

By: Average Joe

Average Joe — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:09:12 +0000

i don’t know but obama’s view on how he counts the votes, on how he campaigns for the GE now – a slap in the face of all democrats! – and what his campaign tried to pull the awful morbid thing the other day when making hillary look like she was calling for some sort of assassination.. honestly, mccain has not done anything that comes even remotely close to all that.
i really don’t know this guy called obama and what he really wants to do – he talks one thing and does something totally different..tally undemocratic
he knows foa fact that there are still people who to vote out there. he knows for a fact that the convention is the place.
seriously, i don’t tnk he is going to make it.
some things you just don’t do..

By: Kate

Kate — Wed, 28 May 2008 18:58:46 +0000

Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won’t vote for Barack Obama in the fall. I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL’s Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You’d rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman’s right to choose? A man who over the last eight years that NARAL has released a pro-choice scorecard has received a 0 percent rating? A man whose campaign website says he believes Roe v. Wade “must be overturned”? A man who has vowed that, as president, he will be “a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement”? Really?

By: Average Joe

Average Joe — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:56:01 +0000

the article is another proof that tehre was no recession during 2000. they revised teh numbers after bush took office. btw, within two weeks in office bush changed clinton’s budget! nobody talks about that one! – so, the final year of the clinton era was drastically altered by bush himself.. i am not clear how he was allowed to do that but he did it.
as he did so many other things.
but my question to you was: forget what the pundits said at the time for a moment. the entire country was talking about the surplus for years to come!
how could that have been a recession?
while talking about trillions in surplus? i don’t think so. it doesn’t make sense.
btw, cnn still refuses to post the popular vote numbers not even to this day!
now, how can a media organization post the numbers of people who have not cast their votes yet but insist in not posting the numbers of the ACTUAL VOTES?
cnn has a different agenda and that is neither mine nor yours..same thing with msnbc..
media organizations have NO right not to tell the truth about the real numbers of this election!
in fact, by not posting the total number of actual votes to date, they are misleading the american people.

By: jmc663

jmc663 — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:39:10 +0000

Average Joe,
2000 is like 2008. “Maybe yes, maybe no”.
Here is a link on CNN about it from November 20, 2000. Right BEFORE the election Gore v. Bush

By: Average Joe

Average Joe — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:09:37 +0000

The Stock Market was high due to “Irrational Exhuburance”, then promptly TANKED. Remember the “dotcom bust”. It was falsely inflated.
When Clinton left, we were in a recession.
You can’t Cherry Pick history.
—
no you can’t!
let me tell what the ‘history’ is:
in april 2000 – last year clinton was in office rememeber! – greenspan came out (i still remember that day, was first week in april i think) and said: this economy is growing so fast (it was growing at 5% gdp rate at that point) that we cannot stop it and we have to do something about it.
and he did! he bumped up the interest rate by 0.5% – just like that.
now, i just happen to remember that year was also an election year and our darling bush was running around the country and ordering his troops that he could not win if the economy were to keep growing like that. he DID actually say that on national tv!
so his friends at goldman sachs came out and said SELL and his buddy republican greenspan went out and bumped up the interest rate as much as he could get away with at the time.
now now.. let’s do a bit of arithemtic here: how was the country in a recession if the gdp was over 5% in q1’2000 and over 3% in q2? that is a tough one.
but stop and think for a second. that election cycle even bush was talking abut what to do with the ‘surplus’ – nobody forecasted there wasn’t going to be one..
so you are right, You can’t Cherry Pick history.

By: Average Joe

Average Joe — Wed, 28 May 2008 16:56:11 +0000

They will say HRC is another 4 years of Bill Clinton, and that aint good.
—
why not? those were the only times in recent memory when we as a country were actually paying off the national debt, creating wealth like never before in history, creating jobs, etc. etc.
i happen to think that having bill there is a good thing.
i don’t think we as a country can afford to pay for obama’s education. it will takje obama 5 years to just learn the ropes..
i mean, look at what he is doing now: engaging mccain in a national conversation?
why?
if nothing else, it is way premature because it really insults the intelligence of every single voter out there yet still to cast his/her vote.
that aside, engagin mccain at this point is really really stupid.. shows that obama does not have experience.
mccain was dying for a reason to get media attention – obama put that on a silver plate for him. so, mccain can raise some money right? he needs it. as he needs FREE publicity. sorry, not free because obama is paying for it :))
i mean, seriously, what was wrong with the clinto years? stock market was going throught the roof, we were paying off the national debt and every single counrty in the wrold wanted to be like us..
clinton went to war and won without one single casualty! in yugoslavia.
i want those times back! i really do. hillary can do it. obama needs time to be able to actually do what he wants. he will never tell you that but, think about it. if experience and knowledge doesn’t count, why do we send our kids to school for?