Next order of business for me is wondering what position Bill Clinton will be appointed to in Hillary's administration

Actually, I am supporting Jim Webb.


You really need to pay closer attention! Originally Posted by bigtex

Ok.

Last time you made any such announcement I detected some "equivocation"~!

On 11Feb15 @1758 hours to be exact:

bigtex: "I have yet to give Webb a check during this election cycle. However, I did give him a campaign contribution when he first ran for the US Senate, in Virginia. It remains to be seen whether I give him another campaign contribution in the future. When and if I do, I will be the one who will make the determination of the exact amount given and when the check, or checks, will be delivered. In other words, it will be done on my timeline. Not yours!

With that said, if you would like to wager on whether I will give Webb "a check for $750" sometime soon. I am open to that concept.

Shall we explore our options or will you do your customary, "cut and run"?"

There's not one POTUS ever elected that wouldn't envy the economic expansion that took place during Clinton's presidency. We can argue til the cows come how whether or not he had anything to do with it....but, it happened on his watch. Originally Posted by timpage

I have no problem agreeing with your statement if you will say the same thing about the Reagan expansion.

There is a solution for that, ...

... but casting "favorite sons" or "favorite flavors" as candidates is not one.

Do you remember the "most likely to succeeds" in junior and high school?

After you've read all the books, read John Kerry's "autobiography,"* and his goal.

Here's the Globe's take on his "remarkable turnaround" ...

http://www.amazon.com/John-Kerry-Bio...der_B00B3M3X9Y

You can pick it up for $6.

Not to pick on him, you understand, but as a "perfect example" of a narcisstic "government man," for whom most of the loudmouths on here voted or facilitated his candidacy ..... as long as people trash honest candidates with integrity .... that's what we'll get. We have another one for almost 2 more years. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Huh?

There's not one POTUS ever elected that wouldn't envy the economic expansion that took place during Clinton's presidency. We can argue til the cows come how whether or not he had anything to do with it....but, it happened on his watch. Originally Posted by timpage

Actually, there is no need to argue it. He had nothing to do with it.

However, like all Presidents, he gets credit/blame for whatever happened while he was in the White House - at least in the minds of most simple folk.

The real danger comes in believing that he really did do it and can do it AGAIN.

Which is why I asked Zanzibar to tell us what technology revolution he sees in the near future to replicate the second half of the 1990s.

Unless fusion energy becomes a reality and the US pioneers it, I don't see anything bailing us out.

Which is why, in a perverse way, I see a sliver lining in a Hillary Clinton administration. If we end up with 4 more years of slow growth that is funded by more massive debt spending, we can finally bury the myth that government in general, and Clinton in particular, caused the late 1990s boom.

Actually, there is no need to argue it. He had nothing to do with it.

However, like all Presidents, he gets credit/blame for whatever happened while he was in the White House - at least in the minds of most simple folk.

The real danger comes in believing that he really did do it and can do it AGAIN.

Which is why I asked Zanzibar to tell us what technology revolution he sees in the near future to replicate the second half of the 1990s.

Unless fusion energy becomes a reality and the US pioneers it, I don't see anything bailing us out.

Which is why, in a perverse way, I see a sliver lining in a Hillary Clinton administration. If we end up with 4 more years of slow growth that is funded by more massive debt spending, we can finally bury the myth that government in general, and Clinton in particular, caused the late 1990s boom. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Actually, if one were inclined to argue about it, one could make an argument that he had at least something to do with it....mostly by staying out of the way. I don't recall anybody advancing the argument that the economic expansion of the 1990's can be replicated by any Clinton....or anybody else.....at least not for the foreseeable future.

Huh? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You think Kerry isn't a "government man"?

That's all he's done except court the catsup queen.

Well... that's not all he "courts"!

You think Kerry isn't a "government man"?

That's all he's done except court the catsup queen.

Well... that's not all he "courts"!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Oh no! He's having dinner with Al-Assad! My god, he's the secretary of state, what's he doing meeting with foreign dignitaries? The french met with him too. And I'm sure many other countries as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_6750864.html

Holy Shit! he meets with reporters too!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...3b2_story.html

Oh no! He's having dinner with Al-Assad! My god, he's the secretary of state, Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Do you know how old that picture is?

John Kerry has a "history" of fraternizing with "the enemy"!

You probably weren't "around" for this photo op...



Child.

Do you know how old that picture is?

John Kerry has a "history" of fraternizing with "the enemy"!

You probably weren't "around" for this photo op...



Child. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Oh no! He thought Vietnam was horseshit. A view shared by many with 20-20 hindsight. At least he was over there, not like Cheney and Bush and the rest of the draft dodging dicknips.

Back to the OP Bill's job would be to line up a large array of pussy lickers with big tits to have sequestered under the desk in the oval office.

Oh no! He thought Vietnam was horseshit. A view shared by many with 20-20 hindsight. At least he was over there, not like Cheney and Bush and the rest of the draft dodging dicknips. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Are you suggesting that all those who did not set a foot on Vietnam soil were...


... "draft dodging dicknips"?

You must be thinking of this guy:



Did you vote for him? Or were you old enough to vote back then?

And IVA ... that's "on topic"!!!!!

Back to the OP Bill's job would be to line up a large array of pussy lickers with big tits to have sequestered under the desk in the oval office. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

That's called "recruiting"!

Oh no! He thought Vietnam was horseshit. A view shared by many with 20-20 hindsight. At least he was over there, not like Cheney and Bush and the rest of the draft dodging dicknips. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Do you really think George Bush was a draft dodger?


Jim

Do you know how old that picture is?

John Kerry has a "history" of fraternizing with "the enemy"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

There you have folks!

Yet another hijacking attempt by LLIdiot in this thread.

Has the count reached 30 yet?

Are you suggesting that all those who did not set a foot on Vietnam soil were...


... "draft dodging dicknips"?

You must be thinking of this guy:



Did you vote for him? Or were you old enough to vote back then?

And IVA ... that's "on topic"!!!!! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Goddamn. I'm not SUGGESTING anything. You take every fucking thing I say out of context. Did I SAY that everyone who didn't fight was a draft dodger? Did I say that? I wasn't old enough to vote for him the first time. Voted for him the second time though.