Senator Clinton on Bush

[mslif]

I just read that Senator Clinton stated that she was "part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party,"
and insulted the president by comparing to Alfred E. Neuman!

New York's GOP chairman, Stephen Minarik stated that "At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign," and added "Her priorities are clearly out of whack."

Clinton insulted the president during a speech here in Colorado.

"I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly.
She also accused the president of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that... Is she just trying to market herself for the senate re-election? Does she really think she could have a shot at the presidentials?

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
I just read that Senator Clinton stated that she was "part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party,"
and insulted the president by comparing to Alfred E. Neuman!

New York's GOP chairman, Stephen Minarik stated that "At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign," and added "Her priorities are clearly out of whack."

Clinton insulted the president during a speech here in Colorado.

"I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly.
She also accused the president of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that... Is she just trying to market herself for the senate re-election? Does she really think she could have a shot at the presidentials?

[/ QUOTE ]

The Mad Magazine bit was a cheap shot, but I agree with her substantive accusations (damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research).

"Does she really think she could have a shot at the presidentials?" Duh. Some polls have her winning. But I'm not a fan of hers, so I hope it doesn't happen.

-ptmusic

[mslif]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I But I'm not a fan of hers, so I hope it doesn't happen.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you there

[[censored]]

ehhh standard stuff and while a cheap shot it is sort of funny.

I personally don't get bothered by stuff like this at all. everyone rips on people, I don't see why politicians should be any different.

I only concern myself with the actions they are taking in terms of their elected position.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Senator Clinton stated ... "I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly. She also accused the president of ... overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers ofb equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do I think of that? Tell me exactly what she said that was not the stone cold, honest-to-God truth.

Her Alfred E. Neuman jab is an opinion but the other stuff is supposed to be made of facts. Are you disputing any of them?

[Jedi Flopper]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Senator Clinton stated ... "I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly. She also accused the president of ... overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers ofb equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do I think of that? Tell me exactly what she said that was not the stone cold, honest-to-God truth.

Her Alfred E. Neuman jab is an opinion but the other stuff is supposed to be made of facts. Are you disputing any of them?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I will take a stab at this.

The president cannot spend money, congress does that. So he cannot be blamed for overspending.

Only taxpayers can get tax cuts, and the rich pay the most taxes, soooo they did get a tax cut. So what, I did too. You did not? Then I guess you do not pay taxes.

The last two items are the same as the first. The president does not control the country's purse strings, congress does. I guess Lady Hillary is deflecting blame to the Executive branch that rightly belongs on the shoulders of the Legislative branch.

So basically everything she said was at least misleading and at most outright lies. Basically the democratic party talking points for the last 3 years. They need a new drum to beat.

[mslif]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Senator Clinton stated ... "I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly. She also accused the president of ... overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers ofb equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do I think of that? Tell me exactly what she said that was not the stone cold, honest-to-God truth.

Her Alfred E. Neuman jab is an opinion but the other stuff is supposed to be made of facts. Are you disputing any of them?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not dispute the facts that she mentioned at all. I just think it's unfortunate she had to make that idiotic comment about Neuman. Her message got lost because of that failed attempt at humor.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I will take a stab at this. The president cannot spend money, congress does that. So he cannot be blamed for overspending.

[/ QUOTE ]
This kind of nonsense is easily debunked today, thanks to the good folks at Google: CNN : "Bush presents a $2.1 trillion wartime budget" (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/04/bush.budget/). See? The Prez proposed, and the Congress examined, approved or rejected. (Well, mostly approved!)

[ QUOTE ]
Only taxpayers can get tax cuts, and the rich pay the most taxes, soooo they did get a tax cut.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are we seriously going to debate now whether Bush's tax cuts favored the rich? Wasn't this something the Dubya himself acknowledged, in his inimitable way: " Haven't we given enough to the rich? (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743255453/qid=1121146979/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-0990305-1400820?v=glance&s=books)" (when presented with another tax cut for the upper percentiles).

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you do not pay taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Can't I be a beneficiary of tax cuts (which I am, as the case is), and still criticize specific parts of the American administration's tax policy for being unfair to American society as a whole? It's called sense of fairness and basic human decency, y'know, something not often encountered at poker tables, as I have come to accept, but, trust me, it's still out there!

[ QUOTE ]
I guess ... Hillary is deflecting blame to the Executive branch that rightly belongs on the shoulders of the Legislative branch.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if that were so (see above why its' not), did you just claim that GOP-controlled Congress is to blame?

[ QUOTE ]
Basically the Democratic Party talking points for the last 3 years. They need a new drum to beat.

[/ QUOTE ]
I realize that it's hard getting the facts across to most people (blame the "liberal media" for that!) but, don't worry, the numbers will come home to roost, eventually, as sure as the American anti-Soviet jihad of the 1980s in Afghanistan came home to roost!..

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not dispute the facts that she mentioned at all. I just think it's unfortunate she had to make that idiotic comment about Neuman. Her message got lost because of that failed attempt at humor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that we have got the facts out of the way (thanks!), can we try to agree on the Alfred E. Neuman comparison?

I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton's but her description of George W. Bush as Neuman-like is
(a) not excessively offensive, given the political climate of this era,
(b) not the first time it's being made, and
(c) has substantial merit!

About that last part: The trademark phrase of the MAD magazine cover boy is "What, me worry?". And it is precisely this imbecilic non-chalance of Dubya about matters of extreme importance (runaway deficits, Iraq snafu, environment, etc) that makes him perfect for a MAD cover.

Moving on, now, to the intelligence of Alfred E. Neuman... /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Jedi Flopper]

I am not arguing with you on any point except this one:

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senator Clinton stated ... "I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said exactly. She also accused the president of ... overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers ofb equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.


What do you think of that?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What do I think of that? Tell me exactly what she said that was not the stone cold, honest-to-God truth.


[/ QUOTE ]

Now after reading your next post, it seems that you agree with me that Sen. Clinton is at best pandering and at worst outright lying in her characterizations of the president.

Did the president "overspend"?

[ QUOTE ]
This kind of nonsense is easily debunked today, thanks to the good folks at Google: CNN : "Bush presents a $2.1 trillion wartime budget". See? The Prez proposed, and the Congress examined, approved or rejected. (Well, mostly approved!)

[/ QUOTE ]

You agree that congress ultimately spent the money. The prez had input but it was congress that spent it, not the prez.

Did the president give taxcuts to the rich? First, your link was to a book written by someone with an axe to grind. Shame on you! How much respect would you have for someone who sourced Ann Coulter? But getting back to the point at hand, ALL TAXPAYERS RECEIVED TAX RELIEF, not just the rich. I am not arguing the wisdom or the morality of the governments role in the transferral of wealth. The only thing I am saying is that calling the recent tax cuts "for the rich" is shameless pandering and not "the stone cold honest to God truth."

Did the president "deprive troops of needed equipment and cut scientific research"? Here are your words again:
[ QUOTE ]
Even if that were so (see above why its' not), did you just claim that GOP-controlled Congress is to blame?


[/ QUOTE ]

That is exactly what I am claiming and your rhetorical question implies that you believe it is true as well. I am not an appologist for the republican party or the congress. Congress is responsible for the contents of the national budget. The president bears some responsibility as well because his signature made it law. But to blame a bad budget exclusively on the president is misleading and not the "stone cold honest to god truth"

[tolbiny]

"The prez had input but it was congress that spent it, not the prez."

"The president bears some responsibility as well because his signature made it law"

The president having to sign it into law is not a formality. He has more influence over the final budget than any other single person - and as the majority party's most visible member gains him an extra measure of clout in proceedings like this. So while its not "his" budget - He holds more responsibility for it than anyone else in the country.

[Malachii]

[ QUOTE ]
"At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign," and added "Her priorities are clearly out of whack."

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, by leaking the name of CIA agents? Unbelievable.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
After reading your next post, it seems that you agree with me that Sen. Clinton is at best pandering and at worst outright lying in her characterizations of the president.

[/ QUOTE ]I have no idea what made you think that! As a matter of fact, I submitted precisely the opposite position : That Sen. Rodham-Clinton spoke the truth.

[ QUOTE ]
You agree that Congress ultimately spent the money. The prez had input but it was Congress that spent it, not the prez.

[/ QUOTE ]
Read the linked text again : The prez sent his budget to Congress, the Congressmen approved it (after the usual dance of cutting-pretend and pork barrel local "improvement additions") and the Prez signed on it. Congress is, at best, an accessory.

Yes, Congress should be acting differently. In matters of economics as well as in matters of (hint, hint) war.

But we live in the era of royal presidents. Didn't you know?

[ QUOTE ]
Your link was to a book written by someone with an axe to grind.

[/ QUOTE ]
Everybody is a critic these days. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
How much respect would you have for someone who sourced Ann Coulter?

[/ QUOTE ]
About zero. But not because Ann "has an axe to grind" -- we all do, to a certain extend. But because she is (a) a serial liar, writing lies that are easily exposed as such, and (b) she is not working on a sound logical basis; her positions are a child's, if not a simpleton's, most of the time.

I sometimes pity her. Who knows what kind of demons haunt her anorexic sould.

[ QUOTE ]
Calling the recent tax cuts "for the rich" is shameless pandering and not "the stone cold honest to God truth."

[/ QUOTE ]
The rich benefited the most under Dubya. This is what the NY Senator was saying. What part of the message do you not get ?

[ QUOTE ]
Did the president "deprive troops of needed equipment and cut scientific research"?

[/ QUOTE ]Ummmm... Yes!

Rewind that Rusmfeld press conference in Iraq and watch it again, as stand-up comedy this time. Lotsa laughs.

[ACPlayer]

It is always amazing to me how giving 300 dollars in income tax cuts to a middle income tax payer buys his vote so that the elected person can give a 300,000 dollar income tax cut to his friend who helped him get elected. And to top it all that "donation" comes at the expense of the middle income tax payers kids.

We wont even discuss the illusion behind the recent set of tax cuts.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
You agree that congress ultimately spent the money. The prez had input but it was congress that spent it, not the prez.

[/ QUOTE ]


VETO!

[BCPVP]

With a lifetime rating at Citizens Against Government Waste is is at 7% (0% being the worst), Hillary is a strange person to be accusing others (especially the Executive branch) of "overspending". She can talk the talk, but can't walk the walk.