All hat no cattle ... Texans were listening

Parent Cafe
101

<p>From Washington Post (Michael Dobbs):</p>

<p>“For her part, Clinton has sought to give the impression that she has a magic formula for turning economically depressed areas around, when this is far from the case. Running for the Senate in 2000, she promised to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there was a net loss of 26,500 more jobs in the region during Clinton’s first six-year-term as senator. She now calls the promise “a little exuberant.””</p>

<p>This FACT is not something that the mainstream media has really published too much. Yet the Obama NAFTA rumor took on a life of its own.</p>

<p>One can only imagine how Hillary’s current promises will be dismissed in a few years, if she wins the nomination… :o</p>

102

<p>sokkermom you are confusing Bill with Hillary on some of the issues. $80 million was spent on whitewater and Hsu.</p>

103

<p>Yeah but Bill keeps reminding us that they are both running for President. :wink:
Don’t kid yourself in to thinking Hillary was not involved. Remember, she keeps telling us that her 8 years as first lady provided her with “experience”, and that she was intimately involved with the job of running the country. You can’t have it both ways.</p>

<p>I also heard one of my co-workers suggest a great comeback to the 3:00am.
phone ringing ad. Obama should show the ad and simply have Monica answer the phone. Nothing else needs to be said. I thought that was hillarious…</p>

<p>I also heard someone ask why Hillary would be completely dressed at 3:00am when she answered that phone? Good question.</p>

104

<p>

</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Clinton is down 91 if you include the SD’s who have already said they will vote for Obama or Clinton…she leads him something like 247-202. </p></li>
<li><p>The demographics of the remaining states, coupled with recent trends, are favorable to her. Plus if FL/MI revote they are also favorable to her. Obviously this can all change. </p></li>
<li><p>Neither her nor Obama are going to win on pledged delegates. She needs to win the overall popular vote so she can say “more people want me than Obama”</p></li>
</ol>

105

<p>“You can’t have it both ways.”</p>

<p>So do you. Either believe her 8 yrs and lump that with Bill, or ignore those 8 years leave Bill alone.</p>

106

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m sure voters would love that. While we’re at it maybe we can release a tape of McCain folding under “pressure” (with pics of his vietnamnese imprisonment) and Obama reading uncle toms cabin</p>

107

<p>^ I wouldn’t be surprised. The Clinton campaign will do or say anything at this point. I hope they can take what they dish out.</p>

108

<p>"by Rob Gillies, The Associated Press
published March 6, 2008 7:12 pm</p>

<p>TORONTO — Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s chief of staff said someone in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign gave Canada back-channel assurances that her harsh words about the North American Free Trade Agreement were for political show, according to a report by the Canadian Press.</p>

<p>The report comes just days after a Canadian government memo stated Barack Obama’s senior economic adviser told Canadian officials that the Illinois senator’s own comments about NAFTA were for “political positioning.” The release of that memo helped Clinton defeat Obama decisively in Tuesday’s Democratic primary in Ohio, where the trade treaty is unpopular."</p>

109

<p>wow. just wow.</p>