Now That the First Primaries Are Over...
... the candidates have taken to attacking the others in their party.
It's really rather amusing, and would be even more so, if one of these people wouldn't end up being blamed for everything that's wrong in this country.
That is, after all, why we elect a president, you know.
The democrats still haven't signaled to Hillary Clinton that they don't want her. And why shouldn't they? She's probably the most polarizing candidate running. Mitt Romney is accused of flip-flopping, which is a negative way of saying "he changed his mind."
Only a fool never changes his mind when confronted with evidence to the contrary. Unless of course, you can blame someone else for it.
Hillary's qualifications are the stuff of legend: Whitewater, the gifts to the Rose Law Firm, the Chinese campaign contributions, grand jury subpoenas, Kenneth Star, the Lincoln Bedroom, Monica Lewinisky, her husband's impeachment, Gennifer Flowers, the failed campaign promise to repair the health-care system in the first 100 days (two terms--no change in health care), the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" and being a reverse carpetbagger.
Of course, she did spend eight years in the White House. But, as Bill Clinton's former advisor, Dick Morris pointed out, "So did the pastry chef."
Of course, Hillary did employ the royal We referring to the Clinton presidency, so it's obvious she feels like she's qualified. Even though she's never run a city, township, county, or state. Well, maybe she did run a state.
Didn't we learn our lesson last time we elected an Arkansas musician turned governor?
I wish there was a candidate who reflected my ideas and opinions. That's one of the failings of a two-party system. And a multi-party system is so fractured that only a few people's opinions are really represented.
It's really rather amusing, and would be even more so, if one of these people wouldn't end up being blamed for everything that's wrong in this country.
That is, after all, why we elect a president, you know.
The democrats still haven't signaled to Hillary Clinton that they don't want her. And why shouldn't they? She's probably the most polarizing candidate running. Mitt Romney is accused of flip-flopping, which is a negative way of saying "he changed his mind."
Only a fool never changes his mind when confronted with evidence to the contrary. Unless of course, you can blame someone else for it.
Hillary's qualifications are the stuff of legend: Whitewater, the gifts to the Rose Law Firm, the Chinese campaign contributions, grand jury subpoenas, Kenneth Star, the Lincoln Bedroom, Monica Lewinisky, her husband's impeachment, Gennifer Flowers, the failed campaign promise to repair the health-care system in the first 100 days (two terms--no change in health care), the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" and being a reverse carpetbagger.
Of course, she did spend eight years in the White House. But, as Bill Clinton's former advisor, Dick Morris pointed out, "So did the pastry chef."
Of course, Hillary did employ the royal We referring to the Clinton presidency, so it's obvious she feels like she's qualified. Even though she's never run a city, township, county, or state. Well, maybe she did run a state.
Didn't we learn our lesson last time we elected an Arkansas musician turned governor?
I wish there was a candidate who reflected my ideas and opinions. That's one of the failings of a two-party system. And a multi-party system is so fractured that only a few people's opinions are really represented.
Comments
Keep that in mind if you ever decide to defend many of the actions of the current administration. ;)
Current administration? Try EVERY administration! :-)