"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:32:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
. ..


Everybody is a racist to some degree. Obama probably less than most,
given his mixed heritage.
I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting
insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between
Hillary and Obama. Here's the article he mentioned.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...or_v isionary

Make of it what you will.

Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph
outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president.
It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects
to
point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for
signature by a Republican congress *three* times. Clinton rejected it
twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him.
The
third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors,
suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction.

But, now he takes credit for it.

If Hillary is the candidate, it's going to be interesting to see how
the American public accepts another HillBilly presidency.

In particular, as a former President, he gets the same NIE as she
will.

If it is Hillary, Bill is going to be a huge issue in addition to the
"dynastic" properties of the election.

My opinion is that average America has had enough of the Imperial Bush
and Clinton families.


Unfortunately, there are no viable potentials that don't already have their
roots deeply planted in the corrupt, sickening WashDC club with membership
consisting of both parties.

Eisboch

On Feb 6, 7:59*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in messagenews:44lkq31am7latsoovdbc5adh7mgu18jovk@4ax .com...





On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:32:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
. ..

Everybody is a racist to some degree. *Obama probably less than most,
given his mixed heritage.
I saw this writer on C-Span this morning, and he had some interesting
insights - based on actual reporting - about the differences between
Hillary and Obama. *Here's the article he mentioned.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...ts_choice_mana....

Make of it what you will.

Interesting and almost believable article until I got to the paragraph
outlining Bill Clinton's successes as president.
It offers "welfare reform" as one of two "success" examples, but neglects
to
point out that the same Welfare Reform Act was submitted to him for
signature by a Republican congress *three* times. *Clinton rejected it
twice, but the Republicans forced the issue by sending it back to him.
The
third time worked when Clinton, at the advise of his senior advisors,
suggested he should accept it or risk serious public negative reaction.

But, now he takes credit for it.

If Hillary is the candidate, it's going to be interesting to see how
the American public accepts another HillBilly presidency.

In particular, as a former President, he gets the same NIE as she
will.

If it is Hillary, Bill is going to be a huge issue in addition to the
"dynastic" properties of the election.

My opinion is that average America has had enough of the Imperial Bush
and Clinton families.

Unfortunately, there are no viable potentials that don't already have their
roots deeply planted in the corrupt, sickening WashDC club with membership
consisting of both parties.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Terry Bradshaw would make a good president, make Howie long VP just so
there would be some teeth in there...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...


I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's
pretty viable as an alternative.

I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25 years in
the Senate.

Eisboch