Presidential Choice: Dumb vs Dumber?

[ritehook]

Hillary vs McCain?

[ritehook]

Hil used to wear a cheerleaders outfit while visiting Iraq, before deciding to run for prez.

John has stated that the US will be in Iraq 50 to 100 years. And that American "boots on the ground" is the solution to all the world's problems.

Where's that thread about living outside the US?

[DrunkenLullaby]

You can dislike her for a million reasons, but to call her dumb is....well...dumb.

[Seattle Slew]

I also hope this is not the matchup, or I will not be voting. McCain is a lock, so hopefully Obama can knock out Hillary.

[slacker00]

I chimpanzee would run this country better than GW.

I'm optimistic about change, whatever that may be.

[Cee]

You can dislike her for a million reasons, but to call her dumb is....well...dumb.

well said

[mofome]

calling hillary dumb?






brilliant post.

[imgv94]

I also hope this is not the matchup, or I will not be voting. McCain is a lock, so hopefully Obama can knock out Hillary.

Clinton is more of a lock than McCain.

[ritehook]

You can dislike her for a million reasons, but to call her dumb is....well...dumb.

Neither of the two are dumb like brain-dead George.

But both are committed to an "Imperial America," a continuation of the same policies that 2 millenia ago destroyed mighty Rome. Hil, like Johnny Boots, also believes in
"boots on the ground" in many a foreign land.

A President Hillary may wind down the war in Iraq (slowly, very slowly) - but will leave a sizable contigent of US troops there, to "train" the Iraqis. Nor will she halt construction on the new, gigantic US Embassy building in the Green Zone in Baghdad -- the largest embassy in the world, larger than the Vatican.

Hil is also very open to the idea of striking at Iran. Using all the tired and discredited arguments that the neocons conned us with. With Hilly it will be the "neo-liberals." Same people, different clothing.

I would say that's - yes, dumb.

She won't embarrass the country when she speaks, like Cheney's puppet does. But she doesn't have the political intelligence (or perhaps the courage) to realize the essential truth of Ron Paul's now-famous dictum: "They (the 9/11 terrorists and their successors) are over here because we're over there."

[ritehook]

From a recent syndicated column by Dick Morris



Hillary Won't Pull Out of Iraq


It's a good time to read Robert Dallek's new book, "Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power," an agonizing presentation of the difficulty the two men had in figuring out how to pull out of Vietnam and end the war "honorably."

Their problem was familiar to anyone who has been following the war in Iraq: We were losing. Any move to pull out American troops would inevitably be followed (as it was) by a collapse of the South Vietnamese military resistance. Impaled on the horns of their own indecision, Nixon and Kissinger kept troops in Vietnam for the administration's entire first term and only pulled them out five years after inheriting the war from Lyndon Johnson.

If she is elected president, Hillary Clinton will probably have to follow the same trajectory whether she wants to or not. What she called "Bush's war" in a televised debate in New Hampshire will inevitably become Hillary's war before her first term in office is over.

[DrunkenLullaby]

She won't embarrass the country when she speaks, like Cheney's puppet does. But she doesn't have the political intelligence (or perhaps the courage) to realize the essential truth of Ron Paul's now-famous dictum: "They (the 9/11 terrorists and their successors) are over here because we're over there."

On this, we most certainly agree.

[slacker00]

Yeah, Hillary isn't that much different than Bush. But, she did try to champion the universal health care, so that's one big difference. I guess I don't care if we continue to bungle foreign affairs for another 8 years or whatever. Domestic stuff needs to get sorted out. One mess at a time. I think Hillary is the best candidate to sort out the domestic issues. Can we appoint McCain as president of Iraq? Kinda throw those guys a bone, giving them our presidential castoffs. Send Cheney over to Afghanistan while you're at it.

[Sportsgirl]

Anyone who got themselves into the office of the presidency or in a position to reasonably expect to be president can't in all seriousness be called "dumb." However, they can be called lying, cheating, conniving sacks of crap - party affiliation aside.

[INVEGA MAN]

What a great choice we have

[isetcap]

Why would we want to leave Iraq now? The country is finally stabilizing and has an opportunity to reach its potential as a valuable economic and political ally in a region of the world that detests western values based purely on religious rhetoric. If we leave now that all goes away instantly as we gift victory to the defeated. Beyond that (and contrary to the neophytic ramblings of Isolationist R. Paul), having a significant military presence in the Middle East has very effectively created a buffer zone against terrorist activities in the States, while destabilizing the major terrorist organizations that used to have free reign in that part of the world.

Any candidate that continues to push for immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq would and should be considered a threat to the military and the global protection of US interests. Based on that simple fact alone, he/she should not be elected. It would be the equivalent of ripping up a winning ticket at the track prior to collecting your winnings, and only an individual making decisions purely based on dogmatic principle would do such a thing.

The Iraq War is not going to be the issue that decides this campaign for the Democrats like so many people prayed it would be. As usual, the most prominent issue will be the economy as we continue into 2008. If anything, the war may be the issue that ultimately saves the elephants in November.

Where is the candidate that has a vision of the US as a world leader on green policy? Where is the candidate that wants to rewrite the antiquated tax code so that individual citizens can play a more prominent role in the shaping of their communities? Where is the candidate who wants to overhaul the way people are educated in this country instead of pouring money into a failed archetype? Where is the candidate that is capable of understanding that ultimately US jobs are not "lost" when someone overseas becomes a part of our workforce? Where is the candidate that will not allow religion to play a role in any part of the political decision-making process? These are the issues that can ensure the USA retains its position of power in the world economy. These are the issues comprising a platform on which an outside candidate can compete against a weak field. These are the issues I want to see in a US leader.

[ritehook]

Anyone who got themselves into the office of the presidency or in a position to reasonably expect to be president can't in all seriousness be called "dumb." However, they can be called lying, cheating, conniving sacks of crap - party affiliation aside.

They can legitimately be called dumb in the field they have chosen for themselves - politics. "Politically dumb."

"But they are the faves to win their party's nomination!" the reply will be. "Pretty smart."

Yeah, just like GW Bush was "smart." Crafty maybe, intelligent no. To believe, as both do, that the American Empire can be sustained without imploding on the people of this country - as with the recession and looming hyper-infation it is doing - is dumb.

The alternative to dumb is the behavior Will Shakespeare's contemporary, Sir John Harrington, penned in a famous couplet. Tho the quote has also been attributed to Ovid, a Greek who wasn't dumb.

[ritehook]

Ah, Ovid was a Roman, not a Greek.

Just shows how even smart guys like me can be dumb sometimes.

[brock]

All the smart people in the US dont run for president can make more money in the private world

[isetcap]

She won't embarrass the country when she speaks, like Cheney's puppet does. But she doesn't have the political intelligence...

I have to agree with ritehook here. In carefully evaluating many of the initiatives she champions, one would have to question either her motives or intelligence. Speaking well and pandering to polls does not necessarily prove one's intellect. Besides, intellect is not always the key component of a great leader.

[Scorpion]

Presidential Choice: Dumb vs Dumber?
Hillary vs McCain?

I dont like Hillary but she is 50x more intelligent than McCain, Johnny is a fukking idiot!

[isetcap]

Seriously, McCain looks like he could be experiencing the afterlife at any given moment.

[Wrigley]

It dont matter who gets in their all bought and paid for by lobbiest

[RageWizard]

Hillary is definitely smarter. But at this level there is proof that smartness isn't really a requirement now is it.

[ritehook]

What's interesting is that a short time ago - a few months - the polls were proclaiming that ending the Iraq misadventure and bringing the troops home was the main thing on the American mind.

Now, that's back burner issue, if it's an issue at all. We're back to Clinton's (Bill, that is) "It's the economy, stupid." And,otherr than Rudy, the two biggest backers of the Iraq thing are the last dummies standing. ('Fess up, Hill, you know yer gonna stay in Iraq for your full eight years.)

Gee, is it stupid to thinnk that maybe the trillions we've dumped into Iraq, and the trillions more to come, has just a teensy bit to do with the economic gears freezing up?