The real issue about Hillary that no one wants to mention because its so obvious.

[Flabbergasted]

How many years do we want two families to control this country?


Can we really say we are fulfilling our political duty when we refuse to look at issues of moral integrity when as a country we allow two families to have complete control over our entire military, infrastructure, education, and economy?


Are we really saying that we have chosen or we have been chosen for?

[Ravy]

1. I would gladly take another 8 years of a Clinton presidency...

if it came down to it.

[Colobo]

5. He had his 8 years

That's more than enough. Bring new blood to the WH.

[AtomicKitten]

2. I don't think that matters per se

... as much as fielding the best candidate we possibly can.

Gore/Obama IMO would be the best ticket.

[SaveElmer]

3. No one wants to mention? Do you live under a rock...

There are multiple threads on this every day...

A ridiculous and dishonest attempt to equate the CLintons and Bush's....

[Flabbergasted]

6. I spend occasionally hours a day on the computer

And I've never seen a thread like this one.

[Alamom]

4. Search "Dynasty" and your computer will overload & explode.

Just a suggestion since you seem to have missed the 6 dozen or so threads and posts on this subject EVERYDAY.

[Flabbergasted]

11. Huh? Just looked through days of threads. Where are they?

[mtnsnake]

7. So what happens IF she just happens to be one of the best we've got to offer?

Is she supposed to be penalized because she was First Lady once?

I don't think it's a good idea to have family rule by virtue of family name alone, such as what happened with the brat son of Pappy Bush, but if Hillary earns her way then she should have every right to become president, despite her famous name.

[Flabbergasted]

12. We as a country are supposed to exercise risk management.

In my opinion it is highly risky to nominate her. She is the most higly divisive candidate running. We need a president to unite right now.

[rinsd]

18. LOL. Risk management from an avid Kucinich supporter?!?!?!?!

:spray:

[Flabbergasted]

21. LOL. Risk management from an avid Clinton Fan?

Knock off the "insults." It doesn't prove anything.

BTW Hillary is a Corporate Pawn.

[rinsd]

23. I love all of our Democrats. Even Kucinich ;-)

Yes I smack down some Kucinich talk but that is more the case of his not being viable.

But at this point I would be happy to have Clinton or Obama or Richardson or Edwards as our nominee (Clark is ok but I don't think he has declared). I think each of that group can beat the hell out of a republican challenger with some caveats with Richardson (largely unknown etc).

[Flabbergasted]

28. What is not viable is accepting the status quo. nt

[mtnsnake]

24. Only on DU is she "the most higly divisive candidate running"

If there's one thing Hillary's done, she's worked hard to overcome that stigma of being so polarizing, and nowadays she's not that much more divisive than any other candidate including Edwards, Biden, McCain, Giuliani, or anyone else.

We need a president to unite right now.

That I can agree with. The candidate that's most suitable for uniting the country and healing it is Obama.

[Flabbergasted]

25. The right loaths her. They would vote for Satin first.

[booley]

8. No, that's not why I dont' want her to be President

At least for me.

I admit, politcal dynasties and having the media choose our canidates for us are bad things.

But it's not the primary reason I oppose Hillery Clinton.

[rinsd]

9. You would have denied this country RFK? or FDR?

"complete control over our entire military, infrastructure, education, and economy"

What utter nonsesne, no President wields that kind of power.

[Flabbergasted]

13. uh that was black and white TV age, Things have changed a bit

[rinsd]

17. What has changed so drastically?

That two brothers was acceptable because of their unique exceptionallity vs. now when we have one obvious case of idiocy in the Bushes and one case of two rather exceptional people?

Do you think Hillary was some kind of trophy wife? She been in the game for a long time.

[Flabbergasted]

20. Mainly an incredible "streamlining" of the and legislature and presidency.

The two parties act so much in sync there is very little that differentiates them. There are only a handful with the courage to speak out.

We all know this to be the case.

And yet refuse to accept anything but the status quo.

BTW I still like Bills presidency overall but he also caused alot of issues we are still dealing with: Signing NAFTA, Drug ads on TV, cutting more timber than Bush etc.

[rinsd]

22. Fuck that no difference between the parties shit

I'm sorry for my coarse language but there are huge differences between the two parties.

Maybe she's not far enough to the left for your tastes but to insinuate that her adminstration would be little different from Bush or any Republican shows a complete disconnect from reality.

[Flabbergasted]

26. Their Rhetoric and Platforms differ but little else.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. FDR was before my time.

And I was a McCarthy supporter.

:shrug:

As for Hillary, she's pure Nepotism.

[ElizabethDC]

10. Are you reading the same DU that I am?

this issue is brought up in just about every Hillary thread. Also I don't think that two families have "complete control over our entire military, infrastructure, education, and economy," because the Constitution has a really cool checks and balances thing that prevents one branch of government from controlling everything.

[Flabbergasted]

14. Its working splendidly at the moment. I meant topics.

[Double T]

15. If the UK can have monarchies and dynasties, then so can 'US' 'murkins..........

the Queen Mother Hillary has a nice ring to it, don't YOU think??

[Flabbergasted]

16. Princess Chelsea?

[Catchawave]

19. What's sad to me, prolly only me.....:(

Gore doesn't have a chance against the Clinton Machine.