I believe you have to register as a Democrat to do that, but I'm not sure.

Good one. I see I need to be a little more careful, you guys are good.

No Clinton reruns - please! - didn't she try and fail to establish national healthcare as first lady? And for what we know about Bill, how could we ever call him "First Gentleman?"

There is one picture I cannot forget about Condie: it's the video of Rice, Bush, Cheney, Tenent and Powell posing for the "historic moment" picture of the group declaring war on Iraq. It looked like she clapped her hands, kicked up a heel and smiled, as if they had just decided to go to a party. The only somber and deeply concerned face I saw was Colin Powell. I'd vote for HIM in a minute. As a woman, I have no need to see my gender as president.

And yes, the UN is just another open window in the vault of U.S. taxpayer money. Couldn't New York use that real estate for something else? Call the Donald.

Oh please please please tell me you are joking, CGM!

Thank goodness there are men like DSTM and others out there that know a statement like that is truly antiquated. You 'allow' a woman to 'run' a family and raise your children - guess it shouldn't be allowed as surely your family is just as vital as a Country! Eep!

Colin Powell was the only one in that picture that really knew what the reality of the moment was about. I still can't figure what they promised him to get him to take the job, he was the only member of the Bush cabinet that had any integrity.

As for Hillarity, as much as I despise what the current administration has done I fear that she could actually be worse.

I never said women cant be good leaders its just men are or seem to be natural leaders. Most women just arent.

Arrrrk!!!!! Good thing your mom isn't reading this thread!!

Not all Men are natural leaders.Just some.Couldn't say your current Leader falls into the natural Leader Basket.
Look at Some of the Women Presidents,that have done a good job.IMO.
The Iron Lady 'Margaret Thatcher' for example.I thought she did a good job at Top Job,for the Brittish people.
India with a population of 1,129,866,154 people thought a Woman worthy enough to govern them.

Let's see...we can start with Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. There are 13 women serving in Congress, 61 women serving in the Senate, and 29 State Governors.

That was just in the U.S., let's look else where...How about Margaret Thatcher, today there are only two countries that haven't had women members of government, Monaco and Saudi Arabia. The United Nations has 192 female members. Chile, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Liberia, The Philippines and Switzerland all have women Presidents. Germany, Jamaica, New Zealand, Mozambique and The Netherlands Antilles have women Prime Ministers.

And this was the short list.

I can not come up with any reason why a woman could not be President of the US.


I do not believe that Hillary Clinton is the right woman, just as I haven't believed that many male candidates were the right person for the position, either.

For what it is worth -

I don't believe she is the right person to run the UN, either.

Its worth about $5.25.

Seriously...you're right JohnWho, she is not the right woman for President of the US. I actually wish there were other women running. I would enjoy hearing a fresh perspective (perhaps coming from a motherly heart), on how to approach various social issues as well as defense.

Like I said its not all women cant be leaders it just most and the same goes with men but it seems more men want to be leaders??

I just dont like the clintons. Bill was lying to us about his little "happy moment" with that woman and then got to write a book and make millions.

Bush is doing something in the white house.

Im a registered Democrat, and I don't get to vote more than once. Maybe if I was a FOB? (friend of Bill)

Or and illegal Mexican.

I read this and had a name pop up in my head that I hadn't thought of for some time, Elizabeth Dole. I had often wondered what kind of a President she would make.

Wow...I had to read that first sentence three times before it started to make sense. I'm still not sure but I think you said something like "it's not that all women can't be leaders, it's just that is seems that more men want to be leaders", is that about right?

The U.S. culture is biased toward male leadership, so I can understand why you would have this perception. Women in the U.S. weren't given the right to vote until 1920, that was only 87 years ago, my father is 86, I'm 55, and you are what,18? This is a short period of time as far a history goes, and social perception takes time to change, so it's no wonder that we are just now seeing the emergence more women running for leadership positions.

As for Bill Clinton, he was not the first President to have been accused or at least suspected of having affairs. Take a close look at the lives of Jefferson, Cleveland, Franklin Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and especially Harding, and Kennedy. Bill Clinton had the bad luck to be caught and then pursued by a bull terrier named Ken Starr, Bill's mistake was to open his mouth. Bill Clinton may not go down in history as one of the best Presidents that we have had, but he won't go down as one of the worst either. Obviously some of those Presidents listed above did have a good and productive Presidency, and I think it unfair to base your opinion of him because of his indiscretion. Hillary Clinton shouldn't be tainted because of her husbands actions either, she will lose on her own merits.

I would like to make a statement regarding my views on Bill Clinton, what I wrote may look like I condoned his actions, that is not the case. I was only trying to point out that this is an age old practice.

And just what is it that bush is doing in the white house, something good for a change???

Good post dc3...something I disagree with...
Even before that, he chose to commit infidelity.

Actually the problem was someone else opening their mouth, but we won't go there. Specifically what I was referring to was that he lied, and that was the mistake that the public won't forgive him for. It's kind of funny that the public can forgive him for "being a man", but can't let the lie go away.

I actually think the public had forgiven him for the lie. Unless you are talking specifically about a certain political party.

I certainly haven't. Just as dc3 pointed out, infidelity among Presidents is no new practice. And to be quite honest, I don't think it should ever have been sensationalized the way it was. It was Clinton's personal life.

The fact that he chose to lie about it, even after the facts had been presented, is what sticks in my craw! When you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar (whether you should have been ratted on or not), at least be adult enough to own up. Clinton perjured himself, for that I will not forgive him.


*I should also add that I do not condone marital infidelity.

I guess it begs the question....is the oval office private or public property?

Correct. I do not think we are biased. I think more men want to be leaders and women dont. I think its like just natural. Most women dont care to be the leader.

This is true, but a guy can get a hummer in the park, can't he?

Not legally to my knowledge. Nope.

My concern over the Bill Clinton scandal revolved more around the fact that he specifically should have known better.

First, this was not the first time he had indulged in a sexual impropriety while holding a public office, and the circumstances surrounding those previous situations should have prevented him from doing it again while holding the highest office in the US. The reaction of the opposing party and other opposition factions, he knew, would be far greater than anything he experienced in the past. Indeed, they ultimately were. Some of us blame his opposition for the level of reaction, but honestly, if it were a Republican President under the same circumstances, the Democrats would have reacted the same way. His action caused a tremendous amount of "grid lock" in Congress, and the blame rests solely on him.

Second, as a senior executive, or in this case, the senior executive, what he did with Ms. Lewinsky could have, and in my opinion should have, resulted in a sexual harassment legal situation. While some would say "it takes two to tango" - when one weilds so much power over the other as in this situation, it wouldn't be difficult to reasonably argue that the events fall under the sexual harassment arena. Especially since they did it in the workplace on "company time".

If his own wife...whom should be the closest person to him in his personal and political life, cannot trust him...how could a nation rely on him to be trustworthy and make appropriate decisions that are in the best interest of his constituents. Know what I mean vern?

Well,

there is that, too.

Sorry bud, but that dog won't hunt. You're comparing apples and oranges. What he did in his personal life does not reflect on his duties as a President, it didn't effect FDR's abilities.

Ah, but the time Clinton spent denying it and damage control - "I did not have sex with that woman!" - was pre-occupying and took a lot of time from his duties as President. History will always reflect this.

He traded his legacy for a little leg, you see.

Aw come on John, the guy was just having sex and got caught. The guy took his job seriously, and I suspect that if anything the interruptions that this caused didn't result in a single hiccup, if it had I guarantee that we the public would have been made privy to it in head lines.

I remember clearly the headlines that read,

"Clinton hiccups in oval oriface".


Maybe you just forgot?

Dang!!! I missed it?

Yeah, and it wasn't Clinton who blew Gore's chances of getting elected---it was Lewinsky!

There has been a whole lot of speculation on that subject and the general consensus is that Al Gore lost that election on his own merits, that and a little help from his advisers who had him come across as stiff as a piece of cardboard.

Some how this has wandered way too far from what the topic of this thread is about, so to try to tie this into the original topic let me reiterate...Hillarity will lose this election one way or another on her own merits...just like Al Bored.

A side note.

We have a local weather man here that has been doing the weekend weather for years, and I have lost track of the number of times that I have mentally nodded off and missed what the forecast was because this person is just that boring, I had the same problem listening to Al Gore. I had a college professor that spoke in the same monotone speech pattern with little or no inflection which put us students to sleep, I think I'm conditioned to fall asleep in similar conditions now.

You're right, it did'nt interrupt anything, he did nothing worth while as a President. But Hillary is using his coat tails to run for office because he owns the Elite Stupid of Hollywood. And most of this nation can't think for themselves so they listen to the ESH.

I was going to just list a couple of his accomplishments like enjoying the longest economic expansion in history, had the lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation since 1968, and left office with a huge and growing budget surplus, but decided to just post a link for a list of accomplishments while in office.

http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/jobwelldone.html

The stock market was going bonkers, that lead to all the good income, jobless rates, and good economy. Clinton had nothing to do with that. What happened? One man, the judge who ruled against Micro$oft, all the tech stocks went crashing down. Clinton had nothing to do with that either, but people tried to blame him and Bush, or both. What tax cuts? My taxes went up. Like they do under all politicians. Clinton changed the hereditary tax to something like $200k, Sounds like a lot until you throw in the fact that the sale of property, house included, can easily go over that amount. He was in office at a very good time in our economic history, that's all. He shut down how many military bases? How many people lost jobs over that?

Naw, he's not the worst, I think that was Carter. But like I said, the ESH loved him. They say they want to raise taxes on the rich, they are the rich, hmmmm.

If the economy had continued to rise after he left office, I would agree that he should get some credit (although I agree with others that a President always gets the credit or blame for the economy, when in reality, he (or she) may not have had any significant influence on the state of the economy at all). However, the economy began a major downturn while he was in office, so one could also say that Clinton took this great economic expansion and turned it into a downslide. Doesn't sound like an issue worthy of praise to me.

Just an observation.

John, you are right, it did happen on his watch and as is it has come to be expected he gets the kudos and the flack both. I noticed that neither of you or Wildabeast have anything to say about the unemployment level being down while on his watch, and I also noticed that no one has pointed out the huge number of jobs he created a very short time after being in office. For those who took the time to read the article that I provided you will find it hard to explain most of those accomplishments being due to the current economic situation.

Some where in this forum I made mention that the first time I saw Clinton in a debate I thought he came across as slimy as a used car salesman. Clinton isn't one of my favorite presidents, but he sure as hell isn't as bad as some of you make him out to be. If you want to complain about a bad president how about George W. Bush, this article is a bit of tongue and cheek but gets the point across effectively enough.

It's not my intention to either bash or praise Clinton, just trying to keep some balance. I believe that during the recent Bush years, unemployment reached lower levels than it did under Clinton, too. The economy has taken an upswing, and the stock market has even gotten higher than it did while Clinton was in office. I would not specifically credit Bush with these areas of progress, either. In my opinion, the US will often either prosper or decline in spite of the President, whoever the President is.

We, the people, should be trying to move toward a stronger unity, and I believe that Hillary Clinton is too devisive a figure to move us in the positive direction.

I should not be bashing Clinton either, but it bothers me when people say "look how good he was", I addressed the jobs and economy by saying the stock market tech's were fueling all of that.

But hey, Clinton's no longer President, sorry for bashing you Bill. I'll try not to bash Bush2 since he can't be re-elected. But PLEASE don't let Hillary get voted in...

I'm beggin ya..

I'm in a pickle in this matter because I'm not old enough to vote yet, but i do NOT want Hilary as president. Forget if shes a women, I'm sure there will be a women president who's good, but she's something else. All I have to say is that if she get's elected, Canada's gunna start to look real nice.

Regards,
TheYoda

This is why Ron Paul seems to be a truly viable choice for President. The one man who truly believes in Capitalism + States Rights! Amazing, the same principles on which the Nation was founded.

Too bad Ron boy is a complete isolationist.

It has worked for Japan and China. Now we buy all of our stuff from them...

I really think this nation could benefit from a dose of isolationism. Maybe then our tax dollars would go back into our citizenry! Novel idea!

Didn't really work for us after World War I.

(Pearl Harbor)

Yeah, barring the Zimmerman Telegram.

But, IMO, NAFTA and CAFTA have gutted this country. Combine that with the poor image we have around the world, and I see a definitive reason to withdraw. Granted Ron Paul is an isolationist, but this pertains more to interceding in world affairs, not necessarily in terms of information and economical retraction. By economical, I mean we will still deal with other countries, but it may be wise to stop our mass outsourcing (Halliburton to Dubai).

YES!!!

Just think, if America had just kept to herself, our ecosystem could have remained intact, without invasion of disease and plant and animal life that did not belong here. Nevermind the accidental stuff, but poison toothpaste from a country we have made wealthy? Without oil imports, we would be using the natural fuels at hand, like wind and solar power. To think of the misery caused by a slow-moving government that took years to decide that HIV/AIDs blood should not be mixed into the blood supply. And the decision when it was finally made, was followed by violent demonstrations from the people who brought it here, because they could no longer sell their tainted blood.

DUH! dammit... Why must Americans suffer for political greed. And to anybody who wants to point to the phrase on the Statue of Liberty, that came from the French, not us.

I sincerely add my deepest apologies to the Native Americans who suffered invasion. These gentle people, however, became co-owners and joined the settlers who built this Nation, and fought to PROTECT it, not destroy it.

Nice idea but it will never happen. Our economy has become too dependent upon other nations that it would collapse if we isolated ourselves. Just as an example, we have to import gasoline to keep up with the demand for it because environmentalists have blocked the building of any new refineries in this country over the past 30-40 years. That is just one example out of many. While there may not be a one world government yet, the economies of the world have already merges and are interdependent.

Seafox14

If Hilary is president im moving to England Turi i'm comin for a visit >.<