Displaying 3 Comments
 
What is the point of a Democrat debate. The press will do little more than bend over backwards to keep from offending Mrs Clinton. Any republican with half the baggage she carriers has been raked over the coals. I have questions about the qualificataions of candidates on both sides. The question about the former secretary though,? revolve around her actions and the deaths of Americans, which kind of elevates that discussion in my mind, and her response or lack of, and her forthrightness with us all. As someone who swore off party politics a dozen years ago, if Clinton looses this year, what does the lack of competition against her say about all the deversity of the Democrats. Does a truely diverse party speak with one voice all the time, or just when the front runner is a Clinton with all the money and power? I'm serious as an independent. Is the former Secretary the only thing the part has to offer as it's front runner once again, and is loosing ground by the day to Bernie Sanders?
The thing about his lack of honesty, seems to be more of you being ticked off because he the government offered up programs that he took advantage of. Just because he is a billionaire, if the government offers programs that keeps one or more of his business on sound footing he would be a fooll not to take it. I dont know expactly what if anything he received, but as a casuql observer I've never heard anyone say he defrauded anyone. He isnt my choice, but I hope if you're voting Dem this year, that you look as hard at the FACTS about the front runner on that side. You have presented absolutely nothing factual, other than he might wear wig, but Reagan was the actor, not Trump. And fyi, even if he did get federal bail out money, he didnt HAVE them do it. They offered. Mrs Clinton didnt ask when she lied to congress, she just did.
The 911 attacks can easily be laid at the feet of the Clinton administration and failing to.eliminate Bin Laudin after the previous attacks onnus abroad. Since I dont back postions for the sake of one party or the other the intelligence presented as reasons for going to war were worse than faulty, and even though with the posture of everyone toward 911 we were going to war with someone else, and it was a matter of going into Iraq or some place else, belcause neither party had blood spilled to make up for 911. You are free to believe anything you wish about the Bush family, or the Clintons, but lets be intellectualy honest. If you use the record of the Bush family against Jeb who has never been in federal government, then you have to be equally offended by Mrs Clinton, who has always been hands on by her own addmission. And if not elected this fall, might face prscecution next spring. For me America missed it's chance when we allowed Ron Paul to get old without being elected.
Displaying 3 Comments