“During these times---our economy in ruin; a war in the land of oil----we need someone with the experience and moxy of Hillary Clinton.
Obama---if he were an economist, or some brilliant, and successful business person, then he should be considered. But he is not. He is a puppy in comparison to Hillary.
Wake up. How in God's name could Obama cure the woes our country faces today?
Vice President----not President Obama.”
vat6948 on Apr 6, 2008 at 10:13:18
“Your exactly right Maureen, the world is in a mess and solutions to problems will NOT be easy. Do you really trust Hillary? if you can, by all means vote for her. I voted and supported Bill with extreme passion, and felt joy early-on at the possibility of Hillary replacing Bush, and reclaiming our country. So Maureen, support your candidate, but after this primary Democrats need to unite for good of the country.”
lotusfalls on Apr 4, 2008 at 21:28:18
“Hillary is just one more of the same politicians we've been putting in power for the last fifty years. She brings nothing new to the table. The old is obviously not working, maybe it's time we tried something new. Obama brings ideas. Right now, I value ideas over experience.”
alyceclover on Apr 4, 2008 at 16:20:36
“MaureenSharkey: Hillary's experience is a long line of corruption. Whitegate; Vincent Foster; Rose Law Firm; Billy Dale to name a few things that quickly come to mind. Peter Paul fund raising FEC fraud or non-disclosure is another example of her experience. Interesting is how the press refuses to report on Peter Paul versus William Thomas Jefferson trial scheduled to start in Los Angeles court on 4/25/08. Especially due to the fact that it has a lot to do with her own lack of integrity in financial dealings.
The other bothersome thing about Hillary's experience is her yes vote to the Iraq war and her yes vote to the Iran Resolution; her constant lies or mis-remembering what she said yesterday and what she says today. I truly can not have a president who says Iran is "make-up" "fantasize" and a non-issue. How dare she dismiss citizens as if she were Queen Bee.
Her health INSURANCE discriminates and anti-freedom of choice with the mandatory and government penalty clause. Her experience is she could not garner support for her secretive plan in 8 years worth of trying. Could go on. Basically experience~hers and mine~tell me she is not presidential material. Not at all.”
That is the only way to change this male supremist thing they've been getting away with for forever.
I am 53 years old. If I could do it over again, with my new ability to see that a lot of men had no interest in me as a person (men that would prefer I not have a voice---want me to just sit there and look pretty and adoringly at them), I would just come outright and say it. Yes, I would say, "You have no interest in me as a person, and you don't give a damn about my personality. So until you prove to me you like me as a person---there will be no sex."
And girls---what is with this high sqeeky voice many of you are doing. That says you are lower on the totem pole. Men are very concious of their voices---trying to keep them as low as possible at all times.
Also, knock it off with the playing dumb. It only creates relationships of dysfunction from the dishonesty.
We need Hillary as President. Can't you women see that!!!”
SicPlurisPoenaPrestantia on Apr 1, 2008 at 15:40:44
“And to this the men could respond, "You have no interest in me as a person, just as a prospective mate that would provide for you emotional and perhaps physical security. You don't give a damn about my personality -- so until you prove to me you like me enough as a person to have sex with me -- there will be no relationship."
Fair is fair. And no, Goddess forbid, we do NOT need Hillary as President. Unless, of course, you desire to set American inter-gender relations back thirty years. She offers little to nothing to men as a group. Why would we vote for her?”
ShimeyShimey on Apr 1, 2008 at 13:58:43
“I hate high pitched voices.”
Darwinita on Apr 1, 2008 at 13:41:35
“And how does Hillary figure into anything at all? She's spent her entire Senate career working to prove herself as many as any of the boys on the hill. Voting for war in 2002, triangulating her position so as to maximize her power- I respect her enough as a woman to acknowledge that she isn't fit for the job of President regardless of her gender.
Tragically, your excellent post was ruined by your non-sequitur kowtow to Hillary at the end. Voting for her because she's a woman is just about the least responsible use of a vote there could be.”
“I'm still for Hillary, even tho I'm going around asking myself, "How could Hillary be so stupid as to tell such a story?"
I'm disappointed, but the fact stil remains: In these highly troubled times, she's the best one to handle the job as President.
Obama would be great as President if we didn't have an economy going down the toilet.
Obama hasn't the experience to handle the right wing attacks, while Hillary can, as she is back with a vengence.
I know everyone wants equality of the races, but gender bias is so ingrained in our society, that most people seem unaware of it.
Having the additional "Black" issue on the plate of the Presidency, may overshadow the fact that this country may be going into financial ruin.
'You're a racist!' 'No, you're a racist!' It's like McCarthyism: 'You're a communist!' That's all we're going to be hearing for the next four years if Obama is elected. Meanwhile, America becomes the next 'Japan-like' economy.”
Nancyann on Mar 31, 2008 at 14:31:05
“HOW DO YOU THINK HILLARY WOULD HANDLE THE LEADERSHIP OF THE COUNTRY WHEN COULDN'T HANDLE HER SORT OF HUSBAND AND HASN'T BEEN HANDLING HER CAMPIGN well. Consider all the money she spent and for what to be behind in delegate and popular vote. Hillary is a dangerous person because she is a congrnital liar and has been as long as she has been in public lfe. The latestt poll indicated that 48% of the prople polled found her to be unfavorable. HOW COULD YOU EXPECT A PERSON WITH SUCH NEGATIVE NUMBERS COULD LEAD A COUNTY???? You are living in fantasy in my opinion!!!”
butch5 on Mar 31, 2008 at 14:30:50
“Bill and Hill were able to fight off every attack from the Republicans because they were "tough" . Ha. I don't know about you guys but most people didn't mess with the tough people that I knew. If they were really so smart and "tough" they would have gotten the goods on some of those Republican hypocrits and told them to back the f--- off. If they were so tough they would not have had eight years of harassment by the Republicans. A tough guy/gal makes people scared to mess with them. If Hill is elected President there will be more of the same for four or eight years.”
“Richardson! He unwisely remarked that Super Delegates should follow what the voters in their region wanted. That was Clinton for him. Then he comes out and endorses Barack!! Geesh! I'm glad he didn't win the nomination!
Hillary won all the major states. They are basically neck and neck. Over 5 times in the past decade, did a candidate go into the convention with less delegates, and come out the winner. Wilson, FDR, Eisenhower...
Howard Dean ultimately will decide this. Unfortunately he was chairman when the DNC decided to have MI and FL not be in the race. Maybe he's a hothead, afterall. If he goes with Barack, we'll have a puppy in there during a most critical time. If we were at peace, and the economy was clicking along just fine, then He would be OK. But it's not. We need Hillary. Barack--Vice President.”
“Very good comments from everybody!
We only have about 30 more years of oil. What, McCain doesn't know that!? I guess not---why else would we stay there 100 years? Once the oil is gone---we're gone.
Too bad there aren't government insentives for discovering alternative energy---I mean something good enough to get an airplane across the ocean. Time is running out. Imagine what our lives would be like if we could no longer fly. Still no cure for the common cold.
Without oil, we come to a screaching halt.
We should have just paid a Middle Eastern country to have a military base there since we got kicked out of Saudi Arabia---it would have been cheaper than a war. Well, that's if you really care about the economy of the whole nation, let alone the devastation the widows of war will never get over.
But obviously, this administration, nor McCain, is concerned about either of those two things---there has been no advantages for us being there. No cheaper oil---but more expensive. No peace in that region---rather turmoil. What are we fighting for? If we win---what does that mean? Nothing. Absolutely nothing---just a richer Halliburton, Blackwater, and a lot of macho fun for that spoiled, ignoramous, our President, George Bush.
If McCain wins it will spell disaster for America in the way of financial ruin.”
StevieRae on Mar 27, 2008 at 13:51:52
“I've been arguing your point for several years. Our "strategic interests" are maintaining access to sources of oil; all the other high fluting reasons for staying in Iraq or the middle east are B.S.”
“Interesting to note that we are all on the bandwagon together in opposition of terrorism.
Had the same amount of people been ambushed by bullets instead of an explosive, we would have been greatly divided.”
sukiposeyzena on Apr 16, 2013 at 17:49:15
“I agree with you, MaureenSharkey. There is no tolerance for violence at the hands of terrorists. Yet there is tolerance for gun owners not even being required to have a background check in this country. Violence of any kind is intolerable, period. The laws enable killers to wipe out innocents with the availability of weapons.”
crezyoz on Apr 16, 2013 at 17:06:30
“not even close to the truth. You don't understand the argument here. It isn't about tragedy it is about whittling away Constitutional rights one step at a time. EVERYONE is on the bandwagon to prevent massacres .. come on.”
cluxury on Apr 16, 2013 at 15:55:30
“As soon as a suspect is identified, the divisiveness will begin, based on his nationality, or race, or religion, or political/social affiliation. Just give it time.”
d00d on Apr 16, 2013 at 15:35:07
“No, we wouldn't be "divided". Both sides of the gun debate would still condemn the attacker(s). Last I checked both bombing people and shooting people were illegal, and contrary to popular belief, guns don't shoot anyone by themselves. A human has to press the trigger (or arm/detonate the bomb).
This case demonstrates as clearly as a day, that as long as we have people who are ready to kill the innocent, we will have these tragedies, with guns or without. Guns are not a problem. Fertilizer, pressure cookers and ball bearings are not a problem. PEOPLE are the problem.”
“Is it really a choice? This epidemic of drug addicts may be the evidence of masses of people trying to transend to get to their real selves. And they have become numb as society breaks the child like a stallion---then their drug is the only way they can feel. Our natural state is to feel very alive, and be spontanious, full of vitality. But this generation has turned out robots--the false self. And what is more tragic then that?--to die never knowing who you were.”
jel3800 on Feb 14, 2012 at 13:27:04
“It is still a choice that each makes. ot sure where you are going with the society breaking children thread but I see it as just as likely that children growing up with too much money and too little responsibility is at the root”
“Hillary, can we please do an advertising campaign, of billboards, and magazine ads, in these poorer nations, that would be of good will, and educate these countries of a better life, including ads expressing our love for them and wise words against terrorism and war.”
“How come the USA never considers a paper campaign, distributed to these foreign countries, to educated them about basic human rights and freedom?
The Middle East starts a revolution in the year 2011--because they didn't know about the abuse they were taking at the hands of their dictator until Twitter and Facebook?!!!
A paper campaign would cost a lot less, and apparently be a lot more effective than our military going into Afghanistan.”
wonderYrednow on Mar 20, 2011 at 18:06:12
“We use green paper instead, with Ben's face on it. Follow the money. Vote.”
rosey7 on Mar 20, 2011 at 13:25:45
“MaureenSharkey, of course they have known about it, lived with it but it took social media to plan how they would resist. Cell phones have been critical in organizing. Paper flyers are just yesterday's news, These people are fighting in real time and communicating in real time as well.”