Is Hillary Clinton going to be President?

page: 14
5
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I do think the GOP as we have known it wil die on January 20 of of 2009. the end of small government advocacy will mean that the Republicans will need to find a new credo. When they return to national prominence, tney may well be the party of fiscal responsibility, but they won't advocate for the smaller-is-better theory any more. Other platform tenants will also be up for grabs.

As for moderate Democrats...I'll believe that when I see it. My read on Hillar yisthat she will not have the luxury of being mild about anything. Not in her first term, to be sure. I fuly expect her to wreck the Republicans as a matter of party domination. She's got old scores to settle with certain members of Congress who won't be smart enough to retire in 2008 of 20010. In general, I expect the Dem's national committee to formulate a strategy to ensure party dominance once and for all. They're just too close to achieving total power.

If the GOP had not dropped the ball...and then lost it in the shuffle...I would expect them to do the same thing if they were so close to achieving the kind of total dominion that the Dems now seem poised to enjoy.




posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   

posted by Justin Oldham
I do think the GOP as we have known it will die on January 20 of 2009. the end of small government advocacy will mean that the Republicans will need to find a new credo. When they return to national prominence, they may well be the party of fiscal responsibility, but they won't advocate for the smaller-is-better theory any more. Other platform tenants will also be up for grabs.


1) J/O, you and have bantered back and forth on the “small government” theme but I’m still not sure we are talking about the same thing. You insist on pressing the deep philosophical argument of Thomas Jefferson, the independent land owing farmer, a time and place where you could post a letter addressed only to the White House and the mailman has no idea where it is.

I OTOH, argue that we cannot go back to those days of Jefferson for at least three reasons, 1) more people, 2) more land area and 3) a more active world. On our last go-around, I offered we both ought to be urging GOOD government instead of SMALL government as if diminutive size alone somehow makes government good. In other words, I do not equate size especially small size, as being good. In government. I’m pleased but never sure if the cheering section really knows what I’m referring to when I say “Bigger is Better.”

Fiscal responsibility on the national scene. We recently proved this can be done and with good side effects on the economy, with the 1993 Internal Revenue Code which brought us a balanced budget and projected surplus by 2000, only to be squandered in 2001.


As for moderate Democrats...I'll believe that when I see it. My read on Hillary y is that she will not have the luxury of being mild about anything. Not in her first term, to be sure. I fully expect her to wreck the Republicans as a matter of party domination. She's got old scores to settle with certain members of Congress who won't be smart enough to retire in 2008 of 20010. In general, I expect the Dem's national committee to formulate a strategy to ensure party dominance once and for all. They're just too close to achieving total power. If the GOP had not dropped the ball...and then lost it in the shuffle...I would expect them to do the same thing if they were so close to achieving the kind of total dominion that the Dems now seem poised to enjoy.


2) Nixon was strong and blemished. He was followed by Ford, who was neither. Yet we have all agreed those 2+ years under Gerald Ford were like a tranquilizer for the United States. And the more we look back at Ford, the better we like him. Even the Nixon pardon is now well received as essential for the national healing so much needed and wished for by so many. You might say the “great national nightmare” that began on November 22, 1963, ended when Gerald Ford took the oath of office. See foot note.

The senior Bush presidency following Reagan was much like Ford following Nixon. Not a let-down so much as a pause. I don’t mean to go to far astray but sometimes cuddling is as rewarding as the more penetrating form of communication. This is how I see Hillary. And Nancy. Sort of a Mothers in Charge. Akin to the MADD Mothers of the 1970s.

The big 3 on any president’s plate are, Iraq, immigration and health care, skipping the #4, fiscal sanity. This will be enough on any plate for the next 2 years. Q. How can Iraq’s PM al-Maliki carry on day-to-day when his major ally is constantly harping on going-staying, measuring benchmarks and etc all in the public eye on worldwide tv? How many Iraqi cops are killed every day? How many Iraq National Guards are killed every day? For how long can this continue before the Iraqi government falls. And who is waiting in the wings. Sheik al-Sadar! If you think dealing with al-Maliki is hard, wait until we tty al-Sadar.

Look, as much as I hate Bush43 we can’t leave Iraq as we did in Vietnam because Vietnam was a paradise compared to Iraq and the Middle East. We had NO vital interest in Vietnam whereas we have a SURVIVAL interest the Middle East. Did not my own icon FDR, in 1943, promise King Ibn Saud that in exchange for oil we would guarantee his family dynasty, ad infinitum or was it ad nauseam? Assuming Bush43 will not flinch on his promise to let the next president decide Iraq, by 2009 we will begin to “draw down” into secure enclaves meant mainly to prevent Iranian intervention in the East and Turkish intervention in the North and Syrian intervention in the West.

Then when the Iraqi have settled their internal dispute, we can leave a secure Iraq behind, as existed in 2003 before the Bush Shock and Awe Adventure. If we are lucky we can escape without passing the 5,000 KIA mark. In any case, all of them owe their early demise to Bush43. That’s your legacy, Dumbya. Let's hope we never forget you.


Foot Note. It is hard to believe Ford was the target of TWO assassination attempts. Lynette ‘Squeaky’ Fromme in Sacramento in 1975 and Sara Jane Moore in San Francisco, just 3 weeks later. Both women are doing life without parole but if it was up to me, I’d parole them along with Sirhan Sirhan. Enough is enough. It's time we showed some charity.

[edit on 7/18/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Bigger is not better, and I've seen that for myself. When six do the job of one, that's not good. When Federal procurements deliberately cost more than off-the-shelf, that's not good. When the fiscal budgeting process punishes thrift, that's not good.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I believe every word you have posted, J/O. I have no intention trying to justify the unjustifiable. I’m just now at page 540 of 715 pages in a book by Doris Kearns Goodwin, “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln” a 2005 bestseller. (RC-61162A & B). One of the major problems Lincoln faced was the corruption in government contracts. For example Treasury's Salmon Chase took kickbacks called commissions then, for allowing his friends to be the sole agents for the sale of US bonds at higher rates than open market sales would have produced. Lincoln learned of this bad practice early on but he needed Chase and he needed money to finance the war. So he bit the bullet. Chase himself reformed half way through the war.

George Washington, all the more of special consequence when at Valley Forge, faced the same problem of corrupt procurement practices of needed supplies for the Continental Army. Every time Gen. Washington would replace the untrustworthy procurement staff, the Congress would appoint a new agent who turned out to be equally corrupt. Or more so. He finally settled on a corrupt but competent one. Stealing was not as serious to the war as non-delivery.

You and I and people like us send $25 to our favorite candidate but those who want government contracts send 10s of 1000s. I have watched this all my adult life. It grates on me that the big donors usually get huge returns on their money, often 1000s of times their outlays. Look at Butch Cunningham. A $100 million contract got him a $500,000 yacht and a very much unexpected 8 years in the pen. AG Gonzales and Bush43 are trying to save the guy who gave that boat to Cunningham from taking up residence with Butch. Hence the US Attorney for San Diego who refused to “back off” was fired. She believed in the oath she took. Gonzales and Bush43 do not believe in the oaths they took. But that’s not new. If that guy knows as much as Scooter Libby, he'll get a "free pass."

When I was in the USAF in the early 1950s I noticed the government paid $1000 for a Collins radio receiver I could buy from Radio Shack for $200. But the Air Force radio came in a series of containers inside containers that made the radio nearly immune to damage during shipment anywhere in the world. In fact, the outside container would float. What good would a damaged Collins radio in a cardboard box have done for me at Kimpo, Korea, when an airplane could not fly without one that would work from the get-go?

As for excess personnel or overstaffing. How many people should FEMA have on hand? Well trained. Fully informed where and what things are where and how many? Who do you call? And etc. Jacksonville has 2,300 uniformed policemen. If they work 40 hour weeks, that means 547 are available at any given time. If 100 are supervisors, clerical and communications types, then you have only 450 available for patrol and detective work. If 25% are assigned to plain clothes duty, then you have 335 available for patrol. Any good cop will spend one-fourth of his time in court, testifying or waiting to testify. Now we’re down to 250 men for patrol. Out of 2,300. Jax has 800 square miles, so each man is obliged to monitor about 3 square miles and 3,000 people. 1 cop.

The Jacksonville police budget is over $300 million a year. And for that whopping sum, we get ONE cop per 3,000 people spread over 3 square miles. Is it any wonder Jax has had 86 murders - 90% by guns - and we’re only 7 months into the year?

[edit on 7/30/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 04:45 PM
link   
We know from the performance of hte private sector that it is possible for the peole doing the work to find the best efficiencies for their field. When government becomes the largest single employer in our country, we need to take a close look at the disposition of that manpower and its budgets. In its current configuration ,we are not being well served. I'm not kidding anyone. The transition away from the classical bureaucratic wste-prone mentality will take the better part of a century.



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   

posted by Justin Oldham
We know from the performance of the private sector that it is possible for the people doing the work to find the best efficiencies for their field. When government becomes the largest single employer in our country, we need to take a close look at the disposition of that manpower and its budgets. In its current configuration ,we are not being well served. I'm not kidding anyone. The transition away from the classical bureaucratic waste-prone mentality will take the better part of a century.


J/O, although I have not conceded the premises of your argument and remain unpersuaded on your rationale, let us assume for now that your wish is granted and the US government downsizes from say 2.2 million as I believe it is today, to say, around 500,000 not counting the quasi postal service which I think is a bit over 700,000. But in the other bureaus, where you now see 3 people, you will see just 1.

The VA needs to be enlarged and that need will continue for the next half century. No help on downsizing there. We are doing an inadequate job in the food from abroad thing and in the cargo container inspections. It looks as if we’ll need MORE and not fewer personnel there. The airline industry is using a system put in place 30 years ago. It is drastically undermanned. So was PATCO right and Reagan wrong on that too?

We keep threatening to secure our borders but that remains more a dream or a nightmare depending on which side of the Rio Grande you are on. No downsizing there is likely. We continue to wage Nixon's unrelenting War on Drugs without much success but we are filling our prisons to record levels and we have the dubious distinction of holding a larger proportion of our population in custody than any other country including Zimbabwe and Sudan.

A trip to Mars will require a big support effort on Earth. Providing essential services to 12 million new immigrants who presumably will come forward when we give them amnesty, will take a lot of people. If we were not blowing our wealth out the end of a barrel, we’d be able to hire extra teacher aides to help in our K12 schools to give our kids a leg up on the Chinese, Japanese and Indian kids who just work harder. As our population ages, we will need more people in assisted living, nursing homes, and full skilled care centers around the country. Or let Dr Kevorkian off his parole restrictions.

Look at Indiana. Yesterday, the State renewed a permit to a giant of American industry to continue dumping mercury into the Great Lakes as if Indiana “owned” the Great Lakes. I’ve always explained it is easer by far to “bribe” states than it is to bribe the Federal government. Of course if you have enough money, you can do both or all. Indiana said the mercury was at harmless levels. If I was GOD I’m put the grand-children of the Governor of Indiana on a food regimen containing the same levels of mercury Indiana’s EPA permitted to be dumped into Lake Michigan. What do you think he’d say then?

[edit on 8/1/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Given the way Federal civil service works, the best we can really hope for is a re-write of the staffing regulations. As it stands now, the requirements for most Federal positions are very low, with many and various exemptions that are supposed to be some form of affirmative action. the only reason that four do the job of one is because that's what they know they can get away with, and that's what the rules tell them to do. Ever wonder why you never heard about Feds being fired? It's too hard. It's esier to just promote them and create dead-end positions for them that keep them out of your hair.

On more than one occassion, I was denied a job that would have been a promote to the next rung up the ladder. but...I did have to train the person who got that job...because...they didn't know how to do what they'd been hired for. As you can expect, there were some very hilarious moments.

It's just my opinion, but I think the U.S. Federal work force should be one of the most elite professional groups on the planet. It's true that there are some Federal programs that are very manpower intensive, but many are not . when the U.S. government can't fulfill its mandate because its too busy hiring the people that the private sector wouldn't pick up, you've really got to wonder.



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   

posted by Justin Oldham
It's just my opinion but I think the U.S. Federal work force should be one of the most elite professional groups on the planet. It's true that there are some Federal programs that are very manpower intensive, but many are not. When the U.S. government can't fulfill its mandate because its too busy hiring the people that the private sector wouldn't pick up, you've really got to wonder.


J/O: Without ready access to the numbers, I’d wager you the total number of US civilian employees - not counting the post office - did not exceed 80,000 in 1932. Just prior to WW2, say late 1940, I’d guess the number had risen to 300,000. Again, not counting the post office. A four-fold increase over a very short time. I don’t mean to include temporary workers building roads or working on contracts to build post offices and other buildings around the country. WPA. PWA. CCC. Etc. I mean genuine permanent civil service jobs. By the end of War 2, I’d say the total number of civilian employees had risen to 1 million.

For reference: US Pop, 1930, 123 million. 1940, 132 million. 1950, 152 million. The Census population for 2000 was 281,421,906. Up 13.2% over 1990. The July 1, 2007 estimated pop is 301,139,947. Up 7%.

The initial run-up in Federal employment came during the Great Depression. Jobs were scarce and government jobs were a real plum. No worry about your boss going bankrupt! Federal hiring was centralized. The Civil Service Commission. Agencies send a ‘needs’ list to the Commission which then interviewed, tested and as we say now, vetted the applicants. Successful candidates were forwarded to the hiring agencies. In fact, the top 3 were sent forward, and the agency could hire any one of the three. Of course, they were looking for Democrats. There was no effort to make the Civil Service demographically representative. Just the opposite. “If you can’t help your friends, who can you help?”

Federal jobs paid a lot more than equivalent state and local government jobs. Federal employment conformed to the new labor laws about hours and overtime pay. Other benefits were generous in comparison to other public jobs. In other words, a Federal job was the creme de la creme of public employment. Because of the Depression applicants were many and frequently, top of the line people. It is my belief that by 1940, the US did in fact have the best large civil service of any country in the world.

People hired in 1940 would begin to retire by 1970-1975. By this time the Republican mantra of “smaller government’ had begun to catch fire with more and more voters.

Actually the smart guys were anti-regulations. The many regulatory agencies set up by the New Deal were popular in the outcomes, but not easily understood by the voters. Who in the hell had ever heard of the Texas Railroad Commission? Even fewer knew the impact those 3 fellows had on the price of natural gas they used to heat their homes. Only the FPC - Federal Power Commission - could trump the Texas RR Comm. It became a primary Republican objective - in private never in public - to reduce or eliminate the FPC power over the price of natural gas in interstate commerce. They won.

Every GOP candidate starting with Reagan would promise to “reduce the size of government.” Reagan was the worst, because he was the most likeable. He endlessly repeated his popular one-liner, “government is not the solution it is the problem.” Many intelligent people fell for that simple solution to a complex problem. Government by slogan. People then and people now do not realize that government performs services the private sector cannot perform. By privatizing our governments, Federal, state and local, we as a country are painting ourselves into a corner we may have a hard time getting out of. It’s made all the worse when I find out the privatized jobs do indeed pay less to the worker than the government job they replaced, but that is not in itself the be all and end all of our existence.

Higher paying Federal jobs tended to force private employers to pay more in the 1930s to work our way out of the Depression. All the worse because in many cases the private contractor is paid $50 an hour for workers he hires for $15 an hour and pockets the difference costing taxpayers more than the replaced Federal worker.

A giant scam worked on the public by shrewd anti-regulation types.

[edit on 8/1/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Even we assume that your analogy holds totally true, today's Federal work force would have to be per capita, smaller. On average, today's Fed's make 30% LESS than their private sector counter-parts. Their best asset would be their gold-plated health care package.

As for Federal contractors, that one could generate a thread all by itself. The arcane formulas by which the procurement bosses generate fee schedules can safely be said to be...incoherent. There was a point when I carried a Federal credit card, and at no time did I buy anything from a GSA approved contractor if I could help it.

At one point, I managed a large computer buy for 24K that would have cost 62K if I had gone with Federal sources. Not only did we buy the same exact thing as what was on the GSA lists, but...we got the same service plan AND upgrade schedule.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 07:30 PM
link   
J/O, I think you and I are like two fellows wanting to go to the SAME place. One decides to fly, the other to ride a train. They go different ways but in the end they arrive at the same place. (Unless the AmTrak derails). Since the advent of Reagan, we have let the bureaucracy decay. We will pay a price for that, too.

[edit on 8/2/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt

Originally posted by donwhite
Versus a Giuliani and Romney ticket for the GOP. The GOP religious base stays home.


I am part of the GOP religious base and this Republican ticket is of absolutely no interest to me.


I am also a "former" part of the GOP religious base, and as far as Republicans now go it's Ron Paul or nothing. I will not vote for Giuliani or Romney no matter the circumstance and I am a conservative Christian voter.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:56 PM
link   
I will not be surprised to see a lot of people like bugman82 staying home on election day. Honestly, I don't know who the campaign managers are for the GOP, but hey need to be fired. Tehre's such a thing as bad advice, and then tehre is...this. Honestly, I think they've already given up.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

posted by Justin Oldham
I will not be surprised to see a lot of people like bugman82 staying home on election day. Honestly, I don't know who the campaign managers are for the GOP, but hey need to be fired. There's such a thing as bad advice, and then there is...this. Honestly, I think they've already given up.


I’ve been watching Rudy and Barack on CSpan yesterday and today. Like it or not, Barack is going to push Hillary - my favorite - into announcing a more detailed plan for achieving universal access to health care in the US. Aside: See the Summer 2007 issue of Democracy: a Journal of Ideas and the comprehensive pro-universal access article by Risa Livisso-Mourey, MD, MBA, and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

I “know” where Hillary stands and I’m confident as president she will get the best anyone can out of one giant can of worms. I’d rather she not be overly specific as that both forewarns and limits her future actions and maneuvering room. Laws, like sausage, are not pleasant to watch in the making. Barack, stuck at a solid No. 2 in the polls enjoys the unsolicited luxury of being able to make detailed proposals that sound reasonable. Hillary, having been there and done that, knows life in the fast lane is not so simple. Voters OTOH, tend to have a very short attention span. Keep your grand plans in 60 second bytes or less, if you please. Preferably less.

Is Rudy becoming a Single Issue Candidate? I watched Rudy at a caucus runup in Iowa. He stressed - tiring and not tirelessly I thought - how he met his greatest challenge in the Nine Eleven Event and the days just following. He certainly earned our accolades for his singular performance; all the more when you recall how hypnotized both Bush43 and VP Cheney were! Bush43 circling in AF 1 afraid to land and VP Cheney hiding in Cheyenne Mountain! Wow! Our Maximum Leaders. They both talk the talk but neither would walk the walk!

So can Rudy ride the Nine Eleven Event into the White House? I think not. What he gets away with in Iowa will not work elsewhere. A caucus is much more personal than the NH and SC primaries. People can vote NO even to the most likeable guy. Or gal.

Rudy needs to “get a life” and talk about health care, immigration, infrastructure and the Iraq War. This will be a FOUR issue campaign. Not a single issue no matter how much he might wish it were so.

[edit on 8/18/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   
I note with some interest that Barack Obama seems to be getting bad advice, or NOT taking the good stuff when its given to him. Would this be his lack of experience showing through?



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Reasons why I wouldnt let anybody in my family vote for Rodham Clinton..

1. She swears her allegiance to Iran
2. President Clinton and wife Hillary ordered the deaths of the Branch Davidians
3. Hillary Clinton and Barbara Bush are both Grande Damme's of the Mothers of Darkness group, but they don't have the power to rule over the entire occult world

What more excuses do I need?




Taken from:

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...


www.godlikeproductions.com.../13/06



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   
We hear a lot of talk about the why's and wherefore's that people have against her, but even I have to admit that she's not making many political mistakes just now. She's proven that she can and will play rough. Say what you wil, but strength does have a certain attractiveness to it. Even with Rudy Giuliani on their side, it'll be hard for the GOP to counter that.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:19 PM
link   
So youre saying shes pretty much president? America will be fooled into voting for her because uses the "first woman to be president" lie to do her bidding of a Totalitarian Government. I thought so..



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Should could end up being President for a variety of reasons. first and foremost, there is her innate political skill. If any of the Republicans had her Machievellian skill, we'd know it. I am no fan of hers, but I will acknowledge skill when I see it. I've spent much of my career as an author trying to warn people about her, and people like her.

It's a sad state of affairs, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Republicans are in such total disarray that they couldn't win an election against a ham sandwich just now. Fred Thomspon gets a lot of baly-hoo, but he has yet to take the plunge.

Hillary in particular, is the last person I want to see as President just now. I think she's going to take hold of Bush's Unitary Exectuive and make us wish he'd never been elected. I do not in any way see the Democrats to be saviors. If anything, we are (as I've said in my work) on the brink of some very hard times, which will be muddled through under the Democrat banner.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:34 PM
link   
WW3 here we come! Nobody lives a happy life.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 09:29 AM
link   

posted by opsecretombomb
Reasons why I wouldn’t let anybody in my family vote for Rodham Clinton..
1. She swears her allegiance to Iran


I admit you’ve got me there, Mr O/S/B. For your #1, I thought you were going to say she hired the Vince Foster killers. Have you actually seen her in a burqa in front of the Ayatollah taking the oath? Aside: Did you know the Germanophile - a made up word - Shah of Persia changed the name to Iran in the 1930s and Iran is an anglicized version of the German word for Aryan? Would that not make Hillary also a pro-Nazi?


2. President Clinton and wife Hillary ordered the deaths of the Branch Davidians


Don’t you think it probable that David Koresh was really Hillary in drag?


3. Hillary Clinton and Barbara Bush are both Grande Damme's of the Mothers of Darkness group, but they don't have the power to rule over the entire occult world What more excuses do I need?


Absolutely no more! PS. I have also heard that Hillary is actually Joan d’Arc reincarnated? That Charles deGaulle was her father. And that she is on a secret mission for the Pope who quietly named her Chancellor of Opus Dei. WoW!

You are on to something here, Mr O/S/B.

[edit on 8/28/2007 by donwhite]





top topics
 
5
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join