imatreat's posts about:
Political
See all posts with this tag
For many years now, we have all heard the evils of Hillary Clinton and between 40-45% of all Americans have said no matter what, they will NEVER vote for Hillary. Now, I will preface this by saying, that I'm still supporting Barack Obama for President. However, if the election plays out as everyone has suggested, Hillary will be the Democratic Nominee. And, I more than likely will be supporting her for the Presidency. I want to know from those 40-45% some concrete reasons why there is no way you would ever support her campaign and nomination. I want REAL reasons, not opinion or your belief. I just want to know what the real reason is that some of these people are so determined that she could be the worst thing for this country. If you're worried about the "Liberal" tag, you need to check out this article...
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/03/mirror_mi
rror_on_the_wall_whos.html
Hillary is probably as middle-of-the-road as any Democrat running for President. And, much to my chagrin, she has probably given more support to this President and "His" War than anyone else on the Left. Not to mention, ever since her attempt to Nationalize Healthcare, she is now #2 on the contributions from Healthcare PAC's, which means she gets the second highest amount of contributions for her Political Campaigns from the Healthcare industry, among people in Congress... Democrat or Republican. Not to mention, she accepts more contributions from big business than any other Democrat running. Now sure she is Pro-Choice/Abortion Rights, but that's where she gets most of her "Liberal" voting scores from. In looking at the Democrats, Hillary is possibly the most moderate out of the pack.
So, I just want to know what is the real deal with the "Hillary Hatred?" And, like I said, I'm looking for facts to back up opinion, not what you think might happen, if she gets elected, because no one knows. After all, Bush was a decent Governor of Texas. However, his Presidency will go down as being one of the worst in American History.
A few weeks ago, Morgan State University in Baltimore hosted a debate for the Republican Candidates to address some issues that the African-American community faces. The event was broadcast on PBS, and hosted by Tavis Smiley. Front running candidates Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and John McCain decided to bypass the event. Citing scheduling issues. However, Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, and a few others seemed to find the time. Huckabee even admitted that he was "embarrassed" by the no-show candidates actions. Now, a debate by the Black Congressional Caucus, that was scheduled tentatively for November 4th in Dallas, for the Republican Candidates has been cancelled due to a lack of response by the candidates themselves. The event was organized by Democratic Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson. Now, I realize that most African-Americans vote Democratic. According to the latest numbers, there is about 15% of the African American Community that is registered Republican. But, if you want to be called a "big tent" party, as the Republicans have claimed, shouldn't you at least make an attempt to reach out to the African-American community? Shouldn't you listen to what they have to say? At least you can say, "I Tried." When you just don't appear interested, people might read more into it than you might expect. I doubt a Republican running for President will ever win the Black vote, but Republicans need to SINCERELY make an effort to try and reach out. It looks really bad when you don't. And right now, I think the Republican Front-Runners need all the help they can get. Even if it is from the most unlikely of places.
Obama on "Tyra Banks" Monday
Sep 26, 2007 | 5:48 AM PST
Category:
Political
Illinois Senator and Democratic Presidential Candidate, Barack Obama will be on "Tyra Banks" Monday Morning at 10am on Fox 26. He will be on for the full hour. Just in case anyone is interested.
Rudy and Family Values...
Aug 23, 2007 | 9:12 AM PST
Category:
Political
It's been well documented for quite awhile by the far
right and Republicans that they want to be the party that stands for
"Family Values." While campaigning last week in New Hampshire, Former
NYC Mayor, Rudy Guiliani was asked a question by a lady about his
family. She basically asked him since his daughter was supporting
Barack Obama and his son decided not to campaign for his Dad, how could
we trust him as President, if his own Family doesn't even trust him? Rudy was clearly flustered by the legitimate question, and proceeded to tell the lady basically, "don't interfere in my family's life, and I won't interfere in your family's life." Personally, I could careless about Rudy's private life. But, it's hard for me to see the "Family Values" people throwing their support behind Rudy. After all, here's a man, who most people said knowingly married his second cousin, Regina Peruggi in 1968, although he denies he knew she was. The marriage had rocky points in the mid 70's and they separated and got back together a couple of times. It was until they agreed to split for good in 1982, that the "second cousin" information became widely known. He had already met and fallen for second wife Donna Hanover at that time. Given the "second cousin" issue came to light, the marriage was annulled. He luckily had no kids with Peruggi. He married Donna Hanover in 1984 and the couple had two children. However, this marriage also had lots of ups and downs. In the late 90's, Rudy became romantically involved with one of his aides, Cristyne Lategano. After it came to light, Hanover had her barred from Gracie Mansion (home to the New York City's Mayor). Soon after that, Rudy met his third wife, Judith Nathan, and the two began their affair. In 2001, Hanover and Guiliani separated and went through an ugly divorce in the media. The divorce became final in 2002. And, in 2003, Guiliani married Nathan. This is why it is surprising to see Rudy leading the Republican pack and actually has a shot to win the nomination.
My question is, do you think Rudy should be obligated to answer the question about how should the country trust him, if his own family doesn't, or was the question "out of bounds and not relevant? Also, explain why you feel that way.
