Jindal vs. Clinton

[Freewill]

[Q

Can't point to anything, duly noted.

Do you need someone to explain the big words to you?

Doubling down on nothing, got it.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Neither one.

I'd like to see former Ohio Sen. (and ex-con) James Traficante run, myself.

I know he has come choice words for Lois Lerner and the IRS.

Choice words for a mid level bureaucrat are essential for a true leader! Way to set that bar.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

You would do that, wouldn't you? You and YogiTheBear.

You still won't name "all the people" on the left who you claim did this in regards to Obama. Why not?

 

[Freewill]

I think you guys should totally get behind Piyush.

Until your masters on Wall Street tell you that you are supporting Jeb Bush.

Very likely scenario unless Romney runs again. Some think Romney would actually win this time, but he won't.

Who'd give money to a guy who lost already? It happened in the age of Black and White TV with limited channels, but in the modern era where everyone wants a beauty show, it just won't happen.

I think I remember Obama losing a congressional race and they still gave the loser money.

 

[Freewill]

Sorry if I missed it but I have not seen an answer to my question. How hard will the left have to hold their noses to vote for Iraq war supporter, Hillary Clinton?

 

[JoeB131]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

Except the GOP is too racist to nominated a guy named "Piyush" to the Presidency.

 

[Freewill]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

Except the GOP is too racist to nominated a guy named "Piyush" to the Presidency.

So you won't speak for liberals but have no problem speaking for all of the GOP. Damn projecting liberal.

 

[Bush92]

Neither of them.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Sorry if I missed it but I have not seen an answer to my question. How hard will the left have to hold their noses to vote for Iraq war supporter, Hillary Clinton?

Does she still think invading Iraq was a good idea?

 

[JoeB131]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

Except the GOP is too racist to nominated a guy named "Piyush" to the Presidency.

So you won't speak for liberals but have no problem speaking for all of the GOP. Damn projecting liberal.

I was Republican for something like 30 years. And, no, whenever I saw a "Piyush" at a party, he was kind of a fringe character standing in the corner no one would talk to.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So thankfully you agree that the Republican party is not the monolithic party that the left implies.

But you also throw out red herrings pretty easily. Of course most policy is directed at those who have money. They do drive the economy and no matter what the left wing wishes to say we can not make the weak strong by making the strong weak.

Every time the left wing throws out the red herring that the Republican party is the party of the rich I think of Obama and his Stimulus. Was he stimulating the rich or the poor? Who has benefited the most? Banks and corporations are seeing RECORD profit while consumer spending is flat lined.

To be honest "the left" doesn't imply that the Republicans are monolithic, "the left" is merely taking part in the mud slinging match where you merely have to insult the other side. "imply" seems a little too educated a word for what a lot of people, on both sides, partake in.

I don't particularly like the Republican Party, parts of it are a pretty well oiled machine, other parts are just scum, but then so too are the Democratic Party.

I understand the point of encouraging business. However there is often a difference between encouraging business and allowing friends to get ahead above the competition because they know someone.

Also, there's a big difference between being the party of the rich and helping rich people every so often.

 

[Redfish]

So thankfully you agree that the Republican party is not the monolithic party that the left implies.

But you also throw out red herrings pretty easily. Of course most policy is directed at those who have money. They do drive the economy and no matter what the left wing wishes to say we can not make the weak strong by making the strong weak.

Every time the left wing throws out the red herring that the Republican party is the party of the rich I think of Obama and his Stimulus. Was he stimulating the rich or the poor? Who has benefited the most? Banks and corporations are seeing RECORD profit while consumer spending is flat lined.

To be honest "the left" doesn't imply that the Republicans are monolithic, "the left" is merely taking part in the mud slinging match where you merely have to insult the other side. "imply" seems a little too educated a word for what a lot of people, on both sides, partake in.

I don't particularly like the Republican Party, parts of it are a pretty well oiled machine, other parts are just scum, but then so too are the Democratic Party.

I understand the point of encouraging business. However there is often a difference between encouraging business and allowing friends to get ahead above the competition because they know someone.

Also, there's a big difference between being the party of the rich and helping rich people every so often.

OK, The CEO of GE, Imelt, is a big obama supporter and donor. GE has shipped thousands of jobs overseas, GE paid zero federal corporate income tax last year. So tell me, dingleberry, who is really helping the rich at the expense of the country?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Chikenwing affirms his racism, like that of Sharpton, by the doctrine of silent affirmation.

 

[chikenwing]

Jindal is an interesting candidate.

He is a good person who has done a great job as governor. The racist left has tried to destroy him but he has survived.

That racists exist on the left is true. That they are particularly significant is false.

That racists exist on the far right is true. They have significance in party politics on the right.

You a blind fool.

Says Chicken Little Wing, "the sky is falling."

Do you deny racism exists in a healthy state on the right?

The doctrine of silent affirmation applies if you refuse to answer.

The sky is falling?? you prided that out of where??

Racism exists everywhere from all walks of life,its just simpletons like yourself that just love to label and categorize people negatively to fit your warped narrative. The right doesn't own racism anymore than the left.,the one lopsided count belongs to the left,there are many more race baiters on the left than right.

 

[chikenwing]

Chikenwing affirms his racism, like that of Sharpton, by the doctrine of silent affirmation.

You are a fool and a real simple one at that.

 

[frigidweirdo]

OK, The CEO of GE, Imelt, is a big obama supporter and donor. GE has shipped thousands of jobs overseas, GE paid zero federal corporate income tax last year. So tell me, dingleberry, who is really helping the rich at the expense of the country?

Are you implying something? What is it?

So you have one company which is a donor for Obama, and also doesn't pay tax. So what? One company? Is that it? Does one company mean Obama is helping the rich and the Republicans aren't?

Funny thing is, GE gives 40% to the Dems and 60% to the Reps. That's about $3 million worth of money.

Top Overall Donors OpenSecrets

Though they put more into lobbying, not quite $7 million in 2014 and $16 million in 2013.

General Electric Summary OpenSecrets

Top two recipients we also Republicans.

A search of Jeffery Immelt, who is CEO doesn't show a donation to Obama in the last two years.

However the guy is chairman of a panel of outside economic advisers and member of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

Immelt s GOP donations - David Catanese - POLITICO.com

"General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt is joining the Obama administration's effort to jumpstart job creation, but prior to that he was a generous donor to GOP candidates."

One of Obama 8217 s Biggest Donors Now His 8216 Economics Adviser 8217 John Hawkins Right Wing News

"As to the donations to Obama’s coffers, Open Secrets has GE’s 2008 donations to Obama’s presidential campaign clocking in at $499,130 putting the company in Obama’s top 20 donators. Other big donors include Goldman Sachs ($994,795), Citigroup ($701,290), and UBS AG ($543,219)."

General Electric Summary OpenSecrets

Romney, Mitt

$342,875

$342,875

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obama, Barack

$139,386

$139,386

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Oh, wait, this is 2012 and GE gave more than double the money to Romney than they gave to Obama, shocking eh? Oh, they gave more to the Republican Party than the Democratic Party too.

What does it all mean then? It doesn't mean what you say it means.

 

[Flopper]

The Republican Party should be rename to Christian Conservative Party because that is exactly what it is. There is no room in the party for non-Christians, liberals, or minorities. If you're looking for diversity both in membership and ideas, your are in the wrong party.

Yeah, and you'd think this would have to change in the future, if they can't get enough votes because the number of people who fit their ideals is shrinking, they will have no choice but to move more to the center.

"move to the center" is based on the flawed concept of a linear left right scale.

The RP does not need to move to the center so much as they need to start actually doing what they say they represent. They continually scream smaller government and then grow it. they scream more freedom and then hatch the PA. They say they stand for freedom and then cant get off gay marriage and abortion. They say they are for simpler taxes and then they complicate them more. They say they are for capitalism and then they forget to mention the crony part.

I could be a republican if they ever did a single thing they state they stand for. Alas, they haven't for decades.

Nothing would strengthen Democrat support more than Republicans passing conservative legislation that restrict abortion rights, slash programs that benefit the poor, restrict civil rights, restrict gay marriage, and cut support for public education, and environmental issues. Republican control of government may be what's need to swing the country further to left permanently.

 

[Vandalshandle]

three things elected obama
1. black pride
2. white guilt
3. a biased lying media.

...and Sarah Palin....

 

[Flopper]

I don't really care who runs for either party, but it would be fun for Jindal to get the nomination so that I can scream "racist!" at anyone who dares to disagree with him on anything.

PC for me!!



.

Except the GOP is too racist to nominated a guy named "Piyush" to the Presidency.

So you won't speak for liberals but have no problem speaking for all of the GOP. Damn projecting liberal.

I was Republican for something like 30 years. And, no, whenever I saw a "Piyush" at a party, he was kind of a fringe character standing in the corner no one would talk to.

Yes, that sounds exactly like the Republican Party meetings I attended 20 or 30 years ago. I doubt seriously there has been any change.