Whoo boy...

[Gellis Indigo]

What is WRONG with this woman (http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/clinton-says-attack-would-help-gop/20070825112509990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001)?

[Saucy Ria]

What is WRONG with this woman (http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/clinton-says-attack-would-help-gop/20070825112509990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001)?

Ummmmmmm she has the balls to say what many others are thinking??

[surlywench]

Ummmmmmm she has the balls to say what many others are thinking??

/agree

[Gellis Indigo]

Sorry, can't see it that way ladies. I just can't.

I find it incredibly disturbing that even if her mind thinks that way, she would actually make a public statement like that.

[Saucy Ria]

Think about it sweetie........ the republican agenda THRIVES at times when this country is fearful and feeling sheepish......... for example....The unjust, unprovoked and unsanctioned invasion of a sovereign nation under the false connection of said nation to WMDs ....... or for God's sake the PATRIOT ACT??????????? The more afraid we are.........the better they like it...... so GOD FORBID. if we should sustain another terrorist attack say, before next fall...... makes perfect sense that the GOP will benefit.
Pretty sure that was what Ms Clinton meant. At least that's how I took it

[Lady Hefron]

Gellis...I'm with you...this person scares me.

[Bean]

I gotta agree with Ria on this one, but if an attack happens, it could go the other way, too. Reps have stressed over and over that they have done so much to make us safer. If an attack occurred on our soil, the voting population could see them as liars (that they didn't protect us) and vote Dem.

Now, with the above put out there, I hope never, ever to see another terrorist attack on US soil.

[Holly]

I think this comment is tasteless and horrible. However, I would make those comments about Ms Clinton in any situation. It makes me mad that she made these comments about herself being ready to deal with these tragedies as an attempt to garner more power.

I really am interested in seeing what Obama sets as his agenda and his platform. It is a bit too slushy for me. Clinton has been and always will be too much of a socialist for me to EVER support her.
I am decisively a republican voter ..I don't live for the patriot act or evil big government rules.... i leave that up to the Democrats with their bloated spending....

ehh.. thread jacking myself....

Clinton's comments are out of place. I am a terribly blunt person who would say the things that most people don't have the guts to say.... I agree with bean that an act of terrorism can go either way for either party in this upcoming election. However, I don't think that the implied 'hope for a tragedy' is ever on the republican agenda....

Now if anything happens, Clinton can stand up and shout.. I told you so .. i told you so! If anything, it make me see her as a bossy student in my classroom trying to get power. With peoples lives in the balance, her comments are a political gambit that makes her look like a catty, trashy and uncaring creature.
The only added bonus is maybe conspiracy theorist will look at her with her ominous comments ....LOL

[surlywench]

I am decisively a republican voter ..I don't live for the patriot act or evil big government rules.... i leave that up to the Democrats with their bloated spending....





oh yes, because the current republican president has done so very much for our country's fiscal responsibility....... ????

_please_.

both sides spend money like water.

[Capt. Stamina]

I don’t believe anything that lying piece of trash has to say. She's as worse than Obama, but she's had a lot more practice at it than he has.

“My momma named me after Sir Edmund Hillary because he climbed to the top of Mt. Everest.” Only problem being that Sir Hillary climbed to the peak four years after she was born. I wonder if Momma and John Edwards are related; momma to predict what was going to happen, and Edwards channeling voices from the dead?

Oh and Hillary, maybe you should do some more research on your socialist health care system. Seems that the French (Socialist) system that you want subject the rest of us to is falling apart and about to implode. French economists are saying the US model of Private Health Care is the model that they should follow.

[Saucy Sue]

As much as I would like to see a woman in the White House...there is no way that I will EVER vote for this woman. Comments like this just reinforce my decision.

[Isabelle Warwicke]

...there is no way that I will EVER vote for this woman.

BUt she's counting on all her sister females to vote for her. She's so confident that she has the Woman Vote in her pocket.

I'll vote for anyone running against her. My reason for not liking her is her voting record (http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463&type=category&category=38&go.x=8&go.y=10)when it comes to healthcare. Not what she says she will do, but what she has done and voted against so far.

Action. speaks. louder.

[LdyJhawk]

Oh and Hillary, maybe you should do some more research on your socialist health care system. Seems that the French (Socialist) system that you want subject the rest of us to is falling apart and about to implode. French economists are saying the US model of Private Health Care is the model that they should follow.



Yeah so, our health care system is hardly something to be proud of. Medications no one can afford without insurance and insurance no one can afford without companies willing to help foot the bill. 2000 a month is what MS paid for my guy's benefits. 2 GRAND so he had full medical, dental, vision and perscription coverage with no co-pays or deductibles. That is insane.

I was paying 400 a month as MY PART only to get a 15 dollar copay and a 300 deductible with crap perscription coverage but at least it was something.

There needs to be a way to meet in the middle where those who can afford through work to get higher level insurance can, and those who can't are able to simply be a part of social medicine. Before anyone throws medicaid out there, have you actually seen the benefits they get? Some of them are worth nothing more than the paper the handbook is printed on. Something has to give relief to those people who can't afford to pay what their companies are asking but can't qualify for medicaid because of income limits

[Capt. Stamina]

How about some tort reform for starts? Limits on how much you can sue for, and if you sue and lose, not only do you have to pay for your lawyer; you have to cover the court costs and the defendant’s lawyer. That would cut back on the malpractice costs and lower our costs.

It’s for the above reason that flu vaccines aren’t manufactured in the US. They’re ordered by the Gov’t and manufactured in the UK; with the proviso that any lawsuits from allergic reactions are handed by our Gov’t.

[Isabelle Warwicke]

How about some tort reform for starts? Limits on how much you can sue for...

Hillary voted against that. She also voted against most of the Medicare/Medicaid reforms that would make the system more "user friendly" for those who actually have to use it.

[sslider66]

I shudder to think what will happen if she gets elected. Our healthcare system may have flaws, but one of the people in my office just came back from living in Canada for the past 10 years and the horror stories he and his wife tell would make you stop and think. They always came back to the states for medical stuff. She had some x-rays taken in the states and took back to her physician in Canada for their records. He was amazed at how clear they were because their equipment is so outdated they can't get clear images.

[Capt. Stamina]

Ask people about government bureaucracy, especially the federal government, and watch they’re eyes roll and if you goad them, you can get a story or two. Then ask them why would they want these same people to control their health care. Seven out of ten times the response is because they don’t want to be bothered (lack of personal responsibility), or it costs too much.

“So the same people that can’t pay their bills on time, balance their own personal checkbooks, and the ‘bureaucrats’ you complain about; you want them to control what medical services you can have and when you can have it?”

Blink
*deer in head lights*

Un-huh.

[Capt. Stamina]

Just curious as to why MSNBC and CNN haven’t even mentioned this?

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118835199704811801.html?mod=blog

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118826947048110677.html?mod=Politics-and-Policy



And this flashback post didn’t seem to make their news either when it was reported:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03042007/news/nationalnews/pro_clinton_dirty_cash_man_flees_nationalnews_chri stine_field.htm

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

Sorry, can't see it that way ladies. I just can't.

I find it incredibly disturbing that even if her mind thinks that way, she would actually make a public statement like that.
Do you really believe that she's the only politician or political operative who has considered the political ramifications of such an event?

Her only mistake is saying it out loud.

I live in NYC, I can tell you with absolute certainty that 9/11 had a direct impact on the mayoral campaign here. Mark Green pretty much had the race locked up, but the attacks turned Giuliani into a superstar (or, honestly, to be more accurate, Giuliani leveraged 9/11 to turn himself into a superstar [and he's still trying to ride those coattails straight into the White House]) and it was his support of Bloomberg (Giuliani and Green having had a longstanding dislike for one another) that propelled Bloomberg past Green and into Gracie Mansion. That isn't just my interpretation, it's the general consensus of the political observers; use teh google and you'll see what I'm saying is true.


Nothing happens in a vacuum, and everything effects politics. For a person to believe otherwise is naive; for a politician to believe otherwise is suicide.


There are plenty of reasons to dislike her and I have no fondness for her either; but all this just seems to me like hating for hating's sake and a lot of empty political rhetoric. What exactly did she say that was so terrible? In response to a question about the political ramifications of a terrorist attack she responded with her opinion on what those ramifications would be. It's not like she said that she has a plan to exploit the attack for her personal advantage (which isn't to say that I don't think she has one, I'm sure they all do. Giuliani pretty much wrote the textbook on it). Now, that would have been an odious statement worthy of the responses currently being bandied about.

[Pathos]

What exactly did she say that was so terrible?
I could be wrong but I think the outrage was based on her opinion that the only effect of another terrorist attack would be a boost to the Republicans.

She didn't say anything about how another terrorist attack would be...you know...bad for the rest of us.

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

I could be wrong but I think the outrage was based on her opinion that the only effect of another terrorist attack would be a boost to the Republicans.

She didn't say anything about how another terrorist attack would be...you know...bad for the rest of us.
I guess whether or not that matters depends on what the question that she was responding to was.



...besides, you could argue that talking about boosts to the Republicans is talking about things that are bad for the rest of us. :wink: