Watch this video. I'm sure some of you guys already know about this. I'm aware there are always two sides to an issue. My question to you is do you believe that the clintons are corrupt? http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=7007109937779036019
LOL!! Lets see... Bush family has ties to Osama Bin Laden, The Carlyle Group, The Saudi royal family, selling war supplies to the nazis, and the Clintons are corrupt? okay...
His foreign policy isn't all that different from Bush's. Only Bush took that extra step... I don't see Hilary doing anything different about Iraq, or even Iran.
Man, I never get tired watching that video. I am what you could call an expert in interpreting facial expressions and mannerisms. This video totally exposes Hillary for putting on the most fake, contrived display, totally intended to manipulate her naive audience. She appears to be in a pissed off mood in nearly every shot, yet slaps that phony smile on her face to attempt to appease her audience. Note her unnatural smile, which lingers longer than it should and is overexaggerated. Note how she goes from pissed to exuberant in a split second. Note how when she is not smiling, she looks disgusted. Yes folks, this is the same b!tch faking like she is not a b!tch....the same b!tch that cusses out her security detail and Arkansas state troopers. The same power hungry, extortionist, selfish, immoral lunatic. Then Peter Paul pretty much sums up Hillaroid's entire existence by saying, "My interest in supporting Hillary Clinton was to specifically hire Bill Clinton." Done, finished, end of story -- this is why Hillaroid garners even a single moment of media attention.
but then you say that videos and other things exposing the bush administration are completely falsified?
The difference in the Clintons, for me personally, is that I would vote for Bill Clinton in this Democratic cast of candidates. With the exception of Huckabee, this would be true for the Republican field as well. If Hillary becomes the Democratic candidate I will work tirelessly, relentlessly for the opposition candidate, even Fred Thompson, who I think is the most unsuitable presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter. IMO, Hillary is that corrupt, that vile, that fractious ... that bad for the nation.
Come on thumbs; you're smarter than that. While Hillary isn't my first choice, anyone will be better then the knucklehead we have now. It would be hard to believe anyone could be as "corrupt, vile, and fractious" as the current administration. I will say though that we do need someone who can bring the country back together and stop the madness. And I agree, Hillary would be hard pressed to do that. Too much baggage. GOBAMA!!!
Seriously? I wouldn't. Incompetent presidents can always be replaced, that is the beauty of democracy. A corrupt president implies that democracy, and America's system of checks and balances, has gone wrong - which in my opinion is far more disastrous and far-reaching than a simple incompetent president.
That is not true, corrupt president will be replaced (8 years max). The US system of government does not allow super corrupt president like in some third world countries, so they will not do lasting damage to the country. Incompetent president on the other hand will create policies or make decisions that often last years if not decades after they leave the office. Lets look at Clinton, what exactly did he do that is really major in the big scheme of things?
WHEN she is president, she wont do anything different about iraq or iran. that is the irony - she is a bush-supporters wet-dream (why do yall think rupert murdock has held multiple fundraisers for her?), yet they are so fixated on the b.s. republican vs. democrat mentality. and clinton supporters who hate bush and all the criminal stuff he has done will defend her when she continues his policies regarding the war in iraq, trying to start another one in iran, keeping the north american union rolling along, pushing amnesty for illegals and kicking protesters out of public events (free speech zones are a two way street). it does seem like hillary has already been anointed though - we might as well stop having elections and just call it what it is - we are now a two family monarchy. there has been a bush or clinton in the white house since 1980! 2 terms of hillary will be 36 years of these scumbags. cant we just give them canada or something and let the rest of us alone? the clintons are crooks and the bushs are crooks - but they both answer to the same masters.
