Printable View
Obama supporter can’t name anything Obama has actually done
For people that watch Fox news, this should sound familar... Was very surprised to hear Chris Mathews ask this question, he is in love with Obama.
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx ... c276111c30
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/
Can you name anything Clinton has done for NY?
She voted for the war... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Me? I don't live in New York, so, I can not answer that question :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
As for me, I have said before, that both Senator Clinton & Senator Obama are not very experienced, but, when compared side-by-side, Clinton has more experience than Obama.
But, Tommy, that's ok, you did not answer the question either :roll: :D :mrgreen:
I know the only thing I ever wanted Hillary to do—sign me up for a tour of the White House—she didn't do. Schumer's office was similarly useless. I can't think of one piece of legislation Hillary sponsored that has done anything for the citizens of New York City...not that I follow every law being pushed through Congress, but given the local media's love of her (even in the Post until recently) we would know all about it if she did.
Recently Bill Clinton remarked that both he and Hillary ("Billary" if you will) have "always been there for California". That was certainly true. A good place to toss some pork.
New York on the other hand they took for granted...and apparently wisely so, considering she was promptly elected as Senator here.
Amazing when you consider their "populist" campaigning style and they even managed to squander the line item veto when they couldn't imagine anything better to do with it than cutting Medicaid (or was it medicare) funds to NY State.
Squander?? The presidential line item veto is unconstitutional!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
Yes, the presidential line-item veto was ruled unconstitutional *after* Guiliani/Moynihan & company took it to court when Clinton first attempted to use it - "against the poor" (as I am reasonably sure would've been said had say, Ronald Reagan, attempted the same exact action, when given the authority).
It may have lasted longer had it been used in other instances... (or perhaps not).
From a political point of view, its odd to have a hard fought and powerful weapon in your arsenal, you have to know is vulnerable to legal challenge, and you roll it out the first time into a potential buzz saw.
Someone was going to take it to court as soon as Clinton used it, no matter what he used it for...remember, Clinton spent all 8 years in office dodging fake scandals, there was no way the Republicans were going to let him have that kind of power.
Well, Bill Clinton asked for the Line-item veto himself, (as did Ronald Reagan). I am sure Daniel Patrick Moynihan did not see himself as the tool of the Clinton-haters when he foamed at the mouth at Clinton's use of it in New York State.
I agree with you Adam, that Clinton was unfairly and consistently targeted by some rabid detractors, but unfortunately there was plenty of legitimate sleaze all the same. I couldn't care less about the Monica Lewinsky situation, but the appearance of hundreds of FBI files of Republican politicians magically appearing in the Clinton White House, for example, (still unexplained?) speaks volumes.
Tom