Why waste time talking about any of the dems when right now Ron Paul needs all the help we can possibly give him to get his message out?

Hillary “the Commie-Marxist” Clinton by now must be “crying ”
and shreeeking at her husband,”Willie…help poor defenseless ME!”
Meanwhile,”Wet Willie” is trying to make important decisions for his future…like whether to take Finnair or Icelandair jet to Finland..
Finnair bus terminal in downtown HELLsinki is convenient to Mannerheimentikatu and Finnish Parliament Funkadelic Mothership.Willie was observed googling for flowers and chocolets and Cuban cigars in CITY SOKOS ,for presentation to unsuspecting Blonde female interns in Parliament Funkadelic Mothership ,Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are not invited for big party!

I so look forward to your contributions via the print media Infinndel.

No, really………….

As I agree with the concept of what you are saying there is a contradiction in what you are saying. Hilarycare was and is a very controversial undertaking for Hilary so to say that she would “do or say anything to remain popular, never taking a stand on anything remotely controversial.” is completely false.

I am not a supporter of Hilary and if faced with her as the democratic nominee I would seriously think about voting Republican or hopefully Independent. That said I think the hatred for Hilary by many people is peculiar. Hate her for supporting the war, name a politician in real contention for the white house that was in the senate during the vote that wasn’t. Hate for attack ads its not like she invented the strategy its the way the game is played in Washington, don’t like it blame Washington. The scandals??? Looking back I would take any one of Hilary’s private scandals that effected only her and her family than any of the scandals in the past 8 years we have now that affect almost everyone around the world.

As I said I am not a supporter of hers but the hatred for her is odd to me you don’t have to like her and you don’t have to rationalize it some people just rub me the wrong way but the things I hear used to justify hatred for Hilary in the big scheme of things are nothing. I mean we live in a democracy if the majority of Americans hate Hilarycare it will never pass so why hate her for trying to make a solution to a problem Americans have. Also the majority of New Yorkers are happy with how Hilary is doing in the Senate so again whats the complaint? She moved her resident there they were happy with it and she won the election democratically. Charisma thing is correct she has very little to none but she has to deal with 2 of the most charismatic character in politics with Bill and Obama so she looks like she has even less charisma then normal.

Again I can’t stress enough how much I think her getting the nomination will be a mistake and I predict the Democrats will lose because of it, but that is not to say she would be a good candidate just that the level of hatred out there for her makes it impossible for her to get the support she would need. I myself would vote for Obama, McCainn, or Bloomberg before her and if none of those are a option then I would stay home. I rather stay home then vote for a lesser of two evils.

Phil: “The White House at any cost. She will do or say anything to become President, she has no morals or principles.”

Well said, Phil. I really couldn’t agree more.

Kourtney Williams: “Hilarycare was and is a very controversial undertaking”

Wrong! Hillarycare is all about populism. Everybody wants universal healthcare. Rightly so, and Hillary is banking on everyone believing that she can provide it. At this point, lots of people want miracles.

But when you realize that ALL the major insurance companies support her campaign, doesn’t it make you wonder about her credibility just a little bit? I mean, does America really need another tool to funnel profit into the pockets of industry?

I think we know from experience here in Finland, that having a card which states “You are insured” doesn’t actually mean very much.

No charisma? She could work quite well in Finnish politics. After all, it’s one of Vanhanen’s selling points. (To me, she doesn’t seem to lack charisma in any case – but perhaps Americans have a higher threshold for “when” someone has charisma?!) In any case, what does it have to do with how good a president she would make?

I haven’t been following much of this campaign yet. (And frankly, I feel sorry for Americans that their election campaign starts SO far in advance of their actual election – no wonder they are sick of it by the time it’s time to actually vote.) However, I would have initially thought Obama would have been the better candidate. However, since actually reading about their politics, it would seem Obama is more to the right than Clinton. He also seems to be as unworldly wise as George Bush jnr was before he became president (the newspaper even said he was looking forward to working with Canada’s president!). However, it doesn’t seem that actual real politics play much role in the election of an American president. It’s all about personality, it would seem. Strange way to choose, but there you go.

Most people do their jobs for some other reason than because they REALLY REALLY like to. I have nothing against machiavellian politician if she does her job well. I mean, Bush is ideological, and look where it got us.

I like Obama as well — not that I can vote in the States — but just rhetorically, how much do good intentions mean if you can’t execute them properly?

I mean, Bush is ideological,

Since when? Did he recently develop an IQ?

Kristian- You can’t seriously believe all Americans want universal health care? If its such a populist thing then why is it seen as her biggest failure during her time as First Lady? We aren’t championing her with foresight. We are saying it was a mistake for her to try and push it through. You don’t have to push through a populist idea.

Americans want a solution to the health care problem I agree but I don’t think the majority think universal health care is the way to the parties are divided among themselves with what the solution should be. I seriously doubt any of the democratic candidates solution will make it past congress. Hilary purposed her health care plan over 15 years ago so to say its a populist movement now because the Democratic party decided to make it there new bullet point is a mis-characterization.

As for the fact she has insurance companies supporting her I see that she learned how to work in Washington and that the lobbyist are better to be on your side then to be against you. That is also a reason I wouldn’t vote for her because she is entrenched in the inner working s of Washington and I want someone that will change Washington for the better because it needs to be redone.

As for the experience in Finland I think I learned more for my experience back home in America that being insured with something is still a millions times better then being uninsured.

“she’s attacking Barack, a fellow Democrat who’s done nothing wrong.”

but then again, he has a long list of ideas of what to do. All of them failed policies from the past, and when Carter comes to mind, he will be the son of Carter.

Look below his good looks, and sound bits. Look at who he would name to attorney General? As very polarizing thinking is going on in his head.

Why waste time talking about any of the dems when right now Ron Paul needs all the help we can possibly give him to get his message out?

Anyone who reads this blog knows enough about Ron Paul already. He had a great run, and his given alot of hope to future libertarian candidates, but he lost. But his campaign refueled the spirits of alot of disenfranchised libertarians, so I suspect in 2012 we’ll see even a better showing from a similar candidate.

Hilarycare was and is a very controversial undertaking for Hilary so to say that she would “do or say anything to remain popular, never taking a stand on anything remotely controversial.” is completely false.

Good point and I was thinking that exact same thing when I wrote this post. I think back in the day she was an idealist, but after 14 years of politics, she’s now tainted and power hungry. She’s a different person now than she was in ’92.

I am not a supporter of Hilary and if faced with her as the democratic nominee I would seriously think about voting Republican or hopefully Independent.

I’ll never vote for Hillary, McCain, or Romney, so hopefully the LP runs a good candidate.

Phil-The LP is thinking of running a candidate??? Do you know any hopefuls I would be interested to know.

Hillary can provide Universal Healthcare about as well as David Copperfield can move the statue of liberty…. Its an illusion!

Love your blog, will definately check back.

I hope Hillary becomes the presidential candidate for Dems. She would never win, and the world wouldn’t be treated to years of Carter-Clinton stupidity.

*
It’s not just Hillary, her purple nosed husband wagging that pasty white finger in our faces every time we don’t fall in gooses-step with them that is getting very old.

You see, the Clintons see themselves as an American post facto royalty and American voters as just so many insects who better know their place.

The Clintons have smeared our faces in their scandals for far too long, still the democrats will trot them out every election so we all can see the scaly underbelly of that party and be forced to once again relive all of the Clinton scandals over and over again, but democrats have no shame after all they keep electing a murderer (Teddy Kennedy) . GAD!

*bert

*

Phil-The LP is thinking of running a candidate??? Do you know any hopefuls I would be interested to know.

Well they’ve run a candidate every term, so I doubt this year would be any different (although if Ron Paul had won, I’d suspect they’d nominate him)

The only one I know is George Phillies: http://www.phillies2008.org

I believe they do their nominations in April/May.

He (Ron Paul) had a great run, … but he lost.

Huh? I’m talking about the run for President.

Ron Paul Progress

Hilarius Hiiri presidentiksi!

Good grief. Your Ms Clinton really sucks. She reminds me of the Italian politicians, the way they are described in the foreign newspapers. (Strudel is an Iti ….)

What exactly are the Clinton scandals? I mean, the political ones – the ones about bedrooms don’t count.

You think any politicians give a fuck about anything but themselves? They’re politicians. Please, spare me your youthful naivete.

On the score of negative ads, man, you aren’t here. You should see the shit slinging from Romney and Mr. I am 9/11.

Personally, I think all the candidates suck this time around, Obama included. I’m just waiting for Nader and Don King to run to make the suckfest complete. McCain is about the only one I could possibly even vote for but it’s unlikely he’ll get the nomination.

Tervetuloa, I have to agree that Ms Clinton’s 35 years of experience mainly consists of manipulating the legal system and trying to conceal her own corruption. Her years as a Jr senate appears to be mainly for show. She is currently being investigated for filing false financial disclosures with the US senate and is refusing to release her own White House records. No doubt, if elected the world community will find her as repugnant as we do.

iJusten – Google for “Whitewater Clinton”

And Then There’s Hillary “That Laugh”

it a caterwaul, the sound the Democratic front-runner makes me want to move to Finland

WHY I AND MOST EVERYONE ELSE LOATHES HILLARY CLINTON???

Myself? I loath the Clintons because no matter what they do, no matter who he rapes, no matter who they screw out of their life savings, no matter how much money they take from the Chinese for our missile technology, no matter how many times they lie under oath… they always seem to walk away with out a scrape while someone else goes to prison or is found dead.

It’s time the Clintons are made to pay for a lifetime of crapping all over America… the only recourse we have is to keep them away from the power they so crave… so don’t vote for them… jail them.

*bert

*

Ted “THE SWIMMER” Kennedy…(remember Chapaquidik bridge tragedy!?)
will announce tomorrow his endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama for
president….Billary feels left out and adrift in changing political currents! Teddy boy Kennedy refuses to throw out floatation device to
drowning witch,drinks another Irish scotch and water….

Billary was later heard shreiking..”I’m melting!…I’m meellllting…
help me!… or you will never see toto again!” this is NOT Kansas
primary…

Billary was later heard shreiking… no more Air Force one? Gee I can’t modest the Interns? What about Cigars?

infinndel – Well, you know the scut on that scandal was that Jack was the one driving….I’d probably drink like him, too, if I had that family.

@26 They seem to have some supernatural teflon coating, a bit like Osama Bin Laden. They just seem to keep escaping consequences for their actions. Perhaps it is Satan himself behind it.

Have you noticed that all these big Democratic senators — Ted Kennedy, Ben Johnson, John Kerry, Patrick Leahy — are basically supporting Obama?

That tells me that the party feels deeply ambivalent about having to deal with the Clintons again. They realize that this is an opportunity to “take back the party” if you will from Bill, Hillary, and thier narrow circle, and expand the franchise to all those 18-year-old kids wearing the Obama t-shirts.

When Ted Kennedy supports the 46-year-old newcomer over the institutional party candidate, you’ve got to know that the Clintons have pissed off some major players in the party along the way.

go Obama!

*
Hillary committed the largest campaign finance felony in history, ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOOwvDtSo3M ) and was able to walk away because the process of bring her and Bill to justice was usurped by a Clinton appointed judge and a sympathetic federal prosecutor who hid evidence from the grand jury till it was too late. That evidence is now available and part of a civil case against the Clintons. ( http://www.peterfpaul.com/ )

If this two million dollar fraud had been committed by any other politician it would have been curtains for them but as it was the Clintons it was just another crime in a list of many and America has been inoculated to ignore Clinton crimes.

These two belong in jail, they should have been in jail long before Bill slithered into the White House. Watch the clip then go to this link http://www.wyomingway.com/hillary_clinton.htm for more.

*bert

*

There is one slightly disconcerting thing if Hillary Clinton does eventually become the American president. That would mean your democratically elected head of state and government has gone to Bush Snr-Clinton, B-Clinton, B-Bush Jnr-Bush Jnr-Clinton, H. Beginning to look like a monarchical or feudal system! With that in mind, I could understand why Obama’s message of bringing change to your government would be an attractive one amongst many.

Obama feels like Kennedy in many ways, which is why I hope he takes the throne. I’m hoping for Ron Paul to take over everything, but I doubt there’s much chance, so Obama it is

As a finn….Obama to win!

giustino #32: Dem senator Ben Johnson? That sounds more like a former Canadian sprinter. I think you meant Ben Nelson (D-NE) or Tim Johnson (D-SD) or both.

Mike Gravel is still making statements, even if he is not getting any votes:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/creationism-cor.html

Phil: I’d like to comment on your points.

-Watergate had nothing to do with Hillary. Neither is she responsible for all of Bill’s scandals.

-I disagree about presidential spouses. Eleanor Roosevelt was an important figure in a time when it was unthinkable for women to become president. It’s different today partly thanks to Hillary herself getting the first primary victory for a woman ever but I still think it’s mostly Bill who is baggage to Hillary more than the other way around.

-I disagree also on the New York senate seat. Many New Yorkers are proud of RFK having been their senator, even if there was the same carpetbagging issue then. America is a free country and if Ron Paul were to move to Idaho tomorrow and they’d elect him as their next senator (this won’t happen but you get my point) you’d stop complaining about people voting for candidates who are recent arrivals in a state. I think it takes courage to run in a state where everyone is going to throw this “you’re not a native” at you. I even think Ron Paul hadn’t lived in Texas for so many years when they first elected him as their Congressman.

-The no charisma issue is rather ridiculous given that the Dems have nominated people like Mondale or Dukakis (people who look and sound like European statesmen) before. She has more charisma than they had. It’s just that Obama is the most charismatic candidate since Reagan. That doesn’t make her completely uncharismatic.

-If the Reps nominate Romney, any Democrat will win against him, so Hillary is not unelectable. There’s a 50% chance the Reps will nominate Romney and a 50% chance they’ll nominate McCain. Basically they decide the issue in Florida tomorrow. The loser will get the whole party against him because in GOP they just don’t do these long, divisive campaigns. They do away with the loser early on.

-Negative campaigning is the American tradition. There is only one scenario where I could imagine less of that than usual: Obama vs. McCain. That would be quite a race given that both parties would nominate someone who was not originally the establishment favorite.

-The biggest problem with Hillary’s vote for the War in Iraq is that she tried to explain it away as a vote for diplomacy. That’s too bad she chose to put it that way because it might kill her campaign in the end (not that she voted for the war and then changed her mind). That vote is also the reason why Ted Kennedy endorses Obama, a factor that may have key importance for Super Tuesday.

-I think Obama is more authentic but if he were to trash Hillary the same way Phil is doing here, he wouldn’t appear that presidential anymore.

Helsinkian: “-Watergate had nothing to do with Hillary.”

I think Phil meant Whitewater and, yes, it had lots to do with Hillary. Together, Bill and Hillary represent the epitome of American’s leftist elite. Whitewater was just one of their many imbroglios.

Helsinkian: “Eleanor Roosevelt was an important figure”

Eleanor Roosevelt was well known and high-profile, but not important in the big scheme of things.

iJusten: “I have nothing against machiavellian politician if she does her job well.”

The problem with machiavellian politics is that, by definition, it involves somebody winning at any cost. In politics, that ‘cost’ is usually paid-for by taxpayers.

In this case, Hillary’s willingness to accept insurance company endorsements, in exchange for funneling money into their shareholders’ and top management’s pockets, will cost America dearly. If it screws-up the economy, then nobody benefits from it—especially not Finland.

But will it help her personally, at least in the short term? Sure, that’s what machiavellianism is all about. Glad you support it.

Helsinkian – “If the Reps nominate Romney, any Democrat will win against him, so Hillary is not unelectable.”

I’m not so sure about that. Romney is getting sold over here as though her were a businessman to heal all that ails the economy. (Oh, and he’s another interloper as he got elected, somehow, as governor of MA.) That and, just as Phil illustrates here, women still get dumped on though their transgressions may be far more minor than the men. Those folks in the fundy belt of the flyover states will never allow a woman out of the kitchen and into the white house. I’m not sure they’ll vote for a black man either, but he stands a far greater chance of getting elected than she does, even with Whitney Young endorsing Hilary.

Kristian – “Eleanor Roosevelt was well known and high-profile, but not important in the big scheme of things.”

Honey, you didn’t read much about Roosevelt, did you? She was essential to that presidency.

Oh, and bonus points for using ‘imbroglio’

helsinkian #38: I was thinking of Ben Nelson, but all these white guys’ names sound the same Nelson, Johnson, Clinton, Bronson …

“Parliament Funkadelic Mothership”

Dude you need to cut on the dope.

#44…Didn’t you know Bill Clinton and George Clinton are cousins?
They both got a natural sense of RHYTHM…catch my drift!?
dey be both boogieing down Manner-HYMEN-T wit’ blonde babes and booze
real soon wit de home boys..after all slick Willie is Amerikkka’s foist blak press…

Slic Willie and colorful George Clinton are strutin ther stuf
in front of Finnish Parliament Funkadelic Mothership…..
serchin for knappy headed blonde interns….

slik Willie:George…look over der by de Mann on de horse in front of dat warped and wavy white building…
colorful George: WOW-WOW-WOW!…Look at dem smokin blondes,bro’!
What dey be smokin!?…I wants to get me sum sooon!
slik Willie: I can’t read dare smoke signals…But weeel be smokin Cuban cigars soooon!!

hfb: Romney got elected governor of MA because he told everybody he healed all the ills of the Olympics. Of course, he was also very liberal on social issues way back then.

I know all the Republicans think strategically and assume Romney is going to carry some blue states because he was a relatively liberal governor of Massachusetts. Now if he wins the Florida primary it will be only because he will carry the very conservative vote by a large margin. He could win the Republican nomination because his campaign has more cash than the competitors. He won’t have that advantage in the general election.

If nominated, Romney will run as a liberal in the blue states and as a conservative in the red states. Already in the Republican primaries he was way more conservative in Iowa than he was in Michigan.

Doing that, he will carry the red states but he will lose all the battleground states where they will be way too confused about his message.

Case in point: The New York Senate seat. She has absolutely ZERO ties to New York, yet she ran for senator and used New Yorkers like a tool to become President. You think she gives a damn about New York? Pleeease. If I were from New York I’d be extremely offended.

I grew up in western New York, which is a FAR different world than NYC. I don’t live in NYS anymore; but if I did, I would make sure that everyone I knew in my circle of friends would vote against her. If she has any ties to NY, it’s only to NYC and Long Island. That’s it. Anything north of the Catskills isn’t even an afterthought to her. Thus, if you haven’t gotten the hint yet, I AM EXTREMELY OFFENDED.

BTW, has anyone noticed that politicians LOVE to play the religion card when they’re running for public office? (I don’t know if they do this in Finland, but this happens in every election cycle in the US.) I have no problem with a bonafide Christian being in politics, so long as they remain true to their word. It’s when people like Hillary use “faith” as a buzzword to try to dupe the evangelical Christain voters for their own personal agenda.

I’ll never vote for Hillary, McCain, or Romney, so hopefully the LP runs a good candidate.
I thought that 2004 was bad enough for the field of choices. 2008 looks even worse. I’m just looking to see who the Constitution Party will field. Maybe something can be done to rescue conservatism from the mess that GWB has left it in.

One final thought on my post: can anyone imagine Hillary being the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces? It was bad enough when her draft-dodging husband held that position, but how many men are going to obey the orders of a woman who has absolutely no military experience whatsoever?

Man, do I miss Ronald Reagan!!!

“Man, do I miss Ronald Reagan!!!”

You know, as a dem I don’t think I ever envisioned myself saying this but….yeah, I miss Ronnie, too.

Reaganite: If the heaviest argument against Hillary is that some people can’t stand a woman as commander-in-chief, then that’s nothing but misogyny. That type of comment sort of makes all the legitimate criticism against her totally irrelevant. I understand that your point is that Hillary doesn’t have military experience but neither had Bill and he didn’t do such a bad job.

Enjoy the man you have as commander-in-chief while you can. Even if Hillary might indeed lose to Obama, one day you will have to swallow the bitter pill and accept a woman at the top spot. Military experience is one of the factors that matter when voting for president but it’s not the only issue and that type of experience in itself does not guarantee that that person is most fit to command armed forces. I’m not sure George W. Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard in any way distinguished him to be the leader of the free world. He has other merits but military experience was always his weak point. That’s why his people had to trash John Kerry who actually happened to have some military experience.

That’s why his people had to trash John Kerry who actually happened to have some military experience.

I hate being proven right when I’ve said in the past that there is only one set of facts, but two (or more) different versions on how those facts are interpreted.

Sure, Kerry had military experience. However, if there is any truth that he made the blind accusations about torture in Vietnam without naming actual names, then he was rightfully excoriated for his opprobrium. (I seem to remember that National Review had a write-up about Kerry’s congressional misinformation testimony.)

BTW, if this will ease things, I didn’t vote for either Bush or Kerry in 2004. I voted with my conscience and went with Michael Peroutka.

thanks for this post mate. hope you have a good day. thanks.

Well all of these comments were certainly entertaining, even if this post was made a while ago. Thanks for everyone that participated.