calfoxwc Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 http://constitution.com/fearful-hillary-bubbas-former-mistress-sleeps-loaded-gun/ She's been threatened in the past, and now is going to write a book to tell the truth about ... the clinton "mafia" some weird visuals about the clintons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 and.....what Trump is saying... http://constitution.com/hillary-clinton-nasty-mean-enabler-husbands-adulteries/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 The Clintons are the real life Underwoods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 I can attribute a lot of stuff old Bill...but dancing around in a nighty playing the sax I call bullshit. THis dumb whore, and remember she's a WHORE she knew full well he was married, is just trying to cash in cause her story is relevant again. That being said the article is 100% correct on one count, the visual is uneraseable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 I would bet money that Trump gets Juanita Broderick to stump for him at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 I would bet money that Trump gets Juanita Broderick to stump for him at some point. Of course because he'll pay her a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 CNN is calling it a dumb line of attacks, among other things like saying Bush 41 signed NAFTA (maybe pioneered it, but Clinton enthusiastically signed it into law) The shilling has begun, but it's a smart attack for Trump to make as Hillary is shilling about how she's a champion for women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 IF he can definitively link her with personal attacks against these former mistresses than maybe, otherwise every woman that's been cheated on will say hey wait you're holding me responsible for my husbands wayward dick? Hows that gonna go for him? In how many demographics does Trump want to take a shed beating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 IF he can definitively link her with personal attacks against these former mistresses than maybe, otherwise every woman that's been cheated on will say hey wait you're holding me responsible for my husbands wayward dick? Hows that gonna go for him? In how many demographics does Trump want to take a shed beating? Yea but by all accounts Bill was not just an innocent little guy with a prostitute problem, there's been a lot of reports about him doing things like whipping his dick out in front of women all the way to full out rape accusations. He has Roger Stone on his side, he's likely in charge of the dirty Clinton attack lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Yeah the full out rape stories...I dunno, "maybe". Which says a lot about someone when one says "maybe" to rape accusations. He's a shady character for sure. But I think he was also a good president. Trump may be similar in that respect, we may very well get to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Yeah the full out rape stories...I dunno, "maybe". Which says a lot about someone when one says "maybe" to rape accusations. He's a shady character for sure. But I think he was also a good president. Trump may be similar in that respect, we may very well get to see that. Many democrats (and independents I guess) like to worship/praise Bill Clinton (Many people support Hillary because they think Bill was an amazing president) Bill Clinton: - Signed NAFTA into law (and had only good things to say about it - http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/nafta-signed-into-law) - Champion of wall street deregulation - Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (repealed glass-steagall), Riegle-Neal, appointed Alan Greenspan as federal reserve chair - Expanded the war on drugs Bill benefited from a natural upswing in the business cycle (similar to Reagan) - people have the illusion he was a good president because of that (same with Reagan) Democrats blame Bush 41 for NAFTA, which is fair because it was pioneered under the Bush administration - but you can't forget that Bill is the one who signed it into law (enthusiastically) --- In the spirit of non-partisan fairness, many conservatives (and independents) love to praise/worship Reagan (much more so than Clinton). Reagan was a shitty president too. Ronald Reagan: - Pioneer of trickle down economics - Tripled national debt - Iran-contra - Funded mujahideen in afghanistan - providing big money, lots of weapons. (led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban) Basically every president has been bad for a long time now, thankfully Donald J Trump decided to run in 2016. The way I see it, he's the only candidate who has a chance at straightening out our foreign policy, stopping TPP, and repealing NAFTA. If he manages to do just one of those things it will make him one of the greatest presidents ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 I think the problem is that at one point nafta was ok but it hasnt changed/evolved. At least thats what ive read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Reagan was the best President in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Or the worst cause he time bombed our currency, either one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 I think the problem is that at one point nafta was ok but it hasnt changed/evolved. At least thats what ive read. Nah, I don't think it went fully into effect right away it happened more gradually over time or something. But back in 92' the Ross Perots and Donald Trumps of the country warned everybody that NAFTA only benefits Mexico and will suck jobs out of the US like a vacuum (a prediction that has since come true) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Ronald Reagan: - Pioneer of trickle down economics - Tripled national debt - Iran-contra - Funded mujahideen in afghanistan - providing big money, lots of weapons. (led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban) EDW **************************************************** Reagan was definately one of our greatest presidents ever. Trickle down economics - check Iran Contra - Jimmy Carter reign hostages taken. Never got them back. Reagan admin did. stfu. Funded mujahideen ... - check. The Russian invasion/war in Afghanistan led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. They were fighting RUSSIA. Not the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Ronald Reagan: - Pioneer of trickle down economics - Tripled national debt - Iran-contra - Funded mujahideen in afghanistan - providing big money, lots of weapons. (led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban) EDW **************************************************** Reagan was definately one of our greatest presidents ever. Trickle down economics - check Iran Contra - Jimmy Carter reign hostages taken. Never got them back. Reagan admin did. stfu. Funded mujahideen ... - check. The Russian invasion/war in Afghanistan led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. They were fighting RUSSIA. Not the US. Trickle down economics is not a good thing. The Iran-Contra scandal occured during the 2nd term of the Reagan administration We armed them to fight the Soviets, but it still led to the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The lesson here is that we need to stop arming terrorists in the middle east (a mistake that keeps on repeating itself, unfortunately) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 (See 'conservatives' freak out when you criticize Reagan) (I'm sure 'liberals' freak out when you criticize Clinton too, but this is the browns board so there's not a lot of Clinton love) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 freak out? because I'm trying to clarify your comments? the hostages were taken during the Carter disaster. Carter badly failed to win their release, and failed in their rescue. Carter was a complete and total ass of a president. "trickle down economics" - doesn't exist, never did. That was just a political slur against a very popular Rep president. "supply side economics" is the theory they labeled something else to ridicule. from AboutMoney During the Reagan Administration, it seemed that trickle-down economics worked. Reagan cut taxes significantly. The top tax rate fell from 70% (for those earning $108,000+) to 28% (for anyone with an income of $18,500 or more). The corporate tax rate was also cut, from 46% to 40%. Reaganomicsended the 1980 recession. And, the emergence of al quaida and the taliban... maybe technically, regarding those terms... but the people who came together came together to fight the soviets. The different groups have existed for centuries. Go read up it. Just trying to correct your shallow assertions, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 10, 2016 Report Share Posted May 10, 2016 Reagan started the tide of deficit spending. Presidents from both parties since then have obviously helped themselves to yhat gravy train too, no argument from me. But it was reagan that some neocon hawks convinced that the u.s was in a unique position to fo things with our currency that wouldnt be possible without a fiat system. This is one of ron oauls biggest grouse's and he's right. All you conservatives that gripe about our govt spending, that landslide started in the early 80's under the guise of combatting the rooskies. What most of yoy will probably never understand or acknowledge is that we didnt really beat the russians. We set a time bomb in our own economy and dared the russians to follow suit. They tried and imploded because they dont print the worlds reserve. If they did they would have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 here's the thing about Reagan increasing our debt. Your democrat dingbat asswipe Pres Carter cut our military to fund other entitlement to poor black dem voters.. and our military was in a crisis. Reagan had to rebuild our military. and to rebuild it, is always a hell of a lot more expensive. ObaMao is doing the exact same thing - cutting our military. God help us if we have to go to war in our situation we're in now. Obamao is practically inviting the soviets and chinese to confront us now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 Yea but by all accounts Bill was not just an innocent little guy with a prostitute problem, there's been a lot of reports about him doing things like whipping his dick out in front of women all the way to full out rape accusations. He has Roger Stone on his side, he's likely in charge of the dirty Clinton attack lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 here's the thing about Reagan increasing our debt. Your democrat dingbat asswipe Pres Carter cut our military to fund other entitlement to poor black dem voters.. and our military was in a crisis. Reagan had to rebuild our military. and to rebuild it, is always a hell of a lot more expensive. ObaMao is doing the exact same thing - cutting our military. God help us if we have to go to war in our situation we're in now. Obamao is practically inviting the soviets and chinese to confront us now. Cal the vietnsm war had just ended a fewvyears before.....the military wasnt hard up for shit. Carter curbed the excesses if anything at all. Justvlike obamas doing now. Like that F-35 doesnt need cut right? Even republicans on the hill are coming around on that one. Why is it you dont have a problem with the milirary industrial complex fleecing us like fogs but the govt hands out some meals to poor people and you hop around like a chicken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 oh, baloney. http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2010/09/lesson-from-jimmy-carter-weakness-invites-aggression http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB1125.pdf http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1957.html As a result of Carter Administration policies, the American military was plagued by low morale, low pay, outdated equipment, and practically zero maintenance on what did exist. Important U.S. military personnel were not reenlisting; it just wasn't worth it to them. In fact, thousands of enlisted men's families survived on food stamps. The U.S. economy was struggling, burdened by seemingly unstoppable inflation. High tax increases and an upward spiral of interest rates were an everyday occurrence for Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 http://onlineathens.com/stories/072400/let_letter2.shtml#.VzKwGfkrL0Q Blame Democrats for cuts in veteran benefits Posted: Monday, July 24, 2000 Now for the rest of the veterans' story. In Gary Locke's (July 11) letter he states that the pension benefits for veterans and widows are below the poverty level. The reason is when anti-veteran President Jimmy Carter and his anti-veteran VA Director Max Cleland, with the help of a Democratic Congress, changed the part of Title 38 USC that reduced the benefits to below the poverty level. Those who were on the ''old'' plan were ''grandfathered,'' but without an annual increase. So we must blame the Democrats of yesteryear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 Carter even cut the college education program as it was. My cousin was just retiring, and they had already cut the benefits. He had to find work just to have a chance to have a place to live. Not many jobs out there for infantry/special forces guys. Used to have college paid for. It was eventually changed to be the soldier puts in money, and the military adds per dollar. The trouble is, a lot of kids didn't know they wanted/needed to go to college until they had already been in the service. they ended up deciding too late. Retirement amount benefits were cut. The Vietnam war ended about 1975. Carter was "president" from '77 to '81. you do the math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Post Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 The Clinton's are so Ratarded. Her staying with the fucking around Billy Clit-ton is alterior. She stays by his side for power and it's bullshit we should all ignore the reverence of being President? The Pres. needs to be revered instead of Pres. in some sex scandal. Bill got two terms tho but no to Hillary. My advise to Hillary. Dump Bill and be happy the rest of your days. Get some old guy that loves bikes and be wild, atleast you wouldn't have to hide it and you would have some respect from the ones who can read between the lies. It's not too late Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted May 11, 2016 Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 The Vietnam war ended about 1975. Carter was "president" from '77 to '81. you do the math. Ok i got this, cmon cleve you know this.....let the force flow through you.........ok ok.......for the win.......77-75............is it 2? 2 whole fucking years removed from the most demoralizing war the u.s ever fought? And lost, remember we lost. 60k livrs for nothing. All so some little straw hat slopes couldnt collectively rule themselves, had to be someone of our choosing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2016 lol. After all that, Carter cut benefits. Not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.