slaveboyforyou
Posts: 3607
Joined: 1/6/2005 From: Arkansas, U.S.A. Status: offline
|
quote:
Can you describe some of those problems? My family and the country as far as I can tell did pretty damned well when President was in office. Certainly better than the current Bush in office has done for us and I'd say better than Regan or the first Bush did. Presidents are limited (or should be) in their authority and power via the Constitution so we always need to be wary of what we place on the President and what we place on the courts and on the Congress. How exactly do the Cllintons differ then, if what you say above is true, from any other "political family" though I strongly hesitate to call them that considering they do not have generations and generations in wealth and political power at least on his side. How exactly do they differ? Well I will give you a few in regards to Hillary. She tried to cram socialized medicine down our throats in the 90's. She is going to try it again if she is elected. It's a bad plan, and it will destroy medicine as we know it in this country. I don't want the government telling me what medical plan I should have. It's none of their business. That's one of the things that scare me about her. I grew up in Arkansas. I remember what went on with the Clintons when they were here. They held on to power because of the politics here. Arkansas is one of three southern states that still votes Democratic overwhelmingly. That's a throwback from the Civil War. One of Bill Clintons best buddies was Orville Faubus. If you don't remember, he is the guy that stood in front of Cental High School in Little Rock and refused to let black students in. The Clintons were part of a extremely corrupt political machine here, and I they brought that experience with them to Washington. Hillary Clinton is a globalist, and she is fooling people when she says she wants to withdraw us from Iraq. She voted for it, and she has voted for ever dollar that Bush has asked for. I was against that war in the beginning. Most REAL right wingers were. When people call Bush a conservative, I want to punch them. He is a neo-con, which is a liberal element in the Republican party going back to the Nixon-Rockefeller split. Hillary is just slightly to the left of Bush. She believes in American imperialism, and so did her husband. You should remember that the largest period of the Iraqi embargo was under her husband. Lastly I will say this; I don't like Hillary Clinton's views on the 2nd amendment. I WILL NOT vote for someone that wants to take away my God given right to defend myself and my loved ones. Hillary wants to do that, and she is unsuitable for office as a result. quote:
I'm glad some things have changed then. When I took a women in politics class in 1992 none of texts mention any women who didn't have male relatives in office. We all of these women though the first in political power and authority? In elected office? Just wondering because it strongly contradicts what I was taught in college in a political science class, not the world most liberal of academic fields but also not the most conservative either. I went to college too, so I understand. I had to take gender studies, and none of the texts mentioned it either. Consider the source of those texts and the professors who assigned them. I don't imagine they were exactly unbiased. This is not new, the Iceland example I mentioned happened in the 80's. You are only 6 years older than I am. We have seen the same world events come and go for the most part. I never trusted my college professors. I did my own reading, and I resisted their efforts to indoctrinate me with globalist liberalism. I had the benefit of majoring in three different disiplines before I decided on my path. I originally majored in criminal justice, which a conservative field of study. I moved on to philosophy, which was half and half. I left school for awhile after that, because I needed to make money. When I went back, I double majored in history and criminal justice. It was an amazing contrast. I enjoyed both subjects, and I still do. But the academics in both disciplines are worlds apart. It was an eye opener. I don't trust or academia or give it much credence as a result. By the way, I mean no offense by that. I liked my professors, I just didn't agree with most of them. I can only think of one history professor that I had who was a paleoconservative like me.
|