Posted on 05/31/2015 1:41:04 PM PDT by Libloather
Obviously it is anybody who is “Dead Broke”.
FDR did “great things” like the wealth-dividing New Deal, and prolonging the Great Depression.
Al Capone was “rich”. So was Mitt Romney.
Clift was senile twenty years ago and mentally defective long before that.
I think JFK was richest.
She means Munchkins.
“”Well, he’s been elected twice with people knowing that he has had affairs. Now is the fact that this woman is 21, I mean she’s still of age I suppose.” Besides, Clift argued, “libido and leadership is often linked.”
The cold hard truth about the behavior of people like Clift is that they are motivated by that which promotes their own sense of self importance. They chose to cover politics because they think it makes them part of ‘what's important’. They gravitate to academia and those politicians who come from academia and who parrot the academies tired old slogans and predictable mantras, and will work tirelessly to protect them from criticism. Why? Principally because this is the ‘important club’ to which they envision themselves belonging, and they must protect its stature (and thus their own stature). They are ‘educated’, generally went to ‘good’ universities and are thus confident in their stature as part of the ‘thinkers’ in America and the world. It's highly elitist, entirely independent of principle, and is truly sad and pathetic.
They ought to issue commemorative kneepads for folk like Eleanor Clift and Mara Laiason ..
Ms. Clift has always been one of the dumbest people ever pretending to be a ‘journalist’
Thanks for your generous assessment Eleanor. My “little person” inside feels so much better.
Stupid elitist Bitch!
If rich people ‘’do great things for the ‘little people,’’’ as Eleanor Clift assures us, what do we need a Democratic party for?
The Democratic party’s self-declared reason for being is to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor; however, it can only achieve that goal by demonizing the rich to such an extent that it can justify confiscating rich peoples’ earnings.
It’s Republicans who believe the rich do great things for the little people, such as providing jobs and incomes.
If Eleanor Clift and her liberal comrades have decided they want to use the media as a re-education camp in order to inculcate pro-rich Republican principles into Democratic minds in order to promote the wealthy Hillary’s presidential candidacy, wonderful. But then what do we need a Democratic party for, since Republicans are already promoting pro-rich Republican principles?
Clift has been very stupid for a very long time.
My thought, as well. The hypocrisy is strong with this one.
Didn’t she say she would gladly strap on the knees-pads for Slick?
I think what Clift really meant was, 'FDR created hugely wasteful pseudo-socialist big government programs that were financed by confiscating $ from ordinary Americans.'
I’m thinking tall trees and short ropes and I’ll bring the beer and supply the rope!
FDR entered the White House a wealthy man (*) and left it a dead man, so whatever he did (and I disagree with most of it) it didn't result in too much feathering of his own nest.
Hillary or Clift?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.