Posted on 01/31/2016 11:53:31 AM PST by Lazamataz
For the past painful year, the Republican presidential contenders have been bombarding Americans with empty propaganda slogans and competing, bizarrely, to present themselves as the least experienced person for the most important elected job in the world. Democratic primary voters, on the other hand, after a substantive debate over real issues, have the chance to nominate one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.
Hillary Clinton would be the first woman nominated by a major party. She served as a senator from a major state (New York) and as secretary of state — not to mention her experience on the national stage as first lady with her brilliant and flawed husband, President Bill Clinton. The Times editorial board has endorsed her three times for federal office — twice for Senate and once in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary — and is doing so again with confidence and enthusiasm.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Some legal folks think Hillary can pardon herself after taking office in Jan 2017. Will Congress then have enough b@lls to impeach and convict her?
Or would the thought of making her VP the new POTUS scare them off?
How does this bird cage bottom lining rag make money anyway? Do people actually still buy this tripe?
Is it really knows when everybody knows ahead of time?
Calling someone “brilliant and flawed”, as they do about Bill Clinton in this op-ed, is a liberal’s way of criticizing a fellow liberal without criticizing them.
They still can't figure out why or how George McGovern lost.
Without her name, the private sector would never hire her.
At job interviews, it is routine to ask, what did you do with a project you were in charge of had issues (deadline, failings, etc.)? Have you ever taken the blame for problems in your department?
Refusal to accept blame, shouting out conspiracy “out to get me” charges, lying to investigators, lying to the public, lying to co-workers, destroying evidence, engaging in secretive means to circumvent oversight of communications(in compliance with laws about document retention), paying staff to moonlight on conflicting business interests on company time...
Did the NYet Times write any editorials against the GOP “culture of corruption” in 2006?
If Hillary isn’t indicted and manages to actually win the election she won’t be protected by Dept Justice anymore, she’ll be under the jurisdiction of Congress. The House can impeach her the minute she is sworn into office.
True. Next they'll be calling him a "tragic figure" ...
I can’t even see this woman being nominated. You’ve got the Obama and Clinton factions maneuvering for control of the Democratic Party and I can’t see the president and his wing of the party allowing the Clintons to run the show again.
If Bill Clinton was so f-brilliant, why isn’t the press endorsing Bill’s policies to turn the economy around?
“No controlling legal authority”
Hillary Clinton would be the first woman nominated by a major party. She served as a senator from a major state (New York) and as secretary of state  not to mention her experience on the national stage as first lady with her brilliant and flawed husband, President Bill Clinton.
sh## supporting and eating other sh##
If there was ever an article that deserved a Projectile Vomit Alert, it’s this one.
Because Bill used elements of the Contract with America in his domestic agenda. Whatever we think about Bill as a person he was a very shrewd and pragmatic politician when it suited him during his presidency. He knew the political winds were blowing away from the far left agenda he promoted in the first two years of his administration, and when Newt and the boys showed up in 1995 he adapted some of their agenda, such as welfare reform, and reaped the political benefits a year later when he smashed Bob Dole for reelection in 96.
What has she done that matches the deeply qualified experience(s) of other presidents?
Oh yeah, she tripped on her face while boarding government planes (while drunk as heck). She lies constantly. She alters her message contradicting herself (and her voice) depending on which audience she addresses. She's absent while bad stuff goes down on our troops and agents (very like Obama). She accepts money from outside parties to influence government decisions enriching the outside bribers.
So she has a few "qualifications". None qualify her to fix the problems of our nation.
(snort) Yeah, that'll work as well as the Obama impeachment.
There is! I very clearly stated the source was the New York Times! That's all the warning ANYONE needs!
EXACTLY.
NY Times is a rag and is certainly not worth the money they charge.
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.