Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney hit NYC for Super Bowl weekend
New York Post ^ | February 1, 2014

Posted on 02/02/2014 11:08:19 AM PST by nickcarraway

Political power players have descended on New York for Super Bowl weekend.

(Excerpt) Read more at pagesix.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 02/02/2014 11:08:19 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The two Slick Willies...

good buds...


2 posted on 02/02/2014 11:09:48 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The subject of underwear come up with either of them?


3 posted on 02/02/2014 11:10:31 AM PST by Zuben Elgenubi (NOPe to GOPe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

COOL!

Maybe they can grab Christie and HIS BFF, Obama, and hit the slopes later in the week. The Boardwalk is too windy this time of year.


4 posted on 02/02/2014 11:10:48 AM PST by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

But no Obama? Why?

He’s beloved by most of the participants.

Won’t they feel left out?


5 posted on 02/02/2014 11:13:31 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.

WAR IN KOSOVO

During Bill Clinton’s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo – which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion – we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a “humanitarian war.” In March 1999 – the same month that the bombing started – Clinton’s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevic’s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevic’s “War Crimes” trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 “bodies and body parts.” During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.

BILL CLINTON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

In fact, as CNN’s Brooke Jackson has reported: “Three days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.” See (See http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/31/jackson.recession.primer.otsc/).

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: “The longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP — the country’s total output of goods and services — shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.” See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3676690/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/gdp-figures-revised-downward/.

6 posted on 02/02/2014 11:14:26 AM PST by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I think this Mitthead is setting up for round two.


7 posted on 02/02/2014 11:20:15 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

“During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

It wasn’t just Clinton. The media and Ross Perot were right there with him.


8 posted on 02/02/2014 11:20:51 AM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

The famous Clintonian plurality win.
Likely making a re-appearance in 2016.


9 posted on 02/02/2014 11:21:56 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I think he is for sure.... So who would you vote for if the nomination was between Crispy Cristie and Mitt? Ugh...


10 posted on 02/02/2014 11:22:53 AM PST by kjam22 (my newest music video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7gNI9bWO3s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

If Republicans couldn’t win in 2012, they will have a a hard time keeping Hillary below 60%.


11 posted on 02/02/2014 11:23:57 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Yeah... I personally think there is NO WAY we don’t end up with Hitlery. Its sickening... but it is what it is.


12 posted on 02/02/2014 11:25:35 AM PST by kjam22 (my newest music video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7gNI9bWO3s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

I live in California, so the chance I’ll get to take part in the nomination process is non-existent.

If there were a third person that was worth voting for, I’d vote for them even if they didn’t have a chance.

No, the smaller states will decide who our Leftist candidate will be, long before I get to vote. That’s how the GOPe has set it up.


13 posted on 02/02/2014 11:26:16 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Too busy dealing with the “no spin zone” that O’Really is putting out there for him </major snark>


14 posted on 02/02/2014 11:31:00 AM PST by Qiviut (It's hard to be a donk if you're sane & it's hard to be a pubbie if you have any integrity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I’m in Oklahoma (the reddest state in the union).... I have no vote in it either....


15 posted on 02/02/2014 11:31:19 AM PST by kjam22 (my newest music video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7gNI9bWO3s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Actually I think she is less appealing to the entitlement army than Baraq on a personal basis. Also her advanced age.

But I also think after holding their nose for Romney in 2012, the Tea Party will bolt.

I see 2016 as

45 Clinton
30 RINO
25 TEA

Thus repeating BJ’s Clintonian plurality win in 1992. If the Chicago Mob decides not to back Hillary, then insert the name of their candidate.


16 posted on 02/02/2014 11:31:47 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

I wonder if that interview will be played on the Jumbotrons in the stadium?


17 posted on 02/02/2014 11:32:30 AM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

I think the answer to why you’re not, is in your post.

Can’t for the life of me figure out why my state isn’t. LOL

Lets see:

1. We let very small states (comparatively) decide who our nominee will be. How is that representative electorally? We are to have representative governance right?

2. We let the Democrats help pick our nominees? How does that help us stick to our beliefs?

3. Does there even need to be a three...


18 posted on 02/02/2014 11:34:45 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Trivia: Guess who attended the 1964 1st boxing match between Cassius Clay and Sonny Liston?

Answer: The Beatles


19 posted on 02/02/2014 11:34:51 AM PST by truth_seeker (Nissan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

So the GOP could decide that the states that voted the highest percent of their population for the republican candidate in the previous election goes first in the next Primary. That seems reasonable :)


20 posted on 02/02/2014 11:42:13 AM PST by kjam22 (my newest music video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7gNI9bWO3s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Don't let FR fade away! .
We need your help to keep the lights on.
FR is funded solely by contributions made by
liberty loving people who enjoy and use it.

Every donation counts no matter how big or small.
If you can donate $5, $10, $20, $100 or more,
it would be greatly appreciated.


Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $31,004
36%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 36% is in!! Thank you all very much!!
Two percent a day keeps the 404 away.

21 posted on 02/02/2014 11:47:00 AM PST by RedMDer (Happy with this, America? Make your voices heard. 2014 is just around the corner. ~ Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Why do not both of them just go away? Geez!


22 posted on 02/02/2014 11:49:29 AM PST by spel_grammer_an_punct_polise (What we need is to sucker the fedthugs into a "Tiananmen Square"-like incident on the National Mall!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

Actually, I kind of like that. It could cause folks to go out and vote in mass, just to get kicked up the nomination ladder during the next primary season.

I would eliminate states with open elections from being a part of the nomination process.

I would look real hard at making sure a more significant slice of registered Republicans actually got to take part in the nomination process.

I might tighten up the nomination process, so that actual votes and not delegates got to take part in the process.

Some of these small states can be gamed big-time, by politicians coming in from out of state and making sure they are over-represented by delegates. It’s just not a clean process. Someone may be able to correct me on that, but it has been my take on it.

Others will probably have additional and perhaps better ideas.


23 posted on 02/02/2014 11:51:15 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

I didn’t see that the Tea Party held it’s collective nose and voted Romney. It stayed away and we got BO for a second term. I will crawl across broken glass to vote for anyone running against Hillary. Staying home is no option.


24 posted on 02/02/2014 11:54:52 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Ugh .... can you imagine? I suspect they’d both get boo’d big time!


25 posted on 02/02/2014 11:55:17 AM PST by Qiviut (It's hard to be a donk if you're sane & it's hard to be a pubbie if you have any integrity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I hope Mitt does run and hope Mitt does win. That said, I can understand the first reactions of many folks here to the very suggestion that Mitt is signaling “This is NOT over!”. Some might think him a masochist, a Rich Man’s George Zimmerman, if you will, who appears to going ‘shopping for trouble’ every day in the week. I disagree with that reflexive analogy.

I think Mitt has been chosen to do this, to keep trying. Even if he loses, Romney will force the nation to focus on aspects that are lost or that we as a culture are on the verge of losing. I think Romney sees this ‘Casandra’ type ringing of warning bells in the town square as part of his mission.


26 posted on 02/02/2014 12:02:49 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

MaceMan, muchisimo gracias for posting all those telling quotes by Bill Clinton. I had forgotten most of these. Bill later became more careful, more evasive, about telling the truth to his public. This is who he and The Hillster really are!


27 posted on 02/02/2014 12:05:42 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

This one picture says it better than I ever could. Look who is absolutely thrilled with what Romney was moved to do.

This is how Romney would operate as president. He couldn't be counted on to move our nation back to the right. Obamacare, Immigration, a host of other Leftist hopes and dreams, Romney would simply be a vehicle to their destination, not ours.

He's good family man. I get that. He's had business acumen. I get that. We can find those things out there. We do need a man with successful executive experience. I agree with that. We also need someone who is well grounded in Conservatism.

When something comes up, they can wing it off the cuff, because they have viewed life's (our nation's) problems from a Conservative perspective for decades, not just the last eight months, or through a couple of campaign seasons.

This nation must be turned back to the right. Romney doesn't even know there is a Right vs a Left, on far too many issues.

I'm sorry folks, but it's time to either put up or shut up. And Romney is not my idea of putting up. He's merely another way of putting it off.

28 posted on 02/02/2014 12:20:50 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Who are they going to run as the third candidate ?


29 posted on 02/02/2014 12:48:54 PM PST by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit

Great question.
I don’t know at all.
It could be somebody who fails to win the R primaries, but I don’t know how that works in states with “sore loser” laws.

But I really think another Republican try with Romney, Huckster, or NJFatboy would likely result in a third party effort.


30 posted on 02/02/2014 12:54:21 PM PST by nascarnation (I'm hiring Jack Palladino to investigate Baraq's golf scores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

Wow.

31 posted on 02/02/2014 12:56:14 PM PST by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Don’t look now but Mitt Romney is on his way to the 2016 nomination. With Christie knocked out and Sarah Palin showing no interest whatseover, there are no other serious GOP players at this time. None.


32 posted on 02/02/2014 12:59:48 PM PST by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Mitt Romney is a power player?

As he turns 67 years old, with decades in elective politics, having invested at least 50 million dollars of his own money, and 100s of millions of other’s in his races, he has a single election win to his name.

The man won a single election with less than 50% and failed in office, unable to run for reelection and leaving with 34% approval, and creating what appears to be a permanent democrat seat, after his having been their 4th GOP governor in a row.

Illusion seems to be the new reality in modern America.


33 posted on 02/02/2014 1:05:50 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

I concur. He’s being set up and he knows it. More money to be made being the fall guy. He’ll get a job as a secretary of something, probably an ambassador ship.

They are already setting the stage for a Hillary victory.


34 posted on 02/02/2014 4:23:15 PM PST by esoxmagnum (Turtles don't win fights. Victory belongs to the aggressor, not the guy hiding in a bunker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

No matter your skilled research, the American people aren’t buying it.


35 posted on 02/02/2014 8:02:21 PM PST by Theodore R. (TX Republicans to endorse Cornball and George P! Stay tuned March 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The problem is that NH will send him a big launch into liberal FL.


36 posted on 02/02/2014 8:04:00 PM PST by Theodore R. (TX Republicans to endorse Cornball and George P! Stay tuned March 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Probably so...

I like New Hampshire, but man they get way too much power in the early part of the nomination process.

One win in one of these Podunk states, and the media runs with it like it was a general election coup.

Sorry about the Podunk comment New Hampshirites, but it really stings to see idiots win elections up there only to get trounced once they’re nominated. Enough already.


37 posted on 02/02/2014 8:13:50 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Amnesty is job NONE! It isn't even the leading issue with Hipanics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson