THIS IS WHY WE NEED RUDY IN '08!
Posted on 04/01/2007 9:26:59 AM PDT by FairOpinion
Edited on 04/02/2007 3:46:23 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
With every passing week it's more likely that Hillary Clinton will be the Democrats' nominee for president. This thought alone should provide the strongest possible motivation for Republicans to get their acts together.
Polls showing half the country won't vote for Hillary should be discounted. The choice on Election Day won't be Hillary or not Hillary; it will be Hillary or someone else.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
I bet she fires all the park rangers her first day in office
One more thing -- I think comparing Hillary to Nixon is a real insult to Nixon.
And a related article:
Clinton expected to lead Democratic fundraising pack
http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070401/NEWS05/704010384/1021
With the 2008 presidential campaign already in high gear, the first-quarter financial reports are viewed as the first major test of each campaign's viability. Some media reports have predicted that Clinton will raise as much as $30 million by the end of the quarter, which came at midnight yesterday.
Tony was charitable in using that term...I would have used some description along the line of "gooey cellulite"...
UPDATE to Hillary fundraising:
Hillary leads the money vote
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21485906-2703,00.html
"multi-million-dollar campaign events that are estimated to have netted Senator Clinton up to $US50million ($61.9million) in the past three months"
WE will probably have to go the whole socialist way to ruin before enough people wake up to what has happened.
Socialism has at least three great flaws:
1. It requires a totalitarian state to impose it and keep it in place.
2. As an economic system it can only consume and cannot generate or accumulate capital for investment.
3. It kills all incentive and innovation.
Hillary and a Dem controlled Congress, the ultimate nightmare.
THIS IS WHY WE NEED RUDY IN '08!
I agree with you except for the "enough people wake up" part. Many don't want to "wake up"...they benefit from the legal stealing that is socialism....so, things only get worse and worse....Or, I guess as you see in the U.K., they wake up for a time and then they doze again....wake up and doze again....uggghhhhh....
Not that I'm a socialist since I'm a busiiness owner, but as to points 2 and 3 - how do you explain China? Also, I know Europeans who individually have been doing just fine.
My sister lived in Amserdam for a few years and didn't mind the high taxes because she thought she got great services in return (had 2 kids for free). I guess that is now a big problem for the Dutch because of the increased percentage of non-contributing "immigrants".
We have some of the best politicians money can buy.
[Sadly, many are more than willing to sell their souls and political clout to the highest bidder.]
That might be outdated thinking. Consider the rise in Socialism in Europe, the UK and Canada. How about this as an alternative:
1. It requires a poorly educated and lazy electorate combined with a cooperative media.
For as much as Herself, the Cold and Joyless, was supposed to have hated and despised Richard Nixon, Herself has kept pretty close to the Nixon playbook that put him in office in 1968.
Get out in the country, at the ward and precinct level. Flatter and encourage the local political pros. Get all those personal obligations lined up, so when the time comes, they may be pulled in and turned into a vote pledge, and a money pledge (allied, but actually two separate things).
Herself already has the "enemies" list and the personal Mafioso bodyguard, and maintains excellent "opposition research" on all potential political rivals, inside and outside the party Herself is using as her vehicle to the Presidency.
But close adherence to that playbook is also what eventually caused Nixon's downfall and resignation from office in 1974. Something Herself would do well to keep in mind.
I worked for a Dutch company for seven years and on more then one occasion discussed that issue with my colleagues. I was surprised to find out that when one takes into consideration all that they get for their taxes, and compares that to all that we pay (either through taxes or voluntary retirement contributions), that the difference in net vs. gross is not that significant.
There net income runs about 55-60% of their gross. The deductions cover: retirement, health care, all taxes.
When I read the title I thought he was comparing her to Bart Simpsons blue haired pal.
She does resemble him.
Egad: Glad I am at the stage in life..where the
taxes are non-cause'.....except for gas, dinner,
grandkids,etc.
Hillary can be beat...Gulianai can beat her..needs
our support....unless we can stop her...Michael
Savage will explode right on your radio....JK
Yes, we need a heavy hitter like Rudy to demolish the Clinton machine.
Rudy is the only one who can go toe to toe with her and win. He is not afraid to do a little street fighting.
I want her to get the nomination so much I can taste it.
Besides good political fun, her failed candidacy will crush the Clinton Mafia once and for all.
There you go, underestimating Hillary and the Clintont machinery. Hillary won't be easy to beat.
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.