Posted on 05/04/2003 8:47:17 AM PDT by mountaineer
LOL. But, who in their right mind would want to??
Yes, I would agree that anything having to do with defense would seem arcane to her. Defense was certainly not one of her (or the co-president's) concerns from 1993 to 2001. Folkways? Did she actually use that word, or was that from the author of the article?
Rudy will never challenge her again.
He doesn't want to suffer a "relapse."
And Hillary has mighty powerful friends in the suburbs of New York.
This woman's ignorance is unbelievable. New York is one of the biggest "donor states" in the nation, which means that it pays far more in taxes to Washington than it receives in Federal outlays. This is primarily due to the fact that the inflated cost of living in New York has driven many middle-class taxpayers into upper-income tax brackets. Which means that any income tax cuts directed at "the rich" will end up benefitting states like New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.
New York is one of the few places I've ever seen outside of West Virginia that is in a constant state of economic stagnation. And it doesn't have a damn thing to do with who is in the White House.
Does anyone in their wildest dreams think this sort of leftist, or thousands of voters like him, will ever vote for a Republican, no matter how bad Hillary is? She owns these people, and they would help get out the vote for her even if she raped and murdered people like her husband.
"Then this administration did an abrupt 180-degree turn," Clinton said, referring to deficit policies of the 1980s. "It didn't work then, and it won't work now.
Uummm...I really don't think she was referring to the 1980s.
How much influence she has beyond Democrats in the Senate is a question. Pollster John Zogby thinks that, in time, "Hillary could be an excellent conduit for the White House to New York State."
With what adminstration? Sheesh.
In an interview with The News, Clinton said questions about her performance in view of her campaign promises "are very appropriate."
"I'm two years into my term, and I'm taking stock of the situation," she said.
Just give her two more years and she might decide to do something about it.
NYC maybe. Upstate was already started taxing itself to death 50 years ago.
Have to agree with this, to a point. The groveling and whining coming from the politicians in this area is becoming embarrassing. Having said this though, when you have to compete with New York City for aid, there is no competition. NYC is truly a money pit which is sucking the rest of the state dry.
A U.S. Senator is one of the few people who can spend 90% of his or her time in Washington, show up at a few staged events in the state they claim to represent, and still go out and claim that they know a damned thing about "their" state.
New York has lagged behind the rest of the country for years when it comes to economic performance. Even when you had two Democratic senators, a majority Democratic Congressional delegation, and a Democrat in the White House. There's just an economic malaise up there that can be attributed entirely to the horrible business climate in the state.
The current budget and tax fiasco in New York is a symptom of that very problem.
While this article does offer somewhat of a critique of Hillary's performance thus far, what Turner is really doing is sending Hillary a wake-up call to let her know that Her Highness isn't keeping the attention of the western portion of the state. Turner is an unabashed (and sometimes nasty) liberal who no doubt doubles as a Hillary bootlicker. Ultimately, this is just another media whore doing the umpteenth image refurbishing of one of the Clintons.
New York has lagged behind the rest of the country for years when it comes to economic performance. Even when you had two Democratic senators, a majority Democratic Congressional delegation, and a Democrat in the White House. There's just an economic malaise up there that can be attributed entirely to the horrible business climate in the state. The current budget and tax fiasco in New York is a symptom of that very problem.
I agree with you. One has to wonder where these people have been or what has happened to them to make them vote for the Liberals over and over again regardless how badly they perform. I know that not everyone is politically motivated but these results speak of a certain malaise, as if people don't care anymore except voting for their party.
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.