Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-17-2007, 08:38 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 2,089,467 times
Reputation: 337

Advertisements

Hillary's own failed amendment was for all z-visa holders (illegals given status) to each be allowed to let in an unlimited number of relatives, etc., as if we weren't already way overcrowded due to illegals. This equals in near future a doomed nation with mostly poor people and a few rich.

In the last two weeks she has changed her position on driver's licences for illegals in NY 'five' times, and her last position was 'no' at debate after telling NY governor to drop his/hers? idea on driver's licenses.

She realized the public won't go for the plan at this time, but she clearly is for lots more illegals coming here and will do what she wants if president, not what the people want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-17-2007, 11:01 PM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,451,330 times
Reputation: 3050
Maybe she should run for Prez of Mexico instead of here!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2007, 11:10 PM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,174,356 times
Reputation: 3346
You know, the USA has some serious money problems. I've never posted the link to this Federal Reserve article until now but I think I'm going to start posting it. There is a reason WHY the USA is letting so many immigrants in and it might do you well to read this article.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/publi.../Kotlikoff.pdf

If you don't want to let immigrants into the USA, then perhaps everyone should start turning over all their money to the government so we can pay our bills. Does that seem like a better idea? You know you can't live on credit cards **forever**. Someone eventually has to pay or else you have to declare bankruptcy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2007, 11:34 PM
JMX
 
Location: Somewhere unloading worthless FRN's
313 posts, read 1,175,498 times
Reputation: 416
Perhaps the government should just stop increasing the debt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2007, 11:44 PM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,174,356 times
Reputation: 3346
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMX View Post
Perhaps the government should just stop increasing the debt.
Duh. This is what Bill Clinton tried to do. Remember the balanced budget? Remember how the balanced budget meant we'd actually have something to apply to the debt? Remember how GWB said "It's the people's money and the people should get a rebate"? And everyone got something like $300 back one year while we went trillions of dollars in the hole in debt?

Perhaps we should let a Republican win again so they can get stuck with this mess. After all, they caused it. They can clean it up.

I actually like that idea but I don't think they are smart enough to pull it off -- therefore I have to vote for Hillary because I believe she and Bill are the only ones (on the ballot) who can clean up the USA's monetary problems.

Seriously...

If the freakin' pubbies hadn't screwed it up, you guys could have been in power for years and years and years -- but you had to go mess with what was working.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2007, 11:55 PM
JMX
 
Location: Somewhere unloading worthless FRN's
313 posts, read 1,175,498 times
Reputation: 416
The national debt increased during the Clinton adminstration just as it did in previous and subsequent adminstrations. But that's not really the subject of this thread, so I won't comment any further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:01 AM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,174,356 times
Reputation: 3346
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMX View Post
The national debt increased during the Clinton adminstration just as it did in previous and subsequent adminstrations. But that's not really the subject of this thread, so I won't comment any further.
Yeah, right. What's your fear? That I might post some CHARTS that would show what GWB did in 8 years? Scared of that? You ought to be!!

The Republicans were completely in charge for 4+ years and did nothing but squander whatever monies they were given. You can't blame any of it on the Democrats because the Republicans controlled the White House, the Congress and the Senate.

They don't want to be held accountable for it, so they'll just bug out when it comes down to saying much or posting anything -- it's much easier to cling to the notion that Hillary somehow equates to Hitler than it is to justify how your party handled their time in control.

I can tell the elections are going to be fun this year. It'll be like 1998 and Bill will be under impeachment again!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 12:08 AM
JMX
 
Location: Somewhere unloading worthless FRN's
313 posts, read 1,175,498 times
Reputation: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
Yeah, right. What's your fear? That I might post some CHARTS that would show what GWB did in 8 years? Scared of that? You ought to be!!
I know exactly what GWB has done and I know how bad it is (and will be) for us as a nation. My point was that Clinton also played his part in this mess.

Just because I'm opposed to Hillary Clinton becoming president doesn't mean I support GWB. I think they're both cut from the same cloth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2007, 05:27 PM
 
1,156 posts, read 2,089,467 times
Reputation: 337
Thank you for interesting posts/article. I think Hillary C. and GWB are different as night and day. The war has increased the national debt but the debt increased with Clinton administration with no war but regardless.... illegals, NAFTA and outsourcing are overwhelming and/or destroying America and it's citizens on the inside.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2007, 08:12 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,918,398 times
Reputation: 4459
obviously, if hillary were running against george bush now she would win but she is not, so we have to deal with what she basically stands for and how she has voted in the past. i am not opposed to a democrat winning the white house, or an independent for that matter, but i do not care for hillary as she is clearly interested in a spending nightmare for this country. (much like george bush has done, only on different things). we need someone with some business experience to run this country, as we could be in a world of trouble otherwise. this country needs an economic turnaround now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:59 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top