“Make the rich play.” Groucho Marx
I have yet to hear anybody refer to Clinton as a communist; I mean, shit, I think most real communists would be insulted if someone had.
Then again, there is that whole Universal Health Care thing. He dropped it like a white-hot brick at the first sign of trouble, but I suppose if someone were a sufficiently deranged, foaming-at-the-mouth-type free marketeer, it could be possible that “COMMUNIST!!” might burst forth from the mouth during a fit of minarchic pique.
Don’t hold your breath.
Cite? And I hope you something better than Rush calling him a commie on his radio show…
It just occured to me that the OP was talking about Hillary, not Bill. Everyone knows that ***she ** * is a commie. 
The Google Genie is your friend…
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a399a02c636cd.htm
Free Republic, Aug, 25, 1997
"…Evidence of Clinton administration complicity in a giant corruption scandal involving former KGB agents is surfacing in an ongoing court hearing just outside Washington, DC.
At the time of the collapse of the Soviet empire, the Soviet Communist Party, through its KGB agents, smuggled hundreds of millions of dollars out of the country to secret accounts, many in Switzerland.
Those KGB agents now hold positions in the new military and civilian intelligence services and are guarding the crime perpetrated against the people of Russia…"
Kerry’s Soviet Rhetoric
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pacepa200402260828.asp
“…KGB priority number one at that time was to damage American power, judgment, and credibility. One of its favorite tools was the fabrication of such evidence as photographs and “news reports” about invented American war atrocities. These tales were purveyed in KGB-operated magazines that would then flack them to reputable news organizations…”
“…As a spy chief and a general in the former Soviet satellite of Romania, I produced the very same vitriol Kerry repeated to the U.S. Congress almost word for word and planted it in leftist movements throughout Europe. KGB chairman Yuri Andropov managed our anti-Vietnam War operation…”
Want more?
Bumper sticker cited on a Rush Limbaugh web site: “Clinton/Gore – America’s Communist All Star Team”
Chuck Moore of the Sierra Times clies the Florida 2000 fiasco as “proof” of Clinton’s communist roots: “The events in Florida are the culmination of eight years of the Clinton/Gore
Communist influence and we are now seeing the fruits.”
Eric E. Clingan, of the Arizona Daily Wildcat, gives us “Clinton’s Communist-Inspired Tactics.”
And what’s wrong with tossing in Rush Limbaugh’s on-air inanity? Is he exempt from being a suspect in muddying the waters of public discourse just because of his celebrity status?
How about one that acutally says “Clinton is a communist”? Your first cite is about helping ex-KGB agents which, even if it were true, is not the same as calling Clinton a commie. As for your second cite, well that one is about Kerry. I’m sure you know that, but I can’t figure out why you’d include it anyway since it only implies that Kerry was a commie pawn, not an actual commie himself.
So yes, I guess I do want more, if we take more to mean “one”.
To hear is to obey, sahib Mace-pasha!..
http://www.tldm.org/news2/sellout.htm
BILL CLINTON’S COMMUNIST CONNECTIONS
"Bill Clinton’s college days at Oxford University in England are quite an eye-opener. His activities there help to explain his appalling decisions as President of the United States. But the exact nature of his trip to Moscow and Iron Curtain countries while at Oxford is still a mystery…
“…his wife Hillary has communist connections as well, doing her post Yale Law school internship with Robert Treuhalft in Berkeley, California. He was the lawyer for the Communist Party of the United States…”
Renob, why are you trying to use No Child Left Behind as something liberal that Bush has done? If anything, he’s using it to cut funding to education and to seriously undermine our schools.
Nonsense! He is merely trying to recreate in the entire country the Houston Miracle, that has made the Houston public school system the envy of all!
I’d just like to comment that wading once into the morass of right-wing bullshit that Googling “clinton communist” returned left me feeling icky for the rest of the evening. I can’t even begin to imagine how friend elucidator manages to stomach repeat visits into that cesspool of conserva-crap.
You are going to present to us from ‘Virgin Mary’s End-Times Prophecies’, and not even have the decency to blush?
Color me unimpressed with the ‘cites’ that you and comrade rjung can dig up.
Bill is a centrist. It is Hillary who is the Marxist.
“We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” — Hillary Clinton, June 2004
“[Proletarians] have nothing of their own to secure and to fortify; their mission is to destroy all previous securities for, and insurances of, individual property.” — Karl Marx and Fred Engels, February 1848
Please tell me how much funding has been cut for education under the Bush Administration. If you look at the numbers, you will see that federal funding for education has gone up quite dramatically in the Bush Administration. There have been no cuts.
And the NCLB Act is a very liberal law if you look at it in light of conservative rhetoric. This law increased federal involvment in education quite dramatically, something which conservatives only a few years ago wanted to end. Gingrich and Co. wanted to abolish the Department of Education. Under Bush and the NCLB Act, it has more money and more power than ever.
When Bush proposed the NCLB Act, it had some conservative programs in it, such as school choice, but they were quickly dropped. The bill is far from conservative. It was written in large part by Teddy Kennedy’s staff. The only reason the Democrats don’t like it is because Bush did it. If Clinton would have enacted such a law they would be praising it. On the flip side, the only reason a lot of Republicans supported such a massive government intrusion into education was because Bush wanted it. If Clinton would have proposed such a law you can be assured they would have never let it pass.
This is the third day of the thread. Still no examples of “Clinton=Communist”.
Mods, can this thread be moved again from Great Debates to Strawmen, please?
Not according to the NEA.
http://www.nea.org/newsreleases/2004/nr040714.html
In short, it states:
Underfunding a federally mandated program isn’t just bad manners, it’s cutting appropriations.
Not according to the NEA. For the FY2005 budget,
http://www.nea.org/newsreleases/2004/nr040714.html
In short, it states:
Underfunding a federally mandated program isn’t just bad manners, it’s cutting appropriations.
I found this great quote that kind of summarizes the tendency for conservatives to shout “commie” or “pinko” for any perceived political stance to the left of their own.
We grow tyrannical fighting tyranny. The most alarming spectacle today is not the spectacle of the atomic bomb in an unfederated world, it is the spectacle of the Americans beginning to accept the device of loyalty oaths and witchhunts, beginning to call anybody they don’t like a Communist.
-E.B. White (1899-1985)
Actually, it’s not. The appropriations process and the authorization process are two separate things. When any program is authorized there is an upper funding limit assigned to those programs. That’s “authorized funding.” This authorized funding level is rarely, if ever, met for any program. And this level is certainly not a “promise” of future funding. Anyone who tells you that is either lying or completely ignorant of how Congress works. Just because the NCLB Act has an authorized funding level of a certain amount does not mean that if that amount of money is not appropriated then the bill is somehow “underfunded.” The authorized level of a program is merely the upper limit of what Congress can appropriate. If that level is not met it’s certainly not “cutting appropriations.”
And, furthermore, the NCLB Act is not a “mandate.” Any state can opt out at any time.
To actually understand education funding you have to get beyond the NEA’s partisan rhetoric and actually look at the amount of money appropriated from year to year. Going to thomas.gov’s appropriations site, http://thomas.loc.gov/home/approp/approplink.html , will help. There you will find information about the funding level of certain programs when Bush came into office (fiscal year 2001). Then compare that to last year’s funding levels (Fiscal Year 2004 – you can’t talk about the amount of funding for Fiscal Year 2005 yet since neither the House nor the Senate have acted on a Labor-HHS-Education approps bill). Here are some interesting examples:
Title I (Education funds going to the disadvantaged): 01 – $10,014,621,000; 04 – $12,342,309,000
Impact Aid (education aid going to school districts that have a large military bases or Indian Reservations): 01 – $993,302,000; 04 – $1,229,526,000
Indian Education: 01 – $115,500,000; 04 – $120,856,000
Special education: 01 – $7,437,948,000; 04 – $11,160,708,000
These are the big federal aid programs to elementary and secondary education. As you can see, they have all gone up. If you check out the link I sent you and explore the various Labor-HHS-Education bills passed by Congress during Bush’s terms, you will see one thing – federal spending for education has risen dramatically in that time. No funding has been cut.