Dirt, she is using only her first name, HILLARY in an attempt to distance herself from the name CLINTON and the attending Clinton-fatigue. Nice try, elephant butt!
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
John John,
Answer the following questions yes or no. No other answers allowed.
-
Do you actually think that the size of a candidate’s ass is relevant to whether you should vote for them?
-
Do you actually think that Hillary Clinton’s ass is large?
If you answer yes to question 1, you are stupid beyond belief.
If you answer yes to question 2, you are also insane.
Here’s the deal, kids…
Hillary is not actually gonna run.
She’ll withdraw from the race within the next 6 weeks or so, allowing her to keep all the campaign contributions (about $6 million now)
The whole thing has been a scam, planned long ago to provide for her after she splits with Bill next year.
Don’t say I didn’t tell ya…
“No, its not foolproof…unfortunately, fools are very clever people.” --Joseph Caro
Actually, during Hillary!'s “listening tour” of NYS, she visited extreme Northern New York (Massena, Potsdam area), which shocked the hell out of me (I’m from that area). Usually, politicians ignore anything north of Albany. You won’t see Guiliani step one foot in the “North Country” and I would stake my life on it.
And this is different than which politician…?? They all do whatever they can to get elected, whether shady or not. They are all phonies. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. I just think she’s the lesser of the evils.
“Don’t look at me–I’m irrelevant.”
I think most of the male politicians learned an important lesson from the “Lamar!” campaign.
John John, Tyler’s post was crystal clear.
You, on the other hand, are a drooling, bottom feeding moronic troll with the brains of a swamp rat.
Putz.
Calif
I’ve heard this kind of thing but I don’t think she can use the money for personal purposes. I think she would only be able to use it for another political run. Does anyone know for sure? Can Bill use the money?
Unfortunately, I think she’s in for the long haul.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
Dewaholic, I would be disappointed if Guilani did not visit the northern part of the State. It would be a big mistake for him not too.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
GoreyTyler
Point of order. This board, its Members, Moderators and Administrators have my word that I was NEVER THOSE PEOPLE, nor have I EVER posted under those screen names AT ANY TIME, FOR ANY REASON. There are some on this board that know that to be a fact.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
(removal of unnecessary bolding and capitalisation mine)
You say that as if it were worth something.
It is my observation that John John is a different poster than IssacN or PorschePup.
Tom~
Campaign contributions not spent on the campaign may be banked in the campaign’s account for use in the candidate’s future campaign, may be donated to other campaigns or PACs subject to campaign finance laws or may be returned to the donors. The candidate may not use them for personal use.
Did anyone else note Cybbie’s umm… “creative” snippage of my original post?
Original post: Oh, Cybbie (or JohnJohn, or Johnsbury1, or IssacN, or PorschePup, or Twyla, or SemperFi, or BLUIICOOL, or Manoffee, or whoever the hell you are this week…)
Cyb’s version: Oh, Cybbie…snip… or IssacN, or PorschePup, or SemperFi, or BLUIICOOL, or Manoffee, or whoever the hell you are this week…)
So you’re finally admitting that you were your imaginary pal, Twyla, all along. You’re SUCH a bonehead, John.
StoryTyler
“Not everybody does it, but everybody should.”
Y’know something?
Barbara Bush really DOES have a lard ass.
But NO ONE, during the entire Bush Administration (1989-1993) came around talking about the First Lady’s big fat ass.
So, what’s the story? Are right-wingers just THAT much nastier, less imaginative, and more anti-woman than left-wingers?
Uke
Please don’t mistake as anti-woman what is probably just anti-ass.
Few people in the early 90s recognized the ass as the threat to democracy it is now known to be. Asses of State were generally expected to be big, yea, even fat. Tighter, more shapely asses were considered shifty, as they were easily concealed within a standard slack.
Well, the asses haven’t changed, but the times sure have. At some point I guess we all woke up and took a good, hard look. The fact is, asses are gross. A lot of them are covered in unsightly hair. They jiggle when poked and tend emit odorous gas. Not to mention the issue (and issuance) of poop.
A sentient people will not let their asses, fat or otherwise, go unchecked. If one of our politician open displays an ass, then that ass should be thoroughly probed, the nature of character of the ass exposed, dissected and discussed. HILLARY!'s ass, fat or not, is an ass. Regard it thus, and proceed with utmost care.
On the other hand, the fat ones do give more cushion for the pushin’…
And yes, most things are funnier if you proofread them first.
Damn.
Spits extremely nasty Big Red soda all over the screen
WHAT!!? Issac Newton? There used to be a troll, way back in the past of this board named Issac Newton? Is that what was implied up there?
–John
I wouldn’t exactly call John John right wing. He spent 8 pages or so in the “6 billion” thread espousing a pretty radical environmental agenda and theories of how to curtail population growth. Al Gore, the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Planned Parenthood International, and ZPG probably know him on a first name basis.
Buy I certainly can’t blame him for not liking Hillary!. I don’t like her one bit either, but not for any perceived physical shortcomings. Why one would choose to focus on her butt when one can find plenty of important things to criticize is beyond me. She is tainted with scandal, can be considered a carpetbagger, and has been said to routinely ignore or even disparage anyone she feels is intellectually or politically beneath her.
Some have pointed out a perceived hypocrisy between her strong-woman persona and the woman who enabled her cheating husband. One could point out that she must be the dimmist bulb in the room not to know (or care?) what her husband was up to. She could be considered paranoid to think the problems they brought upon themselves were the fault of a conspiracy.
One could say she is unable to take responsibility for her own actions, or even just own up to obvious duplicity (Rose Law Firm billing records anyone?).
One could criticize her vision for the direction of this country as being too reliant on the government-as-nanny mentality. One could comment on the increased regulation that would likely accompany Hillary!'s liberal politics.
But one can’t sincerely call her fat. I’ve seen fat women. I know fat women. Some fat women are friends of mine. Hillary! is no fat woman.
Heh heh…you said “taint.”
I have a question for you all. Hillary! is almost always referred to by her stooges (oops, I gave away my feelings) as one of the smartest women in politics or America or the world or where ever. This causes me to wonder. Does “smart” somehow have to be defined in male and female terms? Would she be considered as smart if she were a man? My daughter is going to Cornell, a school that would have laughed at my application. She is a lot smarter than I am or ever was, but I just think of her as smart, not as a smart girl/woman/daughter/valued resource(please insert your favorite PC term here). Is it proper for a feminist like Hillary! to define herself as a smart woman?
Beyond that, seriously, what has she done that is so smart? Ace the SATs? Figure out how to program the VCR? Deduct that Bill was fooling around on her? I know, Hillary! is a lawyer! As if there were a shortage of lawyers. She went to Yale Law School! How many thousands of women/men/people did that as well? She’s a succesful career woman! Big friggin deal. Based on her testimony, all the jobs she worked on as a lawyer were dismal failures and she swears she did not keep good records. As far as I can tell, she goes to visit the hospital, factory, day care center or whatever, but gets briefed before hand by her staff on what the issues are. Is that smart? or would it simply be dumb not to be briefed? She wrote books - they were actually ghostwritten. Health care - an embarrassing fiasco that even the Democrats in Congress turned against. What proof is there that she is smarter than anyone else?
My second question is brief. What has she done? What has she accomplished? When she was first lady in Arkansas, working on education, did the scores improve? Was there a difference? All I hear is that she headed this committee, or started programs, or worked for that, or championed something else - but has anything she done actually improved because of her? Is there anything measureable? A list of jobs held is not a list of accomplishments. What has she done?
PS I don’t care - she does have a fat ass.