Hillary Clinton Regrets Gandhi Joke

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized for joking that Mahatma Gandhi used to run a gas station in St. Louis

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-hillary-clinton-joke,0,4333920.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

Actually the content of the joke don't bother me at all... it's just not funny. If they can't deliver a joke that's funny, they should get out of government!

It’s going to surprise the heck out of me is some wacko right winger don’t come out, for real, and say she should resign.

I'm ready to accept a female President, but this Hillary b---- could ruin the country.

Agree jim, but I don't really think her bad joke is all that big of a deal....

It continues to amaze me that hard-core Republican conservatives are apparently obsessed by nightmares of a potential Hillary Clinton candidacy for President. She is not a candidate, and speculation about the possibilities for such a
candidacy in the future is just that: idle speculation. But apparently her PRESENCE on the political scene is a matter of serious paranoia amongst Republicans. She was elected comfortably
as a senator representing the people of New York State; and, so far as I know, they are satisfied with the job she is doing on their behalf. She was also recently voted one of the most admired women in the United States. Makes you wonder just what is behind all of the attention that hard-core Republican conservatives pay to Hillary Clinton.

I’m not at all paranoid about Hillary running for president. I just wouldn’t like to see a female version of Bill Clinton, and the morals of a she-dog, elected to President. I’ve had enough of that.

I still think Dean, and all his arrogance, will give us some of the best Saturday Night Live laughs of all time if he is elected.

But she is thinking of running for president. Republicans are no the only ones that think that. I have seen any number of her ex-whitehouse staff, form when she was Mrs. President, that have all said she is running; all liberals salivating at the thought.

Chris Matthews, the Jimmy Carter speechwriter, admitted liberal and host of Hard Ball has done any number segments on her running for president. Larry, I never seen a liberal I didn’t love, King asks nearly ever guest he has on about her running.

If people speculating about Hillary is paranoia, it is spread equally straight across the entire political spectrum, not just conservatives.

<small>[ January 10, 2004, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: JFlosum ]</small>

I repeat. There is some bewildering paranoia about Hillary Clinton running for President. The two previous posts ascribe all sorts of motives to Hillary Clinton and infer behaviors (i.e. "winking"
at Bill Clinton's actions -- read her book!) that are more supposition and association than fact.
Pundits can claim all they want. Hillary Clinton's name appears on no ballots for the primaries that begin early next week. And, she has not made any move toward declaring a candidacy for anything. She continues to represent the people of New York State.
Strong women apparently frighten some men.

<small>[ January 11, 2004, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Bob Doolittle ]</small>

Bob, no one is saying Hillary will run this election. She'd have to be nuts...

There are already too many people running and even she probably admits Bush has too good a chance of winning again.

However, I have no doubt that she'll run in 2008. There isn't a clear replacement for Bush at that point. I wouldn't be suprised to see Gore run again then too.

jimbo 71, you say you are ready to accept a woman president. I don't think so. Otherwise you
wouldn't be making the female dog analogy when refering to Hillary. Why is it that men can behave in the same manner and it's considered aggressive but women are being b------? No woman deserves being called that name by any man.

_________________
Life is too short for drama & petty things!
So, laugh insanely, love truly and forgive quickly!

I dunno, I could call my ex-wife that, and in my view she would be very deserving.

_________________
"I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question." - George W Bush

You married her so you must have seen something in her at one point. Generally men do the proposing so what made you propse to someone who is what you consider a not nice person? If the only person thinking another is b**** is an ex-spouse then perhaps the problem is as much his fault as hers.

_________________
Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

Friends never lets friends drive drunk.

Deb! B------ could stand for Babe, Boob, etc. Where was your mind?

Nell - You're right. Before she moved in with her new boyfriend and left me with three kids, a big mortgage and a 60 hr/week job, I thought she was the best person on the planet. She was my hero. Ultimately your are correct however. My problems resulted directly from my poor judge of character.

I may have issues.. Here, I'll set this thread back on track.

THAT WICKED WITCH HILLARY MUST RESIGN!!

Back to you Flosum.

_________________
"I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question." - George W Bush

Bob you have a copy of the 2008 and 2012 ballots?

There you go again, construing other peoples words trying to suggest they said something the didn’t say…. And taking cheap personal shots at people. You are consistent I’ll give you that much!

Just because I don’t like the idea of Hillary for president does not mean I have trouble with strong women or a women president…. Did you forget that I worked for Liddy Dole in California in her bid for president? Doh!

First off, Hillary probably stands a fairly good, better then 50% chance, imho, of getting Democratic nomination…if and when she decides to run. She herself has not closed the door on that possibility.

Second, I never said 2004 or any other year. To think she has not and is still not “thinking” of all possibilities would be a bit naive on anyone’s part, anyone that is paying just half attention anyway.

As for doing such a fine job of representing NY, I’m not sure that has been with out more then a few bumps. Like the time she got booed off the stage at one of the 911 events. Then there was the major screw up that ticked off the Jewish electorate, not all that small in NY, when she “praised” Arafat, not to mention her latest “joke” about Gandhi. I’m not sure that’s the finest kind of representation in some people’s minds.

Hillary Clinton goes to a primary school in New York to talk about the world.
After her talk she offers question time.
One little boy puts up his hand, and the Senator asks him what his name is.
"Kenny."
"And what is your question, Kenneth?"
"I have three questions:
First - whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
Second - why would you run for President after your husband shamed the office?
Third - whatever happened to all those things you took from the White House?"
Just then the bell rings for recess.
Hillary informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.
When they resume Hillary says, "Okay where were we? Oh, that's right, question time. Who has a question?"
A different little boy puts his hand up.
Hillary points him out and asks him what his name is.
"Larry."
"And what is your question?"
"I have five questions:
First - whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
Second - why would you run for President after your husband shamed the office?
Third - whatever happened to all those things you took when you left the White House?
Fourth - why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
Fifth - what happened to Kenny?

Yeah right jimbo 71. Have a good day.

_________________
Life is too short for drama & petty things!
So, laugh insanely, love truly and forgive quickly!

No Flosum, I don't have copies of the yet unprinted ballots for elections in November of this year and (egad!) 2008. AND NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE POSTING ON THIS BOARD, ESPECIALLY YOU.
It may well be that the anti-Clinton, anti-Dean,
anti-Democrats-of-any-persuasion folks who post on
this board believe they can read minds. I cannot
and don't try. I do try to pay attention to what people are actually doing and saying. I see nothing in Hillary Clinton's words or actions that
provide sufficient evidence suggesting that she is ready to declare her candidacy for President of the United States. On the other hand, as evinced by this board, I see lots of paranoid speculation by people who obviously detest Hillary Clinton that she will do just that. No one is foolish enough to suggest that she is or will be a serious candidate this year. And, unless we remove George W. Bush from office this year, the election of 2008 will go to just about anyone willing to clean up the biggest mess this country has ever seen -- worse than the mess Franklin D. Roosevelt confronted when he was elected in 1932.

Bob!! Ahhhhahahaha ! You never disappoint!

Show me where I said she was ready to declare for president?
Show me where I said she was thinking of running this year?

I don’t hate Hillary… I just don’t want her as my president. But if she did win, I bet she would be better then Bill. She is much smarter.

You said, >>I see lots of paranoid speculation by people who obviously detest Hillary Clinton that she will do just that.<<

Do you really think that Larry King, Chris Mathews, Allen Combs and her own x-staff members, Demarcates all of them, detest Hillary? Wow!

As for your “anti-Democrats-of-any-persuasion” comment, wrong again!!!!

As I told you before I have worked for a number of democrats including a gal -I guess that covers the erroneous statement about having troubles with strong women- that ran for and won her party’s, that would be the Democrat party Bob, nomination to run for congress. She lost the general election by less then 1% of the vote.

<small>[ January 15, 2004, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: JFlosum ]</small>

Umm... FDR is already on the dime.

_________________
When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a meteorite hurtling to the Earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much hosed no matter what you wish for. Unless it's death by meteor.

>>instead of spending millions in the space program.<<

For every $1 spent in past space exploration, it returned $7 in economic benefit’

The medical advancements and products and services that came out the space exploration alone would have been worth the money spent. There is probably not a person alive that does not have a family member or close friend this is alive today that may well be dead had it not been for the science that came out of the space programs.

From pacemakers to braces, the medical benefits of space exploration

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9811/02/space.medical/

Beyond medicine some of the other products include:

Robotic, including those used in hostage negotiations, bomb squads and toxic situation.

Cordless drills and other cordless products and the rechargeable batteries themselves
.
Safer automobiles due to the advancement of wind tunnel studies pioneered at NASA and the plastics developed for space travel.

All sorts of thermo products including that little tin foil looking emergency blanket and the blanket that firefighters caught in a blaze hide under to escape being burnt to death.

Dehydrated foods and the packaging that is now used in everyday use.

Sunglasses and sun block and other UV protection products were developed from space-based technology.

Any number of products has been developed form the metal alloys that came out of the space program including the most advanced golf clubs and golf balls, that some may think trivial but golf is a huge industry supplying millions of jobs nation and world wide.

I can go on and on and on. Here go read for yourself: NASA Spinoffs

http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

Well Flosum you are certainly on a roll! I would
have some questions about your ability to focus, but
then in my experience consistency of focus was never a conern of yours. You've bashed Hillary Clinton and you relegated President Franklin Roosevelt to the historical trash heap as a traitor and worse, and under the same thread you've managed to take a few swipes at current Democratic candidates for President. Then, for good measure, you provide a backhanded kind of support for Bush's plans to put a man on Mars. The list you provide of the practical
applications that have come out of space exploration is impressive -- and old. There is with every new major scientific effort benefits
that are realized over time. There is also a
serious concern for diminishing returns from
continued pursuit of the same scientific endeavor.
We've put a man on the moon and we sent probes to
Mars. The potential benefits do not increase from
repetition. By the same logic, wars have generated substantial scientific advances -- in medicine, surgery, explosives, detection equipment, etc. But -- other than Bush -- I don't see anyone eager to become engaged in another war. The issue with Bush's latest attempt to exhibit the "vision thing" is that he
has not made clear WHY we need to go to the moon
and put men on Mars and HOW that can be done we so
many domestic problems going without adequate funds. If you want to look at an impressive list, try lisitng all of the domestic problems that urgently need attention. You might start that list with the need to fix a broken health care system. As to your blog about FDR, his record as President, while not perfect, marks him
in the minds and hearts of most Americans as one of the top five Presidents in our history. It must have escaped your notice that he was overwhelmingly elected President by the people of this country FOUR times. But then what to voters
know, right? After all, more of them voted for Al Gore for President than voted for George W. Bush.

>>you relegated President Franklin Roosevelt to the historical trash heap as a traitor and worse,<<

Bob?? HEHEHE you are so funny. I never said a word about Roosevelt. Hehehe

Focus Bob, Focus!

You do have a problem with truth and accuracy don’t you? Hehehe

And incidentally Bob, I remember hearing most of them same arguments against space exploration back when, oh my! It was Kennedy that was president! And guess what? I supported him 100% against the nay sayers back then! Hehehe

>After all, more of them voted for Al Gore for President than voted for George W. Bush.<

WOW lookie here! Bob has himself a scoop…no wait we have seen that information before … about 50 thousands time!!! ahahahahahahahahah***

<small>[ January 16, 2004, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: JFlosum ]</small>

I do apologize, Flosum. It was your echo, Baby, who bashed FDR. This board does not appear within my computer screen whole unless I adjust the screeen each time. I didn't do it in reading Baby message.
I supported Kennedy's efforts to explore space at the time as well BECAUSE KENNEDY EXPLAINED VERY CAREFULLY WHY WE WERE DOING IT. You may remember we were still involved in a Cold War with the Soviet Union -- a war which nearly got very hot over the Cuban missiles -- and we were still shocked by the Russian success in putting "Sputnik" into orbit well before we got into space. Domination in space was a seriously important, even vital, objective to justify an ambitious space program. And, I remember, too, that JFK was handling the economy very well; we were in the midst of the best post-WWII economic
expansion and producing budget surpluses. That is not the case now. Other than "looking to the
stars" Bush offers no justification for (1) establishing a base on the moon, and (2) using that base as the launching point to put human beings on the surface of Mars. The current estimate, at least the latest one I heard on NPR
"Science Friday" was $3.5 trillion dollars. That's getting real close to the budget deficit that Bush will ring up before his administration
ends. To spend that kind of money we need a much
better justification than Bush has provided. On top of a "enrich-the-drug-companies" reform of medicare and a "make-Vincente-Fox-happy" immigration plan, I'd say that Bush has indeed offered the American people of good idea of his
"vision." And the man must be blind!