Forum Thread

If not NOW.....WHEN???

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 246 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 .. 17 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mary Kirby Wrote: I am very interested in the comments of Hillary "full of herself". I have worked with on numerous occasions with the women you spoke of including Hillary. Because she has been strong in opinions and has acquired financial liberty is not a justification. This mistrust and dislike should be analyzed by all who voice it, Why do you feel that way? Connecting her to her husband, gender, or intangible propaganda makes no sense. We must ask for facts not lies before we personally label her as distrustful. I think we will find the propaganda placed out there is purely political and will if we adopt it accomplish it's goal of once again keeping the best choice, a woman, from the highest office in the land. I for one will not take up the banner of propaganda from the right. Until proof otherwise, she has my vote. She is a winner! If not NOW...WHEN??
    I fully agree with P.R. indeed she sits on a high horse; I guess once you've been in the White House then you become a bit arrogant; just look at the fees she is asking for "speeches" . I've worked in Washington and know the crowd; it is who you know and if you fit in. Without connections and money you never get anywhere and she knows it . A president is not in power; neither will she, the old established clan runs the show, regardless of what the voters think; they make sure someone is elected as their puppet. Ask the 1% as well.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Mary Kirby Wrote: I am very interested in the comments of Hillary "full of herself". I have worked with on numerous occasions with the women you spoke of including Hillary. Because she has been strong in opinions and has acquired financial liberty is not a justification. This mistrust and dislike should be analyzed by all who voice it, Why do you feel that way? Connecting her to her husband, gender, or intangible propaganda makes no sense. We must ask for facts not lies before we personally label her as distrustful. I think we will find the propaganda placed out there is purely political and will if we adopt it accomplish it's goal of once again keeping the best choice, a woman, from the highest office in the land. I for one will not take up the banner of propaganda from the right. Until proof otherwise, she has my vote. She is a winner! If not NOW...WHEN??
    I fully agree with P.R. indeed she sits on a high horse; I guess once you've been in the White House then you become a bit arrogant; just look at the fees she is asking for "speeches" . I've worked in Washington and know the crowd; it is who you know and if you fit in. Without connections and money you never get anywhere and she knows it . A president is not in power; neither will she, the old established clan runs the show, regardless of what the voters think; they make sure someone is elected as their puppet. Ask the 1% as well.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I suppose you do know that a great portion of the Foundations and speaking fees are donated to charity? Before they left office they racked up millions of dollars in legal fees to defend themselves from the propaganda the right spewed against them. They prevailed but at an extreme cost. So what you are telling me is you don't trust her because the money she has made makes her untrustworthy? We are a commerce driven world. I for one want someone who has mastered the ebb and flow of money. She will not put us in danger like the Republican Administration did. If she was not well connected do you really think she could win against the money machine on the right? Think about it. Don't you see an advantage for once on our side? Like I said she has my vote. If not NOW....When??
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    This is why women have such an uphill climb to obliterate the glass ceiling. These last responses are so characteristic of a mentality that tries to discourage women. It's not having to act manly in politics is sufficient enough to overlook the qualities of being woman. I am still optimistic that America will see the advantages of having a woman in office. We need more active women for humanitarian improvement. Men have made such a mess of things. As a male, I am embarrassed at times seeing how people act, especially Neanderthal, Type A, low brow thugs displaying how intimidating they can be around others. Trump is so typical of this character. America needs courageous women to step up and show how they can manage the discourse of this nation. If not NOW....When??? This is a good slogan.........I like it!
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: This is why women have such an uphill climb to obliterate the glass ceiling. These last responses are so characteristic of a mentality that tries to discourage women.

    I won't speak for anyone else, but just because I am not the biggest fan of Hillary Clinton doesn't mean that I want to discourage women from entering politics. Who exactly is discouraging women from entering politics? Just because a member doesn't get excited about a potential Hillary Clinton Presidency doesn't mean that they are discouraging women from entering politics.

    My issues with Secretary Clinton have to do with her tax and other policy positions and the fact that she's a war hawk. I would feel the same way if she were a man or a hermaphrodite. No one is accusing me of being sexist for not supporting Carly Fiorina for President, but a Democrat who would rather have the nominee be someone other than Secretary Clinton is a sexist who wants to discourage women from entering politics? That's a pretty weak argument.

    I also firmly believe that America has far more to offer her citizens than having two families passing the Presidency back and forth.

    AmcmurryFreedom Wrote:It's not having to act manly in politics is sufficient enough to overlook the qualities of being woman. I am still optimistic that America will see the advantages of having a woman in office. We need more active women for humanitarian improvement. Men have made such a mess of things. As a male, I am embarrassed at times seeing how people act, especially Neanderthal, Type A, low brow thugs displaying how intimidating they can be around others. Trump is so typical of this character. America needs courageous women to step up and show how they can manage the discourse of this nation. If not NOW....When??? This is a good slogan.........I like it!

    I would love it if we had fifty percent or more than fifty percent of women in all forms of Government. From local to state to Federal offices. I want to see more women judges and want nothing more than to have a woman as our President. If Senator Warren ran for the Presidency then I would canvass door to door throughout the greater Portland metro area trying to convince any and everyone to vote for her.

    What I won't do is blindly accept that our only choice is Secretary Clinton. There are a dozen women I would rather have as our first female President other than her. That doesn't mean I won't vote for her if she is the nominee, but I can pretty much guarantee I won't be as excited about her candidacy as I would with someone whose policy positions are more in line with mine. If someone thinks that is sexist then so be it.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I worked on her campaign against Obama. She throws scraps out to us like woman's right (which I happen feel are very important) but she is owned by Wall St, just as Obama is. She is a politician first for herself, everyone and everything else comes second. This isn't unusual or even bad but the reality is she is a RINO just like Obama. Better that every and any Republican,YES, but that's a low bar for sure. I'll be voting for Bernie in the NH primary (if they let him on) but mainly to give Hillary something to think about.

    What this country really needs are more Bernie Sanders' and Elizabeth Warrens' not another mouthpiece that says what sounds good and then does what suits her best.. Don't fool yourself!

    i can understand why you would want a woman like Hillary and she is better than the opposition for sure, but the best? Not by a long shot. As LB pointed out, there are plenty of Republican women out there that are total and complete losers without a clue. I don't put Hillary in that category at all, BTW.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Well. now it looks like we have a conversation here. I know Hillary voted for the Iraq war but she has said that vote was a mistake. Given the information and lies spoon fed to our representatives it is no wonder that they voted that way. Are we demonstrating in the streets against those who spoke the lies for their own personal greed? No, we are willing to take the people like Hillary and label her a War Hawk. I am sorry she would have to demonstrate more than a vote based on lies to be called that. She absolutely is well connected and as a former first lady, Senator and Secretary of State, she is in demand and can negotiate speaking fees to us that seem high. I will say it again a great percentage of her fees go to CHARITY. Would you rather the charities receive nothing? The comparison of this two family thing is comparing apples to oranges. There was one Clinton president and two Bush's. She is the wife of the former president not the next in line brother. We have no one at this time who has stepped up to the plate and can any way in God's green earth come up with the money to win. As I see the only real decision is to vote for one of the 17 in the Republican town car or back the candidate who we know comes closest to our ideals. You will never get 100% of what you want. God is not running. I have heard here that voting for Bernie will send Hillary a real message. Really? What message is that? You really think she doesn't get it? The only message I see when you auction your vote off against another democrat is that you don't have the courage to back the person with the best skills, and intelligence for the race to the end. That is why I say If not NOW....When???
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mary Kirby Wrote: I know Hillary voted for the Iraq war but she has said that vote was a mistake. Given the information and lies spoon fed to our representatives it is no wonder that they voted that way. Are we demonstrating in the streets against those who spoke the lies for their own personal greed? No, we are willing to take the people like Hillary and label her a War Hawk. I am sorry she would have to demonstrate more than a vote based on lies to be called that.

    I don't call her a war hawk because of her vote on the Iraq quagmire. I call her a war hawk because her answer to every major world problem during her tenure as Secretary of State was deploying our military. If we didn't have President Obama overruling her at every chance he could get then we would currently have American troops occupying multiple countries and wasting our national treasure on being the worlds police. And am I the only one who finds it odd that she used her perch as the top diplomat in this country to push for more war? Isn't that the job of the Defense Secretary?

    Her vote against the Iraq war is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to my worries about how she would conduct herself as President. We can't solve all the worlds problems by sending our military into a country and bombing it to oblivion. I thought we would have learned that by now.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    You do know that she began the negotiations on the Iran diplomacy with our Allies? Hardly a war monger! At the time she was Secretary of State the Middle East was experiencing the Arab spring. It was the President's call whether he sent our troops in. He himself has said, much more often than he wanted to, he had no choice but to defend our embassies. She was Secretary of State she called it as she saw it. No more, no less. Would you rather she not give the President the truth? Again, I will say find anyone else who at this time can give us most of what we want and the key is THEY CAN WIN. We should be shouting from the roof tops to have a candidate so well known instead of looking for her faults. She is not perfect. she is not God, but she can win.

    If not NOW....When??

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mary Kirby Wrote: You do know that she began the negotiations on the Iran diplomacy with our Allies? Hardly a war monger!

    I think you're going a bit overboard here. She enlisted the help of Qaboos bin Said Al Said, the sultan of Oman, to help free American hikers imprisoned on espionage charges. The sultan agreed and was able to get the hikers freed. He, on his own, then encouraged the two countries to begin nuclear discussions under the radar.

    Low level discussions began shortly thereafter, which eventually led to a historic phone call between President Obama and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in 2013...long after Secretary Clinton left office. Then the P5 + 1 was formed and official negations began.

    So if we want to give anyone credit for restarting the diplomatic discussions between Iran and the United States then we should thank Qaboos bin Said Al Said of Oman.

    Mary Kirby Wrote: At the time she was Secretary of State the Middle East was experiencing the Arab spring. It was the President's call whether he sent our troops in. He himself has said, much more often than he wanted to, he had no choice but to defend our embassies. She was Secretary of State she called it as she saw it. No more, no less. Would you rather she not give the President the truth?

    I'm not saying she didn't advise President Obama in the way she saw fit. I'm saying that I don't like the way she advised him and that I'm glad he didn't listen to her.

    Mary Kirby Wrote: Again, I will say find anyone else who at this time can give us most of what we want and the key is THEY CAN WIN. We should be shouting from the roof tops to have a candidate so well known instead of looking for her faults. She is not perfect. she is not God, but she can win.

    And I will again say that there are dozens of women I would rather vote for to be our first female President. No one knew who Barack Obama was before 2004, but he has been the best President we have had in a generation. Just because someone has name recognition doesn't mean we should blindly fall in line and vote for them to be our next President.

    Mary Kirby Wrote: If not NOW....When??

    I hope it's in 2016, but I have to admit that I won't be terribly excited if it's Secretary Clinton. Senator Warren? Yes. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, or the Notorious RBG? You betcha. But I'm sorry if I don't get terribly excited about Secretary Clinton. I'll vote for her if I have to, but I'm just saying that she is not my first, second, or third choice.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Ok I can accept that. But just for your knowledge go to her website. Immerce yourself in what she wants to do for this country and remember Progressive's

    are not the only voters she needs to win. The idea is to get ONE that can win. Then we apply the pressure on what we want. By the way I was speaking of the other Allies in on the Iran deal. Obama definitely has this win with this deal. I again see no one else on the horizon, I only hope we will have her back in this nasty campaign ahead,

    If not NOW...WHEN ??

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mary Kirby Wrote: Ok I can accept that. But just for your knowledge go to her website.

    Immerce yourself in what she wants to do for this country and remember Progressive's are not the only voters she needs to win.

    Trust me. I have.

    Mary Kirby Wrote: The idea is to get ONE that can win. Then we apply the pressure on what we want.

    No! That is not the idea. The idea is to move our country forward in the right (or should I say left) direction. I don't care if a transvestite from Wyoming is our nominee. I want our next President to continue the fight President Obama started and keep moving this country in a left leaning direction.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mary Kirby Wrote:

    Yes, the women you posted left a lot to be desired, to say the least. But to hold the vast majority to the intellect of those five would be unfair. I am only saying, that I hope you would not judge us all with these five Republican women. There have been many who have come and gone who's accomplishments were not fulfilled because of their gender. We keep on electing the other gender and finally find a diamond now and then...How about we give the female gender the same chance. If not NOW....WHEN??

    I do not hold them as representative of the majority women. I simply point out that women are no less susceptible to stupidity than men are.

    why do you ask the question? What stops them? We know what stops them. Power structures change extremely slowly and are most agreeable to change that is little change. Thus the Republican Party presents us with Palin, Bachman, Schafly et al. Why do we not see even moderate republican woman with very few exceptions? Because the structure does not not permit it. Why do we not not see more in the Democratic Party? The same applies. Religious blowholes wave words written by one Semitic tribe as though they mean something and the wave the words allegedly written by a hellenized Semite again as though they mean something. Stir in simple ridiculous general attitudes and you get what we have.

    you are asking the question that has been asked for millennia. Rather ask the power structure of men. Who knows what the answer will be.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Male domination has greatly influenced humanity for centuries. Women are still fighting the second-class (or less) stigma. When I watch women compete with men for jobs, careers, sports, and including politics, it is very clear that many women make stupid mistakes. I often will think to myself that women should just be women and don't act like the men they compete with. Women have strong compassion and thinking levels that when used are distinctly different from men. It is the intimidation factor where men boast (like thumping chests) and tower over women during meetings that the little girl comes out. I so much dislike that character of a woman and I know very well that women are much stronger than that. So, why do women allow men to control them? Because they allow it. "IF not NOW....WHEN" makes a credible statement for women to stand up, make sacrifice and defeat their male counterparts in competition. That ancient belief that women are not built strong enough like men are capable of doing the job.............is BS.

    Most all of the worlds problems can be attributed to male caused. Human Trafficking, slavery, sex industry, child labor, illegal drugs, and major crime is most all man-made with no compassion or humane efforts to other people. Our prisons are full of mostly males as compared to women. There is a large percentage of women in prison as a result of defending themselves from males abuse and saving their children. I am so upbeat to see a woman run and possibly be our next President of United States. Men have been a sorry excuse for what has gone wrong in the world, environment and the family unit. The family is the biggest crime I see in society and humanity that men have done to destroy. So many children being raised by Mothers and worse no parent because their fathers murdered their mother. Where are the fathers to all these children? These fathers are absent from their child's youth sports, school activities and just being a THERE for the child to talk to. Where are the Fathers?

    Well, I give a big Thank You to Mothers and the women who have stood by the children. For these reasons that women do make sacrifices is that they are most capable for being in charge of this Nation, more so than men. Men you have disgraced our gender.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Another strong woman for possible candidate for the Presidency is Senator Claire McCaskill, D-MO.. Although she has some baggage from a troublesome husband having fraud in nursing care and past tax issues, she is not unlike most politicians. However, she is strong willed and Chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee. She is abrasive, but has to be in front all that male brass she encounters. I like Claire. Another woman hitting the media vibes is Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY. These two women are making their stand for women in politics.

    A chick on women in the current House or 114th Congress shows 22 Republicans and 62 Democrats. Is there a significance in the political side of choice for women? Looking at the current Senate is similar in choice of political party where women number 13 for the Democrats and 5 for the Republicans.

    Hmmmmmm...................................If not NOW.....WHEN? Appears the choice is for Democrats among women or is it that the Republican agenda is not appealing to woman in politics. I wonder if more women as Republicans could get Congress working better.............I wonder?