Last week's Bosnia lie wasn't the only big lie she's told over the years. Here are some of the better ones:

 

 

Then there's the story about Chelsea jogging around the World Trade Center when the Islamic terrorists attacked on 9/11. Wasn't true. Chelsea was nowhere near the trade center. Where did Hillary get this story? Did her daughter make a mistake and tell her that she was out jogging? Hardly. There was no basis at all for this lie. None. This was Hillary trying to make herself a part of this tragic story .. telling a bold lie in order to bring to herself just some of the sympathy felt for those who suffered actually losses in this attack by Muslim goons.

 

How about Monica Lewinsky? Do you really think that the whole story was just made up by some "vast right wing conspiracy" to discredit her husband? Come on now. How many so-called "bimbo eruptions" had Hillary handled before Monica came huffing along? She knew what a whore-dog her husband was, yet she sat there and prattled on about a right-wing conspiracy. Just another lie.

 

Then we have the Sir Edmund Hillary thing. Yeah .. her mother named her after the first person to climb Mt. Everest. Problem is, nobody had heard of Sir Edmund Hillary when Hillary Rodham was born. A lie.

 

Remember Bill Clinton pardoning those Puerto Rican FALN terrorists as he left office? Hillary was running for the Senate in New York at the time, and the Puerto Rican community was demanding these terrorists be pardoned. Hillary – the woman so involved with everything Bill did in the White House – says she didn't know about the pardons. Right.

 

Oh yeah ... Hillary wanted to be an astronaut. Remember this one? She wrote NASA to find out how to apply, and she says they wrote back saying that they "don't take girls." Sally Ride was about three years younger than Hillary when she became the first U.S. woman in space. Do you believe that NASA actually sent that letter to Hillary.

 

Then there's this biggie. The Rose Law Firm billing records. This wasn't an inconsequential lie designed to enhance her image. It was a lie to cover her rear end. Investigators wanted her billing records from the Rose Law Firm to see if she had done any work on a tax scam known as Casa Grande. She claimed – under oath – that she didn't have those billing records, that she didn't know where they were, and that she frankly doubted that they existed at all. Well .. it turns out they did indeed exist. They were found in her private quarters in the White House two years after she swore under oath that she didn't have them. Not only were they found, but they had her handwriting and fingerprints on them. This particular lie was a crime. She was never prosecuted.

 

Moving right along to the soccer lie. The story here was supposed to be that Hillary was on a junior high school soccer team and had a confrontation with the goal tender from an opposing team. If I remember the story correctly, the opposing goalie told Hillary that she didn't like white people. Oh yeah .. like high school soccer goalies just spontaneously blurt out their hatred for white people during a soccer game. The problem here was that the school Hillary was attending didn't have a soccer team. Another lie.

 

Hillary says she didn't give the order to fire the White House travel office staff. Staffers remember the exact words she used: "Fire their asses." She then had their asses and all their belongings unceremoniously dumped on the Ellipse behind the White House.

 

-boortz.com

 

Obama is going to win. Hillary is toast. :dance:

 

**Let me clarify. I don't like Obama. I just hate Clinton. I really don't think any candidate is worthy of the Presidency.**

Lets hope so.

I don´t care who wins, bush has taken the US to far back to get it back... even if a team of which contains the likes off JFK, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, George Washington, and Bob Marley were jointly in control I don´t even think they can grab back what bush & co has started...

 

All we can hope for is for someone to slow the decline... !! as there is no stopping it..

You do realize Bush has very little power compared to Congress.....He really couldn't do anything without Congress....so we owe the thanks to a couple hundred rich bastard from both parties.

 

No one will slow the or change the path of a nation now, presidents are figure heads without any real power, everything is decided by money by big bussiness who have bought congress and the white house.

 

I don't like Bush, but i realize it was not just him who fucked up this nation, him and 50 years of thousands of bad politicians.

THat's some dream team, Bart! They can run my country anytime,lol.

 

Unfortunately, I agree with everything in this thread...and no leader can be trusted, anymore than congress can. Hilary strikes me as incredibly dangerous. When she first announced she was running, I thought a woman in the white house would be cool...but NOT that woman!

And the reason nothing will change, is even american's think it's all Bush's fault and started with Bush, while the politicians of this nation get a to do whatever they want while Bush takes all the blame, thus change will never happen. As long as we see everything at face value and blame one man or one administration, we'll never get any better. People have to realize who has the real power and makes the policy and how we have to change it.

Bush is a megolomaniacal idiot, but he's indeed not the whole problem. I could start in about the Supreme Court here, but I have to go out in a minute, and it would be a looooong post,lol.

out out, damn spot!

 

Well, yes! The problem is the process. What the process does is allow the worst kinds of behavior to surface to the top, and uses the tools of big money and a largely monopolized media to control voting by either negative or positive messages. Until the level of disgust reaches a zenith, that is to say.;)

Well, Hillary's pretty well lost the nomination (or at least I hope so!). She's so far in debt, I cannot see her continuing much longer. Unless her twisting of the disallowed states' primary results are somehow included, I think she's finished.

What isn't being looked at is the fact that Wolfowitz (on the bad council of a senior neo-con who moved him to the "dark side") got Bush and the administration to buy into the Iraq war idea (according to Woodward) - before then, they were focused on the war to be started in Afghanistan. Then, like MacBeth with Lady MacBeth, Bush bought into the idea (as they all did), and rode it and us right over the cliff. So, Congress, being chicken in times of crisis, gave the President a blank check to do whatever he wanted, and the press were corralled like so many penguins into having to be "loyalists" during a "national crisis", and to get access to press briefings at the White House, abandoned their role as watchdog. Media ownership did the rest (the silent hand of the market - e.g. - the paymaster knows how you should report the news), as Dan Rather later confessed...

So, I think Bush deserves much of the blame. He, and his loyalists. Congress deserves plenty, of course, for not putting up much of a fight. But there are some who fought hard against the war. Congressman Charlie Wrangle was one. (More like lone voices in the wilderness, but they were there.)

Now, given that history repeats at times, Vietnam was a lost cause long before we pulled out, and yet President after President kept on with it - afraid of letting down the American people. Iraq seems like this as well - we're the occupiers, and the national government there looks to be created in such a manner as to create divisions, so I see no hope of future peace, until we leave, and some restructuring occurs. But, unlike Vietnam, Iraq has oodles of oil, and the region is crucial for the global oil supply. Perhaps Barack Obama will get us out of this mess - I sure hope so - it's not a good situation, and stability will return in time - for the economy to function there, the groups within Iraq must cooperate.

Anyhow, I'm not so pessimistic about the future - better people in office can make a difference, and the public will regain control of the government. We did it in 1776, and we can do it again!;)

Thats the problem my friends, you assume Barrack Obama is different....he's the exact same as all the politicians. Loyal to money, whoever lines his pockets writes the the policy for him like almost every politician. Americans think voting democrat will change something, but both parties are the exact same,ran by most of the same people.

 

The public will NOT regain control over the government, because no one understands it, and the few who do aren't heard by the nation, and the other few who do, use their knowledge for more power.

 

Each election the grip on america gets tighter, eventually there will be no way out. I'm seriously not trying to offend you here, but you have the mentality like most americans on this issue, and because of that we'll elect another bad leader, backed by bad leaders, making things worse.

You may be correct - but only time will tell. I'm just hoping for better than worse out of the next election.

It is the process that is a large part of the problem. I do not wish to hope for another revolution here, so I put some faith that as things get worse, the public will be awakened to the realities of the day, and movements already afoot to reform the process will get real teeth. Otherwise, it's not a hopeful picture, and that's not something I care to entertain as an idea right now.

Pork gets packed into bills for only so long, and corporate control cannot reign supreme forever - we pushed the tea crates into Boston Harbor at one time for just such a reason.