Temper, Temper.

I grew up between New Haven and Bridgeport, CT. Two cities that have been blue as can be, for 40 years. When I was a kid, my Mom (who was a stay at home mom) used to take us to those cities all the time for a day trip, they were nice places to visit. Now, they are uninhabitable sh*tholes. Paul, if that's your idea of "prosperity", if that's your idea of empathy or compassion for the poor, then you have issues somewhere.

Liberalism is swell for people who are already wealthy. Especially for those who are wealthy, and aren't all that excited about seeing blacks prosper, perhaps (?) because they don't want to ride next to blacks on the ferry to Marthas Vineyard. Whatever the reason, if you can point to large-scale examples of liberalism leading to prosperity for large numbers of poor people (especially blacks), I would just love to see the examples you cite. Hartford? Jersey City? Baltimore? Chicago? Detroit?

Why are those cities poor? Because the prosperous people fled.

What made the prosperous people want to flee? Liberalism. These big cities have become places that are welcoming for those who don't want to work, and places that are impossible for people who do want to work. That's what liberalism does. It turns out, that philosophy is short-sighted and stupid.

and a famous weiner too

time to see what the Puffington Post has to say.........:smokin:

Well, he was acquitted from the impeachment charge and he wasn't disbarred.

Click here...

http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/0...y-gallup-poll/

Then click here...

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/b...massachusetts/

Oh and then click here...

http://www.politifact.com/global-new...illion-lower-/

http://www.investors.com/politics/ed...vable/?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

His license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas...

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10904831/n.../#.V8caJk3lvWM

I didn't say he was removed from office. I said he was impeached.

Here's one for you, Spence...when Clinton denied having sexual relations with Monica Lewinski under oath, was he lying? You may commence your twisting and spinning...

I applaud them, I sincerely do. I didn't see in that article however, a study which estimates how many lives were saved. Nonetheless, it's a world-class gesture.

Furthermore, the Clinton Foundation was also used to give money (via salary) and luxury to people that the Clintons saw fit to reward. I'm not sure Bush used his AIDS initiative to enrich his cronies.

Oh, I did. Massachusetts is quite blue. And you posted a study saying it has a swell economy. I guess I am completely wrong.

Hold on...what variables did your study look at, in ranking the health of the state economy? Income, OK...GDP, makes sense...unemployment, sounds fair. Hold on? No mention of debt! None at all?

Spence, do you know what a "balance sheet" is? When one looks at the health of an organization, do you think it's a good idea to only look at the left side (assets) of a balance sheet, and ignore the right side (liabilities)?

Using that approach, there was a time when this study would have concluded that Allen Iverson's economic health was far superior to mine. After all, he had more assets. Who cares about liabilities?

Here's another study, that looks at state debt per capita...Massachusetts is 3rd highest, with state+local debt per citizen, of $13,000, one spot ahead of CT. So when that debt comes due, which it will soon (it's all tied to when enough Bbay Boomers are retired and looking for fat pension checks), how healthy will that state economy be?

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...nding_2016dH0C

You work in some kind of a business capacity, right? That's terrifying.

Yes sir, according to you, assets = economic health. If you have a lot of assets, that's all you need to know!

What is it with liberals, anyway? How is it, that you can convince yourself that future debt, isn't something that needs to be taken into account?

you might recall he lied to his cabinet and defense squad and they all went out and lied for him as a result....that was nice of him

http://nypost.com/2016/09/01/tax-dol...eport/?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so the the invoice have no names of those mentioned in article

not a Government office: Former presidents are provided $96,600 per year by the US government for staffing expenses. The money is spent at the discretion of the ex-president. and again nothing showing any of that money came from the 96,600 of tax payers money just all suggestive reporting

Bill Clinton has his taxpayer supported office in Hoboken and the Clinton Foundation is in NY city and Arkansas. The equipment went to the Clinton Foundation not Bills "office".
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The blind or maybe not so blind followers will scream " prove it beyond an unreasonable doubt " . What they call "lack of evidence " those with integrity and honesty call " lack of justice". It's been happening since he was governor .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You need to go all in on Vince Foster here.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I thought one of the many reasons America was great because people are innocent until proven Guilty ....

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Seems The right disagree they go with Feelings

Which is why just about all politicians are corrupt. It's so hard to convict them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Were the Clinton's guilty of stealing from the white house when former president and sexual predator William Jefferson Clinton left the white house?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Anyone else would be convicted on far less .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

for the 39th time....I DON"T RECALL!!!!