Type to search

The 5 Worst Things Jeb Bush Has Said Recently

Featured Post Memo Pad

The 5 Worst Things Jeb Bush Has Said Recently


When your last name is Bush and Karl Rove says you’ve had a bad week, you’ve really had a bad week, the way Lehman Brothers — the investment firm whose bankruptcy helped signal the beginning of the financial crisis — had a bad 2008.

The best news Jeb Bush has gotten recently is that he’s no longer the weakest GOP frontrunner in generations. He’s not even the frontrunner anymore. A recent national PPP poll of the 2016 GOP candidates found that he still leads among Republicans who think President Obama isn’t invading Texas, which is enough to put him in fifth place overall.

Bush’s recent problems all come from the same place — his mouth.

S.V. Dáte, who covered Florida politics during Bush’s governorship, wrote that Jeb is used to being “the smartest guy in the room,” who distrusts the press and sees them as an obstacle. That makes him a pretty typical politician, but the exact opposite of his brother, who saw journalists as pawns who could be charmed into furthering his agenda—and turned out to be right.

But as the third member of a political dynasty to seek the presidency as the nation is still suffering from his brother’s many terrible decisions, Jeb’s situation is not typical in any other way. That’s why what he says matters so much. Here are five horrible flubs that reveal why Jeb Bush could be the GOP’s worst possible candidate in 2016—and will probably win the nomination anyway.

1. George W. Bush is his close advisor.
This is the one that actually started Jeb’s downward spiral, and revealed his willingness to bend with the wind and then overcorrect as his greatest weakness.

Billionaire Sheldon Adelson — the man who kept Newt Gingrich in the 2012 primary for far too long advancing the Bain attacks that became the backbone of Democrats’ critique of Romney — didn’t like that Bush family consigliere James Baker spoke to the progressive Israel lobby known as J Street, and didn’t have bad things to say about the proposed nuclear accord with Iran.

Jeb decided that he’d better fire up his secret weapon early. Asked by a group of donors in New York whose counsel he seeks on Israel, he said, “If you want to know who I listen to for advice, it’s [George W. Bush].”

This didn’t just show he was out of touch with current GOP/Israel relations, which has seen Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu invested with a doctrine of infallibility that didn’t exist during W.’s administration. It suddenly opened up a new range of opportunities for reporters to ask about other W. policies.

2. He would have invaded Iraq.
Strangely, when Jeb Bush said he wouldn’t be afraid to launch a “Third Bush War” in Iraq, it didn’t make big news. But that was when he was in his “I’m my own Bush” period. Flailing with a super donor and with a GOP base that prefers real W. to diet Jeb, the candidate decided he should fully embrace his brother’s legacy and say that he would invade Iraq again, knowing what we know now.

“I would have, and so would have Hillary Clinton, and so would have almost everybody that was confronted with the intelligence they got,” he said.

This argument ends up meaning the same thing as saying — as Jeb eventually did — that knowing what we know now, he wouldn’t have invaded. He — and all the other Republican candidates except Rand Paul — pretend that the decision was made in good faith based on bad intelligence, which is the opposite of the truth.

This continuing fallacy is necessary as conservatives pursue an even greater disaster in Iran. We can hope that Democrats (including Hillary Clinton) who voted for the war and have made similar arguments will use this as an opportunity to attack a continuing Republican posture of aggressive war.

But the idea that we’d get another Bush, who learned nothing from the war, created such an uproar that a Bush advisor volunteered that Bush had misheard the question. More likely, he “misunderestimated” the fallout.

Continue reading



  1. FireBaron May 18, 2015

    And he’s supposed to be the “Smarter Brother”?

    1. bobnstuff May 18, 2015

      The frightening thing is that he is the smarter brother.

      1. FT66 May 18, 2015

        Sorry he is not smart. I never call a spade a big spoon. Just wait and see how he will meander when campaigns and debates heat up. I have noticed something already in this man.

        1. bobnstuff May 18, 2015

          GW was one step above Forest Gump so to be smarter then him is no challenge.

          1. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

            You must not have seen the movie because, from my perspective, the Forest Gump character was a frickin’ genius compared to Dubya.

          2. bobnstuff May 18, 2015

            You could be right. The problem with GW was you never know where he left off and Chaney started.

          3. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

            That’s the problem with circle jerks…

          4. plc97477 May 18, 2015

            I have seen plants that could best him in intelligence.

          5. idamag May 19, 2015


        2. idamag May 19, 2015

          Little Georgie was a dismal failure in the debates and he still won.

          1. plc97477 May 20, 2015

            He didn’t actually win. brother jeb gave it to him with the help of the not-so supreme court.

  2. waggaze May 18, 2015

    If he is the smartest of the Bush boys this could be an interesting GOP nomination. He and Perry will be eye to eye, intellect to intellect and of course way out of touch. I hope he does get the GOP nod since it will guarantee a Democratic win hands down. The Bush moniker fraught with too many black marks including the total destruction of the US economy and the illegal war that killed thousands of innocent civilians and will continue to haunt Iraq for generations to come and remind Americans of his big bubba’s stupidity and war crimes. He has too much family baggage to carry around and his intellect is below average to have a positive impact unless Americans want wars during his entire reign of idiocy.

  3. FT66 May 18, 2015

    I am getting difficulties to understand what kind of politician Jeb Bush is. We all know all politicians say what people want to hear. And they are right because they bring votes. How can Jeb get votes while he continues talking what chases people away from him? He doesn’t say it once as it looks like now it his style. By the way, as we continue to hear bad news from Iraq, that is bad news for Jeb or rather republicans as whole, regardless the mega dollar they can accumulate.

    1. itsfun May 18, 2015

      seems like Jeb and Joe Biden have a lot in common.

      1. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

        Only from YOUR biased perspective. Let me guess…You are a 50-something with a massive sense of entitlement to luxury, lacking seriously in the ability to lay blame where blame is due and most talented at throwing anyone but you and your cronies under a bus. Please, spare us more of your biased BS. You know who was president from 2001 to 2008. You know who screwed up the economy. That your meanspirited, angry, seething, raging, ranting, bitter middle aged generation believes you were all born with silver spoons in your yaps is no surprise.

        However, NO you can’t blame Obama or Hillary for Iraq. You can blame them for trying to play clean up crew to your GOP cronies who so badly played to Halliburton and Blackwater profits that human lives in our US military and Iraq didn’t matter.

        Another feature of the 50 something generation today: Get it, get it all and get as much as you can as long as you can. And when the rest of us get fed up with the Silver Spoon Bush generation and decides to hang repsonsibility for your decisions on you? You post and post and post denials till they and you are seen for what you are: phonies playing at being intelligent.

        It makes sense you spoiled brats would hate a president for trying to make the world a better place. All you punks and snot nosed brats know is gimme gimme gimme.

        1. idamag May 18, 2015

          I wouldn’t even respond to that unread person. We are discussing Jeb Bush and it doesn’t matter what we are discussing he has to throw in his hateful ideology about the President and now Hiliary. I think I saw his pickup with homemade hate signs on the back.

          1. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

            Ida…I know what you mean. But, these are 50-somethings with serious mental problems. I have never witnessed people of this age group ever before with such massive anger, bitterness, hatred and mean spirited viciousness. You cannot tell them the truth for their living in constant denial of facts.

            If they could, they would deny everything we all grew up learning and understanding and all for the sake of them wanting ultimate control of a world that smart people know you can change, but never control. But these middle aged lazy butts do nothing worthwhile with their lives and then sit back and blame problems on everyone but themselves.

            I’m a firm believer in not enabling mentalities of this kind. What they want is a totally silent world they control, while they sit back and complain like the neurotics they are. Sad and pathetic.

          2. Paul Bass May 18, 2015

            Eleanore & Ida,
            I (not 50, but 61) agree with your observations, but would like to point out that the majority of 50-60 likely agree with us rather than itsfun.
            I know difficult logic, but follow me here, most women do NOT agree with these right wing bulls, AND there are a few of us older males who aren’t misogynous and can think. Now I know some females ARE republicans, but in presidential years at least, I think we are in the majority.
            So folks like itsfun are a dying breed, and are just trying to spread their bile as far as possible.

          3. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

            I’m 68. So, a first string Baby Boomer. Women do not agree with right wingers or the GOP for one reason: The cards are always stacked against women. Women know this. Only the bravest among us are willing to get out there, get in a bull’s face and chew them up and spit them out.

            Women today are fed up with the massive slathering of masculine ideology that keeps women 2nd and men 1st in the pecking order. Women have had to fight harder to achieve things men had only to crook a pinky finger to achieve. Not because men are smarter or more capable nor more talented or skilled. Because men loathe the idea of any woman being equal.

            The proof of this is the huge flap when women wanted equal status in the military. So what happened? Women in the military were attacked by their fellow officers and when they complained to their superiors? They got that “boys will be boys” mantra women are so sick and tired of hearing.

            The reality is that men simply have never learned to leave their gender out of their workplace or politics. It’s why no woman has ever made it to the White House in 235+ years…It is erroneously presumed that leadership is a “guy’s domain.”

            I am proud of the fact that 11 women from New Hampshire are now in Congress and the number is finally growing. This is also true for women on the SC. It’s also true for women in finance.

            There are alternatives to the way men think. Unfortunately, some men can’t think outside their own gender for longer than a few seconds and the giant imprint of masculinity steps over all women to keep control.

          4. idamag May 18, 2015

            I think women, like Phyllis Shafley, did more to give women the idea that Republicans wanted their women pregnant and barefoot.

          5. idamag May 18, 2015

            See my answer to Eleanor. It isn’t hard to see the drop in mentality overall. When you have a group, in Texas, deciding the maneuvers, at U.S. military bases is the United States trying to take over Texas. Last I heard, Texas was part of the United States. When we have a congress that behaves like children – you have to wonder about the electorate.

          6. itsfun May 18, 2015

            Check out the results of the last national election.

          7. idamag May 18, 2015

            Every ten years the Brookings Institute does a study on overall intelligence. They found I.Q. levels are dropping. We are devolving and that is why you find people, with little education making statements they cannot back up and they don’t care. I don’t know what age group itsfun is, but whatever it is, he is not educated and has little smarts. Rather than give him the satisfaction of responding to him, respond about him. I thought the lower I.Q.s were a result of little mental stimulation in the media. In order to keep our brains functioning above normal, we need the stimulation until we die. However, a woman, at the meeting I was attending, last week, thinks the lower I.Q. levels are a result of nuclear testing and chemicals. She claims they are birth defects. It is beyond their capabilities to do critical thinking.

          8. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

            The scariest thing I heard this weekend was a quick glance at the GOP convention. One of their guest hosts had the gall to state that “College is not important.”

            Can you imagine such a moronic statement? This guy had the nerve to say that if college is not affordable, that simply means that students should not aspire to get a college education.

            AS you can imagine, he also said that the problem in society today is that some people are irresponsible and try to dump their inability to afford college on the wealthy. I wanted to smack him silly.

          9. idamag May 19, 2015

            Since overall intelligence level is dropping, I can believe it. We are paying the price for our attitudes toward education. Those better educated countries will have an advantage over a country that seems to think stupid is a virtue.

          10. itsfun May 18, 2015

            Tolerance in action. Got nothing so just call names.

          11. itsfun May 18, 2015

            yep anyone that doesn’t agree with you has mental problems.

        2. mike May 18, 2015

          Your nose continues to grow!!!

          1. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

            imitation of Mikeee…”Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!!Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!! Your nose continues to grow!!!’ The sum total of your so called intelligence?

          2. mike May 18, 2015

            Your lies keep coming and the nose grows longer. LMAO!!!

          3. plc97477 May 20, 2015

            Mikey seems like a small child to me. Standing on the playground and “yelling I know you are but what am I”

          4. Eleanore Whitaker May 21, 2015

            I agree…Mikey argues with everyone he can possibly prey upon. He is always right and everyone else is always wrong. If you check the status of his posts, he has yet to agree with one single poster.

        3. itsfun May 18, 2015

          Iraq was stable when Obama took over. Now ISIS is only miles from Baghdad and you are finding a way to blame George Bush for the incompetence of Obama.
          I have never know anyone so full of hate as you are. You must be one very lonely and sad person. The way you hate successful people and rich people I can’t understand how you can support and the rich Clinton family. After all they are the top 1% of the 1%. They made 25 million in the last 16 months giving speeches and getting royalties. How many jobs did they create with that money? You hate people like Romney that have worked to create businesses that employ thousands of people.

          1. johninPCFL May 18, 2015

            Of course it was stable with 10’s of thousands of US troops in-country. Too bad GWB set the 2014 end date, right?

            Since the end was set, there was no need for Iraq to give our troops immunity from prosecution. Just imagine how many US servicemen would be in Iraqi jails today had Obama not pulled them out ahead of the GWB end date.

          2. johninPCFL May 18, 2015

            Oops. GWB’s end date was 2011: “in 2008 George W. Bush signed the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. It included a deadline of 31 December 2011, before which “all the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory”. ”

            Then the Iraq government decided that in light of the Blackwater murders it didn’t need to give US servicemen immunity from prosecution, so they wouldn’t agree to a new “status of forces” agreement. Had we stayed in-country, all of our military personnel would be in Iraqi prisons, and they’d be “not torturing” our folks using waterboarding.

          3. Eleanore Whitaker May 19, 2015

            As a matter of fact and truth? Yes. I do blame George Bush. What possible explanation can you righties or the GOP come up with to explain what the hell business the US had using a preemient strike on a sovereign nation like Iraq?

            You boys really need your heads examined if you think that needless Iraq war, the Abu Gharaib, Gitmo and water boarding have NOTHING to do with ISIS growth in Iraq today. These MEN just like you and your Dixie rebels who harbor the same ideas of getting revenge. Your American rebels are just more subtle about wanting a return to the good ole good ole days of Plantations worked by free slave labor. And don’t deny your bullies of the right are not every bit the control freak savages ISIS is. You just don’t get the kind of publicity that’s pushed onto the pages of every billionaire media in the US as ISIS does.

            Did you really think you jerks could just create endless wars for profit and profiteers like Halliburton with ZERO consequences or blowback? Are you men really this hideously moronic?

            Sorry…if your Back Room President Halliburton Cheney had kept his damn oil boy nose out of Iraq, there would be NO ISIS, no waterboarding, no Abu Gharaib, no Gitmo detainees and NO profits to the tune of $350 billion for Halliburton. Go ahead…deny this…I dare you.

            Let’s stop the BS right now. Bush was NEVER president. That evil SOB Cheney with his CEO might and power addiction was. Now…stop trying to erase Bush and Cheney history.

    2. itsfun May 18, 2015

      Wouldn’t the continuing bad news from Iraq, be bad news for Obama and Hillary?

      1. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

        We have been hearing bad news about Iraq since GHWB decided to attack Reagan’s old pal (Saddam Hussein). If we go by the Iraqi standards established the first Gulf War, Iraq is relatively stable, in spite of the pervasive effects of ISIS, an organization composed of the Sunnis that W removed from office and who had no choice but to flee for their lives. As horrifying as their actions are, they pale in comparison to the slaughter of 600,000 people during and after the invasion of Iraq.

        1. itsfun May 18, 2015

          It was stable when Obama took over. Now we have the JV just miles from Baghdad.

          1. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

            Iraq has not been stable since the Gulf war. The situation did improve after Gen. Petraeus put in place a policy of inclusion of Sunnis in government jobs, but what followed can hardly be characterized as stable.
            It is also important to consider the root causes for the emergence of ISIL. ISIL is composed of disaffected Sunnis who lost their jobs after the fall of Saddam, fled their country to escape the slaughter that followed, and are back with a vengeance.
            W’s policies did more than de-stabilize the Persian Gulf region, it is the reason for the emergence of ISIS and calls for an Islamic Caliphate. Creating a problem and blaming the person who was left holding the bag is not a convincing argument.

          2. itsfun May 18, 2015

            Obama has had 6 years to deal with this. He is a complete failure in this. Look at what happened in Yemen after Obama was bragging about how great his policies work.

          3. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

            Yes, he had 6 years to deal with the situation in Iraq, and managed to reduce U.S. casualties to almost zero. Yemen, Somalia, Ethiopia, and just about the entire Arabian Peninsula, Persian Gulf, and the Middle East have been in a state of turmoil since at least the creation of the Jewish State of Israel. Don’t forget that one of the 19 terrorists that carried out the 9/11 attack was from Yemen.
            Yes, for a brief period of time it seemed as if Yemen was finally going to turn things around, when a moderate President took over. That did not last, and they are now back to the same behavior that has characterized life in that part of the world for decades.
            If it was up to me I would order all our troops, diplomats, and businessmen our of those countries, and let the Sunnis and Shiites go at it.

          4. itsfun May 18, 2015

            I couldn’t agree more with you. I think that if a treaty with Iran is made and they can make nuclear weapons, then Israel will attack within a month.

          5. mike May 18, 2015

            In 2010 Biden was saying that Iraq was going to be one Obama’s greatest foreign policy success. Good Biden missed again.


            Thank God are casualties have dropped but the cost to the people of the area is far worse.

            We now find that weapons in Libya were sent to Syria by the Obama administration even after being warned 17 months earlier that ISIS was growing stronger and their desire to form a caliphate.
            Just another failure of Obama.

          6. FT66 May 19, 2015

            Mike dear, it was a huge success because he saved lives and treasure. In you mind, how many lives could have been lost by now (our soldiers + Iraqis), if he could have follow the trend of “W”? Are you trying to convince us the Iraq war will be on forever? Don’t you understand once soldiers are out, the vacuum will be filled? Iraq is for Iraqis. occupation is never wanted by anyone, thats why they will fight our soldiers to the last point.

          7. mike May 19, 2015

            Really, It is a disaster. Obama walked away leaving a giant vacuum, and that “so called stable govt.” disappeared, the army collapsed and ISIS controls large parts of the country, Iran is a major player in the country now, and you think it is a success. What a stupid statement.

          8. FT66 May 19, 2015

            Mike, are you blind? Didn’ t you see who initiated the war? Why are you circling the war around Pres. Obama’s neck. Don’t you know where “W” is and take that huge baggage to him? You are a disgraceful person. Sorry to say so but it is the reality.

          9. mike May 19, 2015

            No blindness here, I understand why those who voted for the war with the intelligence available to all at that time, was a mistake. What I also understand is that Obama wanted no troops in Iraq and had little concern as to the consequences.
            What I also see is Obama’s reluctance to do what is necessary in stopping these evil people. You know they are only the JV team.
            No, what I am circling around Obama’s neck is what happened after he pulled out and devastation of the area and his inability of understand the consequences of his actions.
            As to disgraceful person remark, far from it.

          10. FT66 May 19, 2015

            Right mike, no more argument. I can’t believe you have consumed my valuable time in this discussion. Sorry. I have to deal with much more important issues now.

          11. mike May 19, 2015

            That’s right, go bury your head in the sand, again. Just like Obama on the world problems.
            He tried to have a meeting on the Iran deal and 4 of the 6 Arab leaders didn’t even show up. One leader thought it better to go to Horse Race in UK. And you think he is doing a good job. What ignorance on your part. Very few, if any. world leaders respect him. He is a joke.

          12. paulyz May 19, 2015

            And what of the casualties in Afghanistan as well? 75% of those occurred during Obama’s watch, & you’ve must have forgotten the surge.

          13. FT66 May 19, 2015

            itsfun, itsfun, itsfun where have you been living since 2007? Pres. Obama campaigned to end the war in Iraq, thats why he was elected and re-elected. Do you think he was wasting his time campaigning to people who didn’t understand his words or rather what he meant? If you call your “W” the man of his words, don’t pretend not to see Mr. Obama is the man of his words as well.

          14. itsfun May 19, 2015

            Yes he campaigned to end the war. Why are we still in it then? He has had 6 years to end it. Being a proven liar, how can anyone believe his words? If you like your doctor or insurance plan you can keep both of them. He is a proven failure, just look at Iraq now.

          15. FT66 May 19, 2015

            Well, well! thats itsfun the so-called good thinker. I have to ask you this: why is Pres. Obama and his family staying in the White House? Did they build that building? If you can answer this correctly, then you will have to understand why he is trying to put everything right in Iraq though it is not his war.

          16. itsfun May 19, 2015

            Probably because of election fraud and Harry Reid lying about Romney. He is a complete failure in his trying to put things “right” in Iraq. When he became President it became his war. He knew it was there and hasn’t helped in over 6 years.

          17. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

            Do really believe what you just said?

          18. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

            You don’t argue you fabricate. You fabricate because you like to hear yourself talk.

        2. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

          How many people did Saddam slaughter? You are starting to sound more and more like Rosie O Donnell. I don’t buy those bogus numbers. Most Iraqis died by the hand of their own people. You seem to be a very unpatriotic American who does not appreciate what you have.

          1. Dominick Vila May 20, 2015

            Saddam was a ruthless dictator, and he did kill thousands of people, especially Kurds after Reagan gave him aerial and satellite imagery that suggested collusion between the Kurds and Iranians during the Iraq-Iran war.
            Yes, most of the killings after the invasion were perpetrated by Iraqis, mostly disaffected, unemployed, Sunnis. That was one of the most unfortunate consequences of our decision to invade a country that was not a threat to us, and that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, Saddam’s secular regime was itself a target of Al Qaeda.
            President Reagan recognized the value of having Saddam Hussein in power, and using him to block Iranian ideological expansionism. W ignored that lesson when political and economic imperatives proved to be more important to the neo-cons than military strategy, and we ended up with the mess we have today.

          2. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

            Old retired person, I already know this and just maybe a bit more. I agree, but it is not what happened. Also what happened is we freed a of lot persecuted people and we miserably botched the occupation. That I blame on Cheney and Rummy. But who cares what I think or you think.

      2. johninPCFL May 18, 2015

        Neither of them cooked the intelligence and thus lied the country into the Iraq war. So, no bad news for them.

        1. itsfun May 18, 2015

          In 1998 Bill Clinton warned us about Iraq having nuclear, biological and chemical warfare. He said Hussian would use. I assume He was telling the truth about Iraq. Now you say George Bush lied about that 3 years later. Am I to assume that if George Bush was lying, then Bill Clinton was too.

          Bill Clinton 1998: “Saddam has WMD & will use”

          The Anchoress ^

          | Jan. 26, 2008

          Brilliant Gateway Pundit -and his equally brill readers – remember
          what so many of us have forgotten: This weekend in 1998 brought the Iraq
          intelligence that shaped our policy (under Clinton) to depose Saddam and got us all talking about the WMD which, as we all know, Bush (and only Bush) “lied” about. He brings us the video:

          “Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much
          of his nation’s wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on
          developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to
          deliver them….I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans
          and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, “You cannot defy the will
          of the world,” and when I say to him, “You have used weapons of mass
          destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use
          them again.”

          Yeah, he always could talk the good game, anyway.

          Do go over to Gateway’s and be reminded of a few other peculiarities about how history has been revised on this issue, is still being revised. Also check out some of the quotes in the comments section!
          And remember: Iraq and WMD – you heard it from the Clinton Administration first! You heard it from many others, too, but it started at this SOTU address – that’s right, the intel pre-dated Bush.
          can be more generous than many who find it easier to say “Bush lied”
          than to actually look at the facts; I happen to believe that Clinton was telling the truth as he understood and believed it.

          One other good thing to remember as
          you consider this election year: Sandy Berger, in preparing to face the
          9/11 Commission w/ President Clinton went into the National Archives,
          stole classified documents relevant to the investigation and destroyed
          them. Clinton chucked, “that’s Sandy” and the press yawned. And Berger will have his security clearance back in time to be on Hillary’s staff.

          1. johninPCFL May 18, 2015

            Odd that he didn’t listen to the chief UN weapons inspector: “In June, 1999, Ritter responded to an interviewer, saying: “When you ask the question, ‘Does Iraq possess militarily viable biological or chemical weapons?’ the answer is no! It is a resounding NO. Can Iraq produce today chemical weapons on a meaningful scale? No! Can Iraq produce biological weapons on a meaningful scale? No! Ballistic missiles? No! It is ‘no’ across the board. So from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq has been disarmed. Ritter later accused some UNSCOM personnel of spying, and he strongly criticized the Bill Clinton administration for misusing the commission’s resources to eavesdrop on the Iraqi military. According to Ritter: “Iraq today (1999) possesses no meaningful weapons of mass destruction capability.” ”

            But, OK, that’s a year later and it’s fine right up to the point where several YEARS later GWB sent Joseph Wilson to VERIFY that Saddam had purchased yellowcake for a WMD program. Remember when Wilson’s report said NO YELLOWCAKE, and the Brits agreed “NO YELLOWCAKE” and Cheney got so enraged about the neocon lies being exposed that HE OUTED WILSON’S CIA WIFE?

            How many overseas agents died because Cheney and GWB were pissed at Wilson? Remember when the crap hit the fan and Cheney’s comment was “If the President does it, then it’s NOT ILLEGAL”? How many of the dozen embassy attacks and dozens of personnel killed on GWB’s watch were related to Valerie Plame’s being exposed by those idiots?

      3. FT66 May 18, 2015

        Not bad news for Pres.Obama because he is trying to clean up the mess which he didn’t initiate at the place. Not bad news for Hillary either because she won’t repeat the mistake of Iraq war. Bad news to Jeb because smart people know for sure he will take the country back to Iraq war. Taking four days rumbling with a simple question indicates he has an hidden agenda about Iraq & Iran. Bad news for republicans because the memories of Iraq war are kept alive and angers a lot of voters.

        1. itsfun May 18, 2015

          Iraq was stable when Obama took over. Six years later we have problems with Iraq and you blame George Bush. Obama calls ISIS the JV and them watches them invade and now are just a few miles from Baghdad. Hillary showed her incompetence with foreign policy in Benghazi. Blaming George Bush for the incompetence of Obama just doesn’t fly with the American public anymore.

          1. JPHALL May 18, 2015

            What stability? They couldn’t run their government or army without the US. How much US dollars propped them up even with their oil wealth?

  4. Carol Jones McDonnell May 18, 2015

    Unmitigated arrogance of the Bush family:

    Jeb’s brother started Isis.

    His father started Al Qaeda

    Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany. That’s the origin of the Bush family wealth.

    Other family members, continued a pattern of financial scandals and business failures/scams that ripped off voters; one example, the S&L Savings debacles involving Jeb, his father, and brother George & Neil.

    1. idamag May 18, 2015

      No more. Preston Bush also fought Social Security. He claimed it was socialism and tried to repeal it several times. His grandsons have taken up the cause. Remember the war criminal wanting to put it on the stock market and where did the stock market go under his administration?

    2. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

      Concur. Enough with the Bush-whacking already…

      1. Carol Jones McDonnell May 18, 2015

        Bush whacking? Spread information to voters is NOT whacking. It’s working to avoid another Bush debacle.

        1. CrankyToo May 19, 2015

          Sorry, Carol, but you misunderstood. The first word in my earlier post is “concur”, which means, of course, that I agree with YOUR earlier post. What I’m actually saying, in my clumsy way, is that we the people have been whacked enough by the Bushes…

    3. waggaze May 18, 2015

      It seems they feel entitled to ruling Americans and stealing from the country’s coffers with impunity. They seem to believe the Bush family can commit crimes against the people and not be held accountable for anything they do such as the Iraq War and war crimes and crimes against humanity. Where’s the justice for those harmed by the Bush family? Preston was a Nazi sympathizer and the US never held him accountable but actually rewarded him after WWII. WTF?

      1. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

        So was Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh and a host of others.

  5. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

    There is no question that Jeb shot himself in the foot, not only because of his endorsement of the Iraq invasion, and the excuses or retractions that followed, but because he demonstrated a lack of character that contrasts with his performance as Governor of Florida.
    His dealings with the Cuban Mafia before he became Governor, his involvement in the Terri Schiavo case, and his complicity in W’s selection as President are all going to haunt him politically, but in all honesty his performance as Governor was moderate and was not controversial.

    1. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

      If we, as a unified electorate, don’t stop pulling the lever for Republicans on our ballots, none of us will survive the onslaught from the right.

      1. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

        The most troubling matter of a government entirely controlled by the GOP, because of its long term effects, involves the likelihood of as many as 3 Supreme Court Justices retiring within the next 5 years. The impact of a SC with a majority of Alitos and Scalias should be enough to vote Democratic or Independent in 2016.

        1. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

          That’s a prescient comment, indeed. But the looming, potentially disastrous prospect of a Supreme Court packed with wingnuts like those two (and let’s not forget to mention Thomas, who’s every bit as slimy as Scalia) is (1) lost on moderate cons and (2) pure red meat to extremist cons. If Dems and right-thinking Indys don’t turn out next year, we’ll find ourselves in deep kimchee beginning in January, 2017.

        2. mike May 18, 2015

          The same worries the right if another Obama like is elected. Vote Independent?? Now that is an interesting concept.

          1. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

            The right is worried about increasing the number of “conservative” Justices in the Supreme Court?
            President Obama is one of the best presidents in U.S. history. We would be blessed if someone with his intellect, honesty, and sense of justice was nominated to the Supreme Court.

          2. mike May 18, 2015

            President Obama is one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. History will not be very good to him and he will be right next to Carter. His intellect is in question with his many poor decisions both foreign and domestic, his actions and words have proven him to be dishonest, his sense of justice leaves much to be desired. You continue to try and equate intellect with governing but as we saw in Carter it doesn’t always work much like Obama. Obama considers all those are not of his thinking to be rubes and knaves. Few presidents have more consistently or aggressively questioned the motives of their political rivals, not their judgment, as has Obama. 2014 Quinnipiac Poll-Obama worst President since WW II.

            It looks like his administration knew 17 months before arms were shipped to Syria from Libya that ISIS was no JV team as Obama called them.

          3. hicusdicus May 19, 2015

            You should not post while taking medications.

        3. paulyz May 19, 2015

          Just like Liberals, wanting to legislate from the bench to continue their march to Socialism by any means. Liberals don’t mind the Executive Branch legislating either, because of your ends justify the means mentality.

          1. Dominick Vila May 20, 2015

            If your reference to the Executive Branch legislating refers to President Obama’s Executive Order granting a TEMPORARY work permit to some illegal immigrants, that is neither unprecedented not unconstitutional. If anything, President Obama has issued fewer EOs than most of his predecessors.

          2. paulyz May 22, 2015

            It’s not the number of Executive Orders, but the type of Executive Orders, which Obama himself as well as a Federal Judge stated & ruled unlawful, un-Constitutional.

          3. Dominick Vila May 22, 2015

            President Obama’s EO is neither unlawful or unconstitutional, inasmuch as the Executive Branch has the right to administer and manage the Federal government departments and agencies. In this case, his EO involves a TEMPORARY work order for illegal immigrants who have been in the USA for over 5 years and who had children born in the USA. People with a criminal record are not eligible for the TEMPORARY reprieve. What President Obama said is that his EO would become null and void the moment Congress writes and passes immigration law reform, which they have not done for political reasons.

      2. hicusdicus May 20, 2015

        Its better to be right than wrong.

    2. mike May 18, 2015

      So lets see, Hillary has answered few if any questions since she announced, Has deliberately stayed away from the press, and then dumps this past Friday information showing Clinton’s made 25 Million in speaking fees in a 16 month period, and you are talking about the GOP? Interesting!! Her fees since Jan 2014 range from 100k to 350k, I guess the Press needs to pay her for her thoughts. How is she going to relate to all the middle class families when in less than an hour for some speeches she makes 5 times what the medium family makes in a year. She is not that brilliant to demand such fees, this is all about access to her. If she was so great she should be gathering the world around her and letting us all in on her great wisdom. Can’t wait to see how she answers this latest information and all the other questions she has refused to address.
      Stay tuned, it is only beginning. I think you need to get your own house in order.

      1. Dominick Vila May 18, 2015

        Bill and Hillary Clinton can relate to middle class families for a very simple reason: they are a product of the middle class. Yes, they are very successful, and their experiences and vision do command high speaking fees, in contrast with those who spend their lives in seclusion hiding from the public.
        Are you criticizing intellectual and financial success? The ability of middle class people rising to the top is an integral part of the American dream. That’s what this country is all about, and that’s why so many people admire and support the Clintons.

        1. hicusdicus May 18, 2015

          I know someone else who came from a middle to lower class family and did very well. Al Capone. except he got caught.

          1. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Hyperbole and cheap shots like that are not going to get you very far.

          2. CrankyToo May 19, 2015

            Neither will kicking a dead horse get one very far. I applaud your many efforts to elucidate the likes of Mike and his fellow wingdings, but Dude, you’re kicking a dead horse!

          3. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            I agree, but I can’t pass the opportunity to savor posts by far right Republicans voicing outrage over successful people collecting high fees and becoming rich. No wonder these guys are fighting tooth and nail to preserve their ER freebies, and lament having to pay part of the Obamacare premiums. They are a bunch of communists in disguise! 🙂
            Now we know why they, and the states they live in, are called RED.

          4. CrankyToo May 20, 2015

            I hear you, Bro. This is definitely a target rich environment. But I’m feeling a little ambivalent lately as regards engaging some of these knuckleheads. It can become a chore, as you doubtless have told yourself a thousand times.

            I do admire your tenacity, though. You’re generally the first guy into the fray, and you stay until all the ignorant kids have had their bottoms spanked. And you do it with dignity, style and a remarkable understanding of past and current events. As far as I’m concerned, this is your rag.

          5. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Totally agree…..I suggested many times that we not respond to these trolls and maybe, if ignored, they’d go away, but sometimes you just HAVE to respond because they are so out of touch with what’s going on. But, as you said, it’s like trying to train a cat….almost impossible!!! But, we keep trying and Dom does a great job of it!!! He speaks for many of us…eloquently and on target!

          6. hicusdicus June 28, 2015

            Oh! Another backscratching contest between dumb and dumber.

          7. hicusdicus June 28, 2015

            Dom has the same litany no matter who he is responding to. You eat it up, its high calorie liberalism.

          8. hicusdicus May 19, 2015

            I have gone farther in life than you have and without riding on the back of a corporation. Have you ?actually ever taken a significant risk

        2. mike May 18, 2015

          Now there you go again trying to put words in my mouth. I want every Americans economic status to rise.

          Between them they gave 104 speeches since 1-14 and collected 25 Million dollars. Again, almost 5 times the U.S. medium income if you averaged(240k) their speeches. Plus she was paid 2.5 million by 10 groups lobbying for the trade deal. No wonder she is silent on the deal. She will have to weigh in at some point.

          “It’s not unusual for former elected officials to go out and give speeches and make a lot of money,” said Noble, senior council at the Campaign Legal Center. “What the problem now is that they’re coming back into government after going out and having been paid large sums by these various special interests.”

          The good old Clinton fatigues is back in a big way.

          1. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            You claim you never criticized intellectual and financial success, and followed your denial with a tirade that confirm the conclusions of those who read your posts.
            There is absolutely nothing wrong with being successful, becoming rich, and seeking public office. That’s the American way, and one of the things we like the most about the land of freedom and opportunity.

          2. mike May 19, 2015

            Good old Dom trying to deflect the truth with another stupid attack on me. Go after the messenger not the truth.
            Can’t explain the 104 speeches worth 25 million dollars, can you? It is so middle class to receives such fees. Being one the greatest intellects in the world by your standard, why isn’t Hillary not telling the rest of the world how far thinking she is and how necessary she is to save the world.
            You can’t explain if she is so brilliant to receive anywhere from 100k to 325k per speech, why she can’t talk to the press.
            You won’t touch the 10 groups/companies paying her 2.5 million for access to her on trade agreement. As with the Clinton foundation, these fees are for access to the Clinton’s, Period.
            You once made the claim that the Clinton Foundation does so much for aids, what you left out is the foundation “does not” get involved directly but partners with another organization directly involved in aids. Yes, the monies are important, that is not my point. Why would other govt.s and individuals not just donate to those organizations directly?? Simple answer, They want the access to the Clinton’s, they donated while she was Sec. of State and hedged their bets she would be running for president. Which she is.
            Only in your partisan mind am I against financial success.
            Tirade!! Really?? I gave you facts from their own documents they released last Friday, and I had a tirade. Funny!! Typical Dom, back in denial of the real world.

          3. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Yes I can. People worldwide are willing to pay high fees to listen to what Bill and Hillary Clinton say, and ignore what misunderestimated former Presidents do or say about anything.
            Glad to see a Republican offended by financial success.

          4. mike May 19, 2015

            Yes you can try and deflect and ignore the truth, that is how you try and justify your poor position on so many issues.
            You said “Republican offended by financial success” perfect example of the lies you try and put forward.
            Now why won’t Hillary answer questions by the press??? Her superior intellect should make this a cake walk with the press. Right?? Is facing the press like her failing the DC bar exam the first time???
            I sure enjoy your pathetic responses. Good old Dom, a laugh a minute!!

          5. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Not a deflection, just a conclusion based on what you said. Calm down, re-read your comments, and there is a good chance you will understand why I believe you are criticizing intellectual and financial success.
            Hillary will answer questions from the press, and the public, when she decides to enter that phase of her campaign. At the present time she is focused on hearing the concerns expressed by mainstream Americans, something that most Republicans don’t bother to do. Whether or not you – and people like you – like what she has to say is a different matter.

          6. mike May 19, 2015

            No, you are deflecting as usual. I am far from criticizing success! Another funny comment from you. I love it.
            I am always very calm. No need to reread.
            Hillary hearing the concerns of operatives planted at her table, you mean. They are about as many mainstream Americans at these staged events as Americans living at the south pole.
            First, she hasn’t said anything in weeks since announcing her candidacy. When she did do a press conference it was very weird, she totally blew it, was caught in lies, and showed the world she just isn’t ready for prime time.
            When did she became queen and can tells us when she will answer questions? She doesn’t have that luxury. She thinks she can get away with it but she won’t. Already her favorable is down to 48% and unfavorable up to 49%. Polls show she is the least ethical of all candidates running.

          7. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Should we assume you enjoyed seeing Romney pretending to be shopping at a grocery store?
            At least Hillary is listening. Your hero dismissed the needs of 47% of Americans because we are not worth his valuable time.

          8. hicusdicus May 19, 2015

            We? Who are you trying to scam? You went through life relying on corporate money. I did not care for Romney but I think he meant the 47% feeding from the public trough. It is hard for me to understand why you can not see through Hilary’s game. Why don’t you get behind people who can get this country solvent again? I don’t know who that may be but they must be out there somewhere.

          9. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            The only people who can fix the fiscal problems we have is us, the people. There is no magic wand, and expecting someone, regardless of party affiliation, to show up and take care of our irresponsibility is futile.
            We must learn to live within our means. We have to stop handing money to corporations and the wealthy, and make sure they pay their fair share. We have to eliminate all subsidies to people who don’t need our help. We must make the use of tax havens illegal. We must raise the SS contribution cap to at least $200K to make sure the program remains solvent for many years to come.
            Most importantly, we must stop acting like economic hypochondriacs and accept the fact that our GDP is second to none, that our economy is growing, that jobs are being created, that an unemployment rate of 5.4% is something to be proud of, that a DOW Index over 18,000 points is evidence of corporate growth and profitability, that the 20% increase in new construction is evidence of consumer confidence and wealth, that gas prices in the $2.60 range are bound to help our economy grow by increasing disposable income. Feeling sorry for ourselves, at a time when our economy is the envy of the world, serves no purpose, other than convince the naive that something is very wrong and that we must take America back to the good old days of January 2009, when we were all standing at the edge of an economic abyss without a parachute.

          10. NoodleDogg #1 May 24, 2015

            You really believe unemployment is only 5.4%? Only the people that file for benefits are included in that number. The stock market at 18000 is a disaster waiting to happen. The performance of businesses that comprise the stock market does not justify that inflated value. This overdue correction will wipe out most of the paper profits. About 2/3 of workers earning less than $50,000 pay no income tax. The top 1% of tax payers pay 21% of the income tax collected. Yet you think the rich should be taxed more. The problem is the cost excessive debt assumed by government “for our benefit”, Overall corporate America provides about half of the revenue collected by the government. Defining fair is a conundrum. Just as “minimum wage” is hotly debated. I never considered entry level jobs, such as fast food employees or part time jobs as anything but supplemental income. But that seems to be changing. I might have to wonder if too many people are wanting too much without making the sacrifices needed. Does everyone need a smart phone, HDTV, central air and heat, that bi-weekly nail job or tobacco products? Yet I see the bottom level wage earners living beyond their means too many times. Why are women still popping out babies which they cannot support?

          11. Dominick Vila May 24, 2015

            No. The real problem is our unwillingness to invest in infrastructure, modernization, in the global economy, as well as in support of social programs that benefit the American people.
            The economic disaster waiting to happen is going to be the result of China investing trillions of dollars in infrastructure and modernization, and in global economic expansion, while the Republican party continues to talk about austerity.
            The reason we are not going to remain the global superpower we are today much longer is because of our refusal to invest and pay for what we need.
            Instead of rejecting trade agreements because we only like those we benefit from, while ignoring the needs of our trading partners, we should engage in massive investment at home and abroad to strengthen our global position and put the United States in a position that allows us to compete.
            Paying people enough to pay the rent and buy food, and decrying the fact that poor Americans pay little or no taxes is not going to solve anything. Particularly when billionaires take advantage of enough loopholes and tax shelters to pay little or nothing in taxes. There are no free rides. We either pay for the things we need to sustain our standard of living, our security, and our privileged position in the world, or we should step aside and let others take the lead.

          12. hicusdicus June 29, 2015

            The rich and the corporations pay nearly 70 percent of the taxes. I can tell by what you say that you have never had to make a living by risk taking or any real capital investments. Your income came from people who took the real risks and you just hung to their coat tails. When you have gone out and made a million using your own money and wits then I will take you seriously until then you are just a lot of hot air. Nothing personal but you really are full of it. What do you actually know how to do and I don’t mean shuffle paper?

          13. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Boy….what have you been smoking? A goodly portion of big businesses; i.e. IBM, GE, Nike, etc. pay NO income taxes because they have buried their profits overseas. As for the 2/3’s of workers making less than $50,000 don’t pay any income tax, that’s ridiculous and totally untrue. We ALL pay taxes of one form or another….sales tax, property tax, etc. And, I know quite a few people who make less than $50,000, and every one of them has paid income taxes (unlike the big corporations who make hundreds of times that amount.
            The so-called fast food employees, etc., that you consider as making “supplemental income” is no longer valid….most of these jobs are held by people who have lost their jobs and these are the only jobs they can find at this time to help support their families. I see many middle-age people slinging burgers at Mickey D’s where you used to see teen-agers doing the same jobs. This is what the economy has done. And….women “still popping out babies that they can’t support”…..interesting considering that it’s the evangelical RW republicans who are working hard to stop “Planned Parenthood” from helping these people with birth control, condoms, etc. so that they don’t have to “pop” out babies they can’t support. It’s the same group that’s trying to do away with the so-called abortion clinics, but when a woman ends up having a baby, they immediately back away from helping her care of that child. What a bunch of hypocrites!!!

          14. hicusdicus June 28, 2015

            OMG! you are ignorant. One thing for sure is your not a troll, you are not smart enough.

          15. hicusdicus June 26, 2015

            OMG! who is your doctor and what is the name of the pills he prescribing for you????? You could not possibly believe what you just commented. Wait, I forgot. You think Hilary will lead our country back to prosperity and world prominence. Never mind the clown car just arrived to give me a ride back to the circus.

          16. Dominick Vila June 27, 2015

            The clown car has the acronym GOP engraved on it. Hillary can do a much better job on both domestic and foreign policy than any of the Republicans currently running for the GOP nomination, and so can Sanders. Time will tell.

          17. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

            Did I mention anything about the GOP? By the way how could you know who could what? It seems all you have ever done is shuffle paper. You were an office hack who did what you were told. I have a feeling you are doing the same on this web site.

          18. Dominick Vila June 27, 2015

            I could care less what you think. As for the paper allegation, that’s only true for the last 10 years or so. What did you do? Flip burgers?

          19. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

            Its obvious you don’t care about what anybody thinks if they don’t agree with you. I don’t flip burgers I don’t even eat them. I am a vegetarian. My wife and I have produced enough income to have supported over a hundred employees in our life time how many have you personally supported?

          20. Dominick Vila June 27, 2015

            Just my family, and that’s enough for me. I congratulate you for being a successful entrepreneur, but I assure you, there is more to life than financial wealth.
            BTW, I am not too crazy about burgers either.

          21. hicusdicus June 27, 2015

            Financial health can sure make life more rewarding. Financial health is one of the ways I keep feeding and caring for all these stray dogs that people have abandoned out on the county roads. If I can find the right owner I will pay for the medical and give them a months supply of food. I feel that finding a good home for an abused starving dog to be very rewarding. Cats are Okay but not mixed with 12 dogs.

          22. Dominick Vila June 28, 2015

            Financial wealth is essential to the achievement of specific goals. Especially when those goals require material resources. A poor person can be as satisfied with his/her life simply knowing that he/she is caring for one stray dog – or cat – as those who find satisfaction caring for 12. In the end what matters is what we think about ourselves, and whether or not we believe we have made a difference.
            I must admit that I am partial to dogs. 🙂

          23. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Sure, the same ones that made it insolvent….great idea!

          24. hicusdicus June 26, 2015

            What are you talking about, the same ones that made it insolvent…. great idea? You must have gotten your Mensa certificate from the university of Nigeria. I am also starting to understand why America keeps losing wars.

          25. dpaano June 29, 2015

            Where have you been….your wonderful GWB left such a large deficit when he left office…..it’s taken President Obama and his administration years to bring that deficit down 2/3’s! No, I didn’t get my Mensa “certificate” from the Univ. of Nigeia…apparently, you have NO idea what I take to join Mensa. As for losing wars….we’re losing them because we shouldn’t have help start them in the first place!

          26. hicusdicus June 30, 2015

            Bring the deficit down?????????????????? Okay, whatever. If you did not get the I am smarter than you are certificate from the university of Nigeria then how much did it cost you to get it online? I would like to get my wife one of those certificates but her IO is only 165. All her IQ ever got her was VP of a major oil CO and a couple of science degrees and a capital base with 7 figures. I bet she could have been really successful if she had one of those Mensa things. Even her dad did not have one of those and he was a rocket scientist. You must be proud.

          27. dpaano June 30, 2015

            Apparently, from your confusion about the deficit, you are adhering to the party line (or the myth that FOX News keeps spouting). Needless to say, if your wife is so brilliant (and I’m certainly not saying she isn’t), she can go on line, take the MENSA test, and if she passes it, she can then take the “proctored” test. If she passes that, she gets her certificate. As for her father….same goes for him. If you don’t apply for it, don’t take the test, they don’t just “hand” it to you.
            As for your continued comments about my certification with Mensa, you are rude and have absolutely NO respect for anyone. Typical of most the trolls on this post! So, if you can’t say something intelligent, please don’t bother to respond to my posts….it’s beneath me to respond to such BS!

          28. mike May 19, 2015

            Listening to operatives, not regular Americans in a staged event. Really!!!
            Keep living in the past. Romney is yesterday much like your thinking. The democratic party is not in that good a shape, no matter how hard you try and ignore the situation. I would be worrying about your own back yard.
            Today she graced the press with a few questions, but when asked about TPP she dodged the questions again, dodged the 25 million fees, and ran when the really tough questions came. She wants to control the message but she can’t. Each day she refuses questions will effect the Independents, their numbers are down to just 11% favorable now. We know they will determine the election.

          29. NoodleDogg #1 May 19, 2015

            Hillary is listening only to her handlers. Her only goal is to be elected POTUS. Period. No holds barred. If you can’t see that, you truly are not in touch with reality.

          30. Dominick Vila May 20, 2015

            Are you suggesting the rest of the politicians running for President – past and present – don’t listen to the political strategists in their teams? The only one that may fit that category is Bernie Sanders, and I doubt he will be nominated or elected.

          31. NoodleDogg #1 May 21, 2015

            My comments apply to Hillary, who far exceeds the efforts of other candidates, past and present, to get elected. Hillary’s campaign is about Hillary. Winning is her primary goal. Should she actually win, she will have to rely on a team to have any hope of preforming the job of POTUS. Unfortunately, her payback to her supporters will take precedence over the good of the nation. It’s not worth mentioning the obvious that a candidate employs a team of advisers/coaches/advisors to better the chance of winning .

          32. Dominick Vila May 21, 2015

            All Presidents rely on their team of advisers to make sound decisions. President Reagan, a very popular president in some circles, relied on the expertise of his team, and his wife’s astrological predictions, to make decisions, and a large segment of our population loves him because of it.

          33. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Gee, isn’t that the same thing as the GOP candidates are doing? Isn’t their goal the same thing…to get elected POTUS!! I think you’re the one that is a little out of touch with reality!

          34. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Boy, are you ever delusional!!!

          35. mike June 26, 2015

            No, the only delusional person is you and your only reason to vote for Hillary is because she is a women.
            She is untrustworthy and not honest but to you it is only about gender, heck with the fact she is least authentic person running.

          36. dpaano June 26, 2015

            I can list many people who have failed the bar exam the first time….it’s almost a rite of passage to fail it the first time!!! What’s your problem with that?

          37. mike June 26, 2015

            But she is the smartest women ever. How could she have failed???

          38. FT66 May 19, 2015

            Bravo Dominick as if you have taken the words out of my mouth. I blogged almost the same on a different website.

          39. paulyz May 19, 2015

            Are you talking about the American Way of freedom & opportunity by hard work, playing by the rules & responsibility, or the new American Way of Federal Government redistribution of wealth, quotas, & rammed through legislation that ignores the concerns of most Americans, much of it by lies or misrepresentation?

          40. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Nobody gave the Clintons anything, other than the same opportunities to get an education and work hard to earn what they now have.
            The only redistribution of wealth in recent years involves what happened in Iraq, when over $1T was redistributed to the private sector, in the form of sole source contracts that were seldom finished. Ostensibly to help a few get richer than they already were.

          41. paulyz May 19, 2015

            Are you blindly unaware of the many sleazy & unlawful ways the Clintons came into much of that money? Libs constantly criticized Romney, even though they had nothing dishonest or sleazy on him, a very decent, successful man that made it on his own without his daddy’s money, which he gave entirely to his Father’s Alma Mater, but excuse everything the Clintons have done to obtain their wealth.

          42. Dominick Vila May 20, 2015

            Buying companies in financial trouble, liquidating them, and firing the employees to make a quick buck is not what most people consider hard work. Using foreign tax shelters to avoid paying taxes, and refusing to release tax returns that would have revealed that taxes were not paid or were below 10% is not my idea of sharing the tax burden with those who work their butts off every single day to keep their heads above water.
            In any case, most of the criticisms directed at Romney were influenced by his 47% admission. The disdain and lack of humanity he demonstrated destroyed his candidacy.

          43. paulyz May 22, 2015

            I could list over 10 ways the Clintons have sleasily & some unlawfully, but on this tablet, it is a chore, & Liberals ignore. Again, Hillary is a 1%er like you criticize Romney for, & they have a very disdain, elitist regard for humanity, only caring how it plays out to the voters.

          44. dpaano June 26, 2015

            And, the only ones that got rich from those subsidies were the people in charge in Iraq…..most of the money never got down to the people’s level at all!

          45. Theodora30 May 19, 2015

            So there is something wrong with people paying you to give speeches? Jeb, George I and II, Reagan, Carter, many journalists who complain about the Clintons also make money this way. It is as legitimate as being paid to throw a ball well. This is a ridiculous argument. Who among us would not be willing to be paid for this?

          46. mike May 19, 2015

            More faulty thinking on the left, I see. Nice try, no cigar.

            “It’s not unusual for former elected officials to go out and give speeches and make a lot of money,” said Noble, senior council at the Campaign Legal Center. “What the problem now is that they’re coming back into government after going out and having been paid large sums by these various special interests.”

          47. Theodora30 May 20, 2015

            It is not uncommon for a candidate gets a large amount of funds for reelection from One or two industries – fossil fuels, health care or banking for example. My governor used to work for an energy company and will go back to it when his term limit is up and that company has also been a big donor to him so he clearly is beholden to that industry. Big surprise that he has not cracked down on his companies from that industry that violate or environmental rules.
            Contrast that to the Clintons or any other politician who gives speeches to a wide range of groups, which is usually the case. There is much less of a sense of debt in this situation.
            Funny how the media (and people like you) think there is something wrong with the big bad Clintons raising money by making speeches but have no problem when Republicans like Jeb make millions doing the same. Personally I am much less concerned by the millions that Jeb made speechifying – getting $50,000 per speech – than I am by the fact that he has earned a bundle sitting on the board of Wall Street and health care companies. Or that he has worked on behalf of crooks like Miguel Recarey, Camillo Padreda, before becoming governor. Both defrauded the government out of millions. But that does not come close to his getting Poppy to release the Cuban terrorist, Orlando Bosch. Our government knew Bosch was involved in blowing up a Cuban passenger jet, firing a rocket at a Polish ship and numerous other offenses.

            Lest you think Jeb learned his lesson he recently worked for another crook Claudio Osorio.

            So why is the media in only outraged about the Clintons making money?

          48. mike May 20, 2015

            Nice try again, but no cigar.

            Jeb at this time is not the Republican nominee and has a hard road ahead to being the nominee but Hillary has no competition and is a lock for the democratic nominee.
            I have nothing against the Clinton’s or anyone else giving speeches and making big dollars. My questions is if Hillary is so brilliant why is she not telling the world of her world changing views for all to see, rather than hiding from the press.

            Why would any group pay her $240K per speech(an average)?? The word is ACCESS.
            From your NYT article.

            Mr. Korge, a major Democratic Party fund-raiser who lost millions on his investment in InnoVida, said that once he alerted Mr. Bush to major problems inside the company, the former governor acted swiftly and forcefully to investigate them. “Jeb did everything that he should have done to protect the shareholder,” he said.

            As to Bardach, interesting read as she suggests guilt by association.

            Why the outrage?? Really!!!

            We learned yesterday she has been caught in another lie. She said she had 1 email address but now we learn she had 2 email addresses. It is one lie after another by the Clinton’s. They omitted on tax returns 3 years of donations from foreign govt. while Sec. of State, claiming ZERO dollars from foreign govt.. You seem to ignore since 1-14 receiving 2,5 million from groups pushing TPP knowing she going to run for president and having been part of the negotiation. Their work with aids being good, leaves out the fact they were never directly involved but partnered with another group working on aids. Why didn’t those donating monies just give it to those working on aids? Why the Clinton’s? Simple answer-Access to them.

            “It’s not unusual for former elected officials to go out and give speeches and make a lot of money,” said Noble, senior council at the Campaign Legal Center. “What the problem now is that they’re coming back into government after going out and having been paid large sums by these various special interests.”
            And the election is how many days away?? 526 give or take.

            It is all about Perception.

        3. paulyz May 19, 2015

          When the middle-class “rise to the top” as you say, does that not create what Liberals call income inequality? They are also part of the Leftists dreaded 1%ers. But it’s not the fact that the Clintons are wealthy that is objectionable, it is the questionable manner in which they obtained much of it.

          1. Dominick Vila May 19, 2015

            Nobody is calling for equal financial status for everyone. We are calling for ways to help the poor have enough to pay for what they need, and get the education they need to succeed. To achieve that, one of the simplest ways to do it is to raise the minimum wage. Narrowing the schism between the wealthy and the poor has nothing to do with intelligent individuals being successful.

          2. paulyz May 19, 2015

            But your solutions to helping the poor are redistribution of wealth, constant class warfare & calling for the wealthy to pay even a higher percentage in taxes when they already pay a higher percentage, some calling for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, while many low-income “already” get free or reduced education, free health care, food stamps, free school lunches, energy assistance, etc, etc. The increases in spending for your trying to narrow the schism has not only not alleviated it, but has widened it. The reasons are largely because of the expectations of getting more from the Federal Government, without expecting nothing from them in return. That is what kills motivation & ambition. Constantly blaming the wealth of others just gives the poor more reasons to decide it’s not their fault, and wait for even more government.

          3. dpaano June 26, 2015

            Unfortunately, most of the big corporations and the 1% don’t pay ANY taxes. They can afford their high-priced accountants to figure out how to “bury” their income overseas so that they don’t pay any taxes whatsoever. The middle class doesn’t have that ability, so we pay the taxes that we owe….which means that we are also basically supporting the big corporations (the ones that use the infrastructure; i.e., roads, rails, air, etc. to do business) who pay nothing! And, why shouldn’t people with low incomes get some relief? Don’t we give subsidies to the farmers, the oil companies, etc…..for what?? They already make billions in profits as it is, but we taxpayers have to support them too!! I’m all for giving low-income people taxpayer money to get educated so that they can get good jobs and add to the economy….nothing wrong with that. I’d rather see my taxpayer money going for something worthwhile than supporting big business, who pay nothing. As for healthcare…..we are all entitled to good health care; getting sick can be expensive, especially in this day and age. And, by the way, it isn’t actually “free” now that we have the ACA….even the poor people pay a little towards their insurance, and it saves our taxpayer money from having to pay for their care in the ER’s. Who do you think pays for that care when they can’t??? It ain’t free! And, personally, I don’t think some of the things we have for low-income citizens is causing lack of motivation and ambition…..I think people WANT to get an education; they WANT to get good jobs…..being on welfare isn’t fun! You can probably ask any person that is currently on it and they will tell you that it would be a lot better if they could work and make enough money to support themselves and their families because welfare doesn’t really do that!

      2. dpaano June 26, 2015

        Maybe because much of the money she and her husband have made from speaking engagements have gone to their Foundation to fund projects that help many people in the U.S. as well as third world countries!! Apparently, you weren’t aware of that little fact or chose to not mention it. And you don’t seem to mind that most, if not all, of the GOP candidates for president are, most likely, all millionaires or billionaires in their own right! I guess it’s okay to be rich if you’re a Republican, but heaven forbid if you make a good living as a Democrat!!!

        1. mike June 26, 2015

          Really!! No one knows what she takes in and what she assigns to the foundation. The Foundations 990’s, last one 2012, show nothing about where the monies are coming from. The foundation is there personal slush fund. Lavish travel and costly trips.

          In May, the New York Times published Clinton’s 2015 financial disclosure form. Covering a period from January 2014 to March 2015, Clinton lists a total of 51 speech fees that have been added to her personal account from a variety of companies. Not including her husband’s fees which also appear on the same disclosure, Clinton’s speech fees end up totaling more than $11 million.

          Even the watchdog groups like Charity Navigator has dropped Clinton Foundation because of their atypical business model.

          “most, if not all, GOP are millionaires or Billionaires”‘ still in la la land, aren’t you???

  6. paulyz May 18, 2015

    Jeb Bush may be the choice of the Establishment “Republicans”, but NOT of Conservatives. He has that “I & the Federal Government knows best” mentality.

    1. CrankyToo May 18, 2015

      In other words, Jeb may be a douchebag, but he’s not douchebag enough for you “Cons”.

      1. paulyz May 19, 2015

        How did you come to that “assumption”? Many Conservatives won’t vote for him, as they won’t support other RINOS. Quite the opposite of Liberals like you that will support anyone with a D after their name, regardless of their actions, unlawful behavior, or Socialist ideology.

        1. CrankyToo May 19, 2015

          “Establishment Republicans” and “Conservative Republicans” used to mean the same thing. Then we elected the black dude, which ended the Age of Reason within the GOP. Now it’s full of knuckleheads like you running around squawking about “unlawful behavior” and “Socialist ideology” and “Benghazi”. Gimme a break.

          I can’t tell from your posts whether you’re being gratuitously hyperbolic because you enjoy jerking liberal chains, or you’ve genuinely got no phucking clue as to what you’re on about. Either way, you’ve got no business calling moderate Republicans “RINOS”. I’ve been a Republican for nearly five decades and from where I stand, you Turd Partiers are the Republicans In Name Only. In the span of less than ten years, you’ve turned the GOP into a cesspool of hatred, recklessness and ineptitude.

          Never mind. I’m pretty sure the Greedy Old Pricks who run the show are beginning to understand what a detriment you are to their Oval Office aspirations. They’re either gonna jettison you wingdings or become irrelevant. (I hope it’s the former; the country really needs two responsible parties at the table.)

          1. paulyz May 22, 2015

            Then that will have to be the Republican Party & possibly a 3rd. Party, since the Democrat/ Socialist Party certainly isn’t a responsible Party. Not when they are now $19 Trillion in debt, more poverty, food stamps & unemployment with their continued, old, failed policies, while doing nothing to shore-up S.S. & Medicare.

            Actually that is exactly the reason why the Tea Party was formed, Americans outraged at these continued & growing problems & more growth & Control by the Federal Government. After reading how you elected a “Black dude”, it’s quite obvious you haven’t been a Republican for nearly 5 decades. Quite the obvious racism assumptions. Conservatives will gladly vote for a Conservative Black,& there are more than you think, whearas Liberals trash Conservative Blacks.

          2. dpaano June 26, 2015

            The main problems are not the problems that President Obama is continually blamed for….”smaller” government (which is the biggest problem and is what has caused more poverty, food stamps, and unemployment) is a mantra of the conservatives. They have this misbegotten notion that “smaller government” is the answer…..well, maybe it is for the billionaires and corporations that support them, but it’s not the answer (it’s the problem). So, stop trying to blame today’s problems on President Obama and the Democrats…..we’ve tried to ACTUALLY create jobs, but the GOP voted down the Jobs Act which, by the way, would have cured two ills….replacing and repairing our aging infrastructure, as well as providing millions of jobs (which means more money to spend and that helps the economy). Fortunately, despite the GOP’s blocking of everything that would help this economy, the deficit left to President Obama when he was elected has been decimated by 2/3’s, plus the unemployment rate (again, left by the last administration) has also dropped significantly. So, I don’t know where you’re getting all your so-called information, but you’re full of cow manure!!! As for being “socialist,” maybe you need to research that a little more…..

  7. Eleanore Whitaker May 18, 2015

    Here’s what I can’t figure out. The GOP back room has to know that JEB is a potential problem. If you read the history of JEB and his all too close connections with several Miami thugs, you see the scandals before him.

    So, the puzzle comes in the form of “why” the GOP would knowingly pit JEB against Hillary when all of us can laugh up our sleeves at the GOP’s constant attempts to scandalize Hillary while Jeb has some pretty nasty, dark secrets while he was governor of Florida and before. The only analogy I see is a pound of JEB scandal vs. a pound of Hillary scandal, which has already become so boring since her husband became president.

    The GOP can’t be so stupid as to try for a redoux of a Bush vs. Clinton campaign using JEB as another front man like they did his brother.

    I urge anyone who wants facts on JEB’s past history to read a wonderful book that names names, provides supporting evidence and information most of us would not normally read: “The American Dynasty” by Kevin Phillips. It makes all of those GOP pundits who love to call anyone out who dares throw facts in their faces look like the liars and cheats they are.

  8. Insinnergy May 18, 2015

    Why don’t these people ever get called to task on their lies?
    Will they just completely avoid media situations where this is possible?
    Example: Commenting is Anti-troops… Next day: Comments and becomes anti-troops.

    Surely these people can be aggressively and publicly skewered between all the lies they tell?
    Anyone know how they avoid it?

  9. booker25 May 19, 2015

    Jeb proving over and over again he is really just as dumb as his brother George.

    1. NoodleDogg #1 May 19, 2015

      HIllary is proving over and over again she can’t win without someone(s) telling her what to do and say.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.