Bush was 100% right asking Marco Rubio about his attendance record in the Senate. And in a debate had every right to call him out about it. And just because Bush didn't follow through with it and was inarticulate doesn't mean that Rubio adequately answered the question. Rubio's performance was way over rated by the media. He really wasn't very good.
Of course. Rubio's the next media establishment choice. Guy lies so many times about his tax plan, Cuba story, Florida finance story, etc. He just uses the Senate as a paycheck for not working...He hasn't done a damn thing for Florida. I thought the teabags didn't like people getting government money for doing nothing? (oh that's right, it's only minorities in which they have that problem with).
Yeah and Rubio's personal finances are fair game too. He didn't answer that one either. So where's this great job he did. He loves to call people like Hillary liars for not accurately answering questions. I guess it's ok if they do it.
No they're not because her personal finances are not an issue. Why she herself said that she not only was 'broke' when she and Bill left the White House but actually in debt so again, there's nothing in play here, or in the words of the 5th Beatle Billy Preston: "nothing from nothing means nothing." . And if Hillary Clinton said it, you can rest assure it's good money. And btw, stay tuned for another one of pclfan's puddle-deep 'talking point' gems.
Yeah they are. Everything is. But there's a little difference between getting questioned by US Congress people in a Select Committee to provide info on one topic (which has nothing to do with her personally) vs a debate moderated by the press. There is supposed to be a decorum and respect by a Congressional Committee esp toward a former Senator and Sec. of State. Not the kind of assumption of guilt and attempt to get her to make a mistake. If sbe has unethical business dealings and the Foundation has been doing things illegally she has to be accountable for that. If she gets asked that question in a debate format or by one of the other candidates it's totally legit.
This is why tax cuts need to be directly tied to spending cuts. CNBC didn't bother to ask about the spending cuts, they were too busy badgering the candidates about bullshit and asking nonsense questions. It would have been a perfect question to all the candidates that discussed their tax plans. Rand Paul proposed a balanced budget every year, so I'm sure his plan includes the necessary spending cuts to offset the revenue loss.
Here's an idea - let's have the next Democratic debate on Fox news with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Janine Pirro moderating and badgering the candidates. I'm sure that would go over great.
It would be a lot of fun. But Rush and Levin wouldn't do it. Because they're used to being bullies. Talking a lot of shit with no opposition. Hillary would kick their ass.
This would have been a much better discussion if it addressed only the Republican candidates and their backers and left discussion of the Democrats to that topic.
The leading Democratic candidate is always a topic for the GOP. That's just how they run things. When you're not looking to lead you need to change the message to tearing down the person who is trying to lead.
yea because dems never discuss the gop candidates. it's not like hillary listed the gop as her biggest enemy. sounds great for nonpartisan politics btw. probably most of the posts in this thread are dems just talking shit. pretty much what I expected given the makeup of the board. it is what it is.
I'm gonna watch The Hunt for Red October again tonight. Been meaning too for awhile and this is a good enough reason.
