Janet Jagan was the first American woman to be president, so Hillary you're not that special!

Email Print posted by mejusthavin 01/25/2008 10:23:12 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
Ok, hear me out. 

 Ok, not a lot of Americans know it but (if elected) Hillary will not be the first American woman to be president.  That honor goes to Janet Jagan.  Born in Chicago in 1920 she went on to become president of Guyana in 1997 thru 1999.  She also happened to be white and Jewish (not that either was required for the position).  Jagan's husband much like Hillary's was president before she was. 

So what am I saying?  Hillary you're not so special.  Yes, she got endorsed by the New York Times, the same paper that endorsed the war in Iraq.  The same war you voted for.  The same paper that will endorse your endorsement of war with Iran.  (Yes she likes oil.)

I'm so sick of the media saying "Hillary polarizes people" or that "they love her or hate her."  The media has made this prophecy a reality; Hillary unfortunately does very little good to counter this bs.  Clinton fights a strange fight.  And I'm sorry to concede but if this woman wins the general election, she will not get reelected.  Doesn't that scare you?


I'm not ready to give up on Obama because someone says he's done for.  (I know Mike Gravel is still in but the media has dismissed him, though I still love him).   I'm voting for Obama because it is time for change. I understand Obama is exactly like Hillary when it comes to the big issues, but the difference is he IS different.  I will argue it IS his background that makes him unique and worth voting for.  The criterion for president does not mention experience and it doesn't matter what he has done or how he has served. 

Obama is change, change that may well be of the superficial and unconscious kind but it's CHANGE.  It's much bigger than him.  By voting for Obama, you are making change.  Do it. 

 
< Defend America | Do you think Cenk is HOT???? - Updated with Poll >
 Display:
Janet Jagan was the first American woman to be president, so Hillary you're not that special! | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 hidden)
My question. (none / 1)

Clinton knows where that file cabinet with the executive orders is, AND she knows what was in there in 2000. She can be working while Obama is figuring out where the good bathrooms are.

Does Obama have a plan to get those things done? Who does he plan to have as assistants in taking control of the bureaucracy? Maybe he has a good answer. But right now it is why I think Hillary has the advantage. 

 

by MayorHardin on 01/25/2008 12:19:42 PM EST

This is ridiculous. (none / 0)
We have got to get away from the personal ity contest (here disguised as a contest of experience).  Sen ator Clinton has been in politics forever.  Senator Obama came up through the Chicago and Illinois machine.  Both made it into the U.S. Senate.  Both are political experts.  Both will need a crash course in presidential administration during the transition -- as every new president does.

How about if we stick to the issues?  The sideshow could cost us the election.

by Juarez Traveller on 01/25/2008 01:33:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]
My point was (none / 0)
that Clinton HAS the experience in Presidential administration and Obama must acquire it. I feel that is in fact an issue.

by MayorHardin on 01/25/2008 04:50:07 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Who cares about experience... (none / 0)
...if your policies are not in the best interests of the country?

When Senator Clinton starts showing more loyalty for the United States and less to her corporate/DLC sponsors, I'll have more respect for her.  But right now, her economic plans seem to be a continuation of the uber-rich-focused system we have now, with a couple of minor tweaks merely to slow the growth of income disparity, rather than reverse it.

If all of a country's citizens can't share in the benefits of living in that country, the the country is not worth having.  Without massive welfare programs, poverty always increases under Clinton's brand of economics, just as it does under Republican policies. Her plan to "harness the power of innovation" is wasteful as long as she clings to policies that will continue to move our manufacturing industries outside of our borders.  We need to restore balance to our economy.  The construction sector pulled us out of the last recession, but they can't help us now.  Wouldn't it be nice to have other manufacturing sectors to make some exports that could lend a hand?  The services sector sure isn't going to do it (unless we can figure out how to export a haircut or a pedicure).

And when will she talk about restoring the rule of law and the Bill of Rights, which has been viciously usurped by Bush/Cheney?



by Juarez Traveller on 01/25/2008 07:19:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Huh? (none / 0)
Who's going to keep an eye on Bill as he roams the White House in search of fresh interns? The last thing this country needs is the Clintons dual presidency.

by al92lt1 on 01/25/2008 03:43:57 PM EST

Now then (none / 0)
who's introducing a sideshow?

by MayorHardin on 01/25/2008 04:51:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Better than an R any day (none / 0)
The Clintons will be 10 times better than any Republican.

by Grim Fandango on 01/25/2008 07:44:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the two front runner's (none / 0)
I was on my way to vote for one of them to change thing's , or anybody who will stand up for all of uor right's and that mean's all of our right's, we the pepole!!. but they insist on wanting to change uor right's on the 2nd amendment and put ban's on this and that and what they think . so I hope they can come around to what the heart of our country what's and that is to not change our right's ,and not ban thing's from law abiding pepole  and go after the crooks and put them away for good .and then the usa will be a better place to be  and we all can walk doun the street's not in fear of some gang or robber poping us with his blak market wepon. get the gun's off the street not out of our home's.[once a dem not so sure anymore]

by tuna on 01/26/2008 10:57:13 AM EST

The 2nd amendment scare machine (none / 0)

Since I was a wee boy on my daddy's knee I can remember hearing from acquaintances of my father that "Those Dems are going to take our guns away!"

REALLY?

NO I mean it REALLY?

The "Dems" controlled congress for 40 years from 1954 to 1994 and for 17 years of that a "Dem" was the president. 

In all that time how many guns have they actually taken away? 

I know some people think any one should be able to walk up to a vending machine next to the condom machine at the local gas station men's room and feed it enough quarters to purchase a new and shiny AK47 (ammo and clip sold separately), instead of having laws that perform a background check to make sure Charlie Manson's favorite squeeze Squeaky Fromme can't buy another pistol to attempt to take a shot at another President.

Some believe that Mark David Chapman and John Hinckley deserve to have the same rights as everyone else if they are ever released from incarceration to be able to run down to the corner Shooting Range and Pub and walk out with a fully automatic 50 caliber machine gun with laser sights.

I can't argue with people like that, they are idiots, but again the question becomes how many guns have the "Dems" actually banned?

I'm sure those who would deprive you of your rights remember with a certain twinkle in their eyes the now expired assault rifle ban.

We all remember the feel good law that said you can have the same barrel, trigger mechanism, sights, scopes, ammunition, and clips on a rifle that has a different stock you just can't have THAT STOCK! It was a stupid feel good law that prevented no one from owning anything but a stock, and even it has gone away.

I understand that some believe that if they have the money and the resources to build their very own thermonuclear device then the 2nd amendment guaranties that they should be able to do just that, then again some people believe that the entire world is controlled by the Illuminati. Their believing doesn't make them right.

So back to my original point exactly how many guns have the "Dems" who have had ample opportunity to pass laws to take our guns away, taken?

I'm more concerned about the "Cons" taking away my civil liberties (see Bushco for the past 7 years) than I am about the "Dems" sending jack boot soldiers to my house to collect my weapons.

The entire "Dems are gonna take your weapons" is just another scare tactic used by the Cons to keep people afraid. Don't fall for the Bullshit.

By the way, the Cons really do want you to walk down the street in fear of some gang member or robber because when you strip all the verbiage away the only thing they have to sell is fear and hatred.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill

by Hubble on 01/26/2008 06:43:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
2nd amendment (none / 0)
hey  back ground ck's all for it ,[we need it to keep gun's out of the hand's of murderer's and gang's and sicko's etc.] and it is not just dem's it come's from both side's ,bush is the worst president in my time if not all time.[ak's in vending machine's!!] that is a idiot speaking if you believe that is what[ we the people ]want. just give law abiding citizen's there right's back, and leave our bill of right's alone. and yes the one's bushco took away;the past is not the future, and the dem's are not what they were, nor are the republican's and I DO VOTE FOR DEM'S IF i FEEL THAT IS THE RIGHT CHOICE.   &n bsp;     ;      M/47yrs WISCONSIN a dem state

by tuna on 01/26/2008 07:46:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
&n bsp (none / 0)
hey who put that in there?

by tuna on 01/26/2008 07:53:34 PM EST

[ Parent ]
"We the People"? (none / 0)
ak's in vending machine's!!] that is a idiot speaking if you believe that is what[ we the people ]want.

I would suggest that you actually research the beliefs of the "right to bear arms" groups outside of the NRA if you think that unlimited access to guns is not what they promote. Second Amendment Sisters, Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America to name just a few all believe in unencumbered access to guns.

Yes vending machine AK47's was hyperbole, but these groups advocate the right for ANYONE to purchase ANY weapon, meaning that a homicidal psycho should be able to go online and order a fully automatic machine gun with no interference by anyone.

I may indeed be an idiot, but I refuse to buy into the fear mongering of the Right Wing Talking Machine about how Big Brother is coming to take my gun.

The hilarious part of this is we have no National Registration so it would be impossible to even know how many weapons are out there and were to collect them.
 
You go ahead and keep on buying into the fear about something that Chicken Little has been screaming about for at least 50 years, I prefer to worry about the actual rights that have been stripped away from me in the past 7 years by King George and his henchmen.

When you refer to "We the People" who exactly are you referring to? A little research shows that 61% of Americans believe in stricter gun control.

Perhaps "We the People" think that there can be a balance when it comes to the Rights of the individual and the Rights of Society at large.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill

by Hubble on 01/26/2008 08:50:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Right to the heart of the matter (none / 0)
"Perhaps "We the People" think that there can be a balance when it comes to the Rights of the individual and the Rights of Society at large."

This hits the proverbial nail on the proverbial head.

by Chinese Democracy on 01/26/2008 09:20:40 PM EST

[ Parent ]
guns (none / 0)
gun control is one thing ,gun bans are another, and I to wan t the righs back that bush took away and i do not listen to fear mongers it is my own opinon for which i speak and only my own not the nra or the dems or reps so WE THE PEOPLE? MAYBE NOT, ck out both sides of your poll on 61 % or better yet find a independent one if there is one. but i did say law abiding people did i not, not the hyper one down the street.control yes ,bans no ,self defend yes ,hunting yes ,just to carry around under your coat because you can I don't think so . you have really got me way wrong i am not looking to get guns by the truck load. but hey its been good to chat back and forth, tuna all done with this for now

by tuna on 01/26/2008 10:23:03 PM EST

[ Parent ]
type o (none / 0)
sorry about the type o's was not looking again  finger's to dam big

by tuna on 01/26/2008 11:05:20 AM EST

Janet Jagan was the first American woman to be president, so Hillary you're not that special! | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: