Clinton proposes 100,000 new police officers on streets. – Los Angeles Times — Are the democrats so stupid that they cannot follow trends. This is 1970′s Nixonian blather. Law and Order is not a campaign strategy in 2008. This is especially true if you are one of the candidates encouraging illegal immigration. Cripes. She’s toast.
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, campaigning for president in a neighborhood of Philadelphia so rough the mayor said, “Osama bin Laden wouldn’t last here,” pitched a $4-billion-a-year anti-crime package today that would put 100,000 new police officers on the streets and help stem the tide of repeat offenders back into the country’s prisons.
Claiming that her husband’s administration “reduced crime to historic lows” in the 1990s, Clinton argued that “we have to get back to doing what we know works.”
We are the nation with more people in prison than any other nation in the world. And that means both in total prison population AND prisoners per-capita. She now wants MORE people in prison.
Oops, wrong finger in the wind. See ya Hillary.
She couldn’t disappear fast enough to suit me.
Dvorak is right. She is toast, and so is Obama. The democrat party really dropped the ball this election.
Last Sunday, Obama gave a speech to some very, very rich people in San Francisco. During the speech he said:
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.”
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
And this is the guy who is the UNITER?
I’d love to see a reporter ask the following question to Obama: Do you really think small-town Midwestern voters are bitter, gun-loving, xenophobic, religious border-control zealots?
Less cops, less prisons and more freedom you bitter frigid power hungry witch.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to disparage Wiccans.
“Law and Order is not a campaign strategy in 2008. This is especially true if you are one of the candidates encouraging illegal immigration. Cripes.”
Well, her “I’m a combat vet” lie backfired. Maybe she’s trying another tact to look tough. Since she lies about small stuff you’ll NEVER hear the truth about anything important. So, don’t worry about what she says. It’s a lie anyway.
She never had my vote. She is dangerous, and not in a good way. I won’t vote for either party. I will select an independent who matches my views best and vote for him. Hell, I would even vote for Jesse “Ace” Ventura if he somehow gets on. Anybody but the front-runners.
She never had my vote. She is dangerous, and not in a good way. I won’t vote for either party. I will select an independent who matches my views best and vote for him. Hell, I would even vote for Jesse “Ace” Ventura if he somehow gets on. Anybody but the front-runners…
Yeah, that myth, check the per capita figures:
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
Notice how it raises in the “zero-tolerance” years, drops dramatically in the Clinton years, and stays flat in the “who cares?” years we’re in now.
Oh, wait, why should I care? I’m shallow and live in a good neighborhood.
Worked well the lest time for the Clintons. This is a good political move. Helps her in all the suburbs where people read about the crime rate in the city they fled.
#4 – Less cops, less prisons and more freedom
RIGHT ON!
If this is the best she can do. It time to head er back home, and call it a day.
She looks like she is done.
John, are you getting senile? Bill Clinton proposed the same thing, followed through with it, and greatly reduced crime. It’s a good idea.
Good subtitle for this post would be:
Part 436 in John’s ongoing series entitled: “I Hate Hillary Clinton: 1001 ways to come off sounding like a fool.”
#5
No offense taken, we hate her too. She’s the mason variety of witch, totally incompatible with our more ancient traditions…
#3 – “I’d love to see a reporter ask the following question to Obama: Do you really think small-town Midwestern voters are bitter, gun-loving, xenophobic, religious border-control zealots?”
A reporter saying anything to Obama other than, “I love the hope of change you are bringing to the hopeless non-changing people of this country.”
Don’t hold your breath.
If she’s really desperate to become prexy, it could be the hors d’oeuvre for the April 15th announcement of an independent Hillary-Huckabee ticket. Grin.
I’ll bet the folks that sell tasers just got a big old hard on.
Ah, the Clinton Administration Crime Bill, Part Deux. This sounds exactly like her hubby’s anti-crime bill. He had the 100,000 “new cops on the street” bill as well.
Unfortunately, the Federal Government is not constitutionally allowed to hire a standing police force executing state laws, not directly anyway. Therefore, the Feds simply give money to the states to let them hire new cops.
Of course, it comes with gobs and gobs of red tape and lots of strings attached.
I remember Bill’s cop bill. The first year, it paid for 100% of the new cops. The next year, 80%, then 60%, and so on. After five years, the money ran dry. At that point, the entire cost burden was shifted to the States. The rub was that, if the States took the money and signed on (a voluntary act), they could not reduce the initial number of new cops hired once they started the federal program.
In other words, the Feds put out some initial seed money but eventually the States were left holding the bag. In the end, your property taxes went up and you had cops handing out traffic tickets all over the place to help offset the cost of all the new hires.
Deja vu. Fool you once, shame on you. Fool you twice, shame on Hillary.
What would be better to reduce crime than more cops? More “gun toting” citizens!
WTF? You’ll delete my post because I’m a bit critical of you John, but you’ll keep two posts that say the exact same thing by commenter Carcarius?
Or a post by someone who writes, “bitter frigid power hungry witch.”
I get it. You think I’m a Clinton supporter and so you deleted me. Well, I’m not. But one thing’s for sure…
I’m a F\/CK1NG A55H0LE.
Go ahead. Delete this.
[ed note: John didn't delete it...an editor did for posting violation]