I rarely come to mydd, but you guys keep this kind of talk up and I'm might just become a fixture around here. I'm interested in real progressive change not this deluted thousand year plan for progress the current Democratic leaders use as their guide.
"Bill Clinton would be leading by 15. Hillary, by 10. They'd both be over 50%."
LOL...where did you pull those numbers out of?
Never mind, I think we all know.
I get a always get a kick out of it when someone will post as some kind of proof or justification of their point of view something that can never be proved or disproved. Something made up. A guesstimate?
A statement like the one you made should always be prefixed by.... IMO (because it is certainly nothing more than that.
My guesstimate is Hillary could easily be down by 10% by now if she was running.
I believe in having a big military budget that helps us maintain the strongest military on earth. We should use it to promote good around the world, but mainly to find adversaries before they find us. We need to be realistic about what we get into in terms of the longer term implications of what we do. I supported Afganistan, against Iraq, against Iran. All, based on what was/is in our best interests.
With the faith based charities ties and infiltration and standing in the community they are uniquely suited to disperse aid and have a proven track record over the years. Lets not forget that they collect a lot of money (and always have) from their own parishoners and use it for these same exact type charitable causes.
Bull. The seeds for more government money being dispersed to faith based type charities started under the Clinton Administration in 1996, the legislation was call "Charitable choice" and it was part of Clinton's 'Welfare Reform Bill".President Bush when elected then expanded government help to these faith-based organizations.
In addition,John McCain and Hillary Clinton have at one time or another said they support federal funding of faith-based social services.