Hint, Hint, Hint … Bill Clinton Says Presidents Should be able to Run For a Third Term

You once, twice three times a presidential term. Former president Bill Clinton thinks that former Presidents should be able to run for a third term. Who on Earth could he possibly be referring to? Please slick Willie, two terms is enough for any President. We should be talking about term limits for US Senators and House Representatives and the over al;l amount of time any one individual can spend in political life, not extending it. All politicians should be subject to term limits, it would certainly end much of the lobbying and corruption.

Three times could be a charm — but not for him.

Former President Bill Clinton said Tuesday that presidents should be able to run for a third term as long as they take off some time after their second term.

“I’ve always thought that should be the rule,” he said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “I think as a practical matter, you couldn’t apply this to anyone who has already served, but going forward, I personally believe that should be the rule.”

Clinton made the remark in the context of a question posed by “Morning Joe” co-host Joe Scarborough, who said that many wished that Clinton could run again.

Clint Eastwood as George H.W. Bush’s VP … It Would Have Made Our Day

It would seem that Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush asked himself in 1988 … “Do I feel Lucky?”

According to senior GHWB officials audio tape interviews released by the University of Virginia’s Miller Center and Bush Presidential Library Foundation, George H.W. Bush considered tapping Hollywood actor Clint Eastwood as his Vice President. Makes one think of, what if.

Vice President Dirty Harry … Make our Day!

“When we were way behind. Honestly, [Eastwood] was suggested in not an altogether unserious – Well, he was a mayor. He was a Republican mayor,”  former Bush campaign chairman and Secretary of State James Baker said.

Eastwood served one term as mayor of the conservative ocean side community Carmel, Calif., from 1986-1988.

AUDIO: James Baker describes consideration of Clint Eastwood

“Anyway, it was shot down pretty quick. But we were looking at an 18-point deficit,” Baker said, suggesting the campaign was looking for a boost from its VP choice. Bush, who also considered Sen. Dan Quayle, R-Ind.; Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan.; Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo.; and Rep. Jack Kemp, R-N.Y., ultimately settled on Quayle.

Quayle was “maybe not the most qualified, but he brings other attributes that are extraordinarily important,” Baker said of his initial reaction to Bush’s choice.

However, for some reason at the end of the day Bush picked Dan Quayle as his running mate. As stated at Fox News Boston, in the summer of 1988, Bush was losing badly in the polls to the Democratic nominee, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, and Bush went with Quayle. Of course I hardly think that it was the choice of Quayle that swung the election to a landslide victory. We can only dare to dream what it would have been like with Dirty Harry or the High Plains Drifter as VP.

DNC Chair and US Rep. Wasserman Schultz Says “It’s Baloney to Say the Stimulus Didn’t Work”

What planet does DNC Chair and US Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (NY-D) live on?

Yesterday DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz spewed the Obama, Democrat party mantra that the initial $787 billion stimulus package worked. Really Debbie, who is full of baloney? I guess Democrats believe their policies work when they add nearly a trillion dollars to the US national debt and average hundred’s of thousands of dollars for $40K a year jobs. I guess Debbie thinks that millions sent to bankrupt Solyndra was a success as well.

The stimulus worked so well that the Obama White House managed to triple the US deficit Obama’s first year in office… And, his second year in office… And, his third year in office.

The stimulus worked so well that Obama is considered 5 X’s worse on the economy than former president Jimmy Carter. Care to try again Debbie? Americans are dot going to tolerate lies from Obama’s minions and will take their wrath out in the 2012 elections.

Ten Years Ago Today … September 11, 2001: Fox News Flashback: 9/11 as it Happened On-Air

Do you remember where you were 10 years ago today? The following VIDEO is a FOX News flashback of what was broadcast on-air during that fateful September morning.  It really is amazing to see what was broadcast live and some of the conclusions that were immediately come up with. Ten years later in a PC world we cannot make the assumption that an act of terrorism was not a result of radical Muslims even when we know its the case.

Hat Tip: The Blaze

President George W. Bush addresses the nation following the henious acts of terrorism against the United States.

“Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot shake the foundation of America.  These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.”

“Today our Nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature, And we responded with the best of America.”

Shameful NY Times LEFTIST Paul Krugman Attacks Fake Heroes GWB, Rudy & America On 9/11: “This Has Become An Occasion For Shame, The Nation Knows It”

HOW PATHETIC CAN THE LEFT GET, EVEN ON THE 10 YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11.

What is wrong with some on the LEFT … are they really that hateful, do they really have that much contempt for GWB, Rudy Giuliani and America? Ask New York Times contributor and scumbag Paul Krugman. He penned an article in the Times on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 entitled … ‘The Years of Shame’.

This misguided pathetic individual says that “the memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.” Really?

Is it just me, or are the 9/11 commemorations oddly subdued?

Actually, I don’t think it’s me, and it’s not really that odd.

What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.

A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits — people who should have understood very well what was happening — took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity?

Is Krugman that small an individual that he found it offensive that this morning at the 10th anniversary of 9/11, GWB actually received applause while Barack Obama did not? Is that how truly petty and vile Krugman is? A note to the NY Times and Krugman, GWB was the President who handled the 9/11 terror event, even though slimes like you refuse to acknowledged what 90% of America does … George W. Bush lead us through the difficult, dark days following 9/11 … yes, he was a Leader.

What is the sign of a true coward like Krugman? the liberal POS writes a hateful opinion piece and then does not allow any comments. As stated at Weasil Zippers, they have a tweet from the liberal Politico that notes Krugman’s cowardice.  What a brave soul you are Mr. Krugman. If you can’t take the heat, then get out of the industrious. Isn’t this typical of a hateful liberal who spews their nonsense and cannot take the backlash of truth.

Even those on the other side of the aisle, President Obama, VP Joe Biden and former President Bill Clinton have praised former President George W. Bush for his handling of the terror attacks of 9/11 and the days and years that followed. Yesterday in Shanksville, PA VP Biden thanked and congratulated GWB for bringing our country together when it could have been torn apart.

Sadly, 10 years later, haters like Paul Krugman still have Bush Delusion Syndrome. He cannot stand that Bush received the proper congratulations for a job well done, in a time that was far different from today. GWB became a war President and protector of the USA overnight in a split second. As stated at Legal Insurrection, what a stark contrast that Krugman provides as he kicks and screams like a child who does not get his way that “they can’t stand the fact that the attacks on 9/11 proved that their world view was wrong, and every mention of 9/11 is like a thorn in their political sides.” Obviously Krugman is incapable of giving respect when it is due, his hate does not allow it to occur.