Thursday, December 18, 2014

Hillary Scandals

All in all it's a good summation  and worth the time. [Watch]

They had me in complete agreement until the end, when they made this claim:


I'm not aware of any Democrats and very few Republicans I would agree with the "deserving" assessment over, and am equally skeptical of "qualified" (and that includes third party candidates). I did find this worthwhile on the whole, but that point needed to be made.
at

3 comments:

  1. rkshanny12/18/2014 4:32 PM

    What if "we" don't need or want to be "lead"?! Me and mine don't need "leaders", "rulers", etc. These "leaders" should go home and lead themselves and their families, and get the hell out my life! Under panarchism tenets, boobs who need to be "lead" can choose and subject themselves to their "leaders", while the rest of us can be left alone to "lead" our own lives.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Archer12/18/2014 5:34 PM

    I think I covered this with today's Quote of the Day, which is an oldie but a goodie:

    http://notonemoregunlaw.blogspot.com/2014/12/quote-of-day-douglas-adams-1980.html

    Anyone who self-selects to rule a country, should by no means be trusted to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ned12/19/2014 11:36 AM

    Yeah. Sounds a lot like the "royal" Kennedys, etc.

    Qualification by birthright. Jeb Bush, anyone?

    ReplyDelete

Keep it on topic. Submit tips on different topics via left sidebar Contact Form.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.