Bill Clinton would never praise Reagan or the Republicans

[Scriptor Ignotus]

but he would be best buddies with Reagan's former VP and the GOP's choice for President in 88 and 92.



Clinton, sporting a bright orange tie, said his wife's campaign is "stock-full of new ideas," and also that she has brought about real results for others her whole life. "So you have a choice," he said. "Do we have to start all over again and say thank you very much all those people who fought those against the extreme right wing of the Republican Party.., Or do we want someone who's a proven change maker?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4108925

Change maker? Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton is how things will be if Hillary wins. The only change makers are Edwards or Obama as far as our party should be concerned.

This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen. :eyes:

[Bonobo]

1. It took Nixon to visit China, Clinton to dismantle Welfare.

[dugggy]

2. Only a fool does not bother to learn from strong points of

others. Obama is very smart to imitate Reagans huge success at the polls.
Two landslides is nothing to scoff at.

[FiveGoodMen]

4. Especially if he used bigotry the way Ronnie did!

Some kinds of winning are really losing.

[ursi]

3. and he would out DLC Reagan!

[MasonJar]

5. I prefer that the democrats do not evoke Reagan for any reason,

especially when they are running for the White House. It shows a distinct lack of character to praise a faux-icon just to get elected...praising the gipper is no different than praising Bush/Cheney. The whole Bush/Reagan/Cheney entourage is deceitful and dangerous and deadly. More importantly, they have no conscience and absolutely no sense of noblesse oblige. W would be homeless now if daddy and the Saudis had not bailed him out time and again.