Saturday, March 08, 2008

It's the economy, stupid

It's the economy, stupid.

It is without question the best, brightest statement that came out of the Clinton family's first presidential bid. It got him elected. Twice.

James Carville sure is creepy, ain't he? Like an aging Gremlin. But you gotta admit the guy is brilliant.

So here we are again. In the economic crapper with a Clinton on the campaign trail.

She should win in a walk. Seriously. If she wasn't such an unlikeable shrew, she could do it.

And I really, really hate to say this, but if it meant our economy would get back on track, I'd be okay with another Clinton in the White House.

Now I'm gonna go take a shower because I feel dirty having said that.
I am listening to: The voices in my head
I am reading: Nothing important
And I am: Nuts, I know


Dave said...

What's the equivalent of wash your mouth out with soap when you're typing.

I know what you're saying though.

Anonymous said...

She has the same chance of helping our economy, as your boss getting out of a wet paper bag.

Hedy said...

Explanation: I told Mom that my boss is so incompetent he couldn't f*ck his way out of a paper bag. Mom is anonymous. :)

Posolxstvo said...

I'm with Mom on this one. I think it is a pretty bold assumption you are making that Clinton will get the economy back on track. I don't see that happening. Add to that that I firmly believe that Bill cashed in on a ton of economic policy work that predated him but that had not yet reached fruition by the time his predecessors left office.

What does that mean then? Nothing or everything or something in between. I don't know.

the dilf said...

I find it truly humorous that you actually believe, that getting a new president will improve the economy.

Hedy said...

F*ck off, Dilf. You've been absent all week so shaddap.

Hedy said...

Pos: I agree that Clinton may have benefited from the economic policies of Bush senior and we were heading into another recession at the end of Clinton's second term. And I suppose the Dilf is right - it really makes no difference on the economy who's in office. This was more of a suggestion for the Clinton campaign to focus on what worked for her husband instead of her ridiculous argument that she's more experienced having been a first lady. Sadly, it's all about getting elected and NOT what'll happen once in office.