Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who do you think should or will win the Republican nomination for President in 2008?

We have over a year and a half until elections...aren't we being a bit overzealous?

In terms of likelyhood:

1. McCain
2. Gulianni
3. Gingrich (long shot, like Al Gore or Kerry getting it again)



I hope it's a McCain/Guilianni ticket.

Originally posted by Alliance
We have over a year and a half until elections...aren't we being a bit overzealous? Agreed, but I think Obama is going to be my choice unless he proves himself an idiot before the election...

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2871/walkenb3a8e693vx.jpg

rudy and hi I dont know a lot of you because I post in off topic a lot

Originally posted by KidRock
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2871/walkenb3a8e693vx.jpg

I'd vote for him.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'd vote for him.

I wouldn't vote for anyone with a receding hair line.

Originally posted by Alliance
We have over a year and a half until elections...aren't we being a bit overzealous? Well, this is the time when all the candidates are announcing their intentions srug

Newt Gingrich?

**** him!

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Newt Gingrich?

**** him! eh, he's perpetually mentioned, I thought I'd throw the ****er a bone

the correct answer is: who gives a shit because hes going to lose

Originally posted by PVS
the correct answer is: who gives a shit because hes going to lose

Yeah..because like everybody says, America is full of retards and will vote in someone like Hillary Clinton or some other brain dead democrat.

In a popularity contest, it'd be Rudolf Giuliani all the way.

Originally posted by KidRock
Yeah..because like everybody says, America is full of retards and will vote in someone like Hillary Clinton or some other brain dead democrat.

yeah, doesnt matter how you think im right, just as long as you know im right.


ONE MORE YEAR!!!
ONE MORE YEAR!!!
*cmon, chant with me, you used to love this)
ONE MORE YEAR!!!

Originally posted by PVS
yeah, doesnt matter how you think im right, just as long as you know im right.


ONE MORE YEAR!!!
ONE MORE YEAR!!!
*cmon, chant with me, you used to love this)
ONE MORE YEAR!!!

I thought they would lose last time......

I think they will this time......

But they won last time......

So?

PVS needs to buy a big box of tissues (to wipe away his tears) and a length of rope just in case. Perhaps he has them already He is old enough to like INXS. I think the tissues are a given anyway.

i never liked any of that new wave crap. now please stop derailing threads.

Originally posted by PVS
i never liked any of that new wave crap. now please stop derailing threads.

But your tissues. My point was about the last unexpected victory.

O.K. back to the thread.

Rudy Giuliani is the only person I know, and I haven't heard to many bad things about him. So hopefully him, unless there is a less conservative republican out there. I wouldn't mind that one winning either.

Originally posted by Fishy
Rudy Giuliani is the only person I know, and I haven't heard to many bad things about him. So hopefully him, unless there is a less conservative republican out there. I wouldn't mind that one winning either. .... Rudy is by far the least conservative in the Republican field

Originally posted by PVS
yeah, doesnt matter how you think im right, just as long as you know im right.


ONE MORE YEAR!!!
ONE MORE YEAR!!!
*cmon, chant with me, you used to love this)
ONE MORE YEAR!!!





Originally posted by PVS
now please stop derailing threads.

Relax PVS, clear those tears from your eyes.

Well, Fmr. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is in the race now, I think he's only the 2nd or 3rd 'official' candidate.

ioy90nF2anI&eurl

That was pretty weak

its not supposed to be moving or cinematic.

Originally posted by Soleran
That was pretty weak

That's because it's about a petty and weak man. This guy is all about winning and being president. He doesn't have one ounce of gumption. And everyone who thinks he deserves some measure of respect because he was a POW can just blow all that crap out their ass, just like he did when he supported the president on torture. He's Bush's lap dog

I have read a lot of positive stuff about Gulliani. However, with the announcment that he's considering a run for President he's starting to change several of his positions. Positions, I might add, he's said he would never change for anything. I suppose when he said "not for anything" he wasn't including the white house or the the religious right base.

Originally posted by PVS
ioy90nF2anI&eurl

L L Skys!!! What a schmuck.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
That's because it's about a petty and weak man. This guy is all about winning and being president. He doesn't have one ounce of gumption. And everyone who thinks he deserves some measure of respect because he was a POW can just blow all that crap out their ass, just like he did when he supported the president on torture. He's Bush's lap dog

I have read a lot of positive stuff about Gulliani. However, with the announcment that he's considering a run for President he's starting to change several of his positions. Positions, I might add, he's said he would never change for anything. I suppose when he said "not for anything" he wasn't including the white house or the the religious right base.

Man.

The evangelical crowd is screwed next year.

Clinton
Obama
McCain
Guilianni


^^^None of those are looking very apealing.


I'll throw my vote behind whoever says that they won't touch gay marriage or abortion in any way federally, and just lets the people (states) decide.



Which means I'll be voting for Obama, I guess?

Originally posted by sithsaber408
L L Skys!!! What a schmuck.



Man.

The evangelical crowd is screwed next year.

Clinton
Obama
McCain
Guilianni


^^^None of those are looking very apealing.


I'll throw my vote behind whoever says that they won't touch gay marriage or abortion in any way federally, and just lets the people (states) decide.



Which means I'll be voting for Obama, I guess?

You are ****ing kidding, right?

Gay Marriage and Abortion are your number one topics?

****.

Why not?

Originally posted by Soleran
Why not?

Not really the most important issues, now is it?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really the most important issues, now is it?


That's obviously subjective.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really the most important issues, now is it?

To each his own.


IMO America has more to fear from gay marriage leading to palygamy and bestiality in the next 50 years and abortion continuing to allow murdered children every day, than it does from terrorism.


They'll have no need of trying to destroy us from the outside if we've destroyed ourselves from within.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
IMO America has more to fear from gay marriage leading to palygamy and bestiality in the next 50 years than it does from terrorism.


That's ignorant on a scale I can't even begin to quantify.

true, its all subjective

Originally posted by sithsaber408
IMO America has more to fear from gay marriage leading to palygamy and bestiality in the next 50 years

that however is not subjective. its baseless and retarded.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
and abortion continuing to allow murdered children every day, than it does from terrorism.

got some figures to back this up?


Originally posted by sithsaber408
They'll have no need of trying to destroy us from the outside if we've destroyed ourselves from within.

what of the tens of thousands per year we kill just because other people happen to live in the vicinity of "them". i dont recall us leveling new york state because timothy mcveigh lived there.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
To each his own.


IMO America has more to fear from gay marriage leading to palygamy and bestiality in the next 50 years and abortion continuing to allow murdered children every day, than it does from terrorism.


They'll have no need of trying to destroy us from the outside if we've destroyed ourselves from within. lol You are such a right-wing mouthpiece. Do you have any personal opinions?

Who in their right mind thinks gay marriage leads to polygamy and bestiality? May I remind you that the only polygamous sect in the country's history so far was Christian

Originally posted by PVS
what of the tens of thousands per year we kill just because other people happen to live in the vicinity of "them". i dont recall us leveling new york state because timothy mcveigh lived there.

Indeed. The "War on Terror" doesn't have to be a physical war on the level it is today.

The most effective way to fight these people is on the smaller scale, on the level they operate. The most promising reports I've read indicate that counter intelligence operations would have much more effect than attempting to police an entire population.

If you guys wanna have the abortion or gay marriage debates again, let's continue them in those threads.


I made a response to who I will or won't vote for in the next election.

I gave a few reasons as to what helps me make my choice.

They may not be what motivates your vote, but so what?

It's what motivates mine, and as I said, just my opinion.



Your opinion of my opinions isn't something that really concerns me.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Your opinion of my opinions isn't something that really concerns me.

Then don't address them.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Then don't address them.

Or don't offer them.

Stick to the topic and who should or shouldn't get the Repulican nomination, and your opinion of the potential nominees.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Your opinion of my opinions isn't something that really concerns me. Your opinions are not your own. You get them fed to you by Rick Santorum and Pat Robertson.

"Those that stand for nothing, fall for anything"

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Or don't offer them.

Stick to the topic and who should or shouldn't get the Repulican nomination, and your opinion of the potential nominees. You brought it up, don't pin it on us

Originally posted by Strangelove
Your opinions are not your own. You get them fed to you by Rick Santorum and Pat Robertson.

"Those that stand for nothing, fall for anything"

L L sky's again!!!

I've never listened to a speech, sermon, quote, etc... from either of them.


My beliefs are my own, backed by logic and reason upon looking at a choice.

(though I suppose using the old parrot theme makes it easier for you to discredit a person's views without addressing them.)

Originally posted by sithsaber408




Your opinion of my opinions isn't something that really concerns me.

i respect your opinion SS. i just dispise your spoonfed talking points based on nothing more than lies. i'd be thrilled to see you formulate an opinion on your own with regards to government policy

Originally posted by sithsaber408
L L sky's again!!!

I've never listened to a speech, sermon, quote, etc... from either of them.


My beliefs are my own, backed by logic and reason upon looking at a choice.

(though I suppose using the old parrot theme makes it easier for you to discredit a person's views without addressing them.) Oh no, I did address them. It's just that your 'logic' and 'reason' sound a lot a like speeches I've heard by right-wingnuts.

You're just like my brother. He claims to have opinions, but he never watches the news, just listens to and repeats soundbites. I pity him. And you.

Originally posted by Strangelove
You brought it up, don't pin it on us

No, I mentioned that evangelicals have no good choices in the Republican noms this year (or Democrat ones), and that I'd vote for whoever left the cultural issues to the states to decide.


'Twas bardock who jumped all over my stances, and y'all who jumped on the bandwagon.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I've never listened to a speech, sermon, quote, etc... from either of them.

What a suprise! You might want to research your independant position to see if it's your own or not.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Oh no, I did address them. It's just that your 'logic' and 'reason' sound a lot a like speeches I've heard by right-wingnuts.

You're just like my brother. He claims to have opinions, but he never watches the news, just listens to and repeats soundbites. I pity him. And you.

Save the pity because I watch the news quite often. Kieth Olberman's show, in fact. (gotta get the other sides viewpoint to make an intelligent decision, after all.) I check into current events every day. Not that I need to defend myself to you, but I want you to know that people who keep conservative views aren't just uneducated fools who get their news from a pulpit on a sunday.

No matter, you're a young 20 year-old idealist who believes that absolute freedom is the best thing a person can hope for. Freedom for anything, no matter if that means a sex-change for a 12 year old.

Wanna know something funny? I was a liberal at 20 too.

Give it 4 or 5 years, we'll talk.Originally posted by PVS
i respect your opinion SS. i just dispise your spoonfed talking points based on nothing more than lies. i'd be thrilled to see you formulate an opinion on your own with regards to government policy

Here's a few:

No prison time for drug users. Rehab and treatment, no matter how many offenses. Community service maybe, but as long as they aren't distributing and are just using.... no jail time.

Abortions only in the case of rape or life of the mother.
Sorry.

Civil unions for gay couples, with a "commitment ceremony" performed if they choose.

This provides all tax breaks and benefits, while keeping traditional marriage as the institution it always has been.



Off the top of my head, that's a good start.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
No prison time for drug users. Rehab and treatment, no matter how many offenses. Community service maybe, but as long as they aren't distributing and are just using.... no jail time.

acceptable considering the present policies regarding drug abuse.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Abortions only in the case of rape or life of the mother.
Sorry.

better than nothing i guess

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Civil unions for gay couples, with a "commitment ceremony" performed if they choose.

would that not be a validation for homosexuals? would that not be the green light, so to speak, and bring about civil unions with dogs, donkeys, office furniture etc?

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Save the pity because I watch the news quite often. Kieth Olberman's show, in fact. (gotta get the other sides viewpoint to make an intelligent decision, after all.) I check into current events every day. Not that I need to defend myself to you, but I want you to know that people who keep conservative views aren't just uneducated fools who get their news from a pulpit on a sunday.

No matter, you're a young 20 year-old idealist who believes that absolute freedom is the best thing a person can hope for. Freedom for anything, no matter if that means a sex-change for a 12 year old.

Wanna know something funny? I was a liberal at 20 too.

Give it 4 or 5 years, we'll talk. Actually, I respect many conservatives. I have plenty of friends that are conservative.

I just don't think that religious beliefs should guide public policy. If one reads the 14th Amendment, you can see that Gay Marriage is already Constitutionally protected, but it's the religious wingnuts like President Bush that keep it from becoming a reality.

a) I'm turning 19 in a week 13
b) I'm fairly certain I will hold these beliefs all my life, Ted Kennedy is a 'liberal' at 74, in any case.

Why do conservatives consider liberalism a "phase in life"?

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Abortions only in the case of rape or life of the mother.
Sorry.Seems a bit hypocritical in the case of rape to me. You consider all life sacred and that life begins at conception, yet this child isn't allowed to live? Why not?
Originally posted by sithsaber408
Civil unions for gay couples, with a "commitment ceremony" performed if they choose.

This provides all tax breaks and benefits, while keeping traditional marriage as the institution it always has been.So, ummm, whats the difference? Seems the exact same thing except called something different because they're gay. Are you protecting an institution (which by the way is completely broken to begin with) or a word?

Originally posted by Soleran
That's obviously subjective.

I guess. But what isn't.

Some might find actual people being killed in a war more important than two **** marrying or not actual people and parasites being stopped from becoming actual people.

But to each their own. Originally posted by sithsaber408
To each his own.


IMO America has more to fear from gay marriage leading to palygamy and bestiality in the next 50 years and abortion continuing to allow murdered children every day, than it does from terrorism.


They'll have no need of trying to destroy us from the outside if we've destroyed ourselves from within.

Polygamy sounds good...also bestiality...if one is into it.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
No, I mentioned that evangelicals have no good choices in the Republican noms this year (or Democrat ones), and that I'd vote for whoever left the cultural issues to the states to decide.


'Twas bardock who jumped all over my stances, and y'all who jumped on the bandwagon.

Just for the record, I did not jump all over your your stances, just the importance you seem to give some over others.

I have to jump in and state that PVS' Condoleza/Bush sig is genius...

its not my idea i must confess

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/tags/bush-condi/

i just had to make a sig out of that

Originally posted by PVS
its not my idea i must confess

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/tags/bush-condi/

i just had to make a sig out of that

I like the picture of them in bed.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Porque it tends to be true, ey.incorrectAnd how many young hippies do you see these days? Now how many older ones?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Porque it tends to be true, ey.

Who's more likely to be an anti-war hippie: a college student or a middle-aged working man?

It is true that many younger people look for idealistic causes and battles to fight...but that doesn't make every younger person naive or stupid and not everyone will grow out of it and also...it doesn't make conservative ideas better. Also, SS is like 2 years older than Strangelove...okay, maybe 3.

Originally posted by Strangelove
incorrect

And how many young hippies do you see these days? Now how many older ones?

Very seldom do I see/meet a hippie over the age of 30. The only one I can really recall was a shrink I had to see when I was in my late 20's. But a shrink being a hippie isn't very surprising.

According to my oldest son, about 99% of his professors are all hippies, which agian, isn't very surprising.

Hippies/stereotypical liberals being accociated with the younger generation isn't a farfetched or inaccurate claim.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Also, SS is like 2 years older than Strangelove...okay, maybe 3.

Which is nothing.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Hippies/stereotypical liberals being accociated with the younger generation isn't a farfetched or inaccurate claim.Liberals tend to be younger, this is true. But that's not the point here. SS is presenting liberalism as if it's a phase that you grow out of. Are you also suggesting that? If not, then we're really not disagreeing

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Save the pity because I watch the news quite often. Kieth Olberman's show, in fact. (gotta get the other sides viewpoint to make an intelligent decision, after all.) I check into current events every day. Not that I need to defend myself to you, but I want you to know that people who keep conservative views aren't just uneducated fools who get their news from a pulpit on a sunday.

No matter, you're a young 20 year-old idealist who believes that absolute freedom is the best thing a person can hope for. Freedom for anything, no matter if that means a sex-change for a 12 year old.

Wanna know something funny? I was a liberal at 20 too.

Give it 4 or 5 years, we'll talk.



there are so many logical fallacies in this that i cant help but be impressed that you managed to compress them all into one post.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Liberals tend to be younger, this is true. But that's not the point here. SS is presenting liberalism as if it's a phase that you grow out of. Are you also suggesting that? If not, then we're really not disagreeing

No I dont think liberalism a phase. I think the degrees of how liberal a kid is might change overtime, and its less so when they're older.

i think we need to stop paralleling the democratic party with children who dont want to live by rules, or the other side might be validated in stating that the core of neoconservatism is freakishly bigoted old people who want to implement radical and oppressive changes to government policy in a failed attempt to recreate their 1950's utopia of blissful ignorance for american middle class white men....wait a minute...

Originally posted by PVS
neoconservatism is freakishly bigoted old people who want to implement radical and oppressive changes to government policy in a failed attempt to recreate their 1950's utopia of blissful ignorance for american middle class white men....wait a minute...

That's exactly what Virgil Goode is.

Originally posted by PVS
i think we need to stop paralleling the democratic party with children who dont want to live by rules, or the other side might be validated in stating that the core of neoconservatism is freakishly bigoted old people who want to implement radical and oppressive changes to government policy in a failed attempt to recreate their 1950's utopia of blissful ignorance for american middle class white men....wait a minute... shock

Now Pat Robertson will pray for you to die on national television

Originally posted by Strangelove
shock

Now Pat Robertson will pray for you to die on national television


That is of course after he shows you how to balance your checkbook.

Originally posted by Soleran
That is of course after he shows you how to balance your checkbook. He's Jewish?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Very seldom do I see/meet a hippie over the age of 30. The only one I can really recall was a shrink I had to see when I was in my late 20's. But a shrink being a hippie isn't very surprising.

According to my oldest son, about 99% of his professors are all hippies, which agian, isn't very surprising.

Hippies/stereotypical liberals being accociated with the younger generation isn't a farfetched or inaccurate claim.



Which is nothing.

Agreed, on all counts. Except for the last part.

And he said he just turned 19, while I'm 24 next month.

So the difference is 5 years.

Would you not find a difference between a H.S. senior and an 8th grade junior high kid?

Or more accurately, a H.S. junior and a college senior?


Besides, many people are 40 that are immature and childish, and some in their early 20's have lived enough life to feel 40. (like me)Originally posted by Strangelove
Liberals tend to be younger, this is true. But that's not the point here. SS is presenting liberalism as if it's a phase that you grow out of. No, not that everybody will grow out of. (as you pointed out Sen. Kennedy, the drunken old blow-hard is still liberal.)

Just that I did.

And I'm curious to see if another 5 years of living the adult life might change your thinking in some areas.

Originally posted by sithsaber408


Besides, many people are 40 that are immature and childish, and some in their early 20's have lived enough life to feel 40. (like me)

And I'm curious to see if another 5 years of living the adult life might change your thinking in some areas.

Or maybe you are more like an immature 14 year old and Strangelove like an educated 40 year old...just a possibility.


I am wondering whether more of your life (and more thinking) will change your view as well...but I doubt it...just doesn't seem as if your kind thinks much.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Or maybe you are more like an immature 14 year old and Strangelove like an educated 40 year old...just a possibility.


I am wondering whether more of your life (and more thinking) will change your view as well...but I doubt it...just doesn't seem as if your kind thinks much.

Umm.... yeah, I guess.

If it's the educated point of view to allow a 12 year old to have a sex change, and you agree with the ending of life to support more free sex.

And if it's the immature kids point of view to preserve decency, morals, and some standard of integrity for our country.

Then you'd be correct in your assement.


And I've already changed my mind, from liberal to conservative.

Guess that shows that my "kind" do some thinking after all.



Putz.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Umm.... yeah, I guess.

If it's the educated point of view to allow a 12 year old to have a sex change, and you agree with the ending of life to support more free sex.

And if it's the immature kids point of view to preserve decency, morals, and some standard of integrity for our country.

Then you'd be correct in your assement.


And I've already changed my mind, from liberal to conservative.

Guess that shows that my "kind" do some thinking after all.



Putz.

If they want it.

Yes. If it would give just one person more freedom I would not see a problem with brutally bludgeoning twenty thousand baby seals.

Decency and morals are subjective. You have yours. We have ours. We find it decent and moral to not discriminate against people, to let them live their life in peace, to not oppress them...you..don't.

No, I would not say that it does that. You could just have followed anyways. My theory is still to get in the pants of your wife.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Or don't offer them.

You were the one who brought it up, not Bardock.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Guess that shows that my "kind" do some thinking after all.


No, it shows that your "kind" is capable of thinking, but has decided not to do so. Which I can assume is the only reason you make the statments and associations you do on a constant basis in regards to your "beliefs". (which is really just short hand for your willfully-ignorant social condemnation for anyone who isn't exactly like you, which you then turn around and use your religious preferences as a scapegoat to justify your condemnation)

Originally posted by sithsaber408
And he said he just turned 19, while I'm 24 next month.

So the difference is 5 years.I will be turning 19 in a weekSounds like something a right-wing mouthpiece would say.

Time Magazine rated Edward Kennedy as one of America's best Senators, Get over it, the Chappequiddick accident was in 1968.I doubt it

New article from Larry J. Sabato

http://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=LJS2007020101

i just had to post this somewhere

2uo-9bFJcRM&eurl

Tim Russert is better than that though

I was watching an interview with Rudy Guiliani last night and I was impressed with his presentation.

I hope it's Clinton vs Guiliani for the presidency.

Originally posted by Soleran
I was watching an interview with Rudy Guiliani last night and I was impressed with his presentation.

I hope it's Clinton vs Guiliani for the presidency. Giuliani would never win the candidacy, the primary voters are far too conservative. The best chance the Republicans have for an '08 win would be a McCain-Giuliani ticket. Anything else, forget about it.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Giuliani would never win the candidacy, the primary voters are far too conservative. The best chance the Republicans have for an '08 win would be a McCain-Giuliani ticket. Anything else, forget about it.

We'll see

Giuliani is officially in the race as of today, by the by w00t

Originally posted by Strangelove
Giuliani is officially in the race as of today, by the by w00t


He announced that he was jumping in the race last night.

Originally posted by Soleran
He announced that he was jumping in the race last night. Last night, today...couple hours difference

Bottom line is communication, and along with that empathy, everyone needs to know empathy..........Who doesn't have it???
Yet there are some that really have never experienced it nore what it truly is............

Originally posted by debbiejo
Bottom line is communication, and along with that empathy, everyone needs to know empathy..........Who doesn't have it???
Yet there are some that really have never experienced it nore what it truly is............ What the hell are you talking about?

Oops, wrong thread....

John McCain is being marginalized by Rudy Giuliani these days, it seems...

Rudy....Rudy...Rudy...

Originally posted by Strangelove
John McCain is being marginalized by Rudy Giuliani these days, it seems...

John McCain needs to be marginalized. He's a tool without an ounce of integrity or standards.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
John McCain needs to be marginalized. He's a tool without an ounce of integrity or standards. Agreed

Republican candidates fundraising for the first quarter
Fmr. MA Gov. Mitt Romney: $23 million

Fmr. NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani: $15 million

Sen. John McCain: $12.5 million

Sen. Sam Brownback: $1.9 million

Fmr. AR Gov. Mike Huckabee: $500,000

hmmmm...

I think that Sen. John McCain should win it.He is pretty conservtive and is prolife and for what I heard a good guy.He will not be as good as a president as Bush was but he would be my third choice beside Dick Chenly and Rice would a good choice too!jm

John McCain is a shameless slimeball who will go against any of his principles to gain support.

Bush and Cheney are complete idiots. Rice (along with Sec. Gates) are the only competent people in the administration.

Rice is good.I do'nt see why you would not like Bush or Cleney being a Republican and all which I am guessing you are.Is it becaues of the oil spill or the war that you do not like Bush?And you have to admit he is a better president then Cliton ever was and ever will be!jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Rice is good.I do'nt see why you would not like Bush or Cleney being a Republican and all which I am guessing you are.Is it becaues of the oil spill or the war that you do not like Bush?And you have to admit he is a better president then Cliton ever was and ever will be!jm First off, I am a rabid liberal. Second, Clinton was a fantastic President. Bush cannot compare in the slightest in any way, shape, or form.

Are you nuts?Clinton almost got kicked out because of his afair with Monda.He is nothing but a sick prevent man who has afairs and god knows what else.How do you find him to be better then bush?Also he did get us in a war also so yu can't say that is the reason.jm

The affair with Monica has no effect on his job as a President. You would do well to know that.

It should had it was wrong for him to say he had no affair thus lieing to everyone about it and not saying he was lieing till he was caught.How is that making him a great President.Again you did not answear my question about how you think he was a great President.Do you not have any answear to my question?If not you are unsure why you think he is.Jm

His affair was not America's business..anyone would lie about that. George W Bush still hasn't caught Osama Bin Ladin, and he sacraficed thousands of Americans and Iraqis for this stupid war he proposed.

Dick Cheney shot another man in the face, and Dick Cheney even voted in the past to keep Nelson Mandella imprisoned instead of setting him free.....


Bill Clinton did wondors for our ecomony, where Bush just destroyed everything he worked for, by dragging America's ass in debt. Clinton pushed for better medicare coverage for the average American citizen, he made it possible for Gay men to serve in the military instead of being denied like before, he even promoted programs to help with the AIDS crisis....no Republican President ever even addressed the Aids Epidemic, hell Reagen fkn ignored it.....

In terms of Civil Rights, Clinton has any other President beat. George W Bush and Dick Cheney didn't do jack shit for civil rights....in fact, their policies are directly opposed to much civil rights progression.


Clinton is not perfect....he is a human being just like the rest of us. But no one can say that he is responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people like Bush and Cheney are....Clinton is not responsible for the death of a single child.....Bush and Cheney ARE.....


Clinton may have cheated on his wife, but Bush killed so many people, not only as President, but even back when he was Governor of Texas...do you have ANY IDEA how many people he sent to Death Row ???? And most of the people he sent to the Death Penalty happened to have been either Black of Hispanic...hmmmm....


And Clinton never shot anyone in the face....Cheney has...

Ok answears had not been told me for about the million time but Clinton did start a war much like Bush and because of it some people did die.Sure it was not America's bussincess but does lieing make him look good?
I don't think so!He should had been kicked out now and then.He was also prolife and again prevented.I dont' see why no one argees with me about this but Republicians but whatever.In my eyes he did as much as Bush had ever done.Jm

So wait...u dont like Bush either ?


Secondly, what war did Clinton ever start ? What bad has Clinton ever done other than cheating on his wife ?


George Bush also lied....about the weapons of Mass Destruction...there were no weapons of mass destruction

I did not say I did not like Bush can't say I argee with the war but I still stick to my point that he was a better president then Clinton ever was.What sounds worst an affair then lieing to america about it or wespons which I heard was not hiden nor he lied about?You choose!jm

The affair that Clinton had was not America's business...Jackie, is it anyone else's business who you have sex with or who you date ? Would you tell everyone all the details of your sex life just because they wanted to know?


The affair had nothing to do with the government or the people. Bush lied about worse things.....Bush lied to get this war promoted. There's even evidense that the CIA reported the possibility of the 9/11 attacks to happen before they did, and Bush did nothing to prevent it..he allowed it to happen.


He also lied about the weapons...there were never any. There was never any proof....Goerge Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to attack Sadam Hussein because of the fued that his father had with him long ago....and for the oil. Bush and Cheney made SO MUCH MONEY off of this war !!!! Do you realize that ? They are richer than ever because of this.....


The worst thing Clinton ever did was lie about his affair...that is NOTHING compared to what Bush and Cheney have done:


1) Cheney shot an innocent man in the face and got away with it

2) Bush executed hundreds of prisoners when he was Governor of Texas

3) Bush lied about the weapons of mass destruction

4) Bush had the oppurtunity to prevent 9/11 with information given to him by the CIA and he did nothing about it...he just let it happen

5) Bush sent hundreds of men and women to this war, and he tried to prevent the nation from knowing how many fatalities and dismemberments there were


6) Bush tried to mix religion into the public school systems, enforcing Christianity as the dominant religion, violating the Constitution


7) Bush made it illegal for any public institution to say the Pledge of Allegiance in Spanish


8) Dick Cheney voted to keep refugee Nelson Mandella in prison during Apartheid, even though he was already imprisoned for 30 years !!!!


9) Bush and Dick Cheney have destroyed many rain forests in South America

10) Hugo Chavez, president of Valenzuela, even claims that an American spy was sent to his country to assassinate him, hired by Bush

11) Bush and Cheney attack Green Peace and Peta, wildlife preserve organizations, accusing them of being terrorists, incarcerating members on suggestion.

12) Bush and Cheney not only pushed to have Gay Marriage illegal, but they also proposed for ALL schools in America to teach "abstinence only", meaning people can ONLY have sex after marriage...basically pushing that Gay people be FORCED to live the "Straight" lifestyle....that is unlawful and discriminatory.





Bush and Cheney are HORRIBLE PEOPLE...what has Clinton EVER DONE that is ANYWHERE AS BAD ????!??!?

I just finish telling you and you just repected yourself!Any reason why?Jm

You did not tell me ANYTHING...and I did NOT repeat myself...what do you not understand ????


Bush and Cheney did horrible things.....all Clinton ever did was lie..did you even READ what I wrote ?

Yes and it was the same thing you wrote before that I did answear.I have you on my ignore list for a reason.Anywho got to get some sleep so have a goodnight!jm

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.....and you are on my Ignore as well

Fine then we are both happy!You have no idea what you are talkilng about either.You may think you do but clearly you don't like to listen to others thoughts but your own.If you ask me that is abit imature and selfish don't you think?jm

No i dont thnk so...


I did listen to you, and I answered you question...I provided you with facts, and you ignored them....why do you ignore what I presnted you with ?


I did not repeat myself..the facts I listed were new...they were not mentioned before.


I am asking you how is Clinton worse ? Bush and Cheney have done worse things....you have not answered my question.

I have and yet you put me on your ignore list.The only reason I did because you called me names and were abit nasty if you did not do it and wanted to debate in a calm relax and a mature way I would not had done it.Anyway I am through reading your posts.So say what you want only I will not be reading them.It would be a waste of my time and yours.Jm

When did I call you names ?

You have made no valid points why Bush is a better President than Clinton. Mostly because there are none. All you do is make baseless claims and then ridicule the ones put forth by others. Everything that GK said was true, and you have not said anything except pointless shit and "You are on my ignore list."

And this is about the Presidential election in 2008. Either make your own thread or start being on topic

Whatever this is about nominiees and I was not the one that started to talk about the dems you were my friend!Anyway ok back on subject Rice would make a good president not only becaues she is a woman but she has good views!Jm

Well she's not running for President. Next!

No but she should.I did say that Clenly should.So don't next me!

Cheney has said that he is definitely not running.

Cheney ? Why would you vote for Cheney Jackie ???


I already told you all the horrible things he did....do you not care ?

I would vote for him because again Clinton did alot worst things then Clenly ever did or would.(I know Lovestrange give me a second!)Anyway you put others on the poll so I told you who I wanted to vote.Allow me to say what you are about to say.
NEXT!JM

Jackie..babe...you dont know what you are talking about....



Either give us examples, give us facts, or just stop arguing....do not make blank accusations without backing them up. I know you're smarter than how you are acting.

Originally posted by Strangelove
You have made no valid points why Bush is a better President than Clinton. Mostly because there are none.

and may I add that Rice is a tool and ho no respect from anyone....a common feature of being around the Bush administration too long.

Originally posted by Alliance
and may I add that Rice is a tool and ho no respect from anyone....a common feature of being around the Bush administration too long. Still, next to Secretary Gates, she's probably the most competent person in the Administration

The Republicans not letting her ran for president would be racist and sexist.The same for the dems not likeing her for what ever reason.She would be the first woman President for the Republican side and prolife.Nothing could be better!jm

I do like her far better than Bush and Cheney...she is less evil.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
The Republicans not letting her ran for president would be racist and sexist.The same for the dems not likeing her for what ever reason.She would be the first woman President for the Republican side and prolife.Nothing could be better!jm ....the GOP isn't not letting her run for President. She doesn't want to.

She would not come close to winning.

I don't think so, no.

Well even if she does not want to she still would be a good President maybe next time around!Night everyone.jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
The Republicans not letting her ran for president would be racist and sexist.The same for the dems not likeing her for what ever reason.She would be the first woman President for the Republican side and prolife.Nothing could be better!jm

Your failed attemp at American history is laughable. As is your outcome. Several women have run for president. I guess it's all a matter of moderator interaction and historical relevance that keeps you here.

Oh, but I so wanted Carol Mosley Braun.

btw, Why are all the black candidates from Illinois?

...oh yeah...we rock

(Sharpton doesn't count, because I have no idea where he is from)

What keeps you here?All insults and put downs keep you here why I have no idea.I guess you are pure lucky!Anywho I have to look up more stuff on Mccain still not sure now if I want him for the Republicans or not.JM

a debate between all 8 (a 9th, Jim Gilmore, announced his candidacy on April 26th, so it's unlikely that he will participate) candidates is set for Thursday, 8 pm EST on MSNBC

Originally posted by Alliance
Oh, but I so wanted Carol Mosley Braun.

btw, Why are all the black candidates from Illinois?

...oh yeah...we rock

(Sharpton doesn't count, because I have no idea where he is from) Jesse Jackson's from IL, isn't he? And Alan Keyes too

Keys is from MA. He simply RAN in IL, after calling Hillary a carpetbagger for running in NY after being from AK. THAT led to some interesting responses from him....

I believe Jackson did a lot of work in Chicago....Wikipedia confirms.

"Sweet Home Chicago"

Originally posted by Alliance
Keys is from MA. He simply RAN in IL, after calling Hillary a carpetbagger for running in NY after being from AK. THAT led to some interesting responses from him....

I believe Jackson did a lot of work in Chicago....Wikipedia confirms.

"Sweet Home Chicago" Oh yeah, I remember now

Mike Huckabee Scares me,how many agree

You can bet I will be watching those debates!jm

Originally posted by TRH
Mike Huckabee Scares me,how many agree

Romney is by far the most solid candidate.

Originally posted by Alliance
Romney is by far the most solid candidate. Not really. He used to be pro-gay rights and pro-choice, but now he's completely changed his mind. He used to vote in Democratic primaries (paraphrasing) "for the weakest candidate that a Republican could defeat." Dishonesty, anyone? He claimed to be a "lifelong" hunter, even though he's only been hunting twice in his life and doesn't even own a license. He's a shameless panderer.

Plus there's the fact that a recent poll showed that 66% of Americans say they aren't ready for a Mormon President.

Republicans may overlook these things, but he'd be shredded in the general election by Democrats and the media (if they both grow a spine) if they nominated him. In fact, I hope he does win the nomination.

The only solid chance they have is Fred Thompson, if he decides to run.

I really think Romney is more complex. I really think that McCain and Guliani will collapse. Romney is a good politician, despite his apparent flip flops.

Romney FTW.

Originally posted by Alliance
I really think Romney is more complex. I really think that McCain and Guliani will collapse. Romney is a good politician, despite his apparent flip flops. eh. I don't really want the Republicans to have their "best shot" though 131

McCain will do just fine.I think anyway.jm

Originally posted by Strangelove
eh. I don't really want the Republicans to have their "best shot" though 131

Yeah, he might actually move the party though...hopefully it will just collapse.

Originally posted by Strangelove


The only solid chance they have is Fred Thompson, if he decides to run.

Yup.

Mr. Law and Order.

That's who I'm honestly hoping for right about now.

If not, I don't really care who gets it.

McCain/Guilianni= Fake conservatives.

Might as well let Obama have it.

At least he's honest.

Nah, you underestimate Romney...he's a very skilled politician. After Bush, Republicans might have to live with moderates for a while If the Republican party has become the Conservative (as in only) party, it is surely doomed.

I think it is safe to say Thompson will not get it.

And I'm glad you support Obama

Originally posted by PVS
the correct answer is: who gives a shit because hes going to lose

i agree. you're so smart. this forum could use more people like you. can i orally pleasure you? *doubles over and performs fellatio on self*





hi whirly wavey