Who will be the next President of the United States?

[dean_acheson]

wow, just got home from a meeting, and see that hillary pulled it off.

boy, that's my first real shock of the campaign.

I guess OBH doesn't walk on water after all.

[Zachstar]

One good thing about HC winning though is that it forces both her and Obama to continue and work to win. It may bring some more personal character to light about both of them. We need to see them under pressure!

I still believe Hillary's tears will work against her though... I'm interested to see what tactics they take in the next couple of weeks :hmm:.
They will not work against her if there are more sheep out there. More than ever it is about to come down to the Sheep vs the Thinkers here.

If the sheep win I guess I will just have to wait until 2020. If clinton decides she will actually allow elections to continue.

Maybe she will cry in front of congress to get an amendment that allows her to be president for 10 years. At this rate anything is possible.
You're being sarcastic, right? It's hard to tell, it almost sounds like you are serious.
What makes you think I am not?

Neal go have a look at the polls before. Have a look at the exit data. This ought to NOT have happened! Yet they allowed themselves to be influenced by some stupid events.
I cannot rule that out, certainly, but I also think it could as easily have cost her votes. For every person who felt sympathetic, there could be 5 who were turned off to her for that.

I guess when you say something like Maybe she will cry in front of congress to get an amendment that allows her to be president for 10 years. At this rate anything is possible it sounds like some of the Democratic zealots who say the same thing about Bush, and for a guy as smart as you, it's hard to believe that you believe that.

Don't rule out the power of Bush/Clinton and the power of want.

Ok the economy is about to go into a recession. There is little chance to dodge that now.

Oil continues to skyrocket led mainly by the fact that money is being dumped on the economy.

People allowed themselves to be influenced this early.

Price of gas will rise while jobless rates will also rise.

Food is skyrocketing.

The mexican military along with their drug runners is invading us on a regular basis.

Yes Hillery will wave some magic wands (Ending the War, Social Medicine) and do some other things to gain some trust. Yet if things continue to drop and people continue to decend into sheephood.

Well yes there is a chance she can "delay" elections or even easily change the rules in the name of "Keeping America Strong"

A depression without a good source of raw energy will likely throw us back into the steam age or worse. She knows she can influence people now. So she has a chance to pull off a dictatorship in the future.

[August]

So the short answer is yes? :rotfl:

[Peto]

Don't rule out the power of Bush/Clinton and the power of want.

Ok the economy is about to go into a recession. There is little chance to dodge that now.

Oil continues to skyrocket led mainly by the fact that money is being dumped on the economy.

People allowed themselves to be influenced this early.

Price of gas will rise while jobless rates will also rise.

Food is skyrocketing.

The mexican military along with their drug runners is invading us on a regular basis.

Yes Hillery will wave some magic wands (Ending the War, Social Medicine) and do some other things to gain some trust. Yet if things continue to drop and people continue to decend into sheephood.

Well yes there is a chance she can "delay" elections or even easily change the rules in the name of "Keeping America Strong"

A depression without a good source of raw energy will likely throw us back into the steam age or worse. She knows she can influence people now. So she has a chance to pull off a dictatorship in the future.

Well--that's a pretty worst case scenario (I hope). But frankly, I'm not as surprised by today's results. I said earlier in this thread that results would be very hard to judge before hand because of the turnout of independants and young voters this cycle.

I won't discount your concern though. The last couple elections have been really close and one of them Very controversial. A little paranoia isn't all bad.

But think about this. Watching these two (Hillary and Barack) throwing fastballs at each other for a while might work to our advantage. I'd like to see who has the wit to dodge and the stamina to stand up to the heater for at least a couple months. It's less pressure than they'll face in the White House.

:yep:

[Zachstar]

There is a difference between throwing punches and firing torpedoes for sheep to ruin themselves on.

Debate and Crap is the usual and yes gets voters fired up. However crying and having people say "Iron my shirt!" was completely calculated to ruin anything.

The only way Obama could have defended in a state full of sheep was to start crying himself and have people act racist towards him.

This isn't good for anybody but the establishment.

[Jimbuna]

Well, not being an American citizen, I presume I can call myself a neutral. Now that Mrs Clinton has staged a quick comeback, I must say for the first time in my memory this whole process is beginning to look very interesting.

[Skybird]

Republicans jump on the "change" bandwagon:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-527410,00.html

[Onkel Neal]

Thanks for the page, Sky, it has a very useful map/schedule
http://www.spiegel.de/flash/0,5532,16945,00.html

I think by Feb 5, it will be decided, with California and NY weighing in. By the time Texas votes (Mar/4/08) it will clear who the party nominees are.

[Peto]

I think by Feb 5, it will be decided, with California and NY weighing in. By the time Texas votes (Mar/4/08) it will clear who the party nominees are.

I'm afraid you're right. Too bad really. I'd rather watch this fight than Ali and Frazier :yep:.

[dean_acheson]

Woot! At this time, Hillary is leading Obama 40% to 36% in NH, we still have a ballgame. :()1:
It's the choking up that did it.

OMG, I hope Fred Thompson doesn't try that! :lol:

Are you kidding me, Fred Thompson is the only guy that Chuck Norris is scared of!

[Sea Demon]

I do have to say that before all this hoopla, I never thought McCain would have a prayer in Hades. This is going to make things interesting for both sides.

[Skybird]

I do have to say that before all this hoopla, I never thought McCain would have a prayer in Hades.
A long way into the WH. I said it somewhere above, and still think so, that he will not see the WH from inside.

And hell, beside all political stuff, the man is beyond 70! Do people not remember the saying "Fear the old men, for they have nothing to loose anymore" ? We made jokes about the mean age of the Soviet politbureau in the 80s, didn't we? "Funeral procession", we called it in germany, or the "parade of the wax-faced men."

[Sea Demon]

I do have to say that before all this hoopla, I never thought McCain would have a prayer in Hades. A long way into the WH. I said it somewhere above, and still think so, that he will not see the WH from inside.

And hell, beside all political stuff, the man is beyond 70! Do people not remember the saying "Fear the old men, for they have nothing to loose anymore" ? We made jokes about the mean age of the Soviet politbureau in the 80s, didn't we? "Funeral procession", we called it in germany, or the "parade of the wax-faced men."
How true. I agree. I myself don't think McCain will be in the Oval office. I am surprised by any result that gives him the edge over any other GOP contender. But I don't think age alone would stop any presidential contender. Look at Reagan. He was 70 his first year in the WH. Of course McCain is no Reagan. I wonder if NH is a one state anomaly for McCain. And with Obama only 2 pts. behind Hillary, I wonder the same about Hillary with the Democrat result. The next round will be fun to watch.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H. (http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=655)
By admin | January 8, 2008

Kurt Nimmo (http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1587)
Truth News
January 8, 2008
According to a post (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=82909) this evening on the Ron Paul Forums, vote fraud occurred in Sutton, New Hampshire:
Sutton with 100% reporting reported 0 votes for paul but poster in Sutton posted:
My mom, aunt, and dad all voted for RP today in my hometown, My mom and aunt both work passing out ballots, and checking them off. I just looked at the politico map and it says their town has ZERO votes for Ron. Now i know that there isn’t corruption on voting in that little town, so where they reported it must be. What do I do, anyone know???

Originally Posted by sstjean View Post
This was posted to ronpaul-801 tonight: “This town numbers are wrong wrong wrong on this map. I am from Sutton originally and my parents and one aunt all voted for Ron Paul today and Sutton says 0. So this is wrong. This is a town that had 20 people counting the ballots and I have no reason to believe that they cheated. Small town and I was born and raised there. The real numbers will come in by morning. The electronic machines in the big towns are the ones we have to worry about.”
Earlier in the day, Brad Blog (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5529) reported other suspicious behavior:
Our Spidey-sense started tingling before going to bed last night and hearing reports, on MSNBC, that there were 17 paper ballots cast in Dixville Notch, NH’s midnight, first-in-the-country voting. The report said that there were only 16 registered voters in the tiny voting precinct, yet 17 votes had been cast — suggesting that somehow, paper ballot “voter fraud” skullduggery was afoot.
Brad, however, believes the story is easily debunked:
Given that one of those reports seems to have begun on The DRUDGE REPORT earlier today, we’re not particularly surprised that the MSM kept repeating the easily-debunked stories running all day.
That, even while there are reasons to be concerned about how the paper ballots used in the New Hampshire Primary will actually be counted by the hackable Diebold optical-scan systems used in the state, as controlled and programmed by an outrageously bad private contractor there.
Of course, there is plenty of room for hank-panky, as Michael Collins (http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/opedne_michael__080108_all_diebold_all_the_.htm) notes:
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as “Premier”). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say “but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!”
But they’re not. They’re counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount….


In short, the stage was set by Diebold and Republican operatives to rig yet another election, as the above first-hand account seems to indicate. :shifty: :shifty:

[August]

Ah yes, Ron Paul. The racist, sexist, homophobe who is the darling of nut cases everywhere... :roll:

[Tchocky]

Woot! At this time, Hillary is leading Obama 40% to 36% in NH, we still have a ballgame. :()1: It's the choking up that did it. Was listening to exits on the BBC, apparently the voters who made up their minds after the crying incident were split more or less evenly between Hillary and Obama.
I'm not sure it helped her out.

[bradclark1]

Until a least five states are done the fat lady hasn't even warmed up yet. Hilary's emotion thing was good for one time only and it worked. She does it again she will come across as weak and it will go against her permanently. If McCain wears the same sweater and sleeps in the same bed for a few more states I'm staying well clear of him. What happens if something serious comes down and a black cat crosses in front of him?

[geetrue]

ABC did an exit poll with a majority of voters for Hillary Clinton saying that in deed it was the little emotional coffee shop scene in New Hampshire that convinced them to vote for her.

But I think it's the message she delivered that got to everyone: "I know what's going on"

That was her message to people who think like she does and she let them finish the thoughts ... it's a mind game and she won. :yep:

I'm for Mccain all the way ... She can have all the primary votes she wants.

[STEED]

And here is what our American friend said in the office.

*******ing c*w do they want the red flag over the White House. :hulk: :hulk: :hulk: :hulk: :hulk:

You could say he was very angry. ;)

It's another case don't read into the polls to much people. :yep:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Ah yes, Ron Paul. The racist, sexist, homophobe who is the darling of nut cases everywhere... :roll:
Proof Mr neocon??? :roll:


what is so racist about getting out of iraq, kicking out ILLEGAL (and i emphasize ILLEGAL) Immigrants... getting rid of IRS and fixing the economy??? by the looks of it you dont want any of that to happen??:roll::roll:

or do you want billions more sent to israel which the USA doesnt have??, amnesty for 20 million lazy immigrants who drain billions from the welfare system, bring crime, disease and destroy the economy??? do you want a war with Iran?? cause sure as hell that Clinton and Obama, Huckabee, McCain, Romney are going to do that....

[Zachstar]

Why are YOU sticking up for Ron Paul.

Just so you know I think you ought to be banned just for that sig. Funding them is one thing. Calling them Zionists is QUITE another.

Neal I call on you to take out the trash.

Just a note to everyone that Ron Paul is not the Anti-Israel candidate. Please do not take such a horrific member's post as proof of anything. :nope:

I am honestly scared to death that there may actually be more of you for Ron Paul. Please LEAVE!

[elite_hunter_sh3]

im supporting Ron Paul because he believes in following the constitution, he believes that sending money and alliances with other countries is bad... after all what caused 9/11??? The US installed the shah in the 1950s.. that caused tensions with the arabs... and after the 1979 revolution they just hated them more.. they installed saddam hussein who then caused 3 more wars.. one with Iran, then 2 more with the U.S...
if the US didnt install the shah, didnt install saddam, didnt meddle with the internal affairs of others.. 9/11 wud not have happened...:roll:

[Zachstar]

You sir are completely brainwashed.

Do you honestly believe 9/11 would not have happened if we diddn't do all that?

Assuming you are one of those mindless legions of conspirisy theorists let me ask you this.

Do you honestly think the attack that happened that day would not have happened?

I likely will not get any kind of intellegent answer out of you and nor do I care. You are the type of people that are poisioning Ron Paul's campaign and making him look like the candidate of the conspirisy theorists.

[Onkel Neal]

Well, whatever you believe, let's not get too heated over this. We have a lot of months to go before the November election and if I have to lock this thead, we'll have Bush for another 4 years.

;)

Neal

[Zachstar]

Neal are you Blind?!

Look at his sig. Are you going to allow this outrage to exist on subsim?

I am not talking about freedom of speech. I am talking about how it is part of a movement of hatred these people have.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

:roll::roll:

[August]

Proof Mr neocon??? :roll:

Proof? I've been reading Ron Paul newsletters since the late 70s courtesy of a sister of mine who is as nutty as he is and the guy has written some pretty blatant racial and homophobe stuff. But then again that sort of fits with your white supremacist views, now don't it?

[Jimbuna]

Mam!!....they're fighting again!! :lol:

;) :up:

[STEED]

Mam!!....they're fighting again!! :lol:

;) :up:

Pass the popcorn jim. :yep:

Got give them credit do you see that here? No, to busy talking about EastEnders.

[August]

Mam!!....they're fighting again!! :lol:

;) :up:

You call this a "fight"? :D

[Jimbuna]

Mam!!....they're fighting again!! :lol:

;) :up:

You call this a "fight"? :D

Most definitely not mate :lol:

I look in my locker at work and see all the runners-up medals, and I say "now that was a fight" :doh:

:lol: :up:

[dean_acheson]

im supporting Ron Paul because he believes in following the constitution, he believes that sending money and alliances with other countries is bad... after all what caused 9/11??? The US installed the shah in the 1950s.. that caused tensions with the arabs... and after the 1979 revolution they just hated them more.. they installed saddam hussein who then caused 3 more wars.. one with Iran, then 2 more with the U.S...
if the US didnt install the shah, didnt install saddam, didnt meddle with the internal affairs of others.. 9/11 wud not have happened...:roll:

I'm sorry, you just offended every serious book I've ever read on Foreign Policy. And sir, after a B.A. in American History, a M.A. in American Diplomatic History, another M.A. un U.S. foriegn policy, and a J.D. with an emphasis in International Law, that is more than one or two.

We 'installed' the Shah? Where did you get this? Do you really believe those stupid stories about Eliott Roosevelt?

We 'caused' tensions with the Arab world? I think that was a pretty tension filled bunch long before we came on the scene.

We 'installed' Saddam? What?

'Meddled' with others 'internal' affiars? Yeah, that's called 'foreign policy,' most governments practice it.

That is a load of bunk, but then again, talking to a Ronulan is usually a silly exercise. I try to keep from it, but am not always successful. A fellow came in my office the other day that didn't want to deal with some charges that I had filed against him. He claimed that he couldn't have a driver's liscense since it was part of the government conspiracy to track him and would place the mark of the beast upon him.

Then he saw a Fred sticker on my desk, looked at me, and said, I kid you not, "can I talk to you about Ron Paul?" It was like RP was some kinda messianic figure. I then proceeded to kick him out of my office.

Yes, Ron is a absolute kook.

[dean_acheson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73iQpIATiVE&eurl=http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/10/debate-highlight-fred-takes-huck-to-the-woodshed/

yeah.... Fred ftw tonight.

anyone else watching tonight?

[Onkel Neal]

I didn't get to see it, will try to catch up this weekend. Fred's my man.

In other news, John Kerry being,...well, John Kerry. This guy reminds me why I voted for Bush in '04.
Kerry endorses Obama over '04 running mate (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/kerry.obama/index.html)


.

[August]

Been watching the youtubes you linked. The more i hear from Fred the more i like him.

[Foxtrot]

Obama? But he got a funny name so he must be a terrorist
You get the picture?

Ellison was elected. The story pushed through Hillbilly circles much like this...

Toothless moron 1: "some nigra hads been er electud and weres promisin to launch Jihad by swearin on da cuhran".

Toothless moron 2: "Well Bobby, wat dis nigra's name?"

Toothless moron 1: "merst be dat Usama one, I seens him on somethin during da wrastlin commericals, he be on Tv often..reckon must be him"

Toothless moron 2: "By golly, yous must be rights, I's gonnas tells evrybody!"

[Tchocky]

Kerry endorses Obama

And it was all going so well :cry:

[dean_acheson]

I didn't get to see it, will try to catch up this weekend. Fred's my man.

In other news, John Kerry being,...well, John Kerry. This guy reminds me why I voted for Bush in '04.
Kerry endorses Obama over '04 running mate (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/kerry.obama/index.html)


.

Aw Neal, that's horrible. It was a great debate, even if the Ronulan was there.

Make sure to watch the quotes, they were better in context, but still good for laughs.

The 'find the virgins they are always looking for' was priceless.

[dean_acheson]

Obama? But he got a funny name so he must be a terrorist
You get the picture?

Ellison was elected. The story pushed through Hillbilly circles much like this...

Toothless moron 1: "some nigra hads been er electud and weres promisin to launch Jihad by swearin on da cuhran".

Toothless moron 2: "Well Bobby, wat dis nigra's name?"

Toothless moron 1: "merst be dat Usama one, I seens him on somethin during da wrastlin commericals, he be on Tv often..reckon must be him"

Toothless moron 2: "By golly, yous must be rights, I's gonnas tells evrybody!"

Not exactly, being from the Ozarks, I know a great deal about being a hillbilly.

It was more like this:

Toothless moron 1: Those Yankee idiots have elected a jihad supporing Muslim who likes to hang out with Lewis Farahakan.

Toothless moron 2: Isn't he that anti-Semitic jerk who wears the funny suits?

Toothless moron 1: Yeah, the Nation of Islam get-up.

Toothless moron 2: I'm not really excited about Shria law. Thank God for the 2nd amendment.


Whatever....

However, if you are using the enlightened election of Keith Ellison to show what dummies we hillbillies are, I have grave concerns about your other political choices.

[dean_acheson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ellison_%28politician%29#Farrakhan_and_Natio n_of_Islam_ties


I can't imagine why us dumb hillibillies might even qustion where this fellow's loyalties might lie....

[Ishmael]

im supporting Ron Paul because he believes in following the constitution, he believes that sending money and alliances with other countries is bad... after all what caused 9/11??? The US installed the shah in the 1950s.. that caused tensions with the arabs... and after the 1979 revolution they just hated them more.. they installed saddam hussein who then caused 3 more wars.. one with Iran, then 2 more with the U.S...
if the US didnt install the shah, didnt install saddam, didnt meddle with the internal affairs of others.. 9/11 wud not have happened...:roll:

I'm sorry, you just offended every serious book I've ever read on Foreign Policy. And sir, after a B.A. in American History, a M.A. in American Diplomatic History, another M.A. un U.S. foriegn policy, and a J.D. with an emphasis in International Law, that is more than one or two.

We 'installed' the Shah? Where did you get this? Do you really believe those stupid stories about Eliott Roosevelt?

We 'caused' tensions with the Arab world? I think that was a pretty tension filled bunch long before we came on the scene.

We 'installed' Saddam? What?

'Meddled' with others 'internal' affiars? Yeah, that's called 'foreign policy,' most governments practice it.



Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...

[STEED]

I wonder. :hmm:

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/1201_big.jpg (http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/1201_big.jpg)

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...
bingo.. now if the CIA hadnt done that, didnt go into Iraq, wasnt sending billions and billions of dollars in weapons, aircraft, bobmbs, missiles, and nukes to israel, 9/11 wud not have happen...

[dean_acheson]

im supporting Ron Paul because he believes in following the constitution, he believes that sending money and alliances with other countries is bad... after all what caused 9/11??? The US installed the shah in the 1950s.. that caused tensions with the arabs... and after the 1979 revolution they just hated them more.. they installed saddam hussein who then caused 3 more wars.. one with Iran, then 2 more with the U.S...
if the US didnt install the shah, didnt install saddam, didnt meddle with the internal affairs of others.. 9/11 wud not have happened...:roll:

I'm sorry, you just offended every serious book I've ever read on Foreign Policy. And sir, after a B.A. in American History, a M.A. in American Diplomatic History, another M.A. un U.S. foriegn policy, and a J.D. with an emphasis in International Law, that is more than one or two.

We 'installed' the Shah? Where did you get this? Do you really believe those stupid stories about Eliott Roosevelt?

We 'caused' tensions with the Arab world? I think that was a pretty tension filled bunch long before we came on the scene.

We 'installed' Saddam? What?

'Meddled' with others 'internal' affiars? Yeah, that's called 'foreign policy,' most governments practice it.



Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...

Certainly the Agency was active in Iran, but we didn't install the Shah, that is simply incorrect, or "reinstall" him, as it were. Mossadegh's short sighted economic policies had already made him hugely unpopular with the Iranian people.

Sure, we played around in Guatamala, as well as most of Latin America. So what? What's your point? The US is a big evil bully? We supported dictators? We should just pull out of the world because we ain't worthy to carry Chavez's water?

I'm sure if you are a Marks fan, next you will be telling me to pick up something by that American hero Seymor Hersh. Naomi Klien? The anti-globalist hack? Nice authors there. Might as well trot out Noam Chomsky.

Cheney and Haliburton? Bush and the Rangers? Any other tired left-wing conspiracies you want to trot out? Iraq is all about the oil right? Exxon and Haliburton and the Trilateral Commission are all conspiring to take away our rights.

Did U.S. companies sell some pretty bad things to Iraq in the 80s? Sure:

http://jarrarsupariver.blogspot.com/2007/01/where-did-saddam-get-his-chemical.html

Again, so what? So did France, so did Germany, so did alot of other places. Did we tell Saddam to gas his own people?

I know my country's history pretty well, I just don't agree with the knee-jerk leftwing conclusions that it's the most evil empire in the history of the world. I spent ten years in school embracing that philosphy, then moving away from it, the finding myself harshly disputing it. I've read Chomsky, I've read Howard Zinn, I've read Walter Lefaber. They are all full of crap. I spent enough time in the profession to know how to cherry pick facts, and know when I'm reading it.

Maybe you ought to pick up something by John Lewis Gaddis for a bit more nuanced view of world politics. Maybe you ought to read something by Robert Conquest for a little bit of context before throwing stones at U.S. foreign policy.

If you and Elite want to embrace a Ron Paul view of the world, that's your right, at least in the United States, but it's silly.

[SteminDemon13]

Go John McCain! We not only need someone that is good for our issues at home, but also one that is willing, like Cap, Lehman, and Reagan did in the 80's to fight the pork and actually build up our military instead of wasting trillions in BS R&D and cost plus fee nightmares. His record shows that he is true to his words about fighting pork barrel projects, supports meaningful hardware and supports our military. I support John McCain for president. I do not agree 100% on all of his ideas, but it is my belief that he is the best candidate for president and I wish him all the best.

Bush has thrown the money at the military, but he is blind to how it is being wasted and it is a shame. It is also a shame that for 16 years the boots on the ground have not had a credible NSFS platform. What they have recieved in those 16 years is a bunch of R&D papers and political hampering of proven systems.

[Iceman]

I happen to see the movie "Why We Fight" again this morning and it strikes me that John McCain had the courage to be in it and speak his mind concerning government policies.:up:

[dean_acheson]

Looks like my guy is pretty much out now, with a third place in South Carolina.

Poor ol'Fred, and I feel sorry for my party...

[sonar732]

Looks like I'm going to be watching the morning news programs for highlights of the show tonight in South Carolina.

This is worse than the Bush-Mccain feud of '04. But than again...I don't remember Bush Sr taking pop shots at Mccain like Bill is at Obama.

Oh how I miss the Reagan-Mondale debate that everyone was laughing at the time.:rotfl::rotfl:

[sonar732]

Hillary-Edwards secret meeting (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/22/clinton-edwards-hold-private-post-debate-meeting/#comments) :o:o:o:o

[GlobalExplorer]

Interesting thread for an outsider. Though it would be more enlightening if everyone wrote objectively not his opinions about who he wants to be elected.

Of course from here I have no idea. It just strikes me that there seems to be no serious Republican contender. Does that mean the serious Republican candidates have written off this election?

[3Jane]

:rotfl:
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/1008/bushkidscf1.jpg

[dean_acheson]

Interesting thread for an outsider. Though it would be more enlightening if everyone wrote objectively not his opinions about who he wants to be elected.

Of course from here I have no idea. It just strikes me that there seems to be no serious Republican contender. Does that mean the serious Republican candidates have written off this election?

Objectively, you mean like the New York Times or the Washington Post?

Sorry, that probably wasn't as funny for you, as it is to someone on this side of the pond.

I guess I do find it confusing that you would consider the Democrats as "serious" and the Republicans as not "serious." Now, something there might be lost in the translation, since I am unable to discuss this in my kindergarden German.

Let's see:

John Edwards: a trial lawyer who channels dead babies, has served one term in the Senate, and half of an unsuccessful team in the 2004 election.

Hillary Clinton: a non-trial lawyer who has.... done nearly zero ON HER OWN.

Barack Obama: a non-trial lawyer who has served half of a half of a term in the Senate after his oppenent's divorce records were opened up and exhibited some nasty things in Illinois. Has Barack ever done anything? For God's sake, at least Jack Kennedy was a war hero and had served a few terms in both the House and the Senate.

Mitt Romney: Republican who, showing that it is possible for hell to freeze over, got elected governor in Ted Kennedyville.

John McCain: After years in a Prisoner of War camp in Vietnam, has spent most of his lifetime serving in Congress, working a great deal on defense and foreign relations issues.

Rudy Guilliani: Turned around New York City. That is a heckuva accomplishment.

Huckabee and Paul: Not serious candidates. Sorry.

If you believe that there are other "serious" Republican candidates, I've love to hear about them. I was/am a Thompson man, but that campaign just lost it's legs, or never found them.

Maybe it was the "fire in the belly" issue. Can you imagine how George Washington would have been excoriated for that?

[GlobalExplorer]

Huckabee and Paul: Not serious candidates. Sorry.

.. there you say it yourself ;)

Now what I meant was "serious contenders", who actually have a chance of becoming president. Schwarzenegger can't run for president but he would be such a serious contender imo.

[sonar732]

Interesting thread for an outsider. Though it would be more enlightening if everyone wrote objectively not his opinions about who he wants to be elected.

Of course from here I have no idea. It just strikes me that there seems to be no serious Republican contender. Does that mean the serious Republican candidates have written off this election?

I consider this post hilarious. The current thinking among the democratic followers is that if the campaigns of Hillary and Obama continue down this spiral, than the Republicans are sure to win. Edwards came on top in the debate for showing that he's not getting involved in their fit throwin', mud slingin', typical Washington style. Even though I'm a republican, I can't believe what I'm seeing in the debates on both sides...especially the democrats. As the other post of mine showed, this is worse than the Mccain/Bush feud of '04.:roll:

[GlobalExplorer]

The current thinking among the democratic followers is that if the campaigns of Hillary and Obama continue down this spiral, than the Republicans are sure to win.

God knows whats in the minds of democratic followers right now.

[sonar732]

The current thinking among the democratic followers is that if the campaigns of Hillary and Obama continue down this spiral, than the Republicans are sure to win.
God knows whats in the minds of democratic followers right now.

Since you are across the pond...you wouldn't know. There are plenty of people talking here about the debate and only the die hard followers of Obama or Hillary are happy about it as they are claiming that "their" side came out ahead in the spat. Then, you've got the Edwards campaign people claiming that he came out ahead. However, the majority of democrats that I'm hearing from are affraid of whats to come due to this infighting.

[GlobalExplorer]

Since you are across the pond...you wouldn't know.

I never said otherwise.

[AVGWarhawk]

Personally I'm voting for McCain. Just the sight of the Clintons makes me ill. Obama is not ready. I'm not thrilled with all the other wanna-bee. Furthermore, I'm getting a bit tired of it all really. Day in and day out, nothing but turmoil. We get enough of that in our daily life. Who needs the soap opera?

[GlobalExplorer]

Sure Hillary and Obama fighting is not going to help their party, but they still look like the fresher candidates. McCain is really old and Romney and Huckabee look 2nd class to me.

[AVGWarhawk]

Sure Hillary and Obama fighting is not going to help their party, but they still look like the fresher candidates. McCain is really old and Romney and Huckabee look 2nd class to me.

For 72 years of age, McCain looks pretty good. Ronald Reagan did just fine at this age and took a bullet in the process. McCain seems to have his head on straight. The Clintons are nothing but a power political couple and quite frankly, I do not trust them as far as I can throw them. They have a uncanny ability to fib and cover up things. As of late, who is running, Hillary or Bill? At this point, Obama has two jumping his butt at every given moment. The Clintons are making serious idiots of themselves. I do not buy the drivel Hillary threw out with some tears to back it up that, "She really cares for the country." America can not afford Hillary and her ideas anyway. She will be just another Clinton worried about a legacy.

[GlobalExplorer]

So I gather to many here McCain is the most likely Republican candidate?

[dean_acheson]

Hillary and Obama are the natural endgame of a party that has lived and died, and mainly lived, but then died, based on identity politics.

Who's been oppressed? Who's been wronged? Who has it harder in a United States based on capitalism, rascism, imperialism, or what whatever -ism of the week that our founders and grandparents are guilty of.

Anybody who has been in an American history course in a University in this county in the last twenty-five years knows what I am talking about.

So here we are, the Dems have put up a woman and a 'black' man. Both of them are campaigning based hardly on where they think on the United States should be going, besides single payer health care, and pulling out of Iraq sometime.

No, they are running on who has the stronger 'identity.' White woman or black man? Hillary has a little cry, talks about her hurt feelings, and picks up New Hampshire. OHB talks about 'change' and a 'new' politics, and then is also able to claim that he's a "big supporter" of affirmitive action, which you can find here (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_05/011305.php). In the United States, on the left, and the Clintons lived on this, was to array themselves as being for the little guy, as long as that guy was a woman, or a ethnic minority. Now both of these identities are up against each other. Hillary the woman, and Bill's legacy as the "first black presdient" as Hillary runs against somebody whose father was an African, the melanin counts are running against the Clintons.

So, the ladies and latinos are lining up for Hill, and the "African-Americans" seem to lining up for Obama. The wonderful thing is that the MSM can't seem to get over their gleeful howling over the death of the Reagan coalition long enough to even notice the party of McGovern (entitlement and victimhood, America as evil) is ripping itself apart at the seams also.

Here's the obligatory clip from John Edwards.... (http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/15/video-its-tough-to-be-a-white-man-at-the-democrat-debate/)Sorry, had to do that.

Ideologically, this election is one of the most important we've had in this country in a long time. I mean that, not as a fight between the parties, as it is a fight within the parties, about who they are.

[AVGWarhawk]

So I gather to many here McCain is the most likely Republican candidate?

I believe he runs more as a independant but leans towards Republican.

[AVGWarhawk]

@ Dean,

You watch, Bill is going to say something really stupid and it will bury Hillary. He is working on it right now. :yep:

[dean_acheson]

So I gather to many here McCain is the most likely Republican candidate?

McCain will be our next President.

[dean_acheson]

Sure Hillary and Obama fighting is not going to help their party, but they still look like the fresher candidates. McCain is really old and Romney and Huckabee look 2nd class to me.

Sorry, not to paraphrase Jerry McQuire, but you had me at 'Hillary as the fresher candidate.'

She's been running since 1992.

[GlobalExplorer]

Sure Hillary and Obama fighting is not going to help their party, but they still look like the fresher candidates. McCain is really old and Romney and Huckabee look 2nd class to me.

Sorry, not to paraphrase Jerry McQuire, but you had me at 'Hillary as the fresher candidate.'

She's been running since 1992.

Sure but she's a woman, that should bring some fresh wind.

[dean_acheson]

there's a wind about the clinton's, to be sure.....

[AVGWarhawk]

there's a wind about the clinton's, to be sure.....

and it is putrid to be sure.

[sonar732]

It's funny to see that CNN is getting a ton of flack for the recent article about how female minorities in South Carolina have a tuff decision to make for their canidate. Do they go for the first woman, or the first minority?

CNN Readers respond angrily to 'race or gender' story (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/emails.race.gender/index.html)

[AVGWarhawk]

CNN is often called the Clinton News Network:roll: . CNN holds no water for me...

[bookworm_020]

Fred Thompson is out

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/fred-thompson-quits-us-presidential-race/2008/01/23/1201024931759.html

Not much of a suprise, but it clears the field a little!

[sonar732]

CNN is often called the Clinton News Network:roll: . CNN holds no water for me...

Which was my point...here a liberal news network was being slammed by their own left wing following for creating a news story about the role of minorities in the election.

[Onkel Neal]

Fred Thompson is out

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/fred-thompson-quits-us-presidential-race/2008/01/23/1201024931759.html

Not much of a suprise, but it clears the field a little!

I'm bummed. At this point, I have no candidate I want to send my vote to.

At least the Democrats are showing some teeth! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD9F1t9GQzA)

[Konovalov]

What is it with Rudi Giuliani? :-? Is his grand strategy one is which he is trying to lull his opponents into a false sense of security before pouncing in the Florida primary on 29 January? If he wins it would be a master stroke but if he looses there to McCain or Romney then I reckon the mayor of the planet is sunk. :hmm:

[Skybird]

Republicans have the problem that their candidates are scattered in talents and reputation, they shed their chances onto many of them. the one scores with the religious, the other with the liberal marketeers, the third with something else, but none of them unites several of these "talents" with his name. the democrats have it much easier: there is a one boy and one a girl and a lot of no-chancers - and that's it: toss a coin, and you're done.

[Skybird]

Original thinking:

Clinton or Obama? Why Not Both?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-530207,00.html

[dean_acheson]

It's funny to see that CNN is getting a ton of flack for the recent article about how female minorities in South Carolina have a tuff decision to make for their canidate. Do they go for the first woman, or the first minority?

CNN Readers respond angrily to 'race or gender' story (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/emails.race.gender/index.html)

That is what I was trying to get at, the left in this country isn't concerned with 'ideas' as much as it is with 'identities.'

That is, unless it involves say, the first black Secretary of State, for the first black female Secretary of State, then they are "Uncle Toms." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Belafonte#_note-13)

Clinton and OBH ain't far apart. They both desire a single payer health care system, they both screech about the war in Iraq and how the surge hasn't worked, and support every entitlement program that comes down the road.

It comes down to who the most oppressed, so that the Democrats can eventually nominate the one that the core of the party deserves the nomination most based on how hard their gender/race/identity has had it.

[AVGWarhawk]

My deal is this, Hillary has no clue on the military, neither does Bill as evident with his 8 years and shutting down bases. Obama is lacking even more so. In today uneasy climate, we need a leader who understands the military and has been there, done that. The only choice I see is McCain. Most have written him off as old. What if we did the same with Reagan? Experience wise, he has more experience then Obama/Hillary put together. Just because you hung your hat in the white house does not mean you have experience. If that is the case, Monica Lewinsky could run the country. If Hillary is considering her experience from being a senator, then everyone is on equal ground as McCain, Clinton and Obama were/are all in the government body. Besides, Hillary spent most of her time in the white house attempting to salvage her marriage.

[sonar732]

...neither does Bill as evident with his 8 years and shutting down bases.

I do have to disagree with this statement even though it's somewhat accurate. The BRAC process started in 1988. There were two BRAC's prior to Clinton coming to office. Yes, he did have a ton of bases closed during his tenure. But, the cold war was over, the slow demise of our military started shortly after Desert Storm, and it was a time when servicemen and women could get out for refusing to take their PT exams (I witnessed this on my boat personally).

Did I like the thought of all of these bases being phased out...no. Was it inevitable? Yes.

[AVGWarhawk]

...neither does Bill as evident with his 8 years and shutting down bases.
I do have to disagree with this statement even though it's somewhat accurate. The BRAC process started in 1988. There were two BRAC's prior to Clinton coming to office. Yes, he did have a ton of bases closed during his tenure. But, the cold war was over, the slow demise of our military started shortly after Desert Storm, and it was a time when servicemen and women could get out for refusing to take their PT exams (I witnessed this on my boat personally).

Did I like the thought of all of these bases being phased out...no. Was it inevitable? Yes.
Shutting down the bases was only partial of my idea about Bill and the military. He was no better then GW Bush either. When called upon to consider something militarily, the both lack what John McCain has. That is, how the gears turn. McCain has beared witness to plenty of conflicts over the past 50 years. As much as the country needs a leader to get the country back on track, the leader also needs to watch the countries back because even before 9/11, others around the world are getting bolder and bolder. He needs to understand how it works and who to go to concerning foreign affairs. Obama certainly lacks this. Hillary is not far behind.

[Peto]

McCain has beared witness to plenty of conflicts over the past 50 years. As much as the country needs a leader to get the country back on track, the leader also needs to watch the countries back because even before 9/11, others around the world are getting bolder and bolder. He needs to understand how it works and who to go to concerning foreign affairs. Obama certainly lacks this. Hillary is not far behind.

Good Points. There has been a significant rebuilding of military's throughout the world in the last few years and that is important for our next administration to consider. And McCain could be very good in that aspect...

It'd be interesting to see what would happen if a Democrat and a Republican Candidate joined up to run as Pres/VP team :hmm:. That'd certainly shake the trees a bit. Might even get Candidates to start talking about How they would do something rather than What they will do. The current mud-slinging may be mildly amusing but it sure doesn't help analytically minded voters determine who they like.

It's going to be a longggggg year :shifty:.

[AVGWarhawk]

It's going to be a longggggg year

Grossly misunderstated here. It is going to be a llllllllloooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnggggggg year. :D

[Takeda Shingen]

A good discussion from a variety of people around the world. As far as I am concerned, this topic has earned its sticky for the course of the primary season. Will re-evaluate topic at that time later this spring. Continue on!

The Management

[August]

It'd be interesting to see what would happen if a Democrat and a Republican Candidate joined up to run as Pres/VP team :hmm:. That'd certainly shake the trees a bit. Might even get Candidates to start talking about How they would do something rather than What they will do.

That'd never happen by choice. A close example would be my state where the Lt Governor runs in a separate election. That often leads to the Gov. being from one party and his Lt Gov being from the other, but in practice the LT is kept out of the loop on all executive decisions so the position is pretty much meaningless.

[Peto]

It'd be interesting to see what would happen if a Democrat and a Republican Candidate joined up to run as Pres/VP team :hmm:. That'd certainly shake the trees a bit. Might even get Candidates to start talking about How they would do something rather than What they will do.

That'd never happen by choice. A close example would be my state where the Lt Governor runs in a separate election. That often leads to the Gov. being from one party and his Lt Gov being from the other, but in practice the LT is kept out of the loop on all executive decisions so the position is pretty much meaningless.

I have to agree with you and admit that even my thinking about it is a tad in the fantasy realm. Yet, if it was done (especially this year), I'd bet it would draw a lot of support. Especially from Independants who really want both sides to work together...

Cheers!

[AVGWarhawk]

Mean while back at the bat cave, I'm going to sit by and watch Bill bury his wifes chances at the nomination.

[Peto]

Mean while back at the bat cave, I'm going to sit by and watch Bill bury his wifes chances at the nomination.

WOW! You have a Bat Cave!?! :o

Seriously though folks, I believe AVGWarhawk is correct. All the negativity from this camp will be seen for what it is--double teaming. This will create an under-dog impression for Obama that will create sympathy and probably give him enough of an edge to win the day.

[AVGWarhawk]

While chilling in the bat cave again, I have read yet another article of many condeming Bill and is twist for twisting others words.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/01/24/2008-01-24_hillary_goes_negative-3.html

Once again, Bill is starting to believe his own made up stories and lies. Seems to be a pattern here:hmm:. Hillary needs to make him shut up if she proposes to get anywhere with a nomination.

[dean_acheson]

It'd be interesting to see what would happen if a Democrat and a Republican Candidate joined up to run as Pres/VP team :hmm:. That'd certainly shake the trees a bit. Might even get Candidates to start talking about How they would do something rather than What they will do.

That'd never happen by choice. A close example would be my state where the Lt Governor runs in a separate election. That often leads to the Gov. being from one party and his Lt Gov being from the other, but in practice the LT is kept out of the loop on all executive decisions so the position is pretty much meaningless.

I have to agree with you and admit that even my thinking about it is a tad in the fantasy realm. Yet, if it was done (especially this year), I'd bet it would draw a lot of support. Especially from Independants who really want both sides to work together...

Cheers!


We tried this once, see re: election of 1800 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_of_1800), didn't work so well. The system is set up for enough gridlock, don't need to add to it anymore with a bifrucated Dem/Rep. team.

It's supposed to be nasty, we are supposed to fight, there are supposed to be disagreements. That is how keep any one side from having too much power.

That's why I like gridlock and government shutdowns, it keeps busy-bodies from passing any NEW laws.

[dean_acheson]

I didn't watch the Republican debate last night, had guests at the house. That, and it would just be a bit sad with out The Fred there. O well.

Instead I bring you a photo from the New York Times. Proof, I say, that BHO is JCH!

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/01/24/us/25jackson_600.jpg

[GlobalExplorer]

At least the Democrats are showing some teeth! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD9F1t9GQzA)

Thanks for the link. Here in Germany it's often not easy to get US TV and it makes a big difference to see things first hand.

I must admit I also felt highly irritated by Clinton - she was like a .. mischievous hag. I can understand now why many people don't trust her.

As far as German politics is concerned I have become more of a moderate conservative. But if I lived in the US I would still be a Democrat sympathizer (like most Europeans). I must admit there are also Republican presidents which I can relate to (Eisenhower, Reagan). However here the democrats are perceived as the party of the East coast liberals, the intellectuals (this isn't a negative thing for us), the hippies from California, all the people we can relate to. Bill Clinton might have successfully run for president in any European country, he is still an icon for many people here, though not nearly as much as Kennedy. I am not saying all of this is well founded, and browsing through forum posts by US citizens has taught me a thing or two, but at the heart I still give the Democrats more credit.

Mabye I am also not the only one who thinks in these times a Democrat president could do a lot to normalize relations with the rest of the world. Supposed this is something you desire, of course.

[dean_acheson]

I could have, too a point, been sympathetic with the Democratic Party. The party of Truman, the party of Roosevelt, and the party of Kennedy. I can not, and will not, sypathtize with the Post-McGovern Democratic Party.

I do like Joe Liberman.

I don't know that I would consider the Democratic Party the Party of 'intellecutals.' I mean, most state funded professors tilt that way, but that is based on their own pocketbooks, and the knowledge that they, as well as primary teacher's unions, are a core constituency. That's simply pocketbook politics, it isn't based on anything even remotely representing honest ideology. I mean, for God's sake, it isn't like any Civil Rights bills got passed based on broad based support of the Democratic Party or anything, and if it's based on some type of fuzzy New Deal Alphabet soup programs, that's a bit too Keyesian to hold much water.

The fact is is that many of us conservatives, not the paleo-cons, are very concerned about maintaining the trans-atlantic alliance. To sunder the ties that bind across the pond with the other Western Democracies is to make the world a great deal more unstable and dangerous.

It is possible to be a international conservative. Now, I'm not a big fan of Ike, for many of my own reasons, but I do appreciate the fact that he legitimzied NATO. I'm a huge fan of Truman (and Acheson of course) for creating NATO along with our friends in the ECSC. While the Cold War is over, these alliances HAVE NOT lost their importance. I would have fought Truman all day long on some of "Fair Deal" programs, I hope that I would have been more Arthur Vandenburg and less Robert Taft in supporting that President in international affairs.

I'm not European, in fact, the only place I've ever been in Europe is the UK, but I can't believe that folks across the pond find themselves more comfortable with the idea of President Clinton than they do President McCain or Romney.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i watched the Boca Raton Florida debate.. funny how they censored Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee

Romney: 21 minutes, 11 seconds (12 answers and asked 1 question)
McCain: 16 minutes even (12 answers and asked 1 question)
Giuliani: 13 minutes and 50 seconds (10 answers and asked 1 question)
Huckabee: 12 minutes and 11 seconds (8 answers and asked 1 question)
Paul: 6 minutes and 31 seconds (5 answers and asked 1 question)
:roll:

ere are some screen shots of McCain's folly in response to being asked a question he's out of touch with from Dr. Paul..

First the joy of being asked a question by the anti-war long shot:
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/bill_bruford/mccainsmirk.jpg?t=1201242612
Now reality sets in as he is set to respond on the financial enslavement related question...

Thinking hard
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/bill_bruford/noanswer_mccain.jpg?t=1201242871
"We'll have to do some damage control on this one later" http://www.stormfront.org/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/bill_bruford/mccainslop3.jpg?t=1201242964
:rotfl::rotfl:

[GlobalExplorer]

I'm not European, in fact, the only place I've ever been in Europe is the UK, but I can't believe that folks across the pond find themselves more comfortable with the idea of President Clinton than they do President McCain or Romney.

Well I am also not 100% sure if I can said that. As far as my memory reaches most were happy with Reagan and Bush senior. It's just that the last 8 years, as far as seen from this side, was a disaster for the US, politically, economically, morally, you name it. In particular we just cannot understand the reelection of this .. muppet - though I give him some credit for his second term - firing Cheney and Rumsfeld and thereby half admitting that their policy was wrong, he at least convinced me that neither he nor his advisors are insane.

[dean_acheson]

Actually, Reagan was HUGELY unpopular in Europe.

Go back and look Der Spegiel or such for the protest over the IRBM deployments in the early 80s, that and the freeze movement.

I think much of the view of Reagan has changed over time.

As for Bush 41, hell, it's hard not to not like him. He was/is a war hero and, I think, a genuinely nice fellow.

Bush 43 is hardly disliked for many reasons. I personally am not a big fan of certain decisions, mainly his inability to resist government largess, but his middle eastern policies that have proved so unpopular in Europe, are not as unpopular here.

There is still a large chunk of folks who remember that certain things happened on 9/11 and it was hoped/believed that the destruction of Al Queada and the creation of function republican govenment in that part of the world (besides Isreal) might create a degree of stability that would preclude the spread of terror engendered by the the fundamentalist governments.

Now you can disagree with that, but that was the basis of US policy in the region.

If Iraq ends as a stable, moderate, republican government, it was worth the blood, treasure, and time. It will mean that SOMETHING positive came out of 9/11.

[GlobalExplorer]

There is still a large chunk of folks who remember that certain things happened on 9/11 and it was hoped/believed that the destruction of Al Queada and the creation of function republican govenment in that part of the world (besides Isreal) might create a degree of stability that would preclude the spread of terror engendered by the the fundamentalist governments.

Now you can disagree with that, but that was the basis of US policy in the region.

If Iraq ends as a stable, moderate, republican government, it was worth the blood, treasure, and time. It will mean that SOMETHING positive came out of 9/11.

These could have been exactly my words .. in 2003.

I had a lot of arguments with other germans at the time, when I took the position that our politicians are all opportunists and they have no ****ing clue whats going on in the world.

Today I find it, with respect, unbelieveable that people still believe in it.

[Monica Lewinsky]

Well, 5 pages later. ALL of you got it all wrong.

Our next president will be end up being ... a Hillbilly!

Look:
http://learnabit.homeserver.com/lab/hillbilly.jpg

See what I mean?

[TteFAboB]

I'm not European, in fact, the only place I've ever been in Europe is the UK, but I can't believe that folks across the pond find themselves more comfortable with the idea of President Clinton than they do President McCain or Romney.

Here's the explanation: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/danielhannan/jan08/despotisminparliament.htm

[sonar732]

Another blow from Kerry...

WASHINGTON (CNN) — John Kerry, the Democratic Party's 2004 nominee for president, took aim at Bill Clinton Friday, telling the National Journal (http://nationaljournal.com/onair/transcripts/080125_kerry_john.htm) the former president does "not have a license to abuse the truth."
The Massachusetts senator, who endorsed Barack Obama's (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/barack.obama.html) White House bid earlier this month (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/kerry.obama/index.html?iref=newssearch), said Clinton's criticisms of the Illinois senator have been "over the top," and suggested the former president is getting "frantic."
Targeting Clinton's recent spate of attacks on Obama, Kerry said, "I think you had an abuse of the truth, is what happened. …I mean, being an ex-president does not give you license to abuse the truth, and I think that over the last days it's been over the top.
"I think it's very unfortunate, but I think the voters can see through that," Kerry added. "When somebody's coming on strong and they are growing, people get a little frantic, and I think people have seen this sort of franticness in the air, if you will."
The former president has faced criticism for aggressively interjecting himself into the race between his wife and Obama of late. On Monday, Obama said he feels as if he is running against both Clintons, a charge the New York senator’s campaign said was borne out of frustration. The former president himself later dismissed Obama's comments, saying “I thought he was running against me.”
Campaigning in South Carolina Friday, Obama said the Clinton campaign has stepped up its attacks since his Iowa win, and joked that it's good practice for him, so "when I take on those Republicans I'll be accustomed to it."
Kerry formally endorsed Obama on January 10, saying then that Obama "isn't just going to break the mold….Together, we are going to shatter it into a million pieces."
The endorsement was seen as a blow to both John Edwards — Kerry's running mate in 2004 — and both Hillary and Bill Clinton, who had campaigned on behalf of Kerry's presidential bid.
– CNN Ticker Pro

[AdlerGrosmann]

Vote John McCain! I hope he wins..

" Adolf Hitler orders the Kriegsmarine to keep an eye out for Hillary Clinton and Barack O'bama...while on their trips to other campaign spots."

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee287/AdlerGrosmann/800px-Marine_Hitler-1.jpg

"U-boat captain is trying to see where Clinton is, to make sure he can activate the 'snuke'!"

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee287/AdlerGrosmann/kapitan.jpg

:rotfl:

[sonar732]

An interesting editorial (http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/25/room-for-al-gore-in-the-race/) on CNN about Al Gore.

[dean_acheson]

There is still a large chunk of folks who remember that certain things happened on 9/11 and it was hoped/believed that the destruction of Al Queada and the creation of function republican govenment in that part of the world (besides Isreal) might create a degree of stability that would preclude the spread of terror engendered by the the fundamentalist governments.

Now you can disagree with that, but that was the basis of US policy in the region.

If Iraq ends as a stable, moderate, republican government, it was worth the blood, treasure, and time. It will mean that SOMETHING positive came out of 9/11.

These could have been exactly my words .. in 2003.

I had a lot of arguments with other germans at the time, when I took the position that our politicians are all opportunists and they have no ****ing clue whats going on in the world.

Today I find it, with respect, unbelieveable that people still believe in it.

I consider myself pretty jaundiced, but I guess I still believe it, since a stable democratic middle east would be a good thing for my country.

[Brag]

Graffity:


Balz for prez!

[geetrue]

South Carolina is not going to represent a whole country now is it?

Obama won by a large margin, because the voters were tired of Billary running a smear campaign ... the news said that Edwards got the white male vote, Hillary got the white female vote and Obama got the ... well you know vote.

I think Mccain can take it all against any Democrat, but Obama is getting stronger.

You don't need a poll to figure that out.

[AVGWarhawk]

As predicted by me.....Bill has sunk Hillary's chance for the nomination. Sorry Bill, the the US is looking for a president, not a dynamic duo like Batman and Robin with a belt full of tricks to get what they want.

[Konovalov]

Ted Kennedy endorses Obama today. Is this the kiss of death? :hmm:

[Tchocky]

Ted Kennedy endorses Obama today. Is this the kiss of death? :hmm:
I thought Kerry's endorsement was death, but working off of his 2004 campaign, Kerry has a great database/email setup just waiting to be used.
Ted Kennedy's endorsement was very much up in the air, I'm glad he's not on Hillary's side.

[AVGWarhawk]

Yes, Kennedy's endorsement is the kiss of death for Hillary. Also, perhaps the feelings towards for the Clintons is Washington is being being shown here in his endorsement. At any rate, Obama's buddy Rezno has been picked up by the FBI. I wonder what the real ties are here with this guy. He seems very shady. I'm still leaning towards McCain.

[sonar732]

Ok...for those arm-chair democratic strategist here...where do you think the Clinton campaign will go from here? As evident from the jocking of the Clintons to keep Kennedy neutral, there was an obvious concern on their part and makes you think that from the start Kennedy wasn't going to support Hillary.

With most of the Kennedy clan, Kerry, and other notables, will Obama suffer from his 'connection' with the slum lord Ruzo?:hmm::hmm:

He won the Illinois Senate hands down when his rival Republican canidate had to drop out due to an affair scandal.

[geetrue]

Yes, Kennedy's endorsement is the kiss of death for Hillary. Also, perhaps the feelings towards for the Clintons is Washington is being being shown here in his endorsement. At any rate, Obama's buddy Rezno has been picked up by the FBI. I wonder what the real ties are here with this guy. He seems very shady. I'm still leaning towards McCain.

The people on the inside know more than we do, but they would get sued if they told us. The Kennedy's are definetly on the inside of knowing what's going on.

Didn't you see the picture on CNN yet with both Clinton's and Rezno together.

I know, I know campaign contributions alow you to have a picture taken with the biggies, but come on how can you forget your guilty too.

When Edwards leaves the race it will be down to just black and white. It's black and white, white right now ... lol

[AVGWarhawk]

I think the Clintons are done. Fine by me. I do not care for them. To much shady things in the past. Bill disgraced the office. It has been dirty tactics by Bill and this old school muck racking needs to go away. Obama might have a smudge with the new Rezno issue. I do not believe it will tarnish him. Currently, he is very much a front runner and will remain so. His biggest problem will be lack of experience.....then again, look at GW Bush. Not much going on there when he was elected. McCain will have his issues of age and possibly his way of leaning this way then leaning another way.

Anyway, Kennedy cleared the air in his endorsement for Obama. He point blank said Obama was against the war. You know what Bill said about it already. Therefore, Kennedy in a round about way of say Bill is twisting the truth again to his benefit.

[AVGWarhawk]

When Edwards leaves the race it will be down to just black and white. It's black and white, white right now ... lol

Edwards never had a chance. It is not about black and white at the moment. It seems most of the US has looked past Obama's color and listen to just a man. Obama is very intelligent and well versed. He only lacks a bit of experience. He is on a roll and will continue to do so if he keeps his cool and responds to the best of his ability.

[Jimbuna]

I think the Clintons are done.

Not according to the poll at the top of the page :lol:

[AVGWarhawk]

I think the Clintons are done.
Not according to the poll at the top of the page :lol:

Old poll bro. :up: Closed many moons ago. Useless info at the moment.

[Jimbuna]

I think the Clintons are done.
Not according to the poll at the top of the page :lol:

Old poll bro. :up: Closed many moons ago. Useless info at the moment.

That's what I meant......aint nobody gonna catch her :p

[AVGWarhawk]

I think the Clintons are done.
Not according to the poll at the top of the page :lol:

Old poll bro. :up: Closed many moons ago. Useless info at the moment.

That's what I meant......aint nobody gonna catch her :p

Misconstrued your post:o . Ain't no one going to catch her as she is on her way back to NY. Think she is cold to Bill before this? She will be like the North Pole after this. Unless Al Gore is involved were he knows without any reasonable hard data that the North Pole will be in the 70 degree range within 15 years. So, it does not look so bad for Bill.:rotfl:

[AVGWarhawk]

And here is Obamas downfall and possible end of his race to the white house:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wireStory?id=4171763


Now, back to McCain......we need a warhorse in the white house. All this talk of experience....I do not think Hillary and Obama combined can compair. Even if Bill is there with Hillary. But Bill got a different type of experience in the white house. It was not a breach of security but a breach of his britches. :roll:

[Jimbuna]

I think the Clintons are done.
Not according to the poll at the top of the page :lol:

Old poll bro. :up: Closed many moons ago. Useless info at the moment.

That's what I meant......aint nobody gonna catch her :p

Misconstrued your post:o . Ain't no one going to catch her as she is on her way back to NY. Think she is cold to Bill before this? She will be like the North Pole after this. Unless Al Gore is involved were he knows without any reasonable hard data that the North Pole will be in the 70 degree range within 15 years. So, it does not look so bad for Bill.:rotfl:

No prob matey :up:

IMO they deserve each other ;)

[sonar732]

And here is Obamas downfall and possible end of his race to the white house:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wireStory?id=4171763


It keeps getting deeper and deeper. I don't have cable, but what about the earlier post of the Clinton's with the same scuzball? According to multiple news reports, he's given hansomely to numerous Democratic races.

[AVGWarhawk]

And here is Obamas downfall and possible end of his race to the white house:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wireStory?id=4171763


It keeps getting deeper and deeper. I don't have cable, but what about the earlier post of the Clinton's with the same scuzball? According to multiple news reports, he's given hansomely to numerous Democratic races.

Yes, I saw a candid shot with the Clintons. He is standing between them like he was his son. Now, you do not get to do that unless you donated some serious cash. This will get ugly also.

Now back to McCain. Notice a trend here? :D

[geetrue]

And here is Obamas downfall and possible end of his race to the white house:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wireStory?id=4171763



Obama is really good at side stepping things like this ... I don't think it will be the end of him. ABC newsman George Stephanopoutos interviewed Obama after his win in South Carolina sunday morning. He also brought up the fact about the investment, oh I'm sorry, the contributions to Obama from Rezko could be as high as 3 or 4 times what has been reported.

Obama said, "Well, if we find any more funds that have been contributed to my campaign from Mr Rezko we will make every effort to return them"

He of course means the present campaign :yep:

edit: I wrote that before this just happened: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4204413&page=1
"Rezko ordered to jail"

[August]

ABC newsman George Stephanopoutos

:D

I remember him as senior political adviser and White House Communications Director for Clinton.

[Tchocky]

ABC newsman George Stephanopoutos
:D

I remember him as senior political adviser and White House Communications Director for Clinton.
Yup yup. If you're in the mood for a very long read, check out The Clinton Wars. He's quite a good writer

[dean_acheson]

Is it possible to redo the poll? now that half these folks are gone?

[sonar732]

A HUGE endorsement (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080129/ap_on_el_pr/obama_sebelius)for Obama being played down by Hillary and company.

[August]

Is it possible to redo the poll? now that half these folks are gone?

Just start a new thread and ask Neal to sticky it and unsticky this one...

[geetrue]

Perhaps Super tuesday would be a good change over day ...

MCCain won Florida today ... yea!

He would've made a great Admiral too. I could see him on the bridge of a big super carrier.

[Onkel Neal]

Is it possible to redo the poll? now that half these folks are gone?

Nah, the fun's not over yet. One thing I just noticed, Skybird never registered a vote :( This has to be the only topic he has not predicted something on. :) Dang, I should have made him get off the fence.

[bookworm_020]

Another one bites the dust!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/guiliani-who-mccain-claims-florida/2008/01/30/1201369197500.html

So Rudy is gone, that makes McCain the odds on favourate to win. Now its left to the Democrates to figure out who they want. In a week the answer may be revealed!

Then we all can have a break for 6 months!;)

[Skybird]

Is it possible to redo the poll? now that half these folks are gone?

Nah, the fun's not over yet. One thing I just noticed, Skybird never registered a vote :( This has to be the only topic he has not predicted something on. :) Dang, I should have made him get off the fence.
:D

I didn't forget it, but back then the race was too close, and for the Democrats still is, and even the Republicans can still create some suprises, although chances seem to shift in favour of McCain. I expected several persons with chances amongst Republicans, and you still have three major runners right now, and only Clinton and Obama for the Democrats from the very beginning. McCain I did not have that high on my list, and no way you can tell right now who of C. and O. makes it for Democrats. And eventually McCain versus Clinton or Obama in the finals - another situation were I would not dare any predictions.

So technically, this time it is a very close race indeed. I think that no matter who finally makes it - his policies probably will end up to be as close to those of his rivals as well. I do not expect too much change indeed - the factual problems will be the same - no matter who sits in the WH. At least this can be said about foreign policies.

[Konovalov]

What is it with Rudi Giuliani? :-? Is his grand strategy one is which he is trying to lull his opponents into a false sense of security before pouncing in the Florida primary on 29 January? If he wins it would be a master stroke but if he looses there to McCain or Romney then I reckon the mayor of the planet is sunk. :hmm:

And it appears now that Giuliani, America's Mayor, is indeed sunk having finished a distant 3rd in the Florida primary far behind McCain and Romney. :lost:

Giuliani and his chief campaign strategist should be shot, figuratively speaking that is . :roll:

[Skybird]

A reminder for people's convenience:

http://www.spiegel.de/flash/0,5532,17013,00.html (http://www.spiegel.de/flash/0,5532,17013,00.html)

Click it, it is interactive.

[Skybird]

Edward's out as well.

He never was in anyway.

[CCIP]

I'm still betting on Hillary vs. McCain come election time, although I'm a bit less sure of Hillary now - Obama's definitely been on the offensive in the last few days.
And I suspect McCain is the more likely of those to actually win.

[AVGWarhawk]

We have to see what super Tuesday brings for Hillary and Obama. I believe it will be a McCain and Hillary race eventually. When it comes to the experience Hillary keeps touting, McCain certainly has more than what Hillary has. I do not care she was in the White House for 8 years, so were the cooks and cleaners but they have no more experience then Hillary does. Sure, she is a Senator for NY and has done much of nothing there either. We need a leader who is in touch not only with America and what she needs to get back on track but one that also understands the military. Hillary has one covered, McCain can cover both.

[CCIP]

I have to admit - I don't really agree politically with McCain, but I do have a lot of respect for him as a person. Ironically enough, it's the complete opposite of that with Hillary for me :lol:

Honestly, if I were American, I'd probably not vote at all given that kind of choice :dead:

[AVGWarhawk]

I have to admit - I don't really agree politically with McCain, but I do have a lot of respect for him as a person. Ironically enough, it's the complete opposite of that with Hillary for me :lol:

Honestly, if I were American, I'd probably not vote at all given that kind of choice :dead:
True, but it is another 'lesser of two evils' election again. Hillary and Bill, IMHO, are two shady characters and running the country is not their first wish. It is the thrill of being in the limelight and the chase to the White House. "Look at us, we are just so loved." It is all about them, not what they can do. What was it? "Eight more great, vote Hillary...." Rah, rah, sis-boom-bah. Meaning she is loving the attention and thinking another 8 years of Clinton DYNASTY....that is what I see when Bill is peddling his half truths and Hillary is attempting to well-up some tears....

Now, if Bill could do all the things he did with the women hanging around the White House while President, just think what he can do with all the new found idle time in the White House. He will really be left to his own devices.

[Skybird]

Honestly, if I were American, I'd probably not vote at all given that kind of choice :dead:
Same here. None of all the candidates in the poll list deseves my trust. The mere fact that they are willing to go into that system - already speaks against them. that is not only true for american politics, but Western politics in general. If a system corrupts, you don't become any more noble by submitting to it in order to acchieve power.

And today's politics illustrate that.

[geetrue]

I have to admit - I don't really agree politically with McCain, but I do have a lot of respect for him as a person. Ironically enough, it's the complete opposite of that with Hillary for me :lol:

Honestly, if I were American, I'd probably not vote at all given that kind of choice :dead:

Two hundred and forty some odd votes in Florida in the 2000 election was all it took to win the required number of electorial college votes to become the President of the United States.

One vote might not count, but 240 some odd votes would have ...

It has been prophesied that the next President of the United States would be dark skinned, but the prophet was from India and I didn't trust him then.

Now I'm starting to wonder ... the prophecy was given a few months before the Presidential election in 2000.

I hate to keep bringing up the black and white problem, but that is what it is ...

I was born in Texas, but i'm not prejudice. I lived in Watts in LA right after the riots there in 1992 till 1996.

It took me three months to figure out that I was the only white guy within miles of me.

I didn't worry though, I worked days and slept good all night.

I love the black people, but my fellow Americans are not the same.

Seantor John McCain is a straight shooter ... I like his answers, but a group of Vietnam veterans have now calimed that John McCain was a song bird in prison in Vietnam.

This race is going to get ugly ...

[Konovalov]

Seantor John McCain is a straight shooter ... I like his answers, but a group of Vietnam veterans have now calimed that John McCain was a song bird in prison in Vietnam.

This race is going to get ugly ...

You mean that he is being swiftboated by a small group of Viet vets. I'm willing to bet that despite their attempts to dish the dirt on McCain 99.9% of American voters out there would find the allegation that he "sung like a bird in prison in Vietnam" as a joke. I mean the guy was shot down, captured, imprisoned and tortured by the Vietnamese. I couldn't care less if he "sung like a bird". I bet that this small group of vets would sing like birds too if they had been placed in the same position as McCain was. Just more typical dirty politics from the far right of the Republican party and it's proxies.

[M. Sarsfield]

Just more typical dirty politics from the far right of the Republican party and it's proxies.

A lot of Viet Nam vets are registered Democrats. Do we know the source of this allegation? Also, McCain didn't pull any punches with his robocalls in FL before the primary. He did his best to beat up on Romney and a lot of it wasn't true. This is election year politics and regardless of party affiliation it's going to be ugly.

[Konovalov]

Just more typical dirty politics from the far right of the Republican party and it's proxies.

A lot of Viet Nam vets are registered Democrats. Do we know the source of this allegation? Also, McCain didn't pull any punches with his robocalls in FL before the primary. He did his best to beat up on Romney and a lot of it wasn't true. This is election year politics and regardless of party affiliation it's going to be ugly.

I don't know what the souce of the allegation is. Been trying to find something on it. The first I heard of this was that written by geetrue ealier. I'm just assuming that it is coming from Romney supporters perhaps. The Dems are too busy attacking each other (Clinton and Obama), while the Repubs have been doing the same to each other. Ugly is definately the word on both sides. :down:

[AVGWarhawk]

Just more typical dirty politics from the far right of the Republican party and it's proxies.
A lot of Viet Nam vets are registered Democrats. Do we know the source of this allegation? Also, McCain didn't pull any punches with his robocalls in FL before the primary. He did his best to beat up on Romney and a lot of it wasn't true. This is election year politics and regardless of party affiliation it's going to be ugly.
I don't know what the souce of the allegation is. Been trying to find something on it. The first I heard of this was that written by geetrue ealier. I'm just assuming that it is coming from Romney supporters perhaps. The Dems are too busy attacking each other (Clinton and Obama), while the Repubs have been doing the same to each other. Ugly is definately the word on both sides. :down:

I do not see another swiftboat deal here. As many times as McCain threw his ring in the hat, this never came up before.

[August]

I do not see another swiftboat deal here. As many times as McCain threw his ring in the hat, this never came up before.

Don't call it swiftboat deal. The swiftboaters were speaking the truth. This crap being slung at McCain is not. Heck they still use his POW experiences as an example to emulate in SERE school.

[Konovalov]

I do not see another swiftboat deal here. As many times as McCain threw his ring in the hat, this never came up before.
Some of the same guys from the Swiftboat group that attacked Kerry are involved in a relatively new 527 advocacy group. Check out this article from last year. (http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/mccain-draws-heat-from-vet-group-club-for-growth-2007-03-13.html)
There is this highly caustic group Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain. (http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/) A real charming bunch. :down:

Edit: This article halfway down (http://news.mywebpal.com/news_tool_v2.cfm?show=localnews&pnpID=724&NewsID=872347&CategoryID=16783&on=1)confirms that the above group is trying to Swiftboat McCain.

2nd Edit: Poorly worded hence changed "Many of the same guys..." to "Some of the same guys..." :oops:

[AVGWarhawk]

From the articles in Konovalov post:

Yes, Senator McCain supported amnesty for illegal immigrants. In 2006 and 2007, McCain joined with Ted Kennedy in supporting Senate bills that would give amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. He also denounced and voted against an amendment designed to stop illegal immigrants from receiving social security benefits through identity fraud. McCain co-sponsored the Dream Act, which provided in-state tuition rates for illegal immigrants. Later he said he would have voted against his own legislation – but in fact he was absent when the vote was taken.
Yes, McCain is being swift-boated. There really is a group called Vietnam Veterans against John McCain. They claim that Senator McCain committed treason and does not deserve his medals because he gave the enemy information while he was being tortured as a POW. According to McCain’s own account, he did give the enemy information – some true and some false. For example, when asked to name the members of his squadron, he listed the names of the Green Bay Packers offensive line. McCain is a war hero as far as I am concerned, but it is true that this group exists and that they insist otherwise.

What is interesting here is Ted Kennedy is mentioned and who did he just show his support too? Obama. So we are damned if we do and damned if we don't when making a choice. Seems a hardcore Dem like Kennedy was also in agreement with McCain. Very strange indeed.


The Swiftboaters, this should get interesting but I do not believe it will have any effect on the outcome for McCain. Funny he used the GBP offensive line:rotfl:But, they say McCain said some true and some false. What was the true statements? Could be anything really.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

mccain is a moron, whos worse then bush.. he was one of a few who spearheaded the failed illegal immigrant amnesty bill... hes a traitor and should be jailed for life :nope: "100 more years in Iraq" he says.. over my dead body... he wants to bomb Iran more then bush.. clinton is a communist.. obama will do to america with what mugabe did to zimbabwe, mccain is a more evil bush, romney wont win, huckabee has no chance... in simple terms.. U.S.A is FUBAR :shifty::-?

[August]

I do not see another swiftboat deal here. As many times as McCain threw his ring in the hat, this never came up before. Many of the same guys from the Swiftboat group that attacked Kerry are involved in a relatively new 527 advocacy group. Check out this article from last year. (http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/mccain-draws-heat-from-vet-group-club-for-growth-2007-03-13.html)

According to your own article it isn't "many" of the same guys, it's "two" and they are the same guys who have dogged McCain for years. No real need to exaggerate is there?

[August]

mccain is a moron, whos worse then bush.. he was one of a few who spearheaded the failed illegal immigrant amnesty bill... hes a traitor and should be jailed for life :nope: "100 more years in Iraq" he says.. over my dead body... he wants to bomb Iran more then bush.. clinton is a communist.. obama will do to america with what mugabe did to zimbabwe, mccain is a more evil bush, romney wont win, huckabee has no chance... in simple terms.. U.S.A is FUBAR :shifty::-?

:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::r oll:

[Iceman]

I reckon (and voted) for Hilary Clinton as the likely winner. She's probably not a great choice for president, but I suspect the backlash from getting fingers in too many military pies around the world might swing it for her, even the Bush administration is currently distancing itself from anti-Iranian sabre-rattling at the moment. There is also the female vote, that's something which worked for Margaret Thatcher in the UK when she was voted in to be the first female PM, and has also worked in many other countries too, with many of those women voters not really interested in policies as such, but simply going for 'girl power'.

:D Chock

There will never be a woman American president...period.
Obama will not win either I'm sorry to say because he is black.

....so the democratic party is screwed even before it has a chance.

....it will be a Republican...who, I can not say,but as time passes and World events shape things we will see.

Rudy I'm sorry to see is riding the coat tails of a tragic event "but he does have that Bush Hillbilliness about him :)"...he has no place in the arena.

Mike,Mitt,Fred, or the man with the most XP is McCain but is at the rear atm but we'll see how things unfold this year.

I count on mans prejudice in my comments about Hillary and Obama...man is too prejudiced.

Can I quote myself...?

One of the only 5 to vote McCain....:) :up:

elite_hunter_sh3...your rants are a trip...you strike me as a wild teenager whose been let of the leash...does your mommy know you are using the computer?

[AVGWarhawk]

mccain is a moron, whos worse then bush.. he was one of a few who spearheaded the failed illegal immigrant amnesty bill... hes a traitor and should be jailed for life :nope: "100 more years in Iraq" he says.. over my dead body... he wants to bomb Iran more then bush.. clinton is a communist.. obama will do to america with what mugabe did to zimbabwe, mccain is a more evil bush, romney wont win, huckabee has no chance... in simple terms.. U.S.A is FUBAR :shifty::-?


Well....then to whom does Elite_hunter_SH3 vote for? Sit on your thumbs perhaps or do you look for the best in each candidate and start the elimination process based on what you do not care for about them? Perhaps just sit and tell everyone what is wrong with the world and it's leaders and do nothing about it. :hmm: No voting?

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i would vote for ron paul.... hes the only one who actually sees the inevitable economic crash that could tear apart the USA, he sees the illegal immigration problem and foreign policy problems...

his campaign management are mentally incapable of spreading the message:damn::damn:, if he went strictly to the illegal immigration and the war issue, he would have won along time ago...

for example .. the latest boca raton florida debate... if he asked McCain " Senator McCain, did you or did you not spearhead the Amnesty for illegal immigrants bill in congress last year" if he said that McCain would have lost BIGTIME... instead R.P is concentrating on monetry reform and the currency.. small potatoes compared to the immigration and iraq issues...:cry::damn::damn: juiliani dropped out, thompson and hunter are gone.. Clinton is a communist, and Obama will turn this country into zimbabwe, with his spending and his pro war ideals..

[Konovalov]

mccain is a moron, whos worse then bush.. he was one of a few who spearheaded the failed illegal immigrant amnesty bill... hes a traitor and should be jailed for life :nope: "100 more years in Iraq" he says.. over my dead body... he wants to bomb Iran more then bush.. clinton is a communist.. obama will do to america with what mugabe did to zimbabwe, mccain is a more evil bush, romney wont win, huckabee has no chance... in simple terms.. U.S.A is FUBAR :shifty::-?

Can you make a single post without throwing out names such a "moron McCain" and "evil Bush"? :roll: Better yet don't post at all and save your fingers.

[Konovalov]

I do not see another swiftboat deal here. As many times as McCain threw his ring in the hat, this never came up before. Many of the same guys from the Swiftboat group that attacked Kerry are involved in a relatively new 527 advocacy group. Check out this article from last year. (http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/mccain-draws-heat-from-vet-group-club-for-growth-2007-03-13.html)

According to your own article it isn't "many" of the same guys, it's "two" and they are the same guys who have dogged McCain for years. No real need to exaggerate is there?

Sorry, poorly worded on my part in a rush to get out the door and pickup wife from train station. Some of the same guys....

[elite_hunter_sh3]

debate again tonight at 8pm

" His main issue is hard currency and monetary reform.

If he would have based his platform on the War in Iraq and Illegal Immigration, he would have already won by a landslide.

He's worried about the money, when the reality is - if we don't worry about gaining control of this country's borders first, there won't be a country left to spend this new hard currency in!"



:-? sad but true...

[AVGWarhawk]

i would vote for ron paul.... hes the only one who actually sees the inevitable economic crash that could tear apart the USA, he sees the illegal immigration problem and foreign policy problems...
I think the others see this as well concerning the economy. They are not that blind. Immigration is still a touchy subject. Damned if they do and damn if they don't. Paul seems to be the only one who has a backbone for it.

his campaign management are mentally incapable of spreading the message:damn::damn:, if he went strictly to the illegal immigration and the war issue, he would have won along time ago...
I agree on this point. Such a lack luster campaign really. Then again, it is all what the media wants you to see. They just about written off Republicans because GW was been in for 8 years and well, it is time for a Dem. The media has a long arm in swaying the general public. If he got more camera play he would be more in the forefront.



For example .. the latest boca raton florida debate... if he asked McCain " Senator McCain, did you or did you not spearhead the Amnesty for illegal immigrants bill in congress last year" if he said that McCain would have lost BIGTIME... instead R.P is concentrating on monetry reform and the currency.. small potatoes compared to the immigration and iraq issues...:cry::damn::damn: juiliani dropped out, thompson and hunter are gone.. Clinton is a communist, and Obama will turn this country into zimbabwe, with his spending and his pro war ideals..
I'm guessing Florida has quite a large percentage of illegals and well, perhaps he would not make it out of the state if that question was asked.....again, still a very touch subject concering illegal immigrants. I have not looked into McCain amnesty deal but did it say amnesty for those here already? Get educated and become a citizen but at the same time, close the boarders to any more? What have you read about the Amnesty for Illegals bill? I know very little about it.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

here is the List of all the senators in congress who voted for the Amnesty bill

the amnesty bill was a bill that was supposed to give automatic citizenship to over 12 million illegal immigrants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007

the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, or, in its full name, the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S.1348:)) was a bill discussed in the 110th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress) United States Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress) that would have provided legal status and a path to legal citizenship for the approximately 12 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States). The bill was portrayed as a compromise between legalization of illegal immigrants and increased border enforcement: it included funding for 300 miles of vehicle barriers, 105 camera and radar towers, and 20,000 more Border Patrol agents, while simultaneously restructuring visa criterion around high skill workers. The bill also received heated criticism from both sides of the immigration debate. The bill was introduced in the United States Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) on May 9, 2007, but was never voted on, though a series of votes on amendments and cloture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloture) took place. The last vote on cloture, on June 7, 2007, 11:59 AM, failed 34-61 effectively ending the bill's chances. A related bill S. 1639, on June 28, 2007, 11:04 AM, also failed 46-53.
the bill was a compromise based largely on three previous failed immigration bills:
the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_America_and_Orderly_Immigration_Act_%28S._1 033%29), a bill proposed in May 2005 by Senators Ted Kennedy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy) and John McCain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain), sometimes referred to as the "McCain-Kennedy or McKennedy Bill"
the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comprehensive_Enforcement_and_Immi gration_Reform_Act_of_2005&action=edit) (S. 1438), a bill proposed in July 2005 by Senators John Cornyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cornyn) and Jon Kyl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Kyl), sometimes referred to as the "Cornyn-Kyl Bill"
the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2006) (S. 2611), sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlen_Specter), which was passed in the Senate in May 2006 but never passed in the House

The attempt to pass an Amnesty Bill for 20 million illegal aliens was such an incredible act of treason that we need to remember who voted for this abomination and remove each and every one of them from office. From this point onward, the 46 Senators who voted to destroy America as we know it and who attempted to turn it into a Third World cesspool, will be known as “The Amnesty Traitors.”

http://us.altermedia.info//images/lott2.jpg
Senator Trent Lott --one of 46 Amnesty Traitors who needs to go

A massive grass roots campaign organized by patriots on the Internet and talk radio hosts inspired millions of Americans to lobby the Senate incessantly for over a month to kill the Amnesty Bill. These Senators knew exactly what their constituents wanted. There is no excuse. Every single one of these Senators deliberately ignored the will of the people and voted to betray America.

It is now our moral obligation to vote every one of these traitors out of office. Every time there is a primary or election from now until the purge is complete, we need to e-mail this list of “Amnesty Traitors” to all our friends and encourage them to forward the list to their friends.

Many of these Senators have grown old and arrogant. They have nothing but disrespect for ordinary Americans and they have committed the ultimate offense of supporting an amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens. They tried to destroy our home, and now we have a moral obligation to end their political careers.

The Amnesty Traitors

The following Senators voted “yes” on an amnesty for 20 million illegals.

1. Akaka (D-HI), Yea
2. Bennett (R-UT), Yea
3. Biden (D-DE), Yea
4. Boxer (D-CA), Yea
5. Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
6. Cardin (D-MD), Yea
7. Carper (D-DE), Yea
8. Casey (D-PA), Yea
9. Clinton (D-NY), Yea
10. Conrad (D-ND), Yea
11. Craig (R-ID), Yea
12. Dodd (D-CT), Yea
13. Durbin (D-IL), Yea
14. Feingold (D-WI), Yea
15. Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
16. Graham (R-SC), Yea
17. Gregg (R-NH), Yea
18. Hagel (R-NE), Yea
19. Inouye (D-HI), Yea
20. Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
21. Kerry (D-MA), Yea
22. Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
23. Kohl (D-WI), Yea
24. Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
25. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
26. Leahy (D-VT), Yea
27. Levin (D-MI), Yea
28. Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
29. Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
30. Lott (R-MS), Yea
31. Lugar (R-IN), Yea
32. Martinez (R-FL), Yea
33. McCain (R-AZ), Yea
34. Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
35. Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
36. Murray (D-WA), Yea
37. Nelson (D-FL), Yea
38. Obama (D-IL), Yea
39. Reed (D-RI), Yea
40. Reid (D-NV), Yea
41. Salazar (D-CO), Yea
42. Schumer (D-NY), Yea
43. Snowe (R-ME), Yea
44. Specter (R-PA), Yea
45. Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
46. Wyden (D-OR), Yea

[AVGWarhawk]

Seems to be a overwhelming number of Dems voting yes on this as well. In all reality, elite, they really do not know what to do with the illegals. In my reality, we need to stop the influx of more. Although illegals seemingly look to be a problem, this just did not crop up....it has been going ever since they started coming over the boarder decades ago. Only now are we taking a long hard look at it. It does not look good. So, do we just pack them all up on bus and drop them at the boarder or do we work with those already here, make them citizens and stop more influx? Probably, is the best route in my opinion.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

sounds simple... but.. what i dont understand is , border guards from arizona and texas are now in iraq covering the iran-iraq border :-?:-?:-?, i mean how hard is it.. to go into southern california, arizona and southern texas, with the national guard or the police, then stop and question any hispanic person (yes it sounds racist and omg crazy dictator government) but it has to be done, if the states allocate a portion of their national guard and police to search and arrest illegals, put them on buses and send em back to mexico, everything becomes better.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

also here is Rudy Guiliani's concession speech

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7614782947714217695&q=giuliani+ron+paul+won+all+the+debates&total=16&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

notice how he says Ron Paul won all the debates :rock::rock:

and my favourite video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=911528275921883359&q=ron+paul&total=30334&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

[M. Sarsfield]

Seems to be a overwhelming number of Dems voting yes on this as well. In all reality, elite, they really do not know what to do with the illegals. In my reality, we need to stop the influx of more. Although illegals seemingly look to be a problem, this just did not crop up....it has been going ever since they started coming over the boarder decades ago. Only now are we taking a long hard look at it. It does not look good. So, do we just pack them all up on bus and drop them at the boarder or do we work with those already here, make them citizens and stop more influx? Probably, is the best route in my opinion.



Here in OK they passed an Immigration Reform Bill last year, which basically denies jobs and public benefits (minus emergency care) to illegal immigrants. It went into effect on Nov. 1 and the Mexican population all but disappeared into neighboring states that lacked said legislation. If you come down hard on the businesses that employ them, the immigrants won't show up any more and the ones that are here will go where they can find jobs.

We have seen a small trickle come back into Tulsa, but we have whole housing complexes in certain parts of town that are almost completely deserted since Nov. 1. :up:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

M.Sarsfield, how is the crime in the area?? did it noticably go down??:hmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

sounds simple... but.. what i dont understand is , border guards from arizona and texas are now in iraq covering the iran-iraq border :-?:-?:-?, i mean how hard is it.. to go into southern california, arizona and southern texas, with the national guard or the police, then stop and question any hispanic person (yes it sounds racist and omg crazy dictator government) but it has to be done, if the states allocate a portion of their national guard and police to search and arrest illegals, put them on buses and send em back to mexico, everything becomes better.

Logistically it is darn near impossible to round the illegals up. Lets put you in the shoes of an illegal, what would you do it the law was coming for you to send you south of the border? You would take off! So, to prevent what would take years (money, man hours) to accomplish because most will not come quietly, they voted for amnesty for those that are here, make the a full fledged member of this society and then they need to turn their attention to shutting down the boarders and providing a way for those wanting to immigrate to the US the proper channels to do so.

What I'm saying is, allowing amnesty to those here prevents major money spent, man power need to round up and high speed chases. The idea is to make the productive members of society. I will have you know, that illegals do pay taxes. ITIN or Individual Taxpayer Identifaction Numbers. So, it is not quite as bad as one thinks. Not only that, these illegals will enjoy the tax rebates forthcoming as a result. So, it is just not that easy to round them up and plop them over the fence as it were. I believe McCain voted this way as well as the others because they recognize the greater issues involved.

[AVGWarhawk]

Seems to be a overwhelming number of Dems voting yes on this as well. In all reality, elite, they really do not know what to do with the illegals. In my reality, we need to stop the influx of more. Although illegals seemingly look to be a problem, this just did not crop up....it has been going ever since they started coming over the boarder decades ago. Only now are we taking a long hard look at it. It does not look good. So, do we just pack them all up on bus and drop them at the boarder or do we work with those already here, make them citizens and stop more influx? Probably, is the best route in my opinion.


Here in OK they passed an Immigration Reform Bill last year, which basically denies jobs and public benefits (minus emergency care) to illegal immigrants. It went into effect on Nov. 1 and the Mexican population all but disappeared into neighboring states that lacked said legislation. If you come down hard on the businesses that employ them, the immigrants won't show up any more and the ones that are here will go where they can find jobs.

We have seen a small trickle come back into Tulsa, but we have whole housing complexes in certain parts of town that are almost completely deserted since Nov. 1. :up:
Here is my only issue with that, OK basically sent it's problem to someone elses front porch. For this to be effective, all the states need to enact this reform. I do not see this happening.



We are getting a bit off track! Keep it on the campaign gents.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

the money spent would be offsetted when the cost of social security drops over 60%, the cost to fight crime made by illegal immigrants goes down, cost to healthcare

look up MS-13.. over 60% of the gang members are illegal immigrants.. and there are over 200,000 MS-13 gang members in the U.S

[bookworm_020]

John Edwards is out of the race

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/edwards-drops-out-of-white-house-race/2008/01/31/1201714086388.html

After Super Tuesday it might be known which Democrat will be running for the white house.

[Tchocky]

Sad to see Edwards out of it, although I'm pleased that his votes may transfer to Obama. how exactly the Edwards vote is split remains to be seen, but I see Edwards voters being closer to Obama than Clinton.

[Happy Times]

After watching this, i would put my money on him, a lot of money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8mG5qfDXL4

[elite_hunter_sh3]

some comedy to cheer everyone up :rotfl::rotfl::arrgh!:
http://blogs.chron.com/nickanderson/archives/and071807blog.jpg

http://filebox.vt.edu/users/dwatson/Mitt%20Romney.gif

[AVGWarhawk]

After watching this, i would put my money on him, a lot of money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8mG5qfDXL4

He is a bright young man. My only concern is his thoughts with the international community. Quite frankly, if there was any one black that could be elected to the Presidency it is this fellow. I also believe he is going to do it also. Many think it can't and will not happen... I think Obama is going to give them one hell of a run for the money.

[Happy Times]

After watching this, i would put my money on him, a lot of money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8mG5qfDXL4

He is a bright young man. My only concern is his thoughts with the international community. Quite frankly, if there was any one black that could be elected to the Presidency it is this fellow. I also believe he is going to do it also. Many think it can't and will not happen... I think Obama is going to give them one hell of a run for the money.

What thoughts?
Hopefully no one shoots him, that could cause some serious times.

[AVGWarhawk]

After watching this, i would put my money on him, a lot of money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8mG5qfDXL4

He is a bright young man. My only concern is his thoughts with the international community. Quite frankly, if there was any one black that could be elected to the Presidency it is this fellow. I also believe he is going to do it also. Many think it can't and will not happen... I think Obama is going to give them one hell of a run for the money.

What thoughts?
Hopefully no one shoots him, that could cause some serious times.

Yes, that has been put out there as well. But, it comes with the territory no matter if you are white or black. I'm sure you can name a few that caught a bullet, some lived and some died. I read somewhere that if you type in google, asassinate obama you get over 2000 hits. But, every president had his whack who wanted to have a moment in the spot light.

[Tchocky]

And Rudy is GONE (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7218879.stm)!!!

Wooo!!!

[geetrue]

mccain is a moron, whos worse then bush.. he was one of a few who spearheaded the failed illegal immigrant amnesty bill... hes a traitor and should be jailed for life :nope: "100 more years in Iraq" he says.. over my dead body... he wants to bomb Iran more then bush.. clinton is a communist.. obama will do to america with what mugabe did to zimbabwe, mccain is a more evil bush, romney wont win, huckabee has no chance... in simple terms.. U.S.A is FUBAR :shifty::-?

Now I know I'm on the right side ... :rotfl:

[Skybird]

"Dynasty" is back!

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,druck-532247,00.html
(reprint from the NYT)


If Hillary Rodham Clinton serves two terms, then for 28 years the presidency will have been held by a Bush or a Clinton. By that point, about 40 percent of Americans would have lived their entire lives under a president from one of these two families. (...)
We Americans snicker patronizingly as "democratic" Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Singapore, India and Argentina hand over power to a wife or child of a former leader. Yet I can't find any example of even the most rinky-dink "democracy" confining power continuously for seven terms over 28 years to four people from two families. (And that's not counting George H.W. Bush's eight years as vice president.) (...)
The counterargument goes like this: As voters, we should always choose the best person for the job. We should evaluate candidates on their own merits and not drag in their families. We punish ourselves if we spurn the best person because of his or her family background.
Yet we have faced this trade-off frequently over the last 215 years and regularly inclined on the side of fresh blood. In 1796, George Washington's skill and popular mandate seemed invaluable at a perilous time in our nation's infancy. Yet we overwhelmingly believe that it was good for American democracy that he stepped down after two terms.
As Thomas Jefferson put it: "in no office can rotation be more expedient" than in the presidency.

[August]

Yet I can't find any example of even the most rinky-dink "democracy" confining power continuously for seven terms over 28 years to four people from two families.

You couldn't find a "democracy" that could survive such a thing besides the US either...

[elite_hunter_sh3]

did anyone watch the deliberate censorship of Ron Paul at the debate last night?!!!:damn::damn::nope::nope::nope::nope:

[Skybird]

Yet I can't find any example of even the most rinky-dink "democracy" confining power continuously for seven terms over 28 years to four people from two families.

You couldn't find a "democracy" that could survive such a thing besides the US either...
That's the question - if it really has survived until here. You know I labelled the US a plutocracy in the past, and the European nations oligarchies turning into plutocracies.

I would say the author of that essay probably would not totally agree with me, but wants to warn of exactly this developement: the loss of democracy, due to dynasties taking over.

[August]

That's the question - if it really has survived until here. You know I labelled the US a plutocracy in the past, and the European nations oligarchies turning into plutocracies.

I would say the author of that essay probably would not totally agree with me, but wants to warn of exactly this developement: the loss of democracy, due to dynasties taking over.

Well the "dynasties" in both cases are really confined to just four individuals. As soon as they leave office they loose their power.

[Skybird]

That's the question - if it really has survived until here. You know I labelled the US a plutocracy in the past, and the European nations oligarchies turning into plutocracies.

I would say the author of that essay probably would not totally agree with me, but wants to warn of exactly this developement: the loss of democracy, due to dynasties taking over.

Well the "dynasties" in both cases are really confined to just four individuals. As soon as they leave office they loose their power.
Tell that the Kennedys, to name just the most wellknown. and there are many more cliques, defined as that by family bonds, and relations between capital and industry.

I do not accept you to paint it all clean and tidy, and you do not accept me to cast a shadow of a doubt on the system. We know where this discussion would end, then, for we have been there before. Recommend we skip this round - it's not interesting anymore.

[August]

That's the question - if it really has survived until here. You know I labelled the US a plutocracy in the past, and the European nations oligarchies turning into plutocracies.

I would say the author of that essay probably would not totally agree with me, but wants to warn of exactly this developement: the loss of democracy, due to dynasties taking over.
Well the "dynasties" in both cases are really confined to just four individuals. As soon as they leave office they loose their power. Tell that the Kennedys, to name just the most wellknown. and there are many more cliques, defined as that by family bonds, and relations between capital and industry.

I do not accept you to paint it all clean and tidy, and you do not accept me to cast a shadow of a doubt on the system.

There you go again. :roll:

You accuse me of extremism while you claim to be merely slightly suggesting. Your idea of casting a "shadow" of doubt is like whacking somebody over the head with a 20lb sledge hammer and then claiming it was only a minor love tap. Is that some kind of German debating tactic?

[Skybird]

That's the question - if it really has survived until here. You know I labelled the US a plutocracy in the past, and the European nations oligarchies turning into plutocracies.

I would say the author of that essay probably would not totally agree with me, but wants to warn of exactly this developement: the loss of democracy, due to dynasties taking over.
Well the "dynasties" in both cases are really confined to just four individuals. As soon as they leave office they loose their power. Tell that the Kennedys, to name just the most wellknown. and there are many more cliques, defined as that by family bonds, and relations between capital and industry.

I do not accept you to paint it all clean and tidy, and you do not accept me to cast a shadow of a doubt on the system.

There you go again. :roll:

You accuse me of extremism while you claim to be merely slightly suggesting. Your idea of casting a "shadow" of doubt is like whacking somebody over the head with a 20lb sledge hammer and then claiming it was only a minor love tap. Is that some kind of German debating tactic?
Well, at least I am sure that all this turns into YOUR debating tactic now if I would accept to play it by your rules - so I refuse to continue it from here. Deal with the content of the essay, or don't. After all it is an American author asking some reasonable questions about his home nation. Me - I just linked it, which can be taken as an indicator that I somewhat agree with the author's concerns. If you can't see any reason in why somebody asks questions about the fact that just two rich and influential families having been in power for almost three decades now, and other family clans and cliques influencing and controlling politics over deacdes and even half a century, you probably never see much reason to ask questions in your life anyway.

[geetrue]

you probably never see much reason to ask questions in your life anyway

Remember your heart August ... save it for the Super Bowl :yep:

[August]

Well, at least I am sure that all this turns into YOUR debating tactic now if I would accept to play it by your rules - so I refuse to continue it from here. Deal with the content of the essay, or don't. After all it is an American author asking some reasonable questions about his home nation. Me - I just linked it, which can be taken as an indicator that I somewhat agree with the author's concerns. If you can't see any reason in why somebody asks questions about the fact that just two rich and influential families having been in power for almost three decades now, and other family clans and cliques influencing and controlling politics over deacdes and even half a century, you probably never see much reason to ask questions in your life anyway.

I dealt with the "content of the essay", twice. You of course attempted to radicalize my answers like you always do with anyone who questions your self proclaimed expertise in all things.

[August]

you probably never see much reason to ask questions in your life anyway
Remember your heart August ... save it for the Super Bowl :yep:

:up: Patriots FTW!

[SteminDemon13]

if this is a sticky thread can you please keep the poll open until before the elections?

[Onkel Neal]

The poll was taken when the field was open. Now it's pretty simple to guess the next President will be one of 5 people: McCain, O'Bama, Huckabee, Clinton, or Romney.

After the nominees are decided, we can open a new poll.

Right now, looks like these guys were right so far:

Hillary Clinton
AVGWarhawk, bybyx, Carotio, Chock, CptJoker, Delareon, DR_Woody, Fallen, fatty, GT182, Herr_Pete, iratecabbie, jimbuna, Johann Vilthomsen, JSLTIGER, Konovalov, Kptlt. Hellmut Neuerburg, Lurchi, mr chris, NEON DEON, RamRod, shevlin, TarJak, Tchocky, XabbaRus

Mike Huckabee
bookworm_020, danurve, geetrue, Kapitan_Phillips, Sixpack, The WosMan, VonHammer

John McCain
AG124, donut, Iceman, MothBalls, wetgoat

Barack Obama
badhat17, Biggles, Blacklight, Bort, DAB, Fish, GunnerGreg, headcase, Lagger123987, Peto, RickC Sniper, Stealth Hunter, Zepheron

Mitt Romney
-SWCowboy., nikimcbee, Sailor Steve

[Sailor Steve]

I don't really believe Mitt Romney will be the next president. I voted for him because of the Utah connection. I'm actually one of the few people who didn't like the job he did with the 2002 Olympics.


A side-note on the 'Dynasty' thing:

George Washington, the first president, was from Virginia. His Secretary of State was a fellow Virginian, Thomas Jefferson. Washington had no party, but is usually identified with the Federalists, led by Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton.

John Adams, Washington's Vice President, beat Jefferson, which made Adams President and Jefferson VP. Adams also had no party, but he won the election mainly due to the Federalists.

In 1800 Jefferson beat Adams, and became the third President. Aaron Burr of New York was his VP. His Secretary of State was fellow Virginian James Madison. Madison did the grass-roots groundwork to get Jefferson elected, and Hamilton accused them of forming the first real party. Jefferson believed in the republic, so they called themselves Republicans.

In 1804 Jefferson was re-elected. His new VP was George Clinton.

In 1808 James Madison was elected President, and re-elected in 1812.

In 1816 James Monroe was elected, and again in 1820.

In 1824 John Quincy Adams was elected President. He had been a Federalist, but switched loyalties. Federalists didn't like him much because of that, but my main point here is that they thought him a welcome relief after six terms and twenty years of what they called the "Virginia Dynasty" (eight terms and twenty-eight years if you count Washington).

So again it's all in the eye of the beholder.

[Skybird]

I dealt with the "content of the essay", twice.
Damn - I knew I missed something.
You of course attempted to radicalize my answers like you always do with anyone who questions your self proclaimed expertise in all things.
Of course! :yep: :up: Forgive that I dared to touch your holy grail again! That is very radicalizing indeed...

BTW, what of my self proclaimed expertise was it again that the author used to write his article?

[August]

I dealt with the "content of the essay", twice. Damn - I knew I missed something.
You of course attempted to radicalize my answers like you always do with anyone who questions your self proclaimed expertise in all things. Of course! :yep: :up: Forgive that I dared to touch your holy grail again! That is very radicalizing indeed...

BTW, what of my self proclaimed expertise was it again that the author used to write his article?

:lol: The question really should be when are you NOT proclaiming your expertise on just about any subject Skybird? Germany must be such a wonderful place! I mean even their warehouse workers see things so much more clearly than heads of state, generals and the best scientific minds on the planet! If you guys decide to try to take over the world the rest of us are doomed!

Oh wait... :-j

[Skybird]

Poor August - sees a Skybird underneath his bed, around every corner, and in the trees he walks under (just waiting to jump right onto poor August's back).

Uh, and thank you so much for once again minimizing myself to "just" being a warehouse worker, ignoring all the other things i have done, too, and ignoring my voluntary jobs again. It is always a pleasure to see you using tricks like this. But you see, I have bad news for you - this autumn I'll quit in the warehouse, and this late Spring I will start (again) as "freelance" psychologist and therapist in the outbound service of a nearby hospital, doing once again voluntary work that I can afford to do unpayed, because several people wholeheartly asked me to start doing it again, which I take as a compliment. Then I will be an (unpayed) voluntary specialist (again), and no warehouse part-time-jobber anymore, and I will be that becasue I can afford it and want to do some social service again - say, what will you try to use for making mockery of me, then? Or are you just envy that I have collected experience in more different fields of work and areas of life, than you yourself, maybe, and that I have come around in the world a bit? :hmm:

[Iceman]

Hey wow...come back to topic gents. :)

My daughter and I got a kick when they asked McCain's mom about what she thought the Republican conservatives will have to do about they're choices....lmao.

She is right ...they will have no choice to suck it up and accept him.

McCain will be president mark these words.

It is like chess...look down the road and see the choices...the outcome is already a done deal.

There is no other good choice and McCain is not just a default choice but will make a hell of a president. :up:
http://rightsfield.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/john-mccain2.jpg

[Skybird]

http://rightsfield.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/john-mccain2.jpg

McCain, trying to bite open the iron curtain. :-j

[August]

Poor August - sees a Skybird underneath his bed, around every corner, and in the trees he walks under (just waiting to jump right onto poor August's back).

Uh, and thank you so much for once again minimizing myself to "just" being a warehouse worker, ignoring all the other things i have done, too, and ignoring my voluntary jobs again. It is always a pleasure to see you using tricks like this. But you see, I have bad news for you - this autumn I'll quit in the warehouse, and this late Spring I will start (again) as "freelance" psychologist and therapist in the outbound service of a nearby hospital, doing once again voluntary work that I can afford to do unpayed, because several people wholeheartly asked me to start doing it again, which I take as a compliment. Then I will be an (unpayed) voluntary specialist (again), and no warehouse part-time-jobber anymore, and I will be that becasue I can afford it and want to do some social service again - say, what will you try to use for making mockery of me, then?

Good for you Skybird! :up:

Or are you just envy that I have collected experience in more different fields of work and areas of life, than you yourself, maybe, and that I have come around in the world a bit? :hmm:

Hmm, envy? Lets compare backrounds. I've been a professional soldier, tradesman in the high tech field and am now a professional teacher. I also do some tree farming on the side and eventually plan to run a bed and breakfast for hunters and fishermen when i retire from teaching. I've lived in two countries and visited over a dozen more around the world from the far east to Europe. I'm not saying your experiences are any less valid or extensive than mine but envy is not a word i'd use to describe such a comparison.

[August]

There is no other good choice and McCain is not just a default choice but will make a hell of a president. :up:

I do worry about his temper but I think he'd make a better president than Obama and definitely Clinton. McCain can beat Clinton too though i'm not so sure about Obama.

[Lurchi]

There is no other good choice and McCain is not just a default choice but will make a hell of a president.
Is he the same McCain who mixed up Russia's Putin with our glorious chancellor Merkel?

If yes, then then i am starting to understand what "hell of a president" really means ...

:88)

[August]

Is he the same McCain who mixed up Russia's Putin with our glorious chancellor Merkel?

Ya gotta admit they do look the same... :D

[Skybird]

Good for you Skybird! :up:
Oh please - you are not in a position to judge my life and it's whys and hows - not when I am working in a warehouse, and not when working as a specialist, not when working in the ME, not when working as a martail arts trainer, or a meditation teacher, and not when working in a logistics enterprise, or as schoolboy distributing newspaper - and not when not working at all. Never forget that my life is like it is not becasue of mistakes and error, but because of my intentional decisions which to make I could afford. I could even not work anything at all, if I would wish that. That is more freedom and independence than I see in the lives of most people today. And that is why I give back, and have given back in the past, for free.

So, you must not tell me what is good for me - according to your set of rules for life.

So the question remains - what will you use in the near future to make mockery about my background, then, once I am not jobbing in a warehouse anymore? It has become a habit of yours to do like that.

Think about it in silence, please - I cannot say that I'm really interested in it. Having to face such a strike when it comes, already is annoying enough.

[Skybird]

Is he the same McCain who mixed up Russia's Putin with our glorious chancellor Merkel?

Really happened...? Totally missed the story over here. :lol:

[August]

Oh please - you are not in a position to judge my life and it's whys and hows - not when I am working in a warehouse, and not when working as a specialist, not when working in the ME, not when working as a martail arts trainer, or a meditation teacher, and not when working in a logistics enterprise, or as schoolboy distributing newspaper - and not when not working at all. Never forget that my life is like it is not becasue of mistakes and error, but because of my intentional decisions which to make I could afford. I could even not work anything at all, if I would wish that. That is more freedom and independence than I see in the lives of most people today. And that is why I give back, and have given back in the past, for free.

So, you must not tell me what is good for me - according to your set of rules for life.
Good for you Skybird! :up:

So the question remains - what will you use in the near future to make mockery about my background, then, once I am not jobbing in a warehouse anymore? It has become a habit of yours to do like that.

Think about it in silence, please - I cannot say that I'm really interested in it. Having to face such a strike when it comes, already is annoying enough.
Habit? I've mentioned it exactly twice and the first time was just to ask you if you were serious when you mentioned it. That's not the definition of habit in my dictionary. Maybe yours is different.

Now you claim it's voluntary and i have no reason do doubt your word but even you have to admit that there aren't too many certified Psychologists working in warehouses in German or anywhere else. All I can say is "good luck" to you... :up:

[Skybird]

Habit? I've mentioned it exactly twice and the first time was just to ask you if you were serious when you mentioned it.
Three times. and the third time was already a strike. that'S how it reached over here, and earned me one PM and one email of support from two people who liked your effort as much as I did.[/quote]

Now you claim it's voluntary and i have no reason do doubt your word but even you have to admit that there aren't too many certified Psychologists working in warehouses in German or anywhere else.
So what? There are also not many certitfied psychologists working in security for foreign TV, and came to that job in such an eccentric way like I did. Or trained swordfighting and martial arts. Or got stabbed. Or experienced a bomb attack in Berlin. Or travelled/worked in the ME without ever having used an airliner to go there. Or having had students over years. And more, and most of that offside the official tracks. You are right, I have to admit all that. So...? Any point you want to make?

Honestly, it would be very much appreciated if in the future you leave out personal stuff like this in a debate or "exchange", and refer to your view of the world and it's reasons, and say where you agree or disagree with me or somebody else. but in the past I was annoyed so often by some sidekick here, some stab from behind there, always personal, that I am tired of it, really, and it always is so fine-dosed and cleverly hidden that one may not evcen see it - if one is not the one being targetted. That I see your country not exclusively as a shining light, but also as a force of great shadow, thus as a nation of pro and contra like many others, you must live with - you can give argument why you disagree, but please, leave it to that: your opinion, your arguments.

Back to the topic now.

[geetrue]

You guys sound like your running for something in the next primary ... lol

I want to return to my first love Seantor John McCain ... the biggest reason I went with Huckabee is because of age.

He's twenty years younger, but McCain has the lead and I'm not going to be wishy washy anymore ...

Go Navy :rock:

[August]

[Three times. and the third time was already a strike. that'S how it reached over here, and earned me one PM and one email of support from two people who liked your effort as much as I did.

Two whole people? Oooh your popularity has doubled! :lol:
Any point you want to make?
I thought i had already made it mein herr. I've wished you good luck, what, three times now?

Honestly, it would be very much appreciated if in the future you leave out personal stuff like this in a debate or "exchange", and refer to your view of the world and it's reasons, and say where you agree or disagree with me or somebody else. but in the past I was annoyed so often by some sidekick here, some stab from behind there, always personal, that I am tired of it, really, and it always is so fine-dosed and cleverly hidden that one may not evcen see it - if one is not the one being targetted.
You really ought to have your short term memory checked Skybird as it seems to be quite faulty. I made two posts very much on topic (posts 427 and 430) but you chose in post 431 to make it personal or is that too clean and tidy for you to understand?

That I see your country not exclusively as a shining light, but also as a force of great shadow, thus as a nation of pro and contra like many others, you must live with - you can give argument why you disagree, but please, leave it to that: your opinion, your arguments.
I have never once said my country is a "shining light" but nearly every day i see you criticizing some aspect of it in that arrogant know-it-all manner that marks all your posts. Like that gem you posted today where you claim to be able to fix broken watches and reactivate old bombs by your mere presence. :roll:

Back to the topic now.
Sure. Just as soon as you follow your own advice. Remember you started this latest exchange, not me.

[Skybird]

Either your memory really is that bad, or you play this game of twisting and distorting intentionally. no matter what, I am tired of this endless Augustism. From now on, you will play it all yourself.

[August]

Either your memory really is that bad, or you play this game of twisting and distorting intentionally. no matter what, I am tired of this endless Augustism. From now on, you will play it all yourself.

Good luck :up:

[FIREWALL]

Thats easy The Arsehole with the most MONEY !



Be sure to get out and VOTE :()1: :()1: :()1:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

McCain = Bush(but worse...:shifty:) if he becomes president , kiss civil liberties, personal freedom, your job, the economy and thousands of lives goodbye.... cuz hes sure as hell gonna stay in iraq for "another 100 years"...:nope::down:

[Lurchi]

Is he the same McCain who mixed up Russia's Putin with our glorious chancellor Merkel?
Ya gotta admit they do look the same... :D Mmmmmh ... now that you say it ... :hmm:
:yep:

Old stuff from a year ago:
Yes, McCain told his audience that Mr. Putin is now President of Germany delivering cold war speeches:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5ENwej0fpc

(This is big news, i'll better build myself a nuclear shelter in case it wasn't just a mishap ... :-?)


Occasionally we get some info here about the pre-elections. I always had seen Hillary as favourite but i must say that i have been surprised and impressed by Obama. I like his cool and sober way to articulate himself - he seems to have a clear mind. Certainly not the baddest choice as a president in my unsolicited opinion.

[August]

Is he the same McCain who mixed up Russia's Putin with our glorious chancellor Merkel?
Ya gotta admit they do look the same... :D Mmmmmh ... now that you say it ... :hmm:
:yep:

Old stuff from a year ago:
Yes, McCain told his audience that Mr. Putin is now President of Germany delivering cold war speeches:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5ENwej0fpc

(This is big news, i'll better build myself a nuclear shelter in case it wasn't just a mishap ... :-?)


Occasionally we get some info here about the pre-elections. I always had seen Hillary as favourite but i must say that i have been surprised and impressed by Obama. I like his cool and sober way to articulate himself - he seems to have a clear mind. Certainly not the baddest choice as a president in my unsolicited opinion.

Of all the Democrat party candidates I believe he has the best chance at winning the election.

Barring unforseen developments or extraordinarly poor choices in running mates were I a betting man i'd bet like this in the following potential matchups:

Obama v. McCain - Close but Obama has the edge I think
Clinton v. McCain - McCain by a solid majority
Obama v. Romney - Obama by a solid majority
Clinton v. Romney - Too close to call. The TV debates would probably be the key in that scenario.
Huckabee v. Obama - Obama by a solid majority
Huckabee v. Clinton - Close but Clinton has the edge.
Paul can be easily beat by both Obama and Clinton but he's sure not to get the nomination nor does he have the cash to run as an independant.

Is that everyone left?

[elite_hunter_sh3]

super tuesday hasnt happened yet, so we will see.. after all the diebold machines are rigged :nope::shifty:

heres proof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwWP-N1HqT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4wLiTP80Sg

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/rigvote.html

http://drunkardslamppost.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/diebold-and-new-hampshire/

:damn::damn: another election down the drain... anyone want to bet there will be no election in 2012:hmm::hmm: (aka dictatorship) :down:


ive given up hope, america will turn into a totalitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian) regime :down:

"Fourteen years previously, Britain had suffered from war and terrorism. The socially-conservative and openly fascist Norsefire party led a reactionary purge to restore order; so-called enemies of the state disappeared during the night. The country was deeply divided over the loss of freedom until a bioterrorist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioterrorism) attack occurred, killing about 100,000 people. The fear generated by the attack allowed Norsefire to silence all opposition and win the next election by a landslide. A cure for the virus was discovered soon afterwards. With the silent consent of the people, Norsefire turned Britain into a bigoted totalitarian republic, with their leader Adam Sutler as High Chancellor."

from wikipedia on V for Vendetta movie...

seems a little similar to whats happening to america now... war, terrorism, soon to be national ID cards.. phone tapping .. department of homeland security... :hmm::-?

[Tchocky]

Ah, that movie. Let's take an English story, twist it to aa Bush parable, then set it back in London because we don't have the guts to write an original story set in the US. Meanwhile a great comic book is ripped up.

ugh

[Tchocky]

Giuliyawni - the moment in every morning when the realisation dawns, Rudy Giuliani will never be President of the United States. A delicious feeling, so good it's probably fattening.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/02/01/islamophobia/print.html?source=whitelist

Interesting piece from Salon on religious campaigning by GOP candidates.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

http://us.altermedia.info//images/last_four.jpg


:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::shifty:

[August]

ive given up hope, america will turn into a totalitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian) regime :down:

Then you might want to run away to Serbia while you still can...

[sonar732]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/03/shriver.obama/index.html

Could you imagine the dinner table discussion at the Governors mansion in California?

[dean_acheson]

super tuesday hasnt happened yet, so we will see.. after all the diebold machines are rigged :nope::shifty:

heres proof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwWP-N1HqT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4wLiTP80Sg

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/rigvote.html

http://drunkardslamppost.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/diebold-and-new-hampshire/

:damn::damn: another election down the drain... anyone want to bet there will be no election in 2012:hmm::hmm: (aka dictatorship) :down:


ive given up hope, america will turn into a totalitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian) regime :down:

"Fourteen years previously, Britain had suffered from war and terrorism. The socially-conservative and openly fascist Norsefire party led a reactionary purge to restore order; so-called enemies of the state disappeared during the night. The country was deeply divided over the loss of freedom until a bioterrorist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioterrorism) attack occurred, killing about 100,000 people. The fear generated by the attack allowed Norsefire to silence all opposition and win the next election by a landslide. A cure for the virus was discovered soon afterwards. With the silent consent of the people, Norsefire turned Britain into a bigoted totalitarian republic, with their leader Adam Sutler as High Chancellor."

from wikipedia on V for Vendetta movie...

seems a little similar to whats happening to america now... war, terrorism, soon to be national ID cards.. phone tapping .. department of homeland security... :hmm::-?

Are you going to tell us some 9/11 truther stuff here in a second?

Um, the phone tapping today aint much compared to the Kennedy/Hoover/Johnson years, but that was ok, since those Presidents were Democrats, eh?

[Happy Times]

Obama will win and Biden will be his running mate.:know:
Seems the republicans dont have anyone to throw against them.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?

[August]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?

You really have no clue about my country or the mood of it's citizens.

[Onkel Neal]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?

You really have no clue about my country or the mood of it's citizens.

Agreed.

Today is Super Tuesday, it will be very interesting to see if a candidate breaks out and develops a significant lead after this.

[August]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?
You really have no clue about my country or the mood of it's citizens.
Agreed.

Today is Super Tuesday, it will be very interesting to see if a candidate breaks out and develops a significant lead after this.

Last I heard Obama has a 10 point lead over Clinton in California which provides one 5th of the delegates to the Dem convention.

[Skybird]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president
It seems to me like that as well, at least regarding the stereotypical WASP, although WASPs more and more loose their traditional dominance in American society, due to demographic shifts.

or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?

In a regular docu magazine we have on TV over here, every weekend with three or four 10-15 minute reports from other countries, they looked into Alabama and Georgia. strange to see blacks and white still forming two separate groups in private life and on holiday, or spectators forming two separate blocks at sports events in their communities. The black they asked all said that sure, by law there is no racism allowed, but in reality and everyday life it still is a rule of day, while at the same time habits of the past have formed into habits of the present, when people prefer to stay togetehr with their likes, and avoid the other group. It seems that the enthusiams to actively tackle these kinds of things is very limited. That thing of staying with your known friends and not trying to make friends with the other skin colour may not be intentional, aware racism (or maybe it is, I don'T know), but it shows that blacks and whites still live separate and in two different worlds, of which the black's seem to be the worse.

Asking black locals, unfortunately one must note that they also feared that Obama's life they see in danger if he is making it for candidate - or even should become president. I was shocked to hear several white people making comments on Obama being Muslim and obviously believing in what they said. Setting that lie free on the internet and the media, as happened some months ago, obviously was a very successful attempt to tackle Obama's chances; nevertheless the lie may live on, but it still is a lie.

Not exclusively regarding america, but germany and other nations as well: I wonder if it is really a good idea to let every Peter and Paul vote during poltiical election. I strongly disagree with the idea of letting democcrcy happenig and forming up by habits. No matter how many prejudice somebody ma yhave, no matter gow stupid, or uneducated he may be, and how much competence he may lack to understand political events and consequences: he is given the right to vote. I somewhat disagree with this on a principal, idealistical level. freedom to vote: that measn not onoly freedom from something (from being hindred), but also freedom for something, to do something, and that implies skill. Freedom is no right, it is a skill in my eyes, and it needs to be learned, so voting (ideally) should be seen not as a fundamental right given for free, but a right that needs to be earned. Of course, this idea holds other dangers and intricacies, I am aware of that. However, I just want to point out that the present system is far from being ideal, and that it suffers dearly from it's dark sides. These stupid micky mouse campaigns that have become so common all over the Western states, mostly are for the simple-monded who allow themselves getting impressed by slogans and ballons and free roses. but how many intelligent, educated people do you personally know who get impressed by all this theatre-play, and take it serious? In my own social life, I couldn't name a single person.

The two-faced nature of existence: where there is light, there is shadow - as long as you do not look at a flat empty desert. :)

[sonar732]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?
The more you talk...the more I see the Secret Service and FBI paying you a visit.

If you look at the numbers...America is ready for a change..doesn't matter what type of minority president we elected...one will be chosen soon.

EDIT: Neal should be getting ready for the summons to turn over records of elite_hunter's post.

[M. Sarsfield]

Skybird,

A lot of the U.S. founding fathers originally intended only for "property" owners to vote. Back then property referred to productive property, such as factories, ships, farms, etc. Owning a house, but not owning a productive property would still exclude you from voting. Most state laws were set up this way at the time of the signing of the Constituion and many of the signers believed that the people who should have influence over the federal government only be productive property owners. Not all of them agreed with this thinking and they ended up leaving that matter to the states.

New states after the constitution based their voting upon citizenship, rather than holding productive property.

[Skybird]

Skybird,

A lot of the U.S. founding fathers originally intended only for "property" owners to vote. Back then property referred to productive property, such as factories, ships, farms, etc. Owning a house, but not owning a productive property would still exclude you from voting. Most state laws were set up this way at the time of the signing of the Constituion and many of the signers believed that the people who should have influence over the federal government only be productive property owners. Not all of them agreed with this thinking and they ended up leaving that matter to the states.

New states after the constitution based their voting upon citizenship, rather than holding productive property.

Well, that is a self-supporting system, then, at the price of making it impossible to ever think beyond the established system of production. If those producing are tzhe ones that vote, than they will vote so that the result of the vote is supoorting their way of producing. But their prudction interests must not be the interests of the natio0n, sicne there is so much more defining a nation, a social and communal system or however you name it. It is a very materialistic view, of course, and a system that neither would have something to complain about slavery, nor about social injustice. that's why I would object my idea being covered by this design. Being a producer or factory owner is one thing. Being educated, reasomnable and/or a person with sense of communal responsibility is something different. The capitalist heavyweights in international economics are all this - NOT. So, being owner of installations that could produce items hardly can be the deciding criterion as long as you do not say that employees should have no right to formulate just interests for themselves, too, and should just work and obey - which in principle is the quintessence of slavery like it was still present at that time.

[Tchocky]

Today is Super Tuesday, it will be very interesting to see if a candidate breaks out and develops a significant lead after this.
Last I heard Obama has a 10 point lead over Clinton in California which provides one 5th of the delegates to the Dem convention. Not exactly. California awards delegates on a PR basis, so no single candidate will get that big chunk of delegates. Also, the gap between the two is statistically insignificant, the most i've heard is Obama ahead by one or two points. Of course, the real story here is the evaporation of Clintons lead, so for her, Super Tuesday can't come quickly enough.

[NEON DEON]

Today is Super Tuesday, it will be very interesting to see if a candidate breaks out and develops a significant lead after this.
Last I heard Obama has a 10 point lead over Clinton in California which provides one 5th of the delegates to the Dem convention.
Not exactly. California awards delegates on a PR basis, so no single candidate will get that big chunk of delegates. Also, the gap between the two is statistically insignificant, the most i've heard is Obama ahead by one or two points. Of course, the real story here is the exaporation of Clintons lead, so for her, Super Tuesday can't come quickly enough.[/quote]

It is 10:18 am in Cali. We must be some early bird voters!;)

I will vote after work this afternoon.

[Happy Times]

I have to say im excited, these elections are important for Europe also.

[M. Sarsfield]

Well, that is a self-supporting system, then, at the price of making it impossible to ever think beyond the established system of production. If those producing are tzhe ones that vote, than they will vote so that the result of the vote is supoorting their way of producing. But their prudction interests must not be the interests of the natio0n, sicne there is so much more defining a nation, a social and communal system or however you name it. It is a very materialistic view, of course, and a system that neither would have something to complain about slavery, nor about social injustice. that's why I would object my idea being covered by this design. Being a producer or factory owner is one thing. Being educated, reasomnable and/or a person with sense of communal responsibility is something different. The capitalist heavyweights in international economics are all this - NOT. So, being owner of installations that could produce items hardly can be the deciding criterion as long as you do not say that employees should have no right to formulate just interests for themselves, too, and should just work and obey - which in principle is the quintessence of slavery like it was still present at that time.

Yeah, I don't agree with that line of thinking, either, and I'm glad that opted out of that decision.

I do believe that you should be employed on a regular/consistent basis to have a vote. These mooches that sponge off the government every two weeks for the rest of their lives should not have a say in how the government operates, since they are wards of the government. I'm not referring to the poor slob that gets laid off/fired and is unemployed for a while before finding another job. I was in that position about a year ago and it's no fun. However, we have people that make welfare a career path and they pass that thinking onto future generations.

[dean_acheson]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?

Absolutely pathetic.

[CCIP]

Honestly, today's results keep saying "President McCain" to me. I think looking ahead, I see him having the best shot come election time.

Hillary's pulling up so far, but we'll see where we are when the counting ends! The Democrat contest may go on for a while yet. If Obama wins it, he'll be a strong candidate. Prologing the battle will probably be against Hillary's favour in the long run on the other hand, even if she wins it.

[sonar732]

OK...It's 5:46 CST and I look at the results from Super Tuesday. The Democratic race is tighter than ever.

Hillary Clinton 630 delegates
Barak Obama 625 delegates

Let's focus on these two players since McCain pulled ahead of the Republican pack. What's next for the Dem's? It's obvious that their own party can't decide on who they want. The "all hail Clinton" clan, who would die if requested by Bill or Hillary, want the minority president in a woman....and get a bonus in a Clinton.

O'bama...I'm sure this is an easy one. Come on....a black man who has the charisma of MLK, speaks of new ideals, is farther left than anyone in the party, and finally is an outsider to Washington.

Wow...I might be a independant, but that situation looks like hell!

[AVGWarhawk]

i dont think the majority of the american public want a african american as president.. (judging from history) or if he were to become president, he wouldnt stay alive very long :-?:-?:-?
Absolutely pathetic.
Judging by how many delgates Obama received on super Tuesday, it looks like the majority do not care about his color. History is changing in the present. Concerning assassination, this was brought up back during the Iowa voting. Obama received more protection, against his wishes but he finally accepted. All the others have protection also. Do you think all of America just loves Hillary, McCain, Huckabee? Good Lord, even Ronald Reagan took a bullet. Always a nut in the barn no matter who you are.

[Skybird]

Clinton got more delegates, but Obama won more states. together they would be a force.

McCain has done a remarkable comeback in the past 6 months, I must admit. I also mist admit that I considered hiom dead back then. Maybe he wouldn'T be the worst choice to make, but in some fields he is not concervative enough for many in his party (thank God, I say), so the Republicans have the problem to have ab strong candidate now - with a weak party with much internal fighting supporting him, while the Democrats run the risk of eating up their advantage by having not just one but two extremely strong candidates that keep on duelling themselves - maybe for too long.

I still see myself completely unable to predict in the original poll who of the three most likely candidates will finally end up in the WH.

So I btter move into the kitchen now and prepare the dough for this evening's pizza... :D

[August]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.

How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?

[sonar732]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.
How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?

Per the campaign...first term senator. He "hasn't been influenced by Washington" yet.

I don't support him, was just using the "talk" about him. ;)

[AVGWarhawk]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.
How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?

I would say that Obama has not really gotten the 'same old same old bug' as the Clinton seem to have. He just seems fresh and has not gotten the status quo feeling about him. At any rate, which ever one gets to the white house will not change it all in 4 years. It got this way in 8 years.

[August]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.
How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?
I would say that Obama has not really gotten the 'same old same old bug' as the Clinton seem to have. He just seems fresh and has not gotten the status quo feeling about him. At any rate, which ever one gets to the white house will not change it all in 4 years. It got this way in 8 years.

What exactly do you expect him (or anyone else) to change about the White House?

[M. Sarsfield]

Judging by how many delgates Obama received on super Tuesday, it looks like the majority do not care about his color. History is changing in the present.

Yeah. Obama got a large portion of the southern white Democrat vote yesterday and Hitlery got more of the northern white Democrat vote. Big shift from previous years.

[dean_acheson]

Given Obama toe the line support for every left-wing cause (http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/) to come down the pike since he got to the Senate, I'd say the only change I'll see is it leaving from my and my girlfriend's pockets to fund the Great Society Volume II.

[AVGWarhawk]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.
How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?
I would say that Obama has not really gotten the 'same old same old bug' as the Clinton seem to have. He just seems fresh and has not gotten the status quo feeling about him. At any rate, which ever one gets to the white house will not change it all in 4 years. It got this way in 8 years.
What exactly do you expect him (or anyone else) to change about the White House?

First thing we need to get done is closure on Iraq. Millions are being spent by the minute, not by the day. Immigration needs to be corrected. Borders checked/closed and a quota established on the number admitted to the states yearly. The illegals that are here need to have a road to citizenship established so they become tax paying citizens. Rounding them up and dumping them over the fence is not going to happen. Out sourcing needs to be curtailed. Tax right offs to companies that keep jobs here, not over seas. Welfare systems needs reform, needs a check and balance as well. Too many on the take. It is a shame what I see going on with welfare. Social Security needs to be reformed. Currently I'm dumping money in but when my turn comes, there will be no Social Security. Fair is fair in my book. But again, I do not see this happening in 4 years no matter who gets the presidency.

[Happy Times]

... and finally is an outsider to Washington.
How can a US Senator be considered "an outsider to Washington"?
I would say that Obama has not really gotten the 'same old same old bug' as the Clinton seem to have. He just seems fresh and has not gotten the status quo feeling about him. At any rate, which ever one gets to the white house will not change it all in 4 years. It got this way in 8 years.

What exactly do you expect him (or anyone else) to change about the White House?

Well he would be different, no one has ever seen a politician like him. Its another thing what he can do, but it seems he wants to try. I personally think you are lucky to have him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsrgYvx7KJE

[geetrue]

Today is Super Tuesday, it will be very interesting to see if a candidate breaks out and develops a significant lead after this.

Senator McCain came out a clear front runner going in and coming out.

Last I heard Obama has a 10 point lead over Clinton in California which provides one 5th of the delegates to the Dem convention.

Final outcome had Clinton as the winner in California, but ABC news said that a total of some 14 million votes were cast nationwide just in the Democratic primaries alone ...
yet the total vote difference between Clinton and Obama was only some 43,000 votes.

Very slim margin ... ABC news said this could very well come down to the party nomination party gathering in August with what they call the Super delegates.

Guess who's on the list of Super delegates that may make the last decision on who will represent the democratic party?

Bill Clinton

One more thought: What about Flordia that got it's votes cast out for having the primary early? Clinton won that one, but no delegates can be rewarded ...

Haven't we been here before? :yep:

[sonar732]

Obama's advisors and other notables are projecting the Democratic race to be a draw and the results will hinge on Michigan and Florida. So...Takeda and Neil...how about a new poll?

[AVGWarhawk]

Looks like Mitt has dropped out.

[Tchocky]

Looks like Mitt has dropped out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7233537.stm

Bam! Gone!

Oof, I don't like John McCain :cry:

[dean_acheson]

Obama and McCain picked up Missouri.

Bam! There's your candidates. We ARE the bellweather state.

We've gone with whomever ended up as the presidential nominee.

Since 1900, we've only been wrong once, that was in '56 when Harry told us to vote for Adlai Stevenson.

If you go back, I said a few months or so ago McCain would be the next President. I still stand by that prediction.

[CCIP]

Looks like Mitt has dropped out.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7233537.stm

Bam! Gone!

Oof, I don't like John McCain :cry:

Really? He's been the only Republican nominee I actually liked in all these elections he's tried to run. Perhaps not so much politically, but at least as a person.

We'll see. As I've been saying, if it's Obama - I think Obama will stand a better chance against McCain than Clinton would.

I'm now firmly an Obama supporter for this one, and if it's Obama vs. McCain, I'd say it's definitely going to be a more interesting choice than the past few.

[geetrue]

Looks like Mitt has dropped out.

Did you hear what it cost Mr Big bucks Rommey for each delegate?

One point two million dollars each ... :o