Who do the dems run in 08

[Copenhagen]

I am new to THIS message board. I read thru some of the past threads and such and its obvious Bush is not very popular here. I get that, so if you can tell me who looks good in 08 and why. I hope your reason for supporting someone is because of their beliefs. The anyone is better than bush or bush is a retard/idiot/etc gets old. What ideals or issues are the most key in voting for this person. Try and focus on the question and not have the thread degenerate into a OMGODZOR bush Sux thread.

I find Evan Bayh a very interesting candidate. I just hope he doesnt have to act more left than he is to get the money to run. A democrat with conservative ideals. I think he could be strong on defense and the war on terror, progressive on social issues, and remove some of the corruption from washington (no way of knowing, on the last one, i just feel that way). He seems like a truely honest man (rare in our senate or house these days on both sides), and someone i could consider voting for.

[WendyWilliams]

I surely hope Hillary Clinton. She is an amazing woman, business woman, and has great political potential.

[Copenhagen]

She is a smart woman, i give you that Wendy. She has been alot more "right" lately than "left." Not a dig, just good politics on her part. A NY paper really hammered her for not coming out and announcing where she stands on iraq.

To me she is like the Mccain of the Republicans. Looks good on paper in alot of regards, but i dont believe she is electable.

[SouthGuy]

Hillary is great, but i don't think she could gain enough independents or southerners. I don't particularly care who we run as long as they can get elected. I am sick of the republicans driving this country into the ground

[yourdaddy]

Have you ever seen hillary's ankles? She's not electable. That is about as relevant as the rhetoric the dems are throwing out these days. Anyone ever figured out what john kerry has tried to say lately? Does john dean speak for any of them? If he does, they won't claim it. Jesse Jackson won the democratic primary in Florida in 1984, Maybe they should run that guy again. Barbra Strisand is the titular head of the dem. party, so whomever she endorses, will get the nod. That means Dean.

[Copenhagen]

I like Bush, its obvious southguy is trying to get on my good side by comparing him to Hitler in the image he posted. See my original post and its stupid stuff like that, which makes a thread like this hard to have a "friendly" discussion.

Wendy probably doesnt like Bush, but she was kind enough to not READ my post and reply with a sincere answer.

At least Southguy understands running a northeast liberal will not have favorable results in the south and thats true. I dont think he was trying to be facist, but the picture of Bush/Hitler kinda brings light to Arriana's post. I think his point thou, was don't run someone who can't win. I am not bashing her, but i agree that she would have a hard time winning.

What about you Arriana, who would you like to see run. I am not on here slamming either Clinton (bill/hillary). I listed why i thought Bayh was a reasonable candidate and my concern on him as well. Who do you think they should run and why? (and please don't smash bush, i get the point why certain people dont like him :P)

[Quinn]

In the last two elections, the Democratic Party has run farther to the left rather than moving back to a more Clintonian center. Gore, for example, made a conscious decision to run to the left of Clinton in order to distinguish himself as his own man. He accomplished this quite nicely by loosing an election he should have easily won. Kerry studiously avoided the center and lost as well, also loosing an election that could have been easily won by a better Democratic candidate.

Unfortunately, the Democratic Party doesn't seem to learn from its mistakes. Making Howard Dean party chairman was a joke that has frightened away still more moderates. In keeping with this theme, Hillary will run in 08 and will loose. Her efforts to move to the center as a senator will not be enough. She won't get moderate votes, which is what a candidate from either party needs to do to win these days.

The Republican Party, by contrast, will probably back a maverick like Giuliani (less likely) or McCain (far more likely) who can distance themselves from Bush yet still capture the center. Seriously, the Democrats don’t keep loosing because the Republicans are maneuvering brilliantly; they keep loosing because their leadership makes poor decisions.

And before anyone chimes in that I’m a Republican, keep in mind that I’ve never voted for a Republican in a presidential election. I would, however, vote for Giuliani or McCain over Hillary.

-Quinn

[Jhellis978]

Barak Obama....no doubt......

[Copenhagen]

I can tell you are a democrat (not bashing you haha), very thoughtful post and well said.

My die hard republican friends loathe mccain, while my democrat friends are very open to voting for him (or like you said Giuliani). It sounds like you tend to agree on what i said in the original post about Bayh. He could be a great candidate if he didnt have to go so left to get moveon.org and company's money. Sad thing is for both sides, you have to mold your views to the dollars to get a chance to win.

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

to answer the thread it doesn't matter who the democrats put up as a candidate
it also doesnt matter who the republicans put up as a candidate

in the end, we will still have the same bullshit, same gas prices, etc.

because this country isn't run by the president

it's run by religious freaks, computer geeks, and insurance companies.................

[shemalejunky]

Folks, it's not who runs, but how the Democrats organize. At this point they cannot beat the organization of the GOP. As well, stupid shit like those graphics will only serve to alienate a large voter base and give them to who you don't want it to go to. Deomcrats have to think and fight less dirty if they want to win, but all the same, need to be assertive.

Fascistic is not a word and the U.S. is hardly even close to being considered as such!

[pimpbot8000]

I think that Jon Edwards will be someone big to watch in the democratic primary. I don't care for Hillary Clinton at all, mostly for her economic policies.

Good news is whoever the dems nominate has a better chance in this election then in the past few, the reps are going to have to run Cheney and he's got a snowballs chance in hell.

Oh well, no matter what I'm voting Libertarian

-pimpbot

[Quinn]

Barak Obama....no doubt......

So long as he doesn't get involved in any serious scandals, etc., I think he probably will be president some day.

-Quinn

[Quinn]

I think that Jon Edwards will be someone big to watch in the democratic primary. I don't care for Hillary Clinton at all, mostly for her economic policies.

Good news is whoever the dems nominate has a better chance in this election then in the past few, the reps are going to have to run Cheney and he's got a snowballs chance in hell.

Oh well, no matter what I'm voting Libertarian

-pimpbot

I really doubt Cheney will run. His health would be too much of a campaign issue (it's a much bigger deal when running for pres. vs. VP.) Futhermore, he doesn't appeal to moderates due to the whole Darth Vader thing. The Republican Party's establisment loves the guy, but they wouldn't support him. In short, he couldn't get the nomination even if he wanted it, which he does not.

-Quinn

[Kramer]

in the end, we will still have the same bullshit, same gas prices, etc.

because this country isn't run by the president

it's run by religious freaks, computer geeks, and insurance companies.................


JWBL, you almost hit the nail on the head here. You are correct the president dont really run the country.


Its run by the liberal freaks, jewish bankers, and all major companies.

[Copenhagen]

be a little more partisian Arrianna! lol

Arnold just appointed a democrat to a high ranking post. If anything the govenator has reached out alot in that state. I wish we had more politicians that were willing to work with the other side with honest intentions.

I think you are a little extreme by saying bush has done alot of damage. You Know Bill didnt exactly leave office as our country's savior, but we still are getting by. I tend to give our leaders the benefit of the doubt that they are trying to do what they think is right. it is hard sometimes. i do have issues with bush as well, but lets try and stay on topic!!!!

[Copenhagen]

by the way, some cool responses. i like talking to dems that can acknowledge the faults of their party. I have my issues with mine, like i said (meaning repubs have ours).

The media would have us all think we are totally different, but i believe average americans have alot more in common that uncommon.

[johnb]

no sitting member of congress has gotten elected president since kennedy in 1960...45 years is a long time. ya gotta be a governor...nixon, carter, reagen, clinton, and bush were all governors. the republicans are self destructing right now, i'd keep your eye on that warner guy from virginia

[johnb]

btw, a democratic president with a republican congress wouldn't be such a bad thing right now. need some checks and balances...our government has never been bigger, spent more, nor more out of control then they are right now

[Ecstatic]

The most interesting race would be between Hillary and Condi. :evil:

If the election were today, any dem would beat Bush or any of his clones (but maybe not McCain).

Seriously, I think Kerry is the best man the dems have right now (excepting Kucinich, who hasn't a snowball's chance in Hell). I don't know if he could beat McCain (who is one Republican I can at least respect and live with), but I think he has a good shot if he can position himself more clearly and succinctly.

Then, in 2012, Hillary should take her shot: now is too soon, but it's long past time for a woman as President. That would put Obama in line for either 2016 or 2020: I've long thought that he is Presidential material, but he's still a bit too young. He could well be our first black President, though.

[Copenhagen]

yes they need to get spending in check. Clinton was able to balance the budget, for two reasons in my opinion. One it was a priority, two he could because he was the first president in 50 years to not have to fight the cold war.

Also, Bush has had alot going on with Iraq, afghanistan, the hurricanes, etc. Please dont focus on this and lets stay on track (meaning we can argue about the right/wrongness of it).

I think anyone getting elected has their work cut out because we have so many crappy senators and congress folks on both sides. Ted kennedy (dem) is lost and Spector is worried about his fantasy football team(Repub).

I just hope both sides put really good candidates up so we have a choice. IF they both put up idiots, we all lose. No idea who the republicans will choose. Who would you democrats like to see them put up?

[Quinn]

Giuliani essentially gave one borough a facelift, while the other 4 made little or no progress to speak of. Being a better mayor than David Dinkens was hardly a big accomplishment. For my money, the best mayor NYC had in my lifetime was Koch. If Koch ran for the oval office, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. But since the chances of that happening are slim to none, I'd have to go w/ Hillary. However, the amount of damage that the current administration has done is likely not reversible in any of our lifetimes. But of course, we have to start somewhere.

Btw, does anyone know if Christopher Walken is still planning to run? We might wanna save him for the day that Austrian piece of garbage, Arnold, decides to make a mockery of our democratic process.

Arianna, I'll definitely agree with you on one thing: the amount of damage done by the current administration is not reversible in our lifetime. The administration's fiscal policies, in particular, present a far greater danger than terrorism or underfunded social programs every will. Future generations won't be able to fund anything close to the current spending levels for social programs or defense. Both will have to be drastically cut just to service our debt.

As far as NYC mayors are concerned, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I will say one thing though, Koch is definitely one of the coolest mayors this city has ever had. His answer to the question posed to him about his sexuality during the 1977 mayoral primary was truly impressive. Furthermore, the guy really knew how to party and mix it up with just about anyone.

-Quinn

[Quinn]

The overwhelming majority of polls show both McCain and Giuliani beating Hillary. Kerry, Gore, and Edwards don't fare well against Hillary in any poll that I have seen. Here are just a few reports/sites:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/McCain%20Giuliani%20Hillary.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/2008.htm

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:9Ol_Kuu-_o4J:www.maristpoll.marist.edu/usapolls/HC050308.pdf+polling+data+giuliani+mccain+and+hill ary&hl=en

-Quinn

[Jhellis978]

The Democrats will never reclaim the "red states" by running a candidate from New England. It's sad but true!

A man like John Kerry or Ted Kennedy simply has no way of understanding the needs of rural America.

Not that Bush cares about the needs of rural America, but he at least faked it and got elected because of it.

In order to succeed, the Democrats must choose a candidate that appeals to the ENTIRE nation.

I'm a liberal, but I'm also from Texas and I know what will fly and what won't fly in red America.

[chefmike]

I'm not sure Hillary could even get the nomination. A lot of dems realize she isn't electable. Mark Warner might be a viable candidate. On the other hand, perhaps it may be time for the dems run a truly progressive candidate, who doesn't cater to the center. Edwards might fall under that heading, among others.

And maybe we should be speculating on whether the GOP will be guilty of voter fraud, as they have been in the last two presidential elections.

[Hugh Jarrod]

Here's my take if the Dems put up someone better than who the other parties put up I'll vote for him or her. Though it looks like the Reps are gonna run McCain, so I'll most likely vote for McCain, I wanted him to beat Bush in the Rep primaries, but when asked which politician he'd invite to dinner Bush said JESUS CHRIST and people went ohh good answer. From there it went down hill for McCain. I found it offensive to call Jesus a politician, but then again that takes independant thought. After I cast for McCain I'll only hope that the electoral college will take my wishes to heart. You all do know that you don't actually vote for a president correct? Of course if a different party puts up a better person then I'll vote for him or her regardless of party.

[chefmike]

JWBL, you almost hit the nail on the head here. You are correct the president dont really run the country.


Its run by the liberal freaks, jewish bankers, and all major companies.

Jewish bankers? And there wasn't any holocaust, either, right? You really are a nutjob...break out the butterfly nets...

[Hugh Jarrod]

in the end, we will still have the same bullshit, same gas prices, etc.

because this country isn't run by the president

it's run by religious freaks, computer geeks, and insurance companies.................


JWBL, you almost hit the nail on the head here. You are correct the president dont really run the country.


Its run by the liberal freaks, jewish bankers, and all major companies.


Funny I know a lot of guys like you. They say the same thing. Liberals this and liberals that, jews, jews, jews bla bla. Yet when I ask them what's the greatest country in the world? They all say AMERICA (actually amurica), to them I then ask "Why the fuck are you complaining then? Amrica is number 1?"

[pimpbot8000]

Quinn I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

Though the points you make are valid reasons that Cheney wont win the presidency, I consider it highly unlikely for him not to get the nomination the vice president ALWAYS gets the nomination when the president runs into a term limit, and while Cheney may not be the man for the job, he is practically a shoe-in for the nomination.

It's ironic that the best thing for the republicans chances in '08 would be for Cheney to die between now and then.

-pimpbot

[Kramer]

Chef what the hell does the holocaust have to do with anything??

You dont think that jews run this country? From a financial standpoint?


Arianna,again, youre not very bright are you?

[Ecstatic]

The Democrats will never reclaim the "red states" by running a candidate from New England. It's sad but true!
Absent a candidate equal to RFK, I tend to agree. Yet I still think Kerry is the most qualified with the best platform of any dem who currently has a shot (Kucinich being the best, but zip chance of winning).


A man like John Kerry or Ted Kennedy simply has no way of understanding the needs of rural America.
Untrue. However, what IS true is that this is the perception of a very large cross-section of American voters, and that is effectively the same thing. This is the hurdle that Kerry would have to clear to make it (Teddy is too old and too old school, let alone his personal history, to even think of taking a shot).


Not that Bush cares about the needs of rural America, but he at least faked it and got elected because of it.
That's the point: perceived values, not actual values. Bush fakes it good (as does Clinton, though with greater conviction and a stronger record). Clinton is a perfect contrast to Kerry: he's the more intelligent man (with an IQ of 160, only Thomas Jefferson excells him in intellect), yet Kerry comes across as an over-thinking, overly complex intellectual, while Clinton can build a complex argument while talking like a common man in a bar. The added benefit of being a Southern Dem is almost too obvious to state.


In order to succeed, the Democrats must choose a candidate that appeals to the ENTIRE nation.
How very true: but given the split that both parties have fostered, this seems increasingly unlikely. I can't name a single dem who truly fulfills this criterion (well, one: Obama, but he's still too young).


I'm a liberal, but I'm also from Texas and I know what will fly and what won't fly in red America.
Thing is, there is no red America or blue America (OK, Texas is red and Massachusetts is blue, and I'm your counterpart from Mass, lol): most of America is purple, and the vote is very close. Consider this: last time, Kerry--the loser--had the second highest popular vote for President in history, well ahead of Reagan's previous record in '84. Who had the highest? Bush, of course.

Here's one other obvious thought: consider the pitiful turnout of American voters, 2/3rds of whom feel entirely disenfranchised. These are the key votes. Iraq has a vastly higher percentage of voters actually voting than America does. The dems have to reach those who don't bother to vote.

[Hugh Jarrod]

Chef what the hell does the holocaust have to do with anything??

You dont think that jews run this country? From a financial standpoint?


Arianna,again, youre not very bright are you?


Yeah they run the country, then they move into your neighborhood, by up land, attend school with your kids, and the next thing you know your brother brings one home for Thanksgiving and tells your family he's gonna marry her huh Kramer? Next you'll be telling me they're gonna take over NASCAR just to piss off rednecks!

[Ecstatic]

Quinn I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

Though the points you make are valid reasons that Cheney wont win the presidency, I consider it highly unlikely for him not to get the nomination the vice president ALWAYS gets the nomination when the president runs into a term limit, and while Cheney may not be the man for the job, he is practically a shoe-in for the nomination.

It's ironic that the best thing for the republicans chances in '08 would be for Cheney to die between now and then.

-pimpbot
That's so true. Cheney would win the nomination, but lose the election. Someone asked who the dems would like to see the reps nominate, and I'd have to say Cheney. Definitely not McCain: he could win (and in and of himself, I'd be ok with that by and large, but not with the party retaining power no matter what McCain's personal qualities might be).

[Quinn]

Quinn I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

Though the points you make are valid reasons that Cheney wont win the presidency, I consider it highly unlikely for him not to get the nomination the vice president ALWAYS gets the nomination when the president runs into a term limit, and while Cheney may not be the man for the job, he is practically a shoe-in for the nomination.

It's ironic that the best thing for the republicans chances in '08 would be for Cheney to die between now and then.

-pimpbot
That's so true. Cheney would win the nomination, but lose the election. Someone asked who the dems would like to see the reps nominate, and I'd have to say Cheney. Definitely not McCain: he could win (and in and of himself, I'd be ok with that by and large, but not with the party retaining power no matter what McCain's personal qualities might be).

Pimpbot, Ecstatic,

While anything is possible in the world of politics, I don't believe Cheney could win the nomination. Polling data among Republicans has him far behind likely candidates such as Giuliani and McCain. Furthermore, the bulk of the Republican Party's establishment has made it clear that they don’t want him to run. Most important of all, he himself has categorically ruled out running in 08:

Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday categorically ruled out a run for the White House in 2008, even if asked by the Republican president who recruited him back into government. "I will say just as hard as I possibly know how to say ... 'If nominated, I will not run,' 'If elected, I will not serve,' or not only no, but 'Hell no,"' Cheney told "Fox News Sunday," making clear he intends to retire from politics at the end of his current term. "... I've got my plans laid out. I'm going to serve this president for the next four years, and then I'm out of here."

The 64-year-old Cheney came back from the lucrative life of a corporate chief to be President Bush's running mate despite a history of heart trouble, including a fourth heart attack shortly after the contested presidential election in November 2000. But he said even Bush could not persuade him to change the decision he made 10 years ago not to seek the presidency. "I didn't want to do those things I'd have to do," Cheney said, adding that it had made his current job much easier to be freed from personal political ambition. "I think primarily that's because I'm not worried about what the precinct committeemen in Ottumwa, Iowa, are going to think about me in January of '08," he said of one of the states where the U.S. presidential process gets underway.

And he noted that by 2009 he would be 68. "I've still got a lot of rivers I'd like to fish and time I'd like to spend with my grandkids, and so this is my last tour. I don't plan to run for anything," Cheney said.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/9151

-Quinn

[chefmike]

As popular as McCain is, he may be too much of a "maverick" to pass the GOP nomination process, imo. Great points Ecstatic, and while Kerry is a good candidate, he is sorely lacking in the charisma department. And he made the same MAJOR mistake that Gore did, he didn't hire James "ragin cajun" Carville to run his campaign.

[Ecstatic]

Chefmike, you're dead on. Carville is to the dems what Karl Rove is to the reps. And Kerry shares with Gore giving the impression of being an intellectual, which to at least half the populace translates to boring and ineffectual (or worse). Carter had the same problem. Rare is the dem intellect to rise above that: FDR, JFK, Clinton.

[Ecstatic]

Oh, chefmike, this OT but how did your brining of the turkey go for Thanksgiving?

(I'd like to brine Bush...how's that for bringing it back on topic?)

[Kramer]

Hey Arianna you son of a bitch, apparently you have no idea what a racist is. I'd like one shot at that ugly mug of yours. You wouldnt be calling me that in person, i assure you!

Go call someone else names you poor excuse for a shemale! :lol:

[Copenhagen]

The thread kind of fell apart over the past few posts.

It should be interesting to see who comes up over the next year and puts their hat in the ring. I don't think the eventual Republican nominee even has his hat in the ring yet. The guys who brought up Edwards had some interesting points. I cant see him winning, but had forgot about him.

I am still hopeful the democrats will change their stance and put someone like Bayh up.

Some of the guys who talked about some of the democrats problems earlier had some good valid points.

My worst political fear is a hillary/mccain election. That would be a depressing day to vote. I just don't see either one having a vision that makes the country better off. Hillary won't tell anyone where she stands on Iraq today. Mccain is so busy trying to get in front of cameras, he talks about roids legislation.

Issues that are key to me:
War on Terror
Energy (plants/fuel)
Taxes

[Kramer]

Arianna, you talk way to much. Go think what you want you ugly bastard! Arguing on a computer is pointless. Nothing can cahnge the fact that you are very ugly though. Take that fuckin wig off already!!!!

La de da, what will he come back with next???

[chefmike]

Oh, chefmike, this OT but how did your brining of the turkey go for Thanksgiving?

(I'd like to brine Bush...how's that for bringing it back on topic?)

Thanks for asking. It was a success, I'll definitely do it again. Great flavor, noticeably moister, although not dramatically so. It helps to take the bird out of the brine at least a few hours prior to roasting, so the skin can dry out. For a small bird (about 13 lbs), I used 1 cup kosher salt, half cup brown sugar, two lemons, two oranges, fresh sage, thyme, and rosemary. I only used pepper and herbs on bird prior to roasting, as the brine had already salted it.

[Ecstatic]

Excellent, chefmike. I'm keeping your brine recipe and will give it a try sometime. How long did you brine the bird?

[flabbybody]

If you got a list of the CEO's of the country's 500 largest corporations, you'd have 495 names who were white, Christian men.

[chefmike]

Excellent, chefmike. I'm keeping your brine recipe and will give it a try sometime. How long did you brine the bird?

About 18 hours, which was ample time. Just overnight should be sufficient. I'll probably add a whole head of garlic(cut into two pieces) to the brine next year. I always add garlic to the mirepoix that I stuff inside the bird. That way you have roasted garlic to spread on whatever bread you serve, or you could throw it in mashed potatoes, etc.

[Ecstatic]

Thanks. I was thinking overnight would do, especially for a smaller bird (my wife doesn't eat higher up the food chain than fish, so this would either be an indulgence for me or for a group gathering, but I'd want to do a dry run myself first anyway).

I love spreading roasted garlic on bread, much more than butter. Also roasted garlic, balsamic vinegar, and olive oil makes a nice spread.

[El_hefe]

The Dem nomination now is obviously Hillary's to lose. Her support of the war & her more pro-business choices recently (learning from hubby!) is her attempt to persuade middle of the road soccer moms in the red states. The left has no one else who can win right now & she knows it & is trying to broaden her appeal to moderates & undecided women.
One sign of the near desparation of the Dems & the left is this mooning over Obama, a man who has accomplished nothing in governing other than being elected to his first term in the Senate. Makes John Edwards seem like Aristotle in comparison.

The real action will be in the GOP as the social conservatives attempt to cut the legs off McCain & either wound his candidacy with rumors & allegations or he goes ballistic on camera & falls on his own sword (Last time he called people "gooks".)
(And not only is Rudy too volatile & unpredictable he's also from NYC like Hill...no chance he'll be nominated, or Cheney).
The mainsteam GOP machine will work REAL hard to cripple them & promote someone like Santorum or Jeb Bush (or Condi? interesting...). Throw W's war in there, & the terrorists likelyhood of trying to make an incident here in the US for this election & it will be very interesting to watch the GOP the next 2 years.

[joeblow]

As a devout Republican and conservative, I really do hope that Hillary runs! Wendy, your post on page 1 regarding Hillary's intelligence, etc. is priceless. I LOL so hard that I almost fell out of my chair. It is amazing what the liberal media can do to a mind.

Now for all you left wing liberals that have posted on this thread.

1. Are you college educated?
2. Are you are registered voter?

Now I expect to get the shit flamed out of me! I just put on my asbestos underwear!

[BOATER]

[quote="Copenhagen"]The thread kind of fell apart over the past few posts.

It should be interesting to see who comes up over the next year and puts their hat in the ring. I don't think the eventual Republican nominee even has his hat in the ring yet.

I agree, lets get this thread back in focus.
I definetly see Hillary winning the Democratic Nomination easily. But could she win verse Mccain or Gulliani. She is loved or hated, she is the NY Yankee's of politics.
I think she would do a great job as President. She has enough lnowledge to surround herself with the right people, including Bubba, when he isn't chasing the interns around.
But unfortunately McCain and Gulliani are fairly liberal enough to draw many Democrats over, especailly in Mid West and NY, NJ and Conn. Some just because she is a woman.
But the problem the republicans have is as I said both Mccain and Gulianni are too moderate Republicans for thier taste. It is well know that the Republican party would love to find someone else over McCain. Gulianni is a little more to the right that McCain. And then there is Codi Rice.
I myself am an Independant. And my dream ticket would actually be Mcain as President and Hillary as his Vice. I've spoken with a few chauvinist's collegues that may be open to a female Vice Pres before President.

Right wing Repulicans got Dubya (Bush) elected twice. Unbelivable!! But they were really electing Cheney. To other countries look at us and see Mr Magoo as President. We all know he isn't bright and Chaney uses him to push his policy and do it so that Bush thinks it his idea.
Come on guys we all know poor George was and always will be the guy at parties that you can get to do the craziest things. "Come her George go do ... (fill in the blank). And he does and everyone laughs.
But this is real and the counrty he is running and that is why is is not funny. It is scarry and sad. 3 more year folks.

[El_hefe]

Oh, I forgot......the correct answer for who the Dems will run in 2008 is:











Hillary Clinton & Mark Warner

[Jhellis978]

As a devout Republican and conservative, I really do hope that Hillary runs! Wendy, your post on page 1 regarding Hillary's intelligence, etc. is priceless. I LOL so hard that I almost fell out of my chair. It is amazing what the liberal media can do to a mind.

Now for all you left wing liberals that have posted on this thread.

1. Are you college educated?
2. Are you are registered voter?

Now I expect to get the shit flamed out of me! I just put on my asbestos underwear!

First, too bad you won't be able to sue for the mesothelioma you will suffer for wearing that pair of asbestos underwear. The Republicans have virtually destroyed the asbestos litigation industry.

I'm a "left wing liberal" with a college education and have voted in EVERY election, local and national, since I turned 18 in 1996.

[chefmike]

As a devout Republican and conservative, I really do hope that Hillary runs! Wendy, your post on page 1 regarding Hillary's intelligence, etc. is priceless. I LOL so hard that I almost fell out of my chair. It is amazing what the liberal media can do to a mind.

Now for all you left wing liberals that have posted on this thread.

1. Are you college educated?
2. Are you are registered voter?

Now I expect to get the shit flamed out of me! I just put on my asbestos underwear!

1. Yes, college and culinary school

2. yes, since I was 18

This true believer (fox news, we distort, you decide) knows his talking points...liberal media...left wing liberal (not an insult, btw)...not to mention another stooge who votes with the bible-bangers, yet posts on a TS board...

Where did you get your degree, Bob Jones University?

[Realgirls4me]

As a devout Republican and conservative, I really do hope that Hillary runs! Wendy, your post on page 1 regarding Hillary's intelligence, etc. is priceless. I LOL so hard that I almost fell out of my chair. It is amazing what the liberal media can do to a mind.

Now for all you left wing liberals that have posted on this thread.

1. Are you college educated?
2. Are you are registered voter?

Now I expect to get the shit flamed out of me! I just put on my asbestos underwear!

College educated ? Yep, a couple of degrees.
Registered voter ? Yep, I was fooled and deflowered by the most overrated president of all time -- Ronald Reagan. The debt, his corrupt administration, and homelessness are just three of his legacies that come to mind at the moment.

Not that I'm a Hillary defender, but I seem to remember Hillary writing in scholarly legal journals in her mid to late 20s. You ? Laura Bush ? The Dumbfuck-In-Chief ? If a man who can't get through a sentence without marble mouthing it can get to the highest office in this country, why can't a woman who can speak and can think on her feet not be able to ?

One more thing: In my latter college years while taking political science courses at the time, I remember befriending a guy who I considered, and still consider, quite a cool guy. A man's man in other words. One day early in the semester we happen to walk out together and happened to have parked not too far from one another that day. As we said our good-byes and broke off to our respective vehicles, I couldn't help noticing that he had an arm-and-sickle bumper sticker; the curved blade designed to form the "C" in "Clinton". At the end of the semester, the parking situation repeated once again, and this time I couldn't help notice that he had removed the anti-Clinton bumper sticker.
I never asked him about the bumper sticker, or why he removed it, but my guess is that he, as with most who go through a few upper division Political Science courses, grew in ways that defy bumper sticker reasoning and sloganeering. That is, they come to recognize that the world of politics -- just as most of the "soft sciences" are -- is far grayer than their previous binary mode of thought brought about. My question to you then is, how did your college education fail you ? Given the text and tone of your posting, you're still living in a black and white world devoid of anything beyond what Limbaugh or O'Reilly can provide you. Your college education did nothing to open your mind, did it ?

Answer two simple questions for me:

(1) Liberal is a virtuous term, so can you tell me why you fear its virtuous definition ?

(2) How is the media Liberal ?

For anyone in here who follows politics, as many in here do, the election is an eternity from today. It's really too early to be pondering such a question or candidate. Remember when the Hannitys, Humes and O'Reillys of the Conservative media were asking the very same question right after Bush's "Mission Accomplished" aircraft carrier TV op ? Hell, they wanted to coronate him then and thought any Republican candidate(s) would be shoe-ins in 2006. Look at Bush's poll numbers today. Hee-hee!


8)

[Felicia Katt]

As a devout Republican and conservative, I really do hope that Hillary runs! Wendy, your post on page 1 regarding Hillary's intelligence, etc. is priceless. I LOL so hard that I almost fell out of my chair. It is amazing what the liberal media can do to a mind.
Now for all you left wing liberals that have posted on this thread.

1. Are you college educated?
2. Are you are registered voter?

Now I expect to get the shit flamed out of me! I just put on my asbestos underwear!
a picture, being worth a thousand words, and easier to understand for the preliterate.

FK

[yourdaddy]

Felicia, You are really showing your elitism and the fact that you ain't nuttin' but a dumb blonde bimbo, ( a perfect match as a wife for lonesome chefmike). Psychometric tests are not IQ tests. Iq tests are not the end-all that liberal scholars would have you believe. If those bluu states are so smart, why do they keep losing elections? It's because like you, blue ain't got a clue. It'll be McCain and Rice in 2008.

[Quinn]

they come to recognize that the world of politics -- just as most of the "soft sciences" are -- is far grayer than their previous binary mode of thought brought about.


Whether you are a liberal, conservative, or a committed independent (I am), this is probably the single greatest truth a proper education will impart to you.

-Quinn

[yourdaddy]

Felicia, you're much studied propagandistic, typical left-wing study of relative I.Q. tests, was later declared a "hoax", by "The Economist", The St. Pete Times is too far from the mainstream to even admit they were wrong by publishing that trash.

[Felicia Katt]

If those bluu states are so smart, why do they keep losing elections? It's because like you, blue ain't got a clue. It'll be McCain and Rice in 2008.

They don't lose elections so much as have them stolen by corrupt officials
http://www.localnewsleader.com/elytimes/stories/news-00107333.html

or having them hijacked by someone fraudulently casting themselves as a War president, making the election a referendum on an unfounded and unjustified war and claiming anyone who opposes it is a traitor.
http://islandimage.net/oc/13myths/Factsheet.cfm?ID=5

or by libeling legitimate war heros as either crazy or cowards
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/02/10/kerry_smear/index_np.html

or by whipping up anti-gay/same sex marriage sentiments in key states as the ultimate wedge issue.
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/09/14/loc_loc1amarr.html

Did you really want to back Bush on this issue on this board?

Mainly though, the Republicans won because their politcal agents are very smart and not very ethical and its easier to mislead people who are less intelligent or less educated.

But as Lincoln said:

You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time."

and as the Who said:

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again

We won't get fooled again. Time's up for the Republicans

FK

[McRen]

A few comments that are sure to be flamed:

Right and Left dont mean squat, theyre both part of the same club (rich people club) and both have the priority of keeping their kind going (holding down the poor)

Hillary is probably the best person for the job, but has 0 chance of winning. The Red states wont vote for a female, its just that simple.

All you have to do is look at New York, and Los Angeles as being fully blue to realize that blue = modern forward thinking, and red = backwards prejudiced bible thinking. They give you guys the red or blue choice so you can feel like you are making a difference by chosing your leaders. It doesnt matter. Bill Clinton was cool, I fully agree with most of what he says... but he was dropping bombs where they shouldnt be dropped also. Bush's arent exactly worse than any other presidents.

Jeb Bush will probly end up being president some day, cuz thats George Senior's plan. He's definately what i'd call a real life 'evil genious'

[yourdaddy]

Phallicia Dogg, you just put up some table that said the blue states were smarter, yet you say they were too dumb to elect their candidates. You truly are a bimbette. One other thing, please don't post your retro pics.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

The blue states are smarter dear- no doubt. Richer and smarter.

God I can stand right wing conservatives.

And what I can't stand even more are hypocritcal Republican conservatives on a board like this.

[yourdaddy]

Yeah, i guess you're right Allanah. The Spanish speaking immigrants pouring in down here, like yourself, with no education, are pulling us down. U peekie panish?

[Felicia Katt]

btw, its not just IQ. Red states have lower literacy rates, fewer college graduates, higher bankruptcy rates and poorer health.

put that in your pipe and smoke it

oh yeah, tobacco use is also most prevalent in red states too.


FK

and what is with the personal attacks? I showed you respect for your military service and sympathy for the loss of your son, and you show me the back of your hand?

FU
FK

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Actually- yourdaddy- your comment was quite racist and uneducated- So I will not even validate it.

Both my parents were college graduates from the University of Havana in Cuba- both in accounting. We came to this country legally in 1980- and my parents went from immigrant poverty to owning their own business and real estate in Florida. We never were on welfare or goverment aid- my parents were immigrants that worked their asses off in menial jobs to survive and make it in a foreighn country, and they did. Every single family member of mine has become an American citezen.

Yes, I speak Spanish & English- and I studied German for 5 years in school and I am still taking French lessons and hope to be fluent within a year.

Everyone in this country stems from immigrants- except the Native Americans. This country is/was based in immigration. If you are so concerend from shutting the world out and all it's influences then join one of those cults like in Montana-one of the secessionist.

[yourdaddy]

Allanah, I guess it goes back to my childhood. I was raised during a very conservative period in American history. Davy Crockett was my first hero. I wore a coonskin cap to mass. His motto was ":Be sure you're right, then go ahead". I have never started a political thread anywhere on the internet. I am a conservative, not a neo-con. In fact, I don't even think I know a neo-con. I was always told that people showed their ignorance by bringing up politics or religion in conversation. when I took psychometric placement tests in high school, they said I should be a forest ranger, a lawyer, or a policeman. So, when I see people like Felicia post ridiculous tables, that were revealed as hoaxes, I gotta jump in and say something. I don't enjoy being put down in general terms any more than you do.

[Realgirls4me]

Liberals -- in the political context -- are generally better educated, better read, better traveled, more articulate and/or eloquent, more openminded, more open to discuss diverse views, culturally diversed, and, Ta-dah!, less likely to be intellectually lazy, thus easily swayed by the tinhorns and firebrands of talk radio than their brethren on the right side of the aisle. Yourdaddy personifies the current red state lockstep voter mentality. He just follows. To him, the enemy is within his own country -- Gays, the ACLU, the mainstream media, foreigners, Liberals, Democrats, Illegal aliens, et all -- and any other organization, person, or divisive issue his heroes (Neal Boortz, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Bill O'Reilly, et all) feed him. Ask him to explain why an O'Reilly or Limbaugh will trounce on a Liberal or Democrat for so much as spitting on a sidewalk, but ignore a Republican Congressman's 2.4 million in bribes, and he'll shit in his pants. He simply has never developed tools to reason so to formulate a response on his own without his media masters calling the shots.

... Felicia et Allanah: Vous deux sont très intelligents et très attrayants.


:twisted:

[Felicia Katt]

when I took psychometric placement tests in high school, they said I should be a forest ranger, a lawyer, or a policeman. So, when I see people like Felicia post ridiculous tables, that were revealed as hoaxes, I gotta jump in and say something. I don't enjoy being put down in general terms any more than you do
Yourdaddy is right that the Economist retracted a story on that because they couldn't independently verify the facts in the IQ table. Other media sources did not feel it was necessary and stood by their reporting.

http://www.heartheissues.com/e2004-6-intelligenceiq.html

here are some charts which are not in dispute. It not quite as black and white as the last chart indicates but the smartest states are still blue and the least intelligent ones are still red and the validity of the rest of the points still remains.

(some of the charts were not in graphic form, so I had to screen capture and assemble them, but the data can be verified at the link)

Yourdaddy: No one put you down. We put down your ideas. You immediately stooped to personal attacks. Following the lead of your political heroes. Its a good thing you didn't follow your guidance counselor's advice, because you can't see the forest for the trees.

FK

[AllanahStarrNYC]

there is no excuse for your comments yourdaddy

they were ignorant and racists remarks

this country gave me the opputtunity to be who i am and live the way i do-
i came from nothing- with absolutely no advantages- and i have had to fight my entire life to get somewhere. i am proud to be an american no matter is the neo conservatives are trying to throw this country to the dark ages socially.

does that make me special- no

but don't use your background as an excuse for your ignorance.

i came to this country at 5 years old not speaking a word of english yet grauduated in the top 5% of my highschool class with 3.7 GPA

I never and never have been a victim of my past, where I come from, or what I was taught..

[Copenhagen]

Wow, you are reduced to crying over 04 and decide to hijack the thread. Does it make you feel better by believing the blue states are smarter? Someone who is democratic wiesly pointed out, that kerry had the second highest vote total in our country's history. The good news is that Bush had the most ever. So what he also pointed out, for kerry to win, he would have had more than bush.

All i get on these boards is bush is an idiot, he sucks, rove/chaney are the real bosses, he went to war for the wrong reasons, haliburton, blah blah blah. Well if he was such a crappy candidate, just wait til the republicans pick someone "smart" or a "viable" candidate.

Pick another north east liberal and get smashed in 08.

[Kramer]

You peekie panish???

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


C'mon thats just funny. Dont be so damn sensitive, life is too short! 8)

[GroobySteven]

All i get on these boards is bush is an idiot, he sucks, rove/chaney are the real bosses, he went to war for the wrong reasons, haliburton, blah blah blah. Well if he was such a crappy candidate, just wait til the republicans pick someone "smart" or a "viable" candidate.

Well Bush is all of those things.

Please please please republicans pick a smart, viable, honest, intelligent, non-crony, open-minded, non-religious candidate - give us a choice so people aren't voting just against a candidate but actually for one they want!
seanchai

[Copenhagen]

i asked for thoughts on the dem candidate in 08, but i guess the higher literacy rate on the left don't apply here. they are talking about 04 and bashing bush.

[GroobySteven]

All i get on these boards is bush is an idiot, he sucks, rove/chaney are the real bosses, he went to war for the wrong reasons, haliburton, blah blah blah. Well if he was such a crappy candidate, just wait til the republicans pick someone "smart" or a "viable" candidate.

Well Bush is all of those things.

Please please please republicans pick a smart, viable, honest, intelligent, non-crony, open-minded, non-religious candidate - give us a choice so people aren't voting just against a candidate but actually for one they want!
seanchai

[Realgirls4me]

i asked for thoughts on the dem candidate in 08, but i guess the higher literacy rate on the left don't apply here. they are talking about 04 and bashing bush.

You asked a question that even political pundits haven't really entertained at this point. The ebb and flow of political campaigns can change with the wind. It's not too far from asking what American city will most likely take the brunt of the next hurricane that comes this way. It's a stupid question at this point, in other words.


And anyone -- anyone -- who defends the domestic and foreign policies of this dunce has to be a moron. This is one inept administration.

[Copenhagen]

How so? The economy is booming.

Its not practical to tell you why Iraq is going well. It would be a circular argument and neither of us would change each others minds.

To broadly say the administration is inept is a broad statement which is false. I won't knock bill clinton, until provoked to do so, but Bush's term has been an improvment in alot of regards.

[El_hefe]

Yeah Copenhagen, it really is kinda sad. Even though I think the Dems could have a very good shot at winning the presidency this time around, I also believe they will probably blow it again due to their incredible blindness & self importance. They are unable to reach out, as much as they give lip service to "diversity", they are no different than the social conservatives really when it come to being open minded or fair. The difference is that the conservatives don't pretend to be " more openminded, more open to discuss diverse views, culturally diversed, and, Ta-dah!, less likely to be intellectually lazy, thus easily swayed by the tinhorns and firebrands ..." (uhh,you mean like Jesse Jackson, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton)

The "more openminded, more open to discuss diverse views" etc., majority on this board "discussions" have consisted of shouting Stupid or Asshole at diverse views & putting jpegs with Bush with his little Hitler moustache. A very lofty & superior group indeed.
I would like to commend Allanah for speaking out for her side with passion, but also with respect for the dialogue & the people here, something that is almost totally lacking from every other "progressive" posting on this board.

And while I wish to disassociate from yourdaddy's baiting, I have to admit that Felicia, when you bit you pretty much showed the shallowness of your argument: ""btw, its not just IQ. Red states have lower literacy rates, fewer college graduates, higher bankruptcy rates and poorer health.
put that in your pipe and smoke it
oh yeah, tobacco use is also most prevalent in red states too. "

Well those figures apply to every recent immigrant group in the U.S. and ESPECIALLY to African Americans. So does that mean that they are all stupid too? Lets put the IQ scores of African Americans, or Mexicans up against the Red Staters in a nice chart like you just did before. I have a feeling you won't. Figures lie & liars figure.

And as for "stealing" the election, when you had a second chance Bush won by a LARGER percentage.

Even tho I'm not a Republican I will continue to mostly vote for them because of their pro business stance & the scary unconscious intolerance among the liberals who think they are so "openminded":
"why is it so hard to say that the blue states are smarter but we keep losing because there are more idiots than smart people out there?"

[Realgirls4me]

How so? The economy is booming.

Its not practical to tell you why Iraq is going well. It would be a circular argument and neither of us would change each others minds.

To broadly say the administration is inept is a broad statement which is false. I won't knock bill clinton, until provoked to do so, but Bush's term has been an improvment in alot of regards.

What policies, reforms, or legislation specifically has the dunce, along with his Republican House and Senate, provided this country to account for this "booming" economy that go beyond the expansions and contractions that any free market economy experiences ? In other words, what has he done specifically to bolster it ?

Are you referring to the Iraq we had no business attacking in the first place ? Maybe you can succeed where your brethren has failed, but can you please enlighten me as to how Iraq was/is tied to 9/11 ?

You can knock Bill Clinton all you want if you must, but how is squandering world sympathy over what happened on 9/11, losing the respect of allies, breaking the treasury, launching an illegal pre-emptive war on falsehoods, and putting Americans in danger for generations to come good for this country ?

I guess those "improvements" would explain his recent poll numbers too, right ?

[Kramer]

holy shit, EL-hefe, you hit the nail on the head! Congrats, you actually took the time to type all the good points ive been wanting to do. But I was to lazy to do all that typing!! :D 8)

[El_hefe]

Yeah, Kramer....my hands are so tired I might not be able to wank off tonight... :P

[Copenhagen]

el hefe, good post man. it did hit the nail on the head.

Realgirls,

Bush was just in China, Boeing was awarded a contract for 17 aircraft. Hence reducing a trade deficit with China. Want other examples?

Also, before Clinton took office we never launched satelites form mainland Asia. Under his shift we did. Shooting a nuke to go accross the globe is like launching something into space. China did not know how to do this until Bill Clinton took office. Then on top of it, they were able to infiltrate and obtain secrets on how to miniturize nuclear warheads (different color security badges were deemed discrimatory in alamos under his watch). So if that isn't endangering you..........ok.

[BlackAdder]

"How so? The economy is booming.

Its not practical to tell you why Iraq is going well. It would be a circular argument and neither of us would change each others minds.

To broadly say the administration is inept is a broad statement which is false. I won't knock bill clinton, until provoked to do so, but Bush's term has been an improvment in alot of regards"


Iraq is simple...Its not going well because you cant win a theological war with guns and bombs, other then genocide. Obviously the Crusades taught us nothing. It would take a good 100(3-4 generations) years of brainwashing to change that culture noticeably.

The economy is booming.....uhh....okay....You so obviously dont work in business that im not even going to go into it, other then to say all the big analytical companies are predicting a recession that will knock your socks off. I think Ill believe Legg Mason before I believe some schmoe on the net.


You wont knock Bill Clinton because you cant.....I dont give a fuck if he was getting his dick sucked by any ho in the office, who he's fucking has nothing to do with how well the administration is running things. Under Clinton the economy was REALLY booming, so much so that we actually had a government surplus for the first time in my living memory....Now thanks to Chimpiya were so far in the hole our grand kids will be paying off Iraq/Katrina.

His approval ratings have fallen like a stone, my stauch republican grandparents are voting all Democratic, and everyone I know has less money to actually spend then in 2000, even if there paycheck is saying there making more.

Theres no point in being articulate though, because you republicans are a bunch of hard headed motherfuckers, who go through life largely with blinders on like a stupid horse after that unreachable carrot....

[Quinn]

How so? The economy is booming.


While it's true that the economy is performing fairly well, you need to look at the underlying dynamics that are powering the current expansion. Two words, in particular, are of particular importance: deficit spending. If they are willing to borrow enough money and run large enough deficits, any national leader or political party can bring about a period of sustained growth for a given country. Think of Argentina and Brazil during the 70s.

Add it up any way you want, but the fact is that many foreign investors and governments are growing uneasy with our deficits; consequently, they are beginning to diversify away from the United States. Why? Keynesian economics gone awry is not a sound economic policy and often leads to more severe future recessions/depressions than would have otherwise normally occurred. Think of Japan’s so-called “lost decade” during the 90s. Keep in mind, this isn't just my opinion, but rather reflects the opinion of many leading economists and investment advisors.

-Quinn

[Copenhagen]

No, popularity is good for hollywood stars. It's bad for leaders. You dont feel iraq is a good spot to go. I respect your opinion. Please FUCKING return the favor. We can argue all year on that and neither of us will change our opinions.

I never wanted Bill to fail. Its like you take pride in anything bad going on under Bush's watch. Do you want america to fail? We could not do anything in afghanistan because Russia failed. Well our military proved that wrong. We were going to lose 50k in the streets of Baghdad taking it. No, we took it and captured Saddam. Unlike a music video on MTV you have to spend more than 3 minutes to try and build a democracy there. The plan in going to iraq was never to leave the people high and dry (like we did after the first gulf war).

My industry had a banner year. Yours didn't i guess. Sorry to hear that. I am guessing you had one of the phone answering jobs that got outsourced to India.

[BlackAdder]

Hmnmm.....You wouldnt happen to work at Wal-mart would you Copenhagen? :twisted:


Eh well...I think we know how the majority of the people in the nation currently feel. Theres going to be a swing to the left which is unfortunate, because there going be left holding the bag after this administration is shit-canned.

[Copenhagen]

Quinn, nice/polite post.

Yes, Clinto had Y2k, no direct result of him. He didnt have to fight the cold war and balanced the budget. It worked in his favor. Bush has had similiar good things going on (some bad too, the hurricanes). I tend to believe our presidents are given too much credit for certain good things (i dont see anyone praising bush on the economy) and too much flak on certain other things (did clinton have anything to do with Waco? no)

Debt on the government level works differently than with our personal finances. This is why when we first went into iraq it was laughable to complain about 80 million dollars. That is alot of money to you or i personally, but in the scheme of our economy it would be the equivilent of you buying a candy bar.


Edited to LOL at Blackaddler, very funny :lol:

[Realgirls4me]

Yeah Copenhagen, it really is kinda sad. Even though I think the Dems could have a very good shot at winning the presidency this time around, I also believe they will probably blow it again due to their incredible blindness & self importance. They are unable to reach out, as much as they give lip service to "diversity", they are no different than the social conservatives really when it come to being open minded or fair. The difference is that the conservatives don't pretend to be " more openminded, more open to discuss diverse views, culturally diversed, and, Ta-dah!, less likely to be intellectually lazy, thus easily swayed by the tinhorns and firebrands ..." (uhh,you mean like Jesse Jackson, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton)

Geez, I seem to recall hearing and seeing both Jesse and Al, for example, include the poor whites of Appalachia(sp?) and the south in their stumps for president as well as justice. How often did one ever hear Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, or the late hypocrite, Strom Thurmond, even mention the term "poor", much less African-Americans or Latinos in their speeches ? Can you name one -- just one -- Republican known to be more inclusive than any of the names you posted, El Hefe ? That is, one that isn't concerned with giving tax breaks for the rich, and instead mentions the downtrotten of our society whenever he or she speaks ?


The "more openminded, more open to discuss diverse views" etc., majority on this board "discussions" have consisted of shouting Stupid or Asshole at diverse views & putting jpegs with Bush with his little Hitler moustache. A very lofty & superior group indeed.
I would like to commend Allanah for speaking out for her side with passion, but also with respect for the dialogue & the people here, something that is almost totally lacking from every other "progressive" posting on this board.

You mean like right after they have parroted some stupid or bigoted comment straight from one of their Gods, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Coulter ? I think you should look back and see the difference twixt an ad hominem attack and one attacking what the person said. I bet the house that those who consider themselves Conservatives are the first with the personal attacks and straying from what another has said.


And while I wish to disassociate from yourdaddy's baiting, I have to admit that Felicia, when you bit you pretty much showed the shallowness of your argument: ""btw, its not just IQ. Red states have lower literacy rates, fewer college graduates, higher bankruptcy rates and poorer health.
put that in your pipe and smoke it
oh yeah, tobacco use is also most prevalent in red states too. "

Did she not tell the truth ? Where was she wrong ?


Well those figures apply to every recent immigrant group in the U.S. and ESPECIALLY to African Americans. So does that mean that they are all stupid too? Lets put the IQ scores of African Americans, or Mexicans up against the Red Staters in a nice chart like you just did before. I have a feeling you won't. Figures lie & liars figure.

The majority of immigrants at this time, illegal and otherwise, are not highly educated or highly skilled (non-professional), thus ignorant and easily swayed into voting for what in many cases are against their very own bread and butter interests. They aren't stupid, just ignorant and easily malleable.


And as for "stealing" the election, when you had a second chance Bush won by a LARGER percentage.

In terms of the popular vote, it was a smaller percentage was it not ? He did steal his first office, thus assisting him easily in landing his second term and staying in power.


Even tho I'm not a Republican I will continue to mostly vote for them because of their pro business stance & the scary unconscious intolerance among the liberals who think they are so "openminded":
"why is it so hard to say that the blue states are smarter but we keep losing because there are more idiots than smart people out there?"

Is this pro-business stance the one that lets them circumvent paying their taxes or creating hollow corporate shelters overseas, etc ? The one that does nothing from curtailing the sending of American jobs overseas ? Look at the history of what the economy has been like when Democrat presidents have been at the helm and then get back to me. For some strange reason, the economy seems to respond a lot better when a Democrat is in power.

What a cowardly move, by the way -- "I'm not a Republican" You could have fooled me. So you're either openminded, or a hypocrite and liar ? Care to tell us what Democrats and Liberals you respect and display that openmind ?

[Realgirls4me]

My industry had a banner year. Yours didn't i guess. Sorry to hear that. I am guessing you had one of the phone answering jobs that got outsourced to India.

Your industry by chance wouldn't be the one manufacturing the yellow magnetic Support Our Troops ribbons I see on cars, is it ? Maybe it's one rigging election machines ?

[Copenhagen]

Yeah, we allowed his first election to be rigged by actually counting military votes. I guess in the kerry election he was shafted in ohio and thats how it lost him the election. Never mind the fact bush was closer to winning Pa. Minn. Wis. N.H. than kerry was to winning ohio.

I dont make magnets either, but sounds like you don't support the troops.

[Realgirls4me]

I dont make magnets either, but sounds like you don't support the troops.

There it is ! I don't care for this country's, or should I say, the Dunce's, adventure in Iraq, so I must be against the troops, right ? Anyone else see what's flawed in his reasoning ?

No, I just think we owe it to our valiant service personnel to send them to wars that our legal, just, and with our allies support to begin with, and not one contrived by chickenhawks who have no ideal what they are putting these men and women through. I would argue that I support our troops more than you being I want them home, where they should have never left to begin with. Wrapping yourself around the flag or yellow ribbon when it's convenient does not make you more a patriot or more supportive of our troops than someone who does not agree with the warped policies that placed them there to begin with.

[Copenhagen]

I dont understand why you even would make a comment like that then (someone making money off support our troop magnets). Good that you support the troops as well. Discussion and debate on that over on that.

I just find a bit of irony, that there are people who had Bush as their commander and chief (clinton as well) and you repeatedly jab at what they are doing over there. If you dont think they are making a difference thats fine, but every time you say its a war for oil, it bothers me. I wasnt in afghanistan for oil. The guys in iraq are doing a hard job that no one else will do. Its a job that needed to be done. If democracy succeeded in iraq would it be a bad thing?

If you dont think we should be in iraq, i can respect that, but i guess i just read your text a little provokingly. IF i am wrong for that, i apologize.

[Copenhagen]

J...... sounds like ignorance is bliss.

but you are happy so whatever floats your boat. At least you are honest about it.

[BlackAdder]

You know what I find funny? That theres people that come out and stand up for the republican party on a transsexual message board. The greatest majority of republicans quietly wish the fags, dykes and transsexuals , hell, ANY minority, would kindly commit mass suicide so they could go on living there American Dream, TM, without such unsavory interruptions as Gay Marriage, Abortion and Gender Variation..

You fucking hypocrites make me sick...I do so wish you swallow those goddamned bibles and choke on them.

[Realgirls4me]

I dont understand why you even would make a comment like that then (someone making money off support our troop magnets). Good that you support the troops as well. Discussion and debate on that over on that.

Uh, someone is, are they not ? Just a thought, but I would like to know how many of these manufacturers (My guess is the bulk are made in China) are simply exploiting people's emotions on this Iraq issue and keeping all the revenue made by such products. It would ease my mind a bit knowing some of the proceeds are actually going to the families of dead or injured soldiers, and not simply there to make a buck.


I just find a bit of irony, that there are people who had Bush as their commander and chief (clinton as well) and you repeatedly jab at what they are doing over there. If you dont think they are making a difference thats fine, but every time you say its a war for oil, it bothers me. I wasnt in afghanistan for oil. The guys in iraq are doing a hard job that no one else will do. Its a job that needed to be done. If democracy succeeded in iraq would it be a bad thing?

Do you think we would be there if it weren't for oil ? What's all the base building there going on for ? Really now, there are tyrants all over the planet. When are we going after them in order to stay consistent ? Democracy was not the reason given as to why we've lost over 2100 service personnel there and injured thousands of other GIs to this point, not to mention the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis who have died. Afghanistan is legit, but it still doesn't address the core reasons why we were attacked on 9/11. Until we address those policies, both military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq I'm afraid are worthless ventures for the most part.


If you dont think we should be in iraq, i can respect that, but i guess i just read your text a little provokingly. IF i am wrong for that, i apologize.

I think you did. It's hard to convey nuance in text at times. You didn't have to apologize, but apology accepted.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

IIf you are on this board and you support the Presidents Agenda- and the Republican Conservative Agenda YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.

I don't care how you slice it and try to come at me with diversity.

DIVERSITY MY ASS-HOW DARE YOU EVEN SUPPORT A MAN THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW SOMEONE LIME ME TO MARRY UNTIL I HAVE A SEX CHANGE.

I AM SICK OF YOU 'CONSERVSTIVES' TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE LIKE ME AND OTHER SEXUAL MINORITIES IN THE CLOSET-

JUUST BECAUSE YOU ARE IN THE CLOSET- DOES NOT MEAN I, NOR ANY ONE THIS COMMUNITY NEED ME.

SHAME ON YOU
SHAME ON YOU
SHAME ON YOU

I bet you GOOD money- the conservative arguments here are coming from white men.

Spend a year in my shoes dear- and let's see if you change your mind.

[Hugh Jarrod]

You know what I find funny? That theres people that come out and stand up for the republican party on a transsexual message board. The greatest majority of republicans quietly wish the fags, dykes and transsexuals , hell, ANY minority, would kindly commit mass suicide so they could go on living there American Dream, TM, without such unsavory interruptions as Gay Marriage, Abortion and Gender Variation..

You fucking hypocrites make me sick...I do so wish you swallow those goddamned bibles and choke on them.


Not all, however as you said the overwhelming majority yes.

[El_hefe]

Here's the reasons:

As we can see above & in every preceding page of this thread the Dem supporters are just as crude, intolerant, red faced with yelling names & insults at the opposition as any bible thumping open-mouthed breathing yahoo from the red zone....THE DIFFERENCE IS THE YAHOOS WILL ADMIT TO IT, THAT THEY DON'T LIKE THIS OR DON'T WANT THAT... MOST DEMS HAVE A TOTALLY BLIND FAITH IN THEMSELVES AS THE SUPERIOR & OPENMINDED CLASS EVEN AS THEY ARE YELLING THE SAME INSULTS & BEING JUST AS NARROWMINDED AS THE "HOLIER THAN THOU" CROWD.
Intolerance on both sides cancel the moral superiority arguments for either out, for me anyway: blue faced intolerant dopes are the same as red faced intolerant assholes, so whats to choose from?
What you think is the most important issues facng the country right now & which party/candidate has the most impressive record of results, not rhetoric.

I would like to see gay rights, decriminalization of drugs & other "vice" offenses, abortions available to any adult who can pay/has insurance, the ability to smoke in establishments that want to allow it, but these aren't the most important issues as far as I'm concerned.
I want to know how a candidate will protect the nation & it's interests: terrorism, access to all, esp. oil, markets including more offshore drilling & opening up ANWAR, more nuke plants, giving business incentives to take risks in this fast moving global market that might create new jobs instead of constantly raising the tax rates & funding more government programs that takes currency out of private circulation. I want CEO & COOs that loot companies locked up & a some kind of national health plan that isn't penalizing the businesses that make most of the products & services.

So in the end it's not a zero/sum game, I'm not going to suck W's dick....or Hillary's bigger dick....just pick someone who has the best ideas about staying strong in the global economy & against terrorism. Big picture, that's been Red.

[Hugh Jarrod]

Man I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with a lot of what you said El_hefe. Though I'm not for more offshore oil drilling, and opening up ANWAR. As well giving insentives to big companies, for what so they can out source more jobs? Maybe giving incentives to develop renewable resources freeing us from dependancy on Foriegn energy supplies. Maybe that way we can stop sucking Saudi dick, and paying them money that will go to terrorists. When I say we I mean America because you can't tell me every admin since the 60's hasn't been sucking Saudi dick Rep or Dem. I want a candidate that'll fight terrorism with intelligence (Meaning CIA, and FBI) and intillect. I want a candidate that won't start a war for one reason then when questioned change that reason, then change it again, and again (Bush) take a stance and stick to it! I don't want a candidate who will retaliate an attack with a simple missile launch, hope the best has happened and wite it off (Clinton) dammit do something real! Right now I like McCain.

[tsluver247]

Rant:
Personally, I believe that electing someone on one issue, i.e. Gay Marriage, is rather narrow-sided. There are many issues that Americans need to be aware of then just Gay Marriage. I can understand if Gay Marriage is a major topic for you, but, in my opinion, one issue should not be the reason you vote for someone. Personally, I do not see how banning gay marriage or protecting the word marriage for a man and a woman is stop homosexuals from doing what they are doing now. This is just a ploy by Republicans to get Independents to vote for them. This bill is a Karl Rove tactic to play the GAY card. It works all the time for him. Being Republican and being gay is mutually exclusive, look at the Log Cabin Republicans (http://www.logcabin.org/logcabin/home.html).

As far as war on terrorism, both parties have avoided issues with our border controls until now. Millions cross the borders every year illegally. How can we ensure that they are not terrorists?

As far as the war on terrorism, the Iraq War and the war on terrorism is mutually exclusive. The independent 9/11 commission said there was no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. There were no terrorists in Iraq before the war. The war in Iraq is over. We defeated Saddam in 21 days. Back in 2003, Bush said the mission was accomplished. Right now, America is nation building in Iraq.

A George W. Bush quote on Nov. 6, 2000:
Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place.

Bush does not want a timetable for exiting Iraq.
In 1999, George W. Bush criticized President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo, and yet he refuses to apply the same standard to his war.

George W. Bush, 4/9/99:

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

And on the specific need for a timetable, here’s what Bush said then and what he says now:

George W. Bush, 6/5/99

“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

Right now, in my opinion, our troops are occupying Iraq to keep the peace until the Iraqi government is working and Iraqi's law enforcement and troops can support their own country. Right now, our troops are the target. Generals in Iraq say they do not have enough troops to secure the borders. Right now, Iran has a lot of influence on the Shiite Muslums in Iraq, especially supporting Shiite militias. These Shiite miltias could make a civil war break out in Iraq. These Shiite militias are the major of insurgents in Iraq. Believe it or not, most insurgents in Iraq are from Iraq and not foreign. [Read this week's Newsweek article]

The War on Terrorism:
Key Al Qaeda Figure Killed (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/12/03/terror/main1095163.shtml)
One of al Qaeda's top five leaders, said to be responsible for planning overseas strikes, was killed by Pakistani security forces in a rocket attack near the Afghan border with U.S. help, American and Pakistani officials said Saturday.

Why is the Bush Administration continuing to outsource the war on Terrorism? It was said that Bin Laden was in Tora Bora and it was again Pakistan fighting the war. Whether you believe that Bin Laden was there or not, why is Pakistan fighting the war on terrorism while the U.S. is not leading the effort? If anything, more troops should be in Afghanistan and Pakistan finding the real terrorist, Osama Bin Laden. You know the one that masterminded the 9/11 attack on U.S. soil.

Unfortunately, I used to be a conservative, but the neo-cons have change the party I once voted for. While in the Contract with America, Republicans talked about restoring America's trust in the government by getting rid of corruption, limiting government, and balancing the budget. That was great rhetoretic. Unfortunately, their promise to America has failed. This is more corruption in government now, e.g. Cheney, Libby, Rove, Frist, DeLay, and Cunningham. The government is much larger under the Bush Administration. Once again, the budget is bleeding red. Republicans have been the most fiscally irresponsible party. Under Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush 43 presidence, the federal debt under their Administrations account for over 60% of America's total debt. See for yourself (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm).

If the conservatives resort back to original promise to the American people and stop listening and setting legislation by the extreme right, i.e. Gay Marriage, I may vote conservative once again. But I do not see that happening any time soon.

I suggest all Americans watch Karl Rove the Artitect by PBS (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/architect/). See how he masterminded the Republican back to power. He loves to divide America. United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Yes I guess the issues are not as important to you because you are not gay and you can get married and you would never need an abortion right?
I guess it's not important to you that this administration is trying to curtail and come doen hard on the idult innstry- but you don't benefit from it- less getting off- so the issues is not important to you. I guess the isuee of equal rights is not importsnt to you because I bet you have nevere faced discrimination based on your gender or sexual orientation.

I can see where you are coming from-as I said before and was correct you are a WHTE MALE that this social issues have little effect and inportance of.

By the way I live in Manhattan- I saw the Twin Towers fall from a window.
You can't tell me about being affected bt terrorism.

[McRen]

One thing I find hard to believe is that there are intelligent people who are completely christian (believe in creationism over evolution and science), and completely right wing. How can you be smart yet ignore obvious facts and be closed minded all at the same time.

[tsluver247]

Yes I guess the issues are not as important to you because you are not gay and you can get married and you would never need an abortion right?
I guess it's not important to you that this administration is trying to curtail and come doen hard on the idult innstry- but you don't benefit from it- less getting off- so the issues is not important to you. I guess the isuee of equal rights is not importsnt to you because I bet you have nevere faced discrimination based on your gender or sexual orientation.

I can see where you are coming from-as I said before and was correct you are a WHTE MALE that this social issues have little effect and inportance of.

By the way I live in Manhattan- I saw the Twin Towers fall from a window.
You can't tell me about being affected bt terrorism.

With all due respect, Allanah, the points I was trying to make about Gay Marriage are 1) no one should vote on just one issue, 2) passing a ban on Gay Marriage is not going to change the same sex dating or getting into a relationship (it is meanless legislation to divide America and to gather more votes for the Republicans - watch Karl Rove the Artitect - a gay Republican with his partner in life took a photo with the President and the First Lady - he was a big political fundraiser for the Republican party and he was in a same sex relationship), and 3) being gay and Republican are mutually exclusive.

As far as the gay marriage issue, I support same sex unions. Just because I do not consider myself homosexual does not mean homosexual rights or rights of any American are not important to me. I believe in the Declaration of Independence where it states, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Please show me where they were just talking about heterosexual men. If a homosexual man wants to pursue happiness by getting married, then according to the sentence in the preamble in the Declaration of Independence America is breaking their unalienable rights.

I do not like what the Bush Administration is doing to America, especially with the Adult Industry, Supreme Court, the Federal Budget, Equal Rights, etc. I never stated anything about what the Bush Administration and the adult industry. I never stated that equal rights is not important to me. I do not think anyone should have their rights taken away because of sexuality, gender, race, etc. The Bush Administration has been horrible on rights and liberties, look at the Patriot Act, e.g. Sneak and Peak Warrants. Look at Jose Padilla (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28terrorist%29), a U.S. citizen, and his right to a speed trial and to see a lawyer. He was not even charged with what the Administration leaked about him being a terrorist. There is no mention in the indictment of Padilla's alleged plot to use a dirty bomb in the United States. There is also no mention that Padilla ever planned to stage any attacks inside the country. And there is no direct mention of Al-Qaeda. Whether he was or is a terrorist, he is a U.S. citizen charge him with a crime and let him have his day in court, do not try to break the laws of the land by calling him an illegal enemy combatant.

I never said anything about you affected by terrorism. Terrorism affects the world. I do not like that Bush's war on Iraq diverted our attention on the war on terrorism. Terrorism may be in Iraq now, but it was not before the Iraq War.

[tsluver247]

As far as the abortion, I do not believe that women should get an abortion, but that is my personal belief. I think women should be given information to make an informed choice. There are other avenues like adoption. Those are just my beliefs, but that does not mean that I believe that abortion should be banned.

I do not see how pro-lifers beat the drum about abortion, but overlook the Diamond v. Chakrabarty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_v._Chakrabarty) decision, where businesses can patent life. Genetech and other companies are patenting human genes. Why is this not a hot button issue?

[BlackAdder]

"One thing I find hard to believe is that there are intelligent people who are completely christian (believe in creationism over evolution and science), and completely right wing. How can you be smart yet ignore obvious facts and be closed minded all at the same time."


Answer: You cant be smart and believe all that. To truly smart people, some truths are self-evident. Otherwise its a conscious choice to lead your life with your delusional blinders on. Ignoring obvious facts is a kind of insanity...Unfortunetly, it seems to be quite popular.


And just for the record, I think both parties are complete garbage....A two party system was never intended by our founding fathers and I imagine there turning in there graves lately....

Ive been a Libertarian since 1998, and while the party doesnt have the best candidates, it DOES have the best politics and platforms.


And Ill state once again for the record, Pro-Republican = Anti-gay, Anti-minority, Anti- alternate religion and Anti-personal freedom.


If your on this board out of any board, and preaching the wonders of the Republican party, your either very delusional, demented or just plain old retarded and I feel sorry for you..

[BlackAdder]

"I do not see how pro-lifers beat the drum about abortion, but overlook the Diamond v. Chakrabarty decision, where businesses can patent life. Genetech and other companies are patenting human genes. Why is this not a hot button issue?"


Because its being done oh so quietly and most Americans cant really understand whats going on, or the concepts behind it and where it all might lead too.......That particular subject is a frightening mess. Oh, and biotech is going to be the next Big Business so the Republicans are behind it.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

i was addressing my comments more to el hefe

i am pro life- and STRONGLY believe in a woman's right to choose

[BlackAdder]

"There are other avenues like adoption"


What about those women who just dont want to put there body or mind through that ordeal?? You think it ends at adoption?? Oh no sir...No no no lol.



You all recall the HUGE Faux Pas where the FDA didnt approve the RU486 pills for over the counter use ENTIRELY CONTRARY to what the science and information studies behind it showed?

Its pure political bullshit. Sickening.

Once more simple like....Swallow Bible, commence choking.

[chefmike]

its so much easier to not have to argue policy and stats, i simply hate fuckin conservative assholes, simple;)


J, you're right, why bother with these deluded schmucks...how can anyone mention "war on terror" with a straight face...homeland security, do you mean the repeal of the bill of rights? The only "war on terror" we ever fought was in Afghanistan...and we abandoned that effort, and now the drug lords control it, kinda like 'nam...the only war on terror now, is the one that monkeyboy created in Iraq...don't ya love it how monkeyboy only speaks before a handpicked, screened audience? fuck you assholes...I hope every one of you fools who supports this quagmire has a relative in Iraq...tell them about the "war on terror" and how "they hate us for our freedom"...

[McRen]

One way I see this topic is that there are 2 sides, and not necessarily red and blue. There is the type of person that thinks 'MY WAY IS THE ONLY WAY, AND EVERYONE WHO IS DIFFERENT IS WRONG, AND NEEDS TO CHANGE, OR BE FIXED, EVEN IF THAT MEANS KILLING OR STRIPPING RIGHTS'

The other side thinks 'EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO ANYTHING THEY WANT WITH THEIR LIVES, AS LONG AS THEY DONT HURT ANYONE ELSE (other than the type mentioned above, who seems to be 'hurt' simply by the 2nd type of people existing)

Put into that context, how could someone agree that the 1st type of person is correct in how they view themselves and the world.

[tsluver247]

Why is the president talking about spread freedom and liberties to the Middle East, why he slows strips away his own country's freedoms and liberties?

[tsluver247]

Why rebuild Iraq, when we have New Orleans to rebuild?

[4DegreesWarmer]

Why rebuild Iraq, when we have New Orleans to rebuild?

Naturally, our local issues should receive a greater focus...

Unfortunately, we entered into Iraq...we shouldn't have. Definitely, not under false pretenses, but the fact is: we did. We've torn down the old system, so we have no other option but to assist in rebuilding.

Any arguing and debating over why we shouldn't have ventured there and the reasons stated being bullshit are superfluous and asinine. Now we have to focus on solutions for the present...and hopefully in 08, the general public won't be so uninformed, though I'll try not to be too optimistic.

[BlackAdder]

If the cons get elected again in 08, I swear Im moving......

[TgirlloverinPA]

"Gore, for example, made a conscious decision to run to the left of Clinton in order to distinguish himself as his own man. He accomplished this quite nicely by loosing an election he should have easily won."

Errrr... an election he arguably did win.... but I'll leave that up to the history books.

[TgirlloverinPA]

Well, the best way to shape American politics is to participate at the most local level. Mayor of podunk, state senator, city council, regent or what have you. grass roots really can make a difference. You may not think it but it can make a difference, just look at Dover, PA. We all thought we were turning that corner to the extreme fundamentalist right then this school board gets booted. HooRay SCIENCE!

[BlackAdder]

I gotta give you guys props out there in Dover...Im glad you booted the whole lazy batch of em.

[miatafan]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051212/berman

Theres an excellent article in The Nation magazine that tries to counter the media lovefest currently going on for John McCain. McCain is a republican and cant be trusted. He is no maverick, he is not a "good man" Dems could support. He has some good qualities but he is a REPUBLICAN...which means he believes in the war, he voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, he's anti-civil rights, anti-minority, he believes in tax cuts in a time of war, and he's anti-choice for women regarding abortion.

Dummies like elhefe, Copenhagen, and other "alleged" dems join the Zell Miller/Joe Liberman/ Joe Biden wing of Dems who really are republicans but for some reason stay registered as Dems and vote Republican.

We have had Republican-lite and the DLC with Clinton and now with Evan Bayh and Hillary Clinton. We need a candidate who believes in the true values Dems represent and Howard Dean is trying to separate Dems from special interests. This is a very good thing. If we get away from special interest, we won't have legislation written by corporations and lobbyists....we wont have the Joe Bidens voting for MBNA when they vote for the bankruptcy bill.

Dems support regular people....not special interests. As Truman said, why vote for the guy that looks like a Republican when you can vote for the real thing. ( i paraphrase that quote but its still true in its point)

When i hear people like Copenhagen and ElJefe, I am so disgusted that they try to exist in both worlds...just be like Zell/Liberman and go ahead and suck up to the Repugs...and quit pretending to support the right values, not fake republican values. Real Dems NEVER vote republican.....!!! Angry white men vote Republican......along with the stupid.

[chefmike]

Welcome aboard, that was a helluva first post. I just wonder if the dems can ever get a truly progressive candidate past the nomination process. And I just can't allow myself to vote green, knowing they don't have a snowballs chance in hell (yet). So I feel that a vote for whatever dem is running is at least a vote against the republican agenda.

[chefmike]

And speaking of Lieberman and McCain...some news from a progressive source....


http://rawstory.com/

[tsluver247]

The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever (Hardcover) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465083323/qid=1133918606/sr=8-2/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-3136034-5204653?n=507846&s=books&v=glance)

We need more legislation on Border Security, Privacy Laws, and addressing the ID Theft Issue. Stop special interest bills like Bankruptcy Reform and Energy Bills (http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8130) and Highway Bills (http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=9178&news_iv_ctrl=1025).

Help Kill the Death Tax! (http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=CCAGW_getinv_Advocacy_DeathTax _IssuePage) Don't give more money to the rich!!!

[miatafan]

Thanksfor posting that information. This week Bush is out talking about he has a plan for victory when the 9/11 commission is making it crystal clear to every American that he has not in the least bit done anything to insure our future safety. Think about that, nothing has been done to protect us and this Republican president and congress has spent ludicrous cash over the last 5 years. Results for that spending - ZIP, Ziltch, dick...

Yet there are still people like the two gentlemen I castigated earlier and millions more who continue to support this failed administratrion because they can't get over the idea that Clinton got a BJ or people let their religion cloud their common sense.

Think about how nutty it is to vote against your best interest. Think how nutty it is to see billions go to Iraq and nada to New Orleans. I think we should take care of own first. This administration is anti-progress for youth. The congress and president went out of their way to support the end of refinancing student loans...can you imagine why that was necessary. They support corporate profits over letting our youth benefit from fluctuations in interest rates rather than default on their loans. The new deal was a great legacy and its terrible to let these repugs destroy it.

What's worse is again those people who claim the Dem label then pollute it by supporting predatory Republican policies. This is riduculous. Before you next vote Republican, think about all the accomplishments coming from the left. Think about the short list of accomplishments from the right.

Liberals and Democrats do much better for Americans.....to lift us all to better success....instead of just a few rich cronies and business partners.




The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever (Hardcover) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465083323/qid=1133918606/sr=8-2/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-3136034-5204653?n=507846&s=books&v=glance)

We need more legislation on Border Security, Privacy Laws, and addressing the ID Theft Issue. Stop special interest bills like Bankruptcy Reform and Energy Bills (http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8130) and Highway Bills (http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=9178&news_iv_ctrl=1025).

Help Kill the Death Tax! (http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=CCAGW_getinv_Advocacy_DeathTax _IssuePage) Don't give more money to the rich!!!

[miatafan]

Hi chef, we all have good reasons for wanting to vote other than Dem ..mayb e green, maybe liberatarian...but we can't because for now there is a two party system....the Repugs and the Dems...its not ideal...and Dems have a lot to do to meet up with what we want them to do....I can never understand why people don't see that. Its more honest to say "I hate the Dems but I can't risk idiots like Bush getting into office any more". We understand that you have to compromise for now. Dems need to see that they have drifted away from people and let other issues and special interests cloud the true goals...and those that stay home only play into the hands of the Repugs...thats what they want....disfranchised voters who dont execute their greatest power, the power of one person, one vote.

When you stay home or vote 3rd-party, we all lose....cause the Repugs and the religious right are going to show up to force their narrow or "alleged moral" views on Americans....we have to counter their votes, we have to counter their tampering with voting machines, we have to counter their desire to disenfranchaise..by simply showing up and doing the right thing.

Then we have to keep the pressure on the dems to support people not corporations and special interests.


Welcome aboard, that was a helluva first post. I just wonder if the dems can ever get a truly progressive candidate past the nomination process. And I just can't allow myself to vote green, knowing they don't have a snowballs chance in hell (yet). So I feel that a vote for whatever dem is running is at least a vote against the republican agenda.

[miatafan]

I disagree, if the Dems were smart they would gain all 3 houses then really go public in showing america that they can work with Repugs.....but for a few months we need to correct the nuttiness, then get back to regular government....hat would need to be explained to all Americans,.......

knowing that won't happen... Dems need the presidency and the house at minimum, we need the house to impeach and do more serious investigations.

i predict we get the senate back in 06 but not sure about the house but i hope so....



btw, a democratic president with a republican congress wouldn't be such a bad thing right now. need some checks and balances...our government has never been bigger, spent more, nor more out of control then they are right now

[Felicia Katt]

help kill the Death tax. Don't give more money to the rich!!!
Killing the death tax to not give more money to the rich is like not wearing a condom to avoid STDS.

The so called "Death tax" is an estate tax only on the very wealthy. here are some facts about it

Ninety-eight percent of Americans who die pass their estate on to their heirs completely tax-free. Zero estate tax is charged on assets left to a spouse or to charity.
For 98% of Americans, the estate tax takes away nothing. For the other 2%, the average effective tax rate is 19%.
Most estate tax revenue comes from the top 0.14% of Americans – the few thousand people each year with estates larger than $5 million. In 2001, an even smaller and wealthier group, the 1,337 people with estates greater than $10 million, paid over a third of all estate taxes collected that year – for an average tax of $6 million per estate.
http://www.faireconomy.org/estatetax/ETMythsFacts.html

The example always cited is the family farm. The New York Times reported that the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Federation could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax. Like businesses, family farms can be protected by raising exemption levels. The Democrats proposed raising the exemptions for farms and all smaller businesses to 8 million, and were rebuffed. They then tried to raise the exemption to 100 million. and were again voted against on strictly partisan grounds.

The "death tax" is about helping the uberwealthy either stay that way, or get wealthier. Death and Taxes may be inevitable, but sympathy for a Paris Hilton only getting 80 per cent of her 100 million dollar inheritence is not.

FK

[tsluver247]

"Death Tax" is Republican linguistics to make people think that people get taxed when they die. They found out eliminating the "Death Tax" was better than saying eliminate the "Estate Tax". It is called Orwellian speek. "Tax Relief" Tax has a negative connotation - relief is taking away. Tax Relief has a meaning of taking away a negative connotation. Argue against Tax Relief and you say like you want to keep the negative connotation. Look at the Republicans' bill "Clear Skies Act" or "Healthy Forests Restoration Act". The Healthy Forests Restoration Act cut down the unhealthy trees for the paper companies. Vote against it makes you look back, despite the facts of the bill. Look how this type of language made John Kerry look like he did not support the troops when he tried to explain they he voted for the $87 billion before he vote against it. There were 3 bills floating around with the same purpose, but the bill he vetoed against was a Republican bill laced the admendments to the bill that favor the Republican agenda. Republican know how to frame the debates.

Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1931498717/qid=1133931123/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-3321108-7324821?n=507846&s=books&v=glance)

How Democrats and Progressives Can Win: Solutions from George Lakoff (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002YXYY8/ref=pd_sim_b_5/002-3321108-7324821?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=130)

[Felicia Katt]

So in reality, you were advocatiing to kill the pending repeal of the estate tax? Not to kill the tax itself, which is the Republican's agenda? That wasn't at all clear from your post.

FK

[Crawler]

Barak Obama....no doubt...... Good call!