DNC, GOP Conventions, Presidential elections + more. Palin's Daughter Pregnant :eek: [Archive] - Page 5 - MensTennisForums.com

DNC, GOP Conventions, Presidential elections + more. Palin's Daughter Pregnant :eek:

Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

Scotso
11-08-2006, 06:19 PM
So what's happening in Virginia?? CNN is saying the vote difference is 6708, down from 8132 about 2 hours ago. Is this vote number due to absentee??

The Democrats seem convinced that Webb's lead will hold... and since the Republicans are staying pretty silent, that leads me to believe they also think they've lost.

El Legenda
11-08-2006, 06:23 PM
:lol: my Political Science class was breaking out in fist fights today :rolls:

i just seat in the back and watched

mangoes
11-08-2006, 06:24 PM
The Democrats seem convinced that Webb's lead will hold... and since the Republicans are staying pretty silent, that leads me to believe they also think they've lost.

Ok.........true, that is a positive sign. I hope they concede and don't keep this going for weeks. I did hear Allen's campaign "something" person give a speech that seemed to hint at possible legal reasons to denounce the vote numbers.

Sparko1030
11-08-2006, 06:24 PM
By the way, look at this result http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/CT/H/02/ :rolls:. That's what i call close.

Proof every vote DOES count!!! :eek:

El Legenda
11-08-2006, 06:25 PM
MBF, got a question about Virginia gay Marriage ban...
is that a ban on gay marriage completely or legally/state recognized

NATAS81
11-08-2006, 06:25 PM
Perot was pure trash and also the biggest set of flappers in political history.

It's great that he lost and I hate when independants take away votes from the main candidates when they know they have no shot of winning.

Sparko1030
11-08-2006, 06:25 PM
Man, I wish Cindy Sheehan would just shut up and go home. That woman annoys me.


Yeah, like one of the commentators said, "someone tell her that her side won" :lol: I sympathize with her but she has definatly become shrill.....

NATAS81
11-08-2006, 06:26 PM
:lol: my Political Science class was breaking out in fist fights today :rolls:

They have nobody to blame but the city of St. Louis. Poor, immature beings.

Scotso
11-08-2006, 06:29 PM
What is she doing?

Protesting at the White House again. As usual.

Scotso
11-08-2006, 06:31 PM
MBF, got a question about Virginia gay Marriage ban...
is that a ban on gay marriage completely or legally/state recognized

Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:

Clara Bow
11-08-2006, 06:32 PM
Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:


That is pretty pathetic.

El Legenda
11-08-2006, 06:33 PM
Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:

thats terrible. was that the case for all other states that had it for vote.

Scotso
11-08-2006, 06:36 PM
thats terrible. was that the case for all other states that had it for vote.

Not all of them, no. But most, I think.

Scotso
11-08-2006, 06:43 PM
Time for an interview :wavey:

Go Webb :rocker2:

alelysafina
11-08-2006, 06:44 PM
Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:

:( :( That's just stupid and wrong!

Sparko1030
11-08-2006, 06:52 PM
Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:

:mad: It even bans private companies for offering benefits????? Man, what are these voters so afraid of?????

zicofirol
11-08-2006, 07:51 PM
Well, you have a LOT of anger there.... I understand that since the last 6 years have been a nightmare for me. Look, you want little government so you are likely to be critical of any programs. You feign concern for the poor and unskilled but find rationals for not supporting raising the minimum wage, and dispairage programs to help the disadvantage. You complain about poor mothers who need finacial help to take care of their kids, yet seem to be agianst abortion. And yes, I am quite confident any person who is a parent will want health insureance for them. Trust me on that one-when a parent is put in the position of choosing a trip to the dr for their sick child vs feeding them,if they love thier child, yes, that person will want the insrueance. I don't trust health insurance companies either and they are big part of the current problem, yet YOU don't want the government to step in and do anything about it-who else will???? Experience has taught us that business is not capable of policing itself. Greed is a much stronger urge than doing the right thing.

I don't like what the current adminstration has done with the military either but to be without one would be more than foolhardy. Do you really think we would last without the military????? What do you think N. Korea, China and other assorted powers would do without a strong US???? Do you know any history????? We must wield our power wisely but we must maintain it. And don't blame the military when its the president who is responsible for the current mess. And the US electorate has finally told Bush ENOUGH!!!!!

You think I'm self rightous for wanting the government to help people. So be it, label me as you like, I know my motivations. If you think compassion is the wrong reason for the government to "help" then consider how society and therefore the economy benifits from all citizens being well ecducated and in stable environments. You slam public education yet seem not to care to do anything about it. Public education is the the backbone of our culture/economy/society. We ALL benefit from a well educated public and if its not working, we need to fix it, not abandon it.

Really, it seems you have a lot complain about but offer nothing but cynisim, no solutions. I still think you'd be happier on that deserted island. :)
I dont think you understood my post, everything I mentioned there are IMO abuses of government power.

Ill sum up my position, I believe the only job for government is to protect our rights, our rights include property, life, liberty. From those rights you can specify other rights but they all come from these 3 mainly life and liberty. Because we have those rights a person can choose to live his own lifestyle as long as it does not violate another person's right.
So I believe these be legal: abortion, drug usage(all of them), prostitution, gay-marriage(although marriage being a religious term should not even be certified by gov. they should only certify unions for both types of relationships) etc. Now I
am not saying I condone these activities am just saying they should be legal. Because non of these violate another person's right in other word non of these initiate force against anyone else.

As for the other issues.
Because of my concern for the poor I realize that minimum wage HURTS the poorest people, because of job loses, this is not some made up stat, and like I said the overwhelming majority of economist agree that minimum wage hurts the poorest and lowest skilled workers. This is proven by theory and facts, so knowing that how can you support minimum wage?
Also, it is not governments job to force an employer to pay a certain wage, that is a voluntary agreement between employee and employer.

Since you apparently have infinite wisdom, if medical cost in some fields where lowered so much so that insurance would no longer be needed would they stil want insurance then? Every parent wants health care for their children, how they want it is another issue entirely, or how much of it they want, maybe they just want insurance to cover life threating diseases etc. so who the fuck are you to make the decision for them?

As for government, anything they touch turns to shit, they are in bed with the big companies,it is filled(not entirely and not all politicians are this, but for the most part) with liars, cheats, basically the scum of the earth, government has killed more people than any other thing, person in history. Yet you have this blind faith in them. Dont you see that the more power government has the more they will abuse it, the more it will attract parasites.
If they would let up their countless regulations on the medical industry im sure the prices would go down, making less of a need for insurance companies unless what they propose is cost effective. The consumers would control the insurance companies, not some politician who just makes this worse anyway.

Who says am against the military and who says I was talking about the current war? Am all for having a strong military, however they should not be sent on excursions throughout the world, either to spread democracy, or intervene in a place that poses no threat to America (Somalia, Serbia/Kosovo, Haiti etc.)

I dont think your self righteous for wanting government to help people, I think your self-righteous for assuming you know what people want. Again why do you trust government so much? besides they are so inefficient that I cant believe support what they do.

I agree, public indoctrination is the backbone of the USA, that is why we end up with a choice of Bush or Kerry for president. Again the mind of children are so valuable to society that your willing to risk them by having the state "educate" them :eek:

The only "solution" is a free-market(capitalism) the same system that works for so many other products and services, the only free system where ideas, products and services can be exchanged without government interference. The country that came closest to being a true capitalist nation was the USA and in about 100 years it became a world super power reaching previously unimaginable standards of living(look at what the age of enlightenment and the industrial revolution brought to the world?). The same has happened in other countries with freer economies and societies, they are the most successful. While the countries with the most government interference are, either defunct or hellholes.

As for wanting to help people, I am all for it, but I believe government thus a terrible job at it so they should be left out of it and it should be left up to citizens to do it. besides government has no right or at least should not have the right to steal from one citizen to give it to another.
Having said that why do you have so much trust in government, if you think single mothers should get help why dont you do it with your own money, there are plenty of charities that do that and do it much better than government.

zicofirol
11-08-2006, 07:52 PM
Completely. It also bans any kind of domestic partnerships, and even forbids private companies from offering benefits to domestic partners. :rolleyes:

why is that wrong? that's democracy!!!

Sparko1030
11-08-2006, 08:02 PM
I dont think you understood my post, everything I mentioned there are IMO abuses of government power.

Ill sum up my position, I believe the only job for government is to protect our rights, our rights include property, life, liberty. From those rights you can specify other rights but they all come from these 3 mainly life and liberty. Because we have those rights a person can choose to live his own lifestyle as long as it does not violate another person's right.
So I believe these be legal: abortion, drug usage(all of them), prostitution, gay-marriage(although marriage being a religious term should not even be certified by gov. they should only certify unions for both types of relationships) etc. Now I
am not saying I condone these activities am just saying they should be legal. Because non of these violate another person's right in other word non of these initiate force against anyone else.

As for the other issues.
Because of my concern for the poor I realize that minimum wage HURTS the poorest people, because of job loses, this is not some made up stat, and like I said the overwhelming majority of economist agree that minimum wage hurts the poorest and lowest skilled workers. This is proven by theory and facts, so knowing that how can you support minimum wage?
Also, it is not governments job to force an employer to pay a certain wage, that is a voluntary agreement between employee and employer.

Since you apparently have infinite wisdom, if medical cost in some fields where lowered so much so that insurance would no longer be needed would they stil want insurance then? Every parent wants health care for their children, how they want it is another issue entirely, or how much of it they want, maybe they just want insurance to cover life threating diseases etc. so who the fuck are you to make the decision for them?

As for government, anything they touch turns to shit, they are in bed with the big companies,it is filled(not entirely and not all politicians are this, but for the most part) with liars, cheats, basically the scum of the earth, government has killed more people than any other thing, person in history. Yet you have this blind faith in them. Dont you see that the more power government has the more they will abuse it, the more it will attract parasites.
If they would let up their countless regulations on the medical industry im sure the prices would go down, making less of a need for insurance companies unless what they propose is cost effective. The consumers would control the insurance companies, not some politician who just makes this worse anyway.

Who says am against the military and who says I was talking about the current war? Am all for having a strong military, however they should not be sent on excursions throughout the world, either to spread democracy, or intervene in a place that poses no threat to America (Somalia, Serbia/Kosovo, Haiti etc.)

I dont think your self righteous for wanting government to help people, I think your self-righteous for assuming you know what people want. Again why do you trust government so much? besides they are so inefficient that I cant believe support what they do.

I agree, public indoctrination is the backbone of the USA, that is why we end up with a choice of Bush or Kerry for president. Again the mind of children are so valuable to society that your willing to risk them by having the state "educate" them :eek:

The only "solution" is a free-market(capitalism) the same system that works for so many other products and services, the only free system where ideas, products and services can be exchanged without government interference. The country that came closest to being a true capitalist nation was the USA and in about 100 years it became a world super power reaching previously unimaginable standards of living(look at what the age of enlightenment and the industrial revolution brought to the world?). The same has happened in other countries with freer economies and societies, they are the most successful. While the countries with the most government interference are, either defunct or hellholes.

As for wanting to help people, I am all for it, but I believe government thus a terrible job at it so they should be left out of it and it should be left up to citizens to do it. besides government has no right or at least should not have the right to steal from one citizen to give it to another.
Having said that why do you have so much trust in government, if you think single mothers should get help why dont you do it with your own money, there are plenty of charities that do that and do it much better than government.


Ah, you're a libertarian, of sorts. Yes, I guess I must have misunderstood you becuase I never gleaned any of this from your previous post. Your arguments are still full of contradictions IMO and with your view of government and its role I'm sure we'll never see eye to eye. Perhaps we can just agree to disagree....but we can do that in this imperfect country and that still counts for a lot. And governemnt, even this administration has heard the voters and is making changes already. I know my vote and all the others were heard this time. If you don't like the way things are and want change, you have to do more than complain. :p

zicofirol
11-08-2006, 08:21 PM
Ah, you're a libertarian, of sorts. Yes, I guess I must have misunderstood you becuase I never gleaned any of this from your previous post. Your arguments are still full of contradictions IMO and with your view of government and its role I'm sure we'll never see eye to eye. Perhaps we can just agree to disagree....but we can do that in this imperfect country and that still counts for a lot. And governemnt, even this administration has heard the voters and is making changes already. I know my vote and all the others were heard this time. If you don't like the way things are and want change, you have to do more than complain. :p

Yes, although I am in disagreement with the LP in some serious issues but if you want to put me in a political spectrum I am libertarian, in agreement with basic economic philosophy of the Austrian school of economics.

yes we can agree to disagree, as for changing your opinion I was staunchly in the middle and I changed my mind :D

undomiele
11-08-2006, 08:28 PM
I waited soooo long for this bitch to fall! Sweet icing on the cake I tell ya...

Johnny Groove
11-08-2006, 08:31 PM
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08 :yeah:

zicofirol
11-08-2006, 08:33 PM
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08 :yeah:

And from the on shit on the country you will!!!!:worship:

dorkino
11-08-2006, 08:45 PM
Posted by undomiele
I waited soooo long for this bitch to fall! Sweet icing on the cake I tell ya...
Now,Rumsfeld is a scapegoat for a beginning.Don't u think so?

Couldn't believe it when Mr. President asked -as an answer to some question-:
"Do u think i am nuts?? "
I thought,GOD, what took him so loooong to ask such a question?

Posted By Blaze-2004
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08
Very close to my thoughts.Except i never expect too much from either sides.

Pfloyd
11-08-2006, 09:25 PM
This change will be good. Just wait and see.

buddyholly
11-08-2006, 09:28 PM
I waited soooo long for this bitch to fall! Sweet icing on the cake I tell ya...

You obviously didn't mature during your sabbatical

NicoFan
11-08-2006, 10:27 PM
:wavey: to all!

I thought just in case there were people here new to the process who might be saying hey the elections are over - what now???

If you want to keep up with your representatives/senators, one of the best sites that I've found is THOMAS from the Library of Congress.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

All you have to do is find your elected official names, and you'll see all the bills that they've sponsored or co-sponsored (co-sponsoring a bill is very important). You can look through them, and see what your representative/senators is spending her/his time on.

You can see what bills are coming up on the floor. Check out the committees. All sorts of stuff you'll find cool if you're a political geek like myself. :lol:

You can also look up all their names and get to their web sites with information on their offices.

Don't hesitate to call your elected officials (or write a letter or email or fax them). They work for you!!! They are supposed to be doing what you want them to do.

Over the weekend, I''ll post some tips on how to write and call your representatives/senators. I used to teach classes on lobbying so have lots of material.

(Of course, keep in mind that the people elected yesterday for the first time won't be on Thomas until the legislative session opens in January....and the people who lost yesterday are still working until the end of the year.)

NicoFan
11-08-2006, 10:35 PM
Just heard that Allen will probably concede....don't know when though. They are doing a review now (or going to do a review), but the Republicans are admitting that it probably won't change anything.

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 10:35 PM
Just heard that Allen will probably concede.

:woohoo:

:banana: :banana:

Yesssssssss :banana: :banana:

NicoFan
11-08-2006, 10:37 PM
:lol: I changed it - wanted to give more info. :lol:

But I should have kept the :banana: and :woohoo: ... :lol:

Lee
11-08-2006, 10:41 PM
Question for the regular posters here:

Do you want the thread stay here and let it dies a natural death when the election is over

or

move it to chat forum and continues on

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 10:43 PM
Question for the regular posters here:

Do you want the thread stay here and let it dies a natural death when the election is over

or

move it to chat forum and continues on

Chat thread! I think we plan on discussing politics in here regularly :) At least that's what some of us have said :p

El Legenda
11-08-2006, 10:47 PM
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08 :yeah:

No not quite like that. If Bush wants to get anything done from his side he will have to pass some of the laws from the Dems and if Bush vetos something, some Reps might still vote for it, depending if they're delegates or trustees

NicoFan
11-08-2006, 10:53 PM
Chat thread! I think we plan on discussing politics in here regularly :) At least that's what some of us have said :p


Ditto!

And its a great way to share information...

Lee
11-08-2006, 11:01 PM
I didn't read back since I left last night. If there's already a consensus of keeping this thread alive, I will move it to chat forum.

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 11:02 PM
I think that's why Lafuria had changed the title from just following the elections to something more generic. :)

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 11:12 PM
We're a chat thread now :D

NicoFan
11-08-2006, 11:13 PM
Yeay!!! :woohoo: :yeah:

I'm listening to Nancy talking about "draining the swamp.....". I love it!

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 11:23 PM
WASHINGTON - The first female speaker of the House will lead a chamber filled with more women than ever before.

Congress as a whole, however, still will be dominated by white men.

The House will add at least three women and the Senate will add two, bringing the total number of female members of Congress to at least 86 — 70 in the House, 16 in the Senate.

Women were candidates in two House races that were too close to call Wednesday.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061108/ap_on_el_ge/new_congress_demographics_2 for the whole article.

:yeah: More women in Congress, even if it's still not that many, is still a very good thing :)

Pfloyd
11-08-2006, 11:57 PM
I think that's why Lafuria had changed the title from just following the elections to something more generic. :)

Yeah, I mean, if its a chat thread, It's better to make it a general title, you can only talk so much about congressional elections, but you can never talk too much about politics.

:D

savesthedizzle
11-08-2006, 11:59 PM
Yeah, I mean, if its a chat thread, It's better to make it a general title, you can only talk so much about congressional elections, but you can never talk too much about politics.

:D

Very true :lol:

Pfloyd
11-08-2006, 11:59 PM
By the way, Allen is losing by 8000 votes in Virginia...1% is still to be counted...

Pfloyd
11-09-2006, 12:33 AM
Jim Webb is now, according to the associated press, is officially the winner of Virginia.

Democratic Senate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 12:34 AM
Jim Webb is now, according to the associated press, is officially the winner of Virginia.

Democratic Senate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The last 24 hours have been the best that I can remember for a lonnng time. :lol:

mangoes
11-09-2006, 12:46 AM
Jim Webb is now, according to the associated press, is officially the winner of Virginia.

Democratic Senate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:dance: Just heard the news on msnbc WOOHOO!!

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 12:47 AM
Oh man, this is exciting :D

LaTenista
11-09-2006, 12:50 AM
The last 24 hours have been the best that I can remember for a lonnng time. :lol:

The house race in my district is still not decided but otherwise it's been great. Ohio's new minimum wage effective January 1 is $6.85 an hour and smoking has been banned in all indoor public areas where people work, like bars, restaurants, etc. :woohoo:

Tennis Fool
11-09-2006, 12:57 AM
Someone posted on WTAWorld that Rumsfeld resigned and I thought they were just kidding :lol:

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 12:57 AM
The house race in my district is still not decided but otherwise it's been great. Ohio's new minimum wage effective January 1 is $6.85 an hour and smoking has been banned in all indoor public areas where people work, like bars, restaurants, etc. :woohoo:

:yeah:

Scotso
11-09-2006, 01:02 AM
They just projected Webb as the winner here in Virginia! :banana:

Scotso
11-09-2006, 01:03 AM
Oh you guys already knew!

Well, it needed repeating, anyway! :bounce:

I'm so happy Virginia has swayed back to the Democrats for the time being :p

LaTenista
11-09-2006, 01:05 AM
Congrats Scott. :)

Scotso
11-09-2006, 01:09 AM
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08 :yeah:

I'd rather them not be able to do anything than have Bush's conservative social agenda and outrageous spending habits go through.

Scotso
11-09-2006, 01:10 AM
Of course I shouldn't be happy because Webb is really a Republican, but at least he's better than Allen. :p

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 01:10 AM
I'd rather them not be able to do anything than have Bush's conservative social agenda and outrageous spending habits go through.

Exactly.

MisterQ
11-09-2006, 01:20 AM
Oh you guys already knew!

Well, it needed repeating, anyway! :bounce:

I'm so happy Virginia has swayed back to the Democrats for the time being :p

I didn't know! :banana: :bounce: :woohoo:

alfonsojose
11-09-2006, 01:40 AM
:rolls:

Tennis Fool
11-09-2006, 02:05 AM
J'Torian: I see it's you b-day. :wavey:

knight_ley
11-09-2006, 02:22 AM
:woohoo:

Lee
11-09-2006, 02:39 AM
The house race in my district is still not decided but otherwise it's been great. Ohio's new minimum wage effective January 1 is $6.85 an hour and smoking has been banned in all indoor public areas where people work, like bars, restaurants, etc. :woohoo:

Same for Arizona (although not sure the minimum wage is how much)

But I'm really happy with the smoking ban. :woohoo:

mangoes
11-09-2006, 02:40 AM
So now the democrats in Congress will pass laws with their majority, Bush will veto to no tomorrow, and the democrats cant do anything because they dont have the 66% needed to override the veto.

So basically, we cant do shit until 08 :yeah:

No president should have as much free reign as Bush has had. There needs to be a system for accountability in place. That is suppose to be the purpose of the House and Senate.

However, due to the House and Senate being controlled by the Republicans, Bush has not had to give any type of accountability for things such as the billions being pumped into Iraq. I do not think that the Democrats will refuse funding for the troops, however, Bush will no longer have a blank check with which to do as he pleases. Presently, under the Bush administration, the US has the biggest debt of all the first world countries.........a debt that didn't exist 6 years ago. Bush needs to walk into the house and senate and explain where the '2 billion' on line 5 is for as well as the '6 billion' on the bottom line.....

The one concensus that all the politicial historians can agree on is that Bush will go down in history as one of the worst presidents. Hell, Bush is beginning to make Nixon look good :lol: Nevertheless, if for the next two years there is a decrease in the nonsense Bush does, then so be it. It is better he do nothing, than do as he has done for the past couple of years.

The last 24 hours have been the best that I can remember for a lonnng time. :lol:

So true........I think we each have measures that we want to see passed eventually. Top of my list is stem cell research. And today, with the Democrats taking control, I feel like we took, however tiny, a step toward approval. If we can maintain that control in 08 and get a president willing to sign off on the research, I will be so very happy.

I also hope that more focus will be put on some social programs. An important program that bothers me is the foster care system. There are constant complaints that the social service dept is underfunded and cannot handle the work load. Children that are suppose to be in the foster system cannot be accounted for by the dept. I am hoping that the Democrats bring the focus back, a bit, on domestic issues.

Socket
11-09-2006, 02:58 AM
The AP projected Webb as winner, and Webb is calling himself Senator-elect, but the vote hasn't been certified yet and Allen hasn't conceded, so it's still unofficial. Useful link for unofficial results (Virginia State Board of Elections):

http://sbe.virginiainteractive.org/index.htm

mangoes
11-09-2006, 03:12 AM
Allen is expected to concede tomorrow afternoon.

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 03:12 AM
Yes, although I am in disagreement with the LP in some serious issues but if you want to put me in a political spectrum I am libertarian, in agreement with basic economic philosophy of the Austrian school of economics.

yes we can agree to disagree, as for changing your opinion I was staunchly in the middle and I changed my mind :D

:D :wavey:

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 03:20 AM
:wavey: to all!

I thought just in case there were people here new to the process who might be saying hey the elections are over - what now???

If you want to keep up with your representatives/senators, one of the best sites that I've found is THOMAS from the Library of Congress.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

All you have to do is find your elected official names, and you'll see all the bills that they've sponsored or co-sponsored (co-sponsoring a bill is very important). You can look through them, and see what your representative/senators is spending her/his time on.

You can see what bills are coming up on the floor. Check out the committees. All sorts of stuff you'll find cool if you're a political geek like myself. :lol:

:wavey: salutations fellow geek (although I am not as dedicated as you)!!! :lol: Thanks for providing all that info and important link Nicofan. You are so right-it is imperative that we know what is going on and contact our legislators to keep them honest!

Lee
11-09-2006, 03:21 AM
Nobody talked about Remsfeld's resignation because of the Republicans' defeat in election?

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 03:26 AM
Nobody talked about Remsfeld's resignation because of the Republicans' defeat in election?

We did earlier! :lol:

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 03:30 AM
Nobody talked about Remsfeld's resignation because of the Republicans' defeat in election?


We did talk about it earlier today-and took much joy in it!!! :lol: I have to add that I told my husband (who is at a class for two weeks-he's full time Army National Guard) about it and he said all the guys were very happy with Rumy being gone. The soldiers knew Rumsfeld was doing a crap job and from all accounts he was a big part of low moral in the ranks. (all antedotal mind you from what hubby has heard.) I think Rumy has achieved uniting many different factions in disgust for himself. ;)

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 03:38 AM
:woohoo: on Webb's probably victory!!!

:woohoo: on more women in the House!! (although one-Michelle Bachman form MN- is an ultra conservative, "family values" "I submit to my husband's will"(yeah, she said that...:rolleyes: ) type. But she is of the female gender so I guess she counts. :p

:woohoo: On this thread becoming a chat thread!!! I don't suppose anyone keeps stats on these things but it must be one of the fastest "to chat thread" status ever! :lol:

:woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo: (just cannot have too many 'woohoo's today!!!)

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 03:40 AM
:woohoo: on Webb's probably victory!!!

:woohoo: on more women in the House!! (although one-Michelle Bachman form MN- is an ultra conservative, "family values" "I submit to my husband's will"(yeah, she said that...:rolleyes: ) type. But she is of the female gender so I guess she counts. :p

:woohoo: On this thread becoming a chat thread!!! I don't suppose anyone keeps stats on these things but it must be one of the fastest "to chat thread" status ever! :lol:

:woohoo::woohoo: :woohoo: (just cannot have too many 'woohoo's today!!!)

Definitely. It only took one day :) See what some fired up Democrats can achieve?! :p

Lee
11-09-2006, 03:43 AM
We did earlier! :lol:

:o I didn't read back :p

I am so happy he's gone.

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 03:47 AM
:o I didn't read back :p

I am so happy he's gone.

It was a move Bush had to make. Even Republicans wanted Rummy to step down. :lol:

Dirk
11-09-2006, 03:50 AM
The Dems only won because conservatives didn't feel like supporting a party that moved away from them.

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 04:05 AM
The Dems only won because conservatives didn't feel like supporting a party that moved away from them.

:umbrella: so you're going to rain on our parade????:lol: I know its not some sweeping vote for the demacratic platform-and many of the new members are more middle ground. IMO its a referendum on the war in Iraq more than anything but it doesn't matter so much why but that it did happen. Bush now has a demacratic controled congress to deal with and will no longer have a bunch of "yes" men and no one demanding accountablilty. Even he got that and has already rid us of the pathically incompetant and inflexible Rumy. :)

nkhera1
11-09-2006, 04:10 AM
I agree with Dirk. The Democrats mainly won because they weren't Republicans. Now they have two years to show whether Americans made the right choice.

tangerine_dream
11-09-2006, 04:17 AM
Did you guys hear how the GOP are now spinning their embarrassing midterm defeat? They're actually saying that they're glad that they lost both the House and Senate because—get this—(paraphrased) "The Republicans have moved so far away from their core conservative roots that they're not "real" Republicans anymore and I don't want to support Republicans who are not true to themselves so, throw the bums out!" :spit:

This is what true desperation sounds like. :haha:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17947
Republican leaders are still in denial in the wake of their crushing defeat. They blame individual losing candidates for failing to prepare themselves for the election. In contrast, the private reaction by the candidates was anger at President Bush and his political team. That includes a rising GOP undercurrent against Iraq policy. The unpleasant truth is that Republicans lost almost everywhere the president campaigned during the past week. An exception was Florida, where State Attorney General Charlie Crist kept out of Bush's way and won the election for governor.
:lol: Bush is political poison now. The GOP needs to understand the USA is mostly a centrist nation (left of center, right of center) and zealotry of any sort is not what the majority of normal, intelligent people want.

Dirk
11-09-2006, 04:22 AM
Conservatives are not happy because we know a likely Shamnesty will get passed for illegals and that will cost a lot of the house members their jobs in 2 years, it was the house that held the line on enforcement only policy for illegal immigration and now that is gone unless the 39 Dems who voted for it stick with it as does some of the other new ones that came out of red districts.

Bush and the gutless GOP senate along with the spending on the domestic side is what really hurt the GOP along with the illegal immigration issue along with fighting a PC war in Iraq.

Dems just better be careful of what they do and if the GOP wants a future they need to support conservatives like Tancredo instead of shooting them down.

El Legenda
11-09-2006, 04:24 AM
What a day for the Dems :lol:

everyone wish me luck..tomorrow 2:30pm im taking the "US Citizenship Test" aka Grade school history test :rolls:

El Legenda
11-09-2006, 04:25 AM
Did you guys hear how the GOP are now spinning their embarrassing midterm defeat? They're actually saying that they're glad that they lost both the House and Senate because—get this—(paraphrased) "The Republicans have moved so far away from their core conservative roots that they're not "real" Republicans anymore and I don't want to support Republicans who are not true to themselves so, throw the bums out!" :spit:

This is what true desperation sounds like. :haha:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17947

:lol: Bush is political poison now. The GOP needs to understand the USA is mostly a centrist nation (left of center, right of center) and zealotry of any sort is not what the majority of normal, intelligent people want.


what do you care, you're a communist :ras:

Dirk
11-09-2006, 04:26 AM
Did you guys hear how the GOP are now spinning their embarrassing midterm defeat? They're actually saying that they're glad that they lost both the House and Senate because—get this—(paraphrased) "The Republicans have moved so far away from their core conservative roots that they're not "real" Republicans anymore and I don't want to support Republicans who are not true to themselves so, throw the bums out!" :spit:

This is what true desperation sounds like. :haha:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17947

:lol: Bush is political poison now. The GOP needs to understand the USA is mostly a centrist nation (left of center, right of center) and zealotry of any sort is not what the majority of normal, intelligent people want.

It is actually more conservative than you think, that is how Reagan got elected and those conservative dems won over the conservative voters in the house elections, the rest just stayed home like they did with Santorum.

savesthedizzle
11-09-2006, 04:28 AM
What a day for the Dems :lol:

everyone wish me luck..tomorrow 2:30pm im taking the "US Citizenship Test" aka Grade school history test :rolls:

Good luck! :smooch:

LaTenista
11-09-2006, 04:29 AM
What a day for the Dems :lol:

everyone wish me luck..tomorrow 2:30pm im taking the "US Citizenship Test" aka Grade school history test :rolls:

I'll keep you in my thoughts tomorrow. You better pass or we'll have to laugh at you for making fun.

El Legenda
11-09-2006, 04:36 AM
I'll keep you in my thoughts tomorrow. You better pass or we'll have to laugh at you for making fun.

:lol: i would be sick for days if i didnt pass
here is the test http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/M-638.pdf

there is like 96 questions, but they ask like 10 :lol:

i hope they dont ask if i have any tattoos, i have tattoo of Bosnian flag on my back :)
my next tattoo will be my last name across the back, like a name on sport jersey :yeah:

El Legenda
11-09-2006, 04:37 AM
Good luck, Ducky/Jerry/George/alias. :hug: You need to turn legit and become a proper US citizen, but you can no longer root for Croatian players and you must abandon your interest in soccer, among various other unAmerican activities. ;)


Ivan's going down in Shanghai. Deal with it. :lol:

i have gone on record saying Ivan will win in 2... you're turn :kiss:

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 04:40 AM
What a day for the Dems :lol:

everyone wish me luck..tomorrow 2:30pm im taking the "US Citizenship Test" aka Grade school history test :rolls:

Buena suerte George! :wavey: I hope by this time tomorrow you're on your way to becoming a citizen of this crazy country! :D

El Legenda
11-09-2006, 04:46 AM
I'm on record saying that Ivan is going down. Period. :wavey:

.

:rolls: you're funny

Get rid of the Bosnian flag, traitor

NEVER!!!!:p

Lee
11-09-2006, 05:26 AM
Buena Suerte Ducky! :lol:

What? Spanish is not the official language of USA? :p

undomiele
11-09-2006, 12:55 PM
Northern Virginia made Webb senator. NOVA now counts for a third of the state's total votes and its still growing. Virginia will be competitive in 2008 for sure. :)

Sparko1030
11-09-2006, 04:14 PM
I don't know whether to laugh or cry....The Iowa gov.Bilson, a dem., is going to announce his canidancy for president, for the 2008 election....PLEASE NOT YET!!!! :scared: We just survived this round of elelctions-we need a rest!!! :lol: And will starting this early actually increase his chances of getting the nomination or just ensure that an even larger amount of money will be wasted on campaigning, and increase voter fatigue....Man, at least wait till next spring....:rolleyes:

Pfloyd
11-09-2006, 06:17 PM
I believe the new Congress will start sometime in January, so you still have to wait some time...

Pfloyd
11-09-2006, 08:44 PM
Allen has officially admitted defeated...

dorkino
11-09-2006, 08:59 PM
They say chances for extending Bolton's job in the UN are decreasing. Hope this is true . The guy is horrible.

NicoFan
11-09-2006, 10:22 PM
:lol: i would be sick for days if i didnt pass
here is the test http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/M-638.pdf

there is like 96 questions, but they ask like 10 :lol:

i hope they dont ask if i have any tattoos, i have tattoo of Bosnian flag on my back :)
my next tattoo will be my last name across the back, like a name on sport jersey :yeah:

Buena suerte George!!!! I'm sure you will pass easily! :hug:

And they won't ask if you have a tattoo! :haha:

NicoFan
11-09-2006, 10:24 PM
I don't know whether to laugh or cry....The Iowa gov.Bilson, a dem., is going to announce his canidancy for president, for the 2008 election....PLEASE NOT YET!!!! :scared: We just survived this round of elelctions-we need a rest!!! :lol: And will starting this early actually increase his chances of getting the nomination or just ensure that an even larger amount of money will be wasted on campaigning, and increase voter fatigue....Man, at least wait till next spring....:rolleyes:

Now I'm not sure who I'm rooting for. I want Hillary but no one thinks she can win. :sad: And we have to win. I really like Joe Biden. Very smart man, knows his foreign policy, is respected by both parties. I have to see everyone who is running but Joe is in the lead right now (though still want Hill to win. :( ).

NicoFan
11-09-2006, 10:26 PM
Does anyone know when the new House sessions begin? I want to watch them on C-Span. :)

In January - this site should have the exact date.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

NicoFan
11-09-2006, 10:29 PM
:wavey: salutations fellow geek (although I am not as dedicated as you)!!! :lol: Thanks for providing all that info and important link Nicofan. You are so right-it is imperative that we know what is going on and contact our legislators to keep them honest!

De nada Sparko! :hug:

And I think you are very dedicated! You'll be lobbying in DC next year! :)

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 02:05 AM
Now I'm not sure who I'm rooting for. I want Hillary but no one thinks she can win. :sad: And we have to win. I really like Joe Biden. Very smart man, knows his foreign policy, is respected by both parties. I have to see everyone who is running but Joe is in the lead right now (though still want Hill to win. :( ).

Joe Biden! Syracuse Law alum! Go Orange! Okay I'm done.

:secret: I actually wore a Syracuse Law t-shirt in his honor on election night for Dem. good luck. :rolls: :rolls:

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 02:45 AM
Now I'm not sure who I'm rooting for. I want Hillary but no one thinks she can win. :sad: And we have to win. I really like Joe Biden. Very smart man, knows his foreign policy, is respected by both parties. I have to see everyone who is running but Joe is in the lead right now (though still want Hill to win. :( ).

Yeah, I don't know who I hope will get the nomination either-but most certainly it has to be someone who can win. Hilary is great but there are so many who just blindly hate her and many use old baggage to get at her. :shrug: I mean, if they can make decorated war heros like Kerry and Max Clealand look like a cowards than I shudder what they might say about Hilary. It obviously doesn't have to be true for the voters to swallow it.

I like Biden too-he always seems so thougtful and intelligent but so did Kerry and he just wasn't able to connect with the voters like Bill did/can. I think Biden did run years ago if memory serves me right, can't remember how well he did. Of course I like Obama but it is true he doesn't have much experience yet-but I do think he has the personality. Maybe there is someone we haven't even thought of yet who will emerge as "the candidate". Personaly I just just want to bask in the hope and joy the these results for awhile! :lol:

ufokart
11-10-2006, 02:47 AM
I wanted to know everyone's opinion on Russ Feingold (if you have one that is :p ).

Because i've been reading some stuff about him and he seems a nice choice, but i don't really know how he is perceived there.

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 02:48 AM
Yeah, I don't know who I hope will get the nomination either-but most certainly it has to be someone who can win. Hilary is great but there are so many who just blindly hate her and many use old baggage to get at her. :shrug: I mean, if they can make decorated war heros like Kerry and Max Clealand look like a cowards than I shudder what they might say about Hilary. It obviously doesn't have to be true for the voters to swallow it.

I know a woman who hates Hillary JUST because she doesn't respect women who stay with men who cheat. :shrug: I'm sure she's not the only one who thinks like that.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 02:50 AM
Kudos to Allen for having the balls to concede without whining and drawing it out for months. Finally he does something respectable.

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 02:51 AM
De nada Sparko! :hug:

And I think you are very dedicated! You'll be lobbying in DC next year! :)


:haha: Yeah, the me in my parallel life! Its a nice thought though...I will defianlty be writing letters though. I'm really being moved by the situation in Darfur and the least I can do it write letters, donate some $.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 02:52 AM
:woohoo: on more women in the House!! (although one-Michelle Bachman form MN- is an ultra conservative, "family values" "I submit to my husband's will"(yeah, she said that...:rolleyes: ) type. But she is of the female gender so I guess she counts. :p

She doesn't count. Just like you can't really say Bush runs the country.

Women like that really piss me off.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 02:54 AM
I agree with Dirk. The Democrats mainly won because they weren't Republicans. Now they have two years to show whether Americans made the right choice.

:shrug: If they won because they got on their knees and begged every person for their vote, it wouldn't matter. The important thing is that the people that control the legislature are no longer conservative Bush puppets.

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 02:55 AM
I wanted to know everyone's opinion on Russ Feingold (if you have one that is :p ).

Because i've been reading some stuff about him and he seems a nice choice, but i don't really know how he is perceived there.

He's a senator from Wisconsin, right? What I know about him I like but I have to admit that what I know isn't much.

Lee
11-10-2006, 02:55 AM
I know a woman who hates Hillary JUST because she doesn't respect women who stay with men who cheat. :shrug: I'm sure she's not the only one who thinks like that.

I don't respect her because of the reason she stays with men who cheat. If Bill Clinton is a nobody, she would have kick him out long time ago. She liked the power being First Lady and thus turned a blind eye to a cheating husband. I don't trust her because she would do anything to stay in power or to gain more power.

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 02:56 AM
I know a woman who hates Hillary JUST because she doesn't respect women who stay with men who cheat. :shrug: I'm sure she's not the only one who thinks like that.

Ya gotta wonder what's wrong with some people....:(

Scotso
11-10-2006, 02:57 AM
I wanted to know everyone's opinion on Russ Feingold (if you have one that is :p ).

Because i've been reading some stuff about him and he seems a nice choice, but i don't really know how he is perceived there.

I agree with him ideologically for the most part, but he's far too militant. Even though I want a liberal President, I want one that can compromise. Not one that pouts and runs out of a meeting when he doesn't like what people are saying. :rolleyes:

Scotso
11-10-2006, 02:59 AM
I don't know, I think that you can make it work after someone cheats. I think if you really love someone you would try to make it work. :shrug:

It's easy to leave them, it's much harder to stay.


Did you guys even notice that Allen conceded? Someone said it but no one mentioned it again. :p Democrats now OFFICIALLY control the Senate as well. :p

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 03:00 AM
She doesn't count. Just like you can't really say Bush runs the country.

Women like that really piss me off.

Yeah, I embarrassed that she's even from my state. :o The district she won is gerrymandered to support republicans though so her opponant had an uphill battle.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:01 AM
Now that Santorum is out, my enemy #1 in Congress is a woman.

That bitch from Colorado, Marilyn Musgrave.

Lee
11-10-2006, 03:04 AM
I don't know, I think that you can make it work after someone cheats. I think if you really love someone you would try to make it work. :shrug:

It's easy to leave them, it's much harder to stay.



To make a union work, you need work from both sides. If one partner in the relationship cheats, that means that person doesn't really love his/her partner.

May be I'm too cynical, I still have to find a cheating spouse really changed and tried to make the marriage work. :shrug:

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 03:06 AM
I'm a strong believer in once a cheater always a cheater since I've seen friends be hurt by that...

...but I've also see Hillary do a good job for NY in the Senate. :shrug:

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 03:07 AM
I don't know, I think that you can make it work after someone cheats. I think if you really love someone you would try to make it work. :shrug:

It's easy to leave them, it's much harder to stay.


Did you guys even notice that Allen conceded? Someone said it but no one mentioned it again. :p Democrats now OFFICIALLY control the Senate as well. :p

:woohoo: :)

ufokart
11-10-2006, 03:07 AM
I agree with him ideologically for the most part, but he's far too militant. Even though I want a liberal President, I want one that can compromise. Not one that pouts and runs out of a meeting when he doesn't like what people are saying. :rolleyes:

Yeah, i suppose that can be a weak point.

Did you guys even notice that Allen conceded? Someone said it but no one mentioned it again. :p Democrats now OFFICIALLY control the Senate as well. :p

:woohoo: :woohoo:
Allen gets just a LITTLE of my respect by conceding defeat instead of trying typical dirty tricks :) :lol:

Now that Santorum is out, my enemy #1 in Congress is a woman.

That bitch from Colorado, Marilyn Musgrave.

Please, don't mention Santorum again :scared:
Let him rot :devil:

Sparko1030
11-10-2006, 03:08 AM
I don't know, I think that you can make it work after someone cheats. I think if you really love someone you would try to make it work. :shrug:

It's easy to leave them, it's much harder to stay.


Did you guys even notice that Allen conceded? Someone said it but no one mentioned it again. :p Democrats now OFFICIALLY control the Senate as well. :p

:woohoo: :aparty:

For me, I can't judge what people do when one of them cheats. I've never been in that situation so I honestly don't know how I would react. Personally I think Hilary and Bill have a strong bond even though they both may have strayed. Maybe they are united by a common cause they both feel deeply about and they feel they are more effective by staying together. After years of marriage, there is much more b/t people then just sex. :shrug:

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:10 AM
I don't think I've been cheated on, but I don't know for sure. But if I really loved someone and they cheated, I would give them another chance. But of course, if they kept doing it... they have to go.

But people make mistakes.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:14 AM
Anyway, I think it's improper to judge a politician solely based on their choices in their personal lives.

If Hillary has done great things, rejecting her because she stood by her husband is kind of petty.

But I'll say that I don't really like her for other reasons. She used to be much more liberal... but now that she's considering the Presidency, she's moved to the center.

Lee
11-10-2006, 03:21 AM
I have stated I don't respect her not because she stays with him but WHY she stays with him.

May be she really loves him that much but I honestly don't believe that. In my experience, when two people are very in love with each other, you can see it in tiny gestures. All these years, I really haven't seen any real affection between the Clintons.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:26 AM
I think you're probably right. I think she thinks that staying with him makes her a more electable politician... but I don't know if that's true. I guess in some ways divorced WOMEN are less liked than divorced men, but on the whole society is getting rather used to divorce.

And surprise, surprise.... the queers have nothing to do with it! :eek:

Lee
11-10-2006, 03:34 AM
And surprise, surprise.... the queers have nothing to do with it! :eek:

:lol:

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 03:35 AM
On a sidenote: Chafee thinking of leaving the GOP

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_el_se/rhode_island_senate

Lee
11-10-2006, 03:39 AM
On a sidenote: Chafee thinking of leaving the GOP

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_el_se/rhode_island_senate

Sounds like a loser for me :tape:

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:39 AM
Anyway, I think it's improper to judge a politician solely based on their choices in their personal lives.

If Hillary has done great things, rejecting her because she stood by her husband is kind of petty.

But I'll say that I don't really like her for other reasons. She used to be much more liberal... but now that she's considering the Presidency, she's moved to the center.


If you have followed her closely enough you will know that she has made some very liberal policy ideas like wanting to give illegals more money for education for college and wants to have a France like work week so you still have a liberal there and she will never get elected for that and the fact she is too cold and shrill for most americans. She is just playing to the center to help her chances but those things I listed and more will come out when she runs.

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:40 AM
Sounds like a loser for me :tape:


He was never really in the GOP.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:42 AM
If you have followed her closely enough you will know that she has made some very liberal policy ideas like wanting to give illegals more money for education for college and wants to have a France like work week so you still have a liberal there and she will never get elected for that and the fact she is too cold and shrill for most americans. She is just playing to the center to help her chances but those things I listed and more will come out when she runs.

I wonder if you would call a man with her personality "cold and shrill."

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:43 AM
On a sidenote: Chafee thinking of leaving the GOP

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_el_se/rhode_island_senate

Had he done that a year ago he would be celebrating his victory.

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:43 AM
It is her voice and there is a lot of women even on the dem side that don't like her and even the DNC admits this.

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:45 AM
Had he done that a year ago he would be celebrating his victory.


He voted for Kerry and against the Iraq War and had 62 % approval but it wasn't enough for them in Rhode Island.

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 03:45 AM
Had he done that a year ago he would be celebrating his victory.

Yup. He didn't fit with the GOP, and probably wouldn't have lost his seat if he had run as an independant or Democrat this year.

As he says at the end of the article, he mainly stuck with them just to get funding for the state.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:48 AM
He voted for Kerry and against the Iraq War and had 62 % approval but it wasn't enough for them in Rhode Island.

The reason he lost is because RI didn't want Republican control of the Senate.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:48 AM
It is her voice and there is a lot of women even on the dem side that don't like her and even the DNC admits this.

Ah, you hate her because of her voice. :p

Lee
11-10-2006, 03:52 AM
I'm out of here :wavey:

Last thing I like to say is John McCain will very likely run for Presidency in 2008 and the first female President of USA may be Janet Napolitano instead of Hilary Clinton. ;)


:lol: I am turning into a true Arizonan. :lol:

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:52 AM
The Democrat that I most wanted to run for President has already decided not to do it. (Mark Warner)

So my support is up for grabs, but most of the leading contenders for the nomination right now won't get it. I don't like Clinton or Feingold. It's too soon for Obama. I'm not voting for one of those Republican Democrats.

Likely I'll end up supporting some unknown who ends up getting about 1% in the first primary. :p

I wish Dianne Feinstein would run :rocker2:

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:53 AM
Ah, you hate her because of her voice. :p

and her views. She won't win and she probably won't even run because she knows she likely wouldn't get the nod and that would hurt her power. She had indicated she would like to run the senate and I hope she never gets her chance because of it returning to GOP control in 08 again.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:54 AM
I'm out of here :wavey:

Last thing I like to say is John McCain will very likely run for Presidency in 2008 and the first female President of USA may be Janet Napolitano instead of Hilary Clinton. ;)


:lol: I am turning into a true Arizonan. :lol:

I don't like McCain. He used to be such a moderate, but he's pandering to the conservatives now. :mad:

Dirk
11-10-2006, 03:54 AM
I'm out of here :wavey:

Last thing I like to say is John McCain will very likely run for Presidency in 2008 and the first female President of USA may be Janet Napolitano instead of Hilary Clinton. ;)


:lol: I am turning into a true Arizonan. :lol:



McCain will likely get his ass handed to him in the GOP primaries in 08 and I can't wait. :)

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:55 AM
and her views. She won't win and she probably won't even run because she knows she likely wouldn't get the nod and that would hurt her power. She had indicated she would like to run the senate and I hope she never gets her chance because of it returning to GOP control in 08 again.

Hillary pretty much controls the Democratic Party right now, and don't delude yourself... if she ran for the nomination she would get it. Whether or not she won the general election would depend on who she was against, but no, she probably wouldn't win that.

Scotso
11-10-2006, 03:55 AM
Bernie Sanders (I) for President! :rocker2:

Dirk
11-10-2006, 04:04 AM
Hillary pretty much controls the Democratic Party right now, and don't delude yourself... if she ran for the nomination she would get it. Whether or not she won the general election would depend on who she was against, but no, she probably wouldn't win that.


They will dump her for almost the same reason they dumb Dean at the last minute, they want someone who they think will win and she can't do that so it will likely to go Obama who has no substance and they will have to hope the let's elect a first black president" is strong enough to win.

Pfloyd
11-10-2006, 04:12 AM
Barak Obama is also a very popular option.

Yes, he is black, and that might be an issue even today in the US. But still, this man is very smart, articulate and imposing. He attracts large sums of people, blacks, whites everybody. Look out for this guy, I happen to like him even more that Hilary Clinton.

Dirk
11-10-2006, 04:16 AM
Barak Obama is also a very popular option.

Yes, he is black, and that might be an issue even today in the US. But still, this man is very smart, articulate and imposing. He attracts large sums of people, blacks, whites everybody. Look out for this guy, I happen to like him even more that Hilary Clinton.


He is a better bet to win than her but he hasn't written anything and just says the same thing every other dem says and he doesn't give any details. He is too vague and being black isn't going to hurt him but being a legislator who hasn't written anything especially anything good will hurt him.

If the GOP puts up a great conservative who can communicate it well than they will win. The GOP voters were tired of staying with the party that moved from them and want a real conservative.

RickDaStick
11-10-2006, 04:16 AM
I Want Hilary!!!!

tangerine_dream
11-10-2006, 08:29 PM
Donald Rumsfeld's greatest moments on the podium :haha:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmLToYe8nRo

Last thing I like to say is John McCain will very likely run for Presidency in 2008 and the first female President of USA may be Janet Napolitano instead of Hilary Clinton. ;)
John McCain :cool: Hillary Clinton :cool:

I should switch my political allegiance over to Republican. When Hillary runs in '08 I want to be able to collect all of the paranoid anti-Hillary propaganda the GOP sends out to voters. My mailbox will be stuffed. :rolls: That garbage will be worth a lot when she's President.

savesthedizzle
11-10-2006, 08:47 PM
That reminds me of the best piece of political mailing I got this year that was anti- Mike Ferguson (yes I obsess over my Congressman but he is so crappy you have no idea how mad I am that we reelected him...) anyway. One was him saying that he and GWB were two peas in a pod, and it was like, in the shape of a pea pod with their heads in the little peas. I think I am going to keep that forever. :lol:

Scotso
11-10-2006, 09:30 PM
Barak Obama is also a very popular option.

Yes, he is black, and that might be an issue even today in the US. But still, this man is very smart, articulate and imposing. He attracts large sums of people, blacks, whites everybody. Look out for this guy, I happen to like him even more that Hilary Clinton.


I think his inexperience is more of a factor than his race. Yes, he's likeable, and he seems smart and also seems to be a good guy, but I would have trouble voting for him. He just doesn't have the experience needed for the job after just a few years in the Senate. He's never been an executive of anything.

NicoFan
11-10-2006, 10:34 PM
Scott - I would love Bernie as President! :yeah:

Tangy - I can't wait to see all the anti-Hill propaganda too. :lol: Too bad people will believe all that shit. :sad:

About Barak - he is too inexperienced. And people have seen how poorly (the understatement of the both the 20th and 21st centuries) Bush, who also had little experience before he became President has performed, and they won't want a repeat.

About Hill/Bill and the cheating. My blood pressure goes up when I have to argue about it, but I will say this - VOTE THE ISSUES!!!! 50% of all married men cheat on their wives - and who knows how many of the remaining 50% have thought about it. Does that mean that whatever the percentage is left over are the only men who can run for the Presidency? That will definitely limit our options. ;) And think Frankie D and Eleanor - he cheated on her, and she stayed with him - and Frankie D was The Greatest President in the US's history - and Eleanor did so much for our country. I don't even want to think about what would have happened to our country if Frankie D wasn't running the show during the Depression and WWII.

VOTE THE ISSUES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pfloyd
11-11-2006, 12:21 AM
There's news that Howard Dean might quit as head of the democratic party, and Harold Ford Jr. might replace him, that would be awsome.

Lee
11-11-2006, 12:24 AM
VOTE THE ISSUES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:shrug: The reason people start looking at the character of a candidate on top of the issues is, there are so many politicians forget "the issues" once they are in office.

Scotso
11-11-2006, 02:09 AM
Frankie D was The Greatest President in the US's history

:worship:

Lee
11-11-2006, 03:09 AM
On a lighter note :haha:

http://phoenix.cox.net/cci/entertainmentnews/national?_mode=view&_state=maximized&view=article&id=D8LAEPS80&_action=validatearticle

N.C. Candidate Easily Wins Board Election, Despite Being Dead for a Month
11-10-2006 2:19 PM

MONROE, N.C. -- A candidate for a county board who appeared in newspaper ads the weekend before the election sailed to victory with 12,000 votes _ despite being dead for a month. Sam Duncan was the top vote-getter Tuesday for two seats on Union County's Soil and Water Conservation board.

Although county elections officials knew of Duncan's death, no one told the voters.

"We are instructed that it's not our job to do that," said Shirley Secrest, elections director.

The Democratic Party ran newspaper endorsement ads about Duncan and literature distributed near the polls included his name.

Democratic Party officials said they didn't know Duncan had died when they placed the ads and printed the literature.

Former sheriff Frank McGuirt said he was one of the voters who helped Duncan edge out the sitting chairman who had served for about a dozen years.

"I was shocked to know that poor Sam was gone," McGuirt said. "I guess I had just missed that obituary." :haha:

Duncan's seat will be filled by appointment, officials said.

mangoes
11-11-2006, 03:37 AM
Barak Obama is also a very popular option.

Yes, he is black, and that might be an issue even today in the US. But still, this man is very smart, articulate and imposing. He attracts large sums of people, blacks, whites everybody. Look out for this guy, I happen to like him even more that Hilary Clinton.

I agree with everything said about Obama, however, I think he lacks experience. Nevertheless, money talks in politics, and if he has some powerful backers*cough* Oprah, we can't cross out his chances. I like Hilary more than Obama. But, I think if she were to win, it would be on the strength of her spouse. I'd personally like to see Edwards take another run at it. To some degree, I believe if he were running in 04 minus Kerry, things may not have been so gloomy. Lastly, I hope Kerry doesn't even consider making another run.

mangoes
11-11-2006, 03:56 AM
I don't like McCain. He used to be such a moderate, but he's pandering to the conservatives now. :mad:

Completely agree and that's turning me off to him. But, I suppose he is doing this to prepare himself for the 08 run.......afterall, that's how Bush screwed him over in 2000. Once upon a time, I wouldn't have minded seeing him as president, but now he is beginning to piss me off with his pandering, of late, to the conservatives. However, if he keeps going down that road, that could ultimately screw him. Independents are sick and tired of this constant pandering to the conservatives. If the Democrats have a smart/strategic plan for the next two years, it will strengthen the chances of the democratic nominee for president. I hoping the democrats push through bills concerning prescription medication or increased funding for public education or a decrease in the interest rate on school loans. Then put Bush on the spot. If he really does veto those bills, it will cast a negative light on conservative candidates and may be of positive consequence for the Democrats in 08.



I should switch my political allegiance over to Republican. When Hillary runs in '08 I want to be able to collect all of the paranoid anti-Hillary propaganda the GOP sends out to voters. My mailbox will be stuffed. :rolls: That garbage will be worth a lot when she's President.

So, so true. If Karl Rove has anything to do with the 08 campaigns........I can only imagine the filth and BS campaign strategies he will dream up at nights.........on second thought, I can't imagine the nasty crap Rove will dream up for Hillary.

Sparko1030
11-11-2006, 05:07 AM
Completely agree and that's turning me off to him. But, I suppose he is doing this to prepare himself for the 08 run.......afterall, that's how Bush screwed him over in 2000. Once upon a time, I wouldn't have minded seeing him as president, but now he is beginning to piss me off with his pandering, of late, to the conservatives. However, if he keeps going down that road, that could ultimately screw him. Independents are sick and tired of this constant pandering to the conservatives. If the Democrats have a smart/strategic plan for the next two years, it will strengthen the chances of the democratic nominee for president. I hoping the democrats push through bills concerning prescription medication or increased funding for public education or a decrease in the interest rate on school loans. Then put Bush on the spot. If he really does veto those bills, it will cast a negative light on conservative candidates and may be of positive consequence for the Democrats in 08.

I agree. There was a time,not too long ago, that I had the utmost respect for McCain. Rove and co. did a job on him too during the 2000 campaign. But now his obvious pandering with the very groups who screwed him makes him look desperate. I think he wants to be president very badly but I think his new tatics could backfire on him. HIs time may be past....

And Rove is a pig. He respresnts the lowest point of politics. Sometimes I don't know how he avoids at the very least charges of libel.

Pfloyd
11-11-2006, 06:49 AM
For you guys that watch MSNBC, what is your opinion of Tuker Carlson?

I didn't even know he was a conservative until I read up on him in Wikipedia. He seemed to be a nice guy. To find more on this guy I went to you tube and you do take notice that he is quite a conservative. He can be an a-hole but not blatantly so like O' Reilly or Sean Hannity. For a conservative he's ok I guess. What do you guys think?

NATAS81
11-11-2006, 06:49 AM
Yeah, I liked Tucker during the time I was lucky enough to catch him on Election Night.

uglyamerican
11-11-2006, 07:01 AM
For those who think McCain was ever anything other than conservative, check out this link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0061103

This is a neat web-site I just discovered, that (among other things) lists how various politicians were rated by various institutions (from Planned Parenthood to the John Birch Society).

uglyamerican
11-11-2006, 07:02 AM
Also, remember McCain voted guilty on both of Clinton's impeachment articles.

NicoFan
11-11-2006, 01:31 PM
:shrug: The reason people start looking at the character of a candidate on top of the issues is, there are so many politicians forget "the issues" once they are in office.

But that's not because they are cheating. :lol:

Its because of the way the system is set up for getting elected. Everything revolves around money. Politicians have to spend half of their time raising money. And they have to satisfy the people who give them the money. As many political pundits have said over this past week, the politicians themselves would rather not have to raise money. They would rather work on the issues they were sent to DC to work on.

Now they have to leave DC on Friday to go home to raise money all weekend and not come back until Monday. Leaves them only 3 days to do their actual jobs.

Used to be that politicians didn't have to raise so much cash to get re-elected. And they would stay in DC all week rather than having to go home every weekend. From what I've heard, that's when a lot of bi-partisan deals were made. Both sides of the aisles knew each other better, would have dinner together, etc.

NicoFan
11-11-2006, 01:34 PM
For you guys that watch MSNBC, what is your opinion of Tuker Carlson?

I didn't even know he was a conservative until I read up on him in Wikipedia. He seemed to be a nice guy. To find more on this guy I went to you tube and you do take notice that he is quite a conservative. He can be an a-hole but not blatantly so like O' Reilly or Sean Hannity. For a conservative he's ok I guess. What do you guys think?


I like Tucker too - he's a conservative, but like you said he's not an extreme conservative. And he can be critical of the Republicans.

Which reminds me, I was going to DC one week, and he was at Penn Station waiting for the train too. I wanted to go up to him and say - you seem like such a nice person, how come you're a Republican? :lol: But needless to say, I didn't. :lol:

mangoes
11-11-2006, 04:42 PM
For you guys that watch MSNBC, what is your opinion of Tuker Carlson?

I didn't even know he was a conservative until I read up on him in Wikipedia. He seemed to be a nice guy. To find more on this guy I went to you tube and you do take notice that he is quite a conservative. He can be an a-hole but not blatantly so like O' Reilly or Sean Hannity. For a conservative he's ok I guess. What do you guys think?

Agree, to some degree..........but, he can still irritate me at times :lol: :lol: ..........not to mention his bow ties. Everytime I see him and his bowtie, I always remember the movie, Problem Child 1 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sparko1030
11-11-2006, 05:41 PM
Agree, to some degree..........but, he can still irritate me at times :lol: :lol: ..........not to mention his bow ties. Everytime I see him and his bowtie, I always remember the movie, Problem Child 1 :lol: :lol: :lol:

:haha: I thought the same thing when Lafuria asked about him! When I see a guy wear a bow tie, I figure he's telling the world he's a proud nerd-George Will anyone? He's advertising he's a independant thinker(although if you have to advertiese it, is it really true?) Much the same as getting a tatoo, only its not permanent...

As far as a politician's private life and his fitness for office...from all accounts Dubya and Laura are very happy, no rumors of any philandering on his part and yet I still prefer Clinton ;) ....

Oh, and McCain...I always knew he was a more right then left but I also thought he had a backbone....He stood up to Bush when no one else would and even though I knew I didn't agree with on on many issues, I still respected him. Now that he's kissing the far rights ass-the ones who 6 years ago started those rumors that he had fathered an illegatimate black child (which was wrong in so many different ways) he just looks pathetic.

MisterQ
11-11-2006, 06:19 PM
Agree, to some degree..........but, he can still irritate me at times :lol: :lol: ..........not to mention his bow ties. Everytime I see him and his bowtie, I always remember the movie, Problem Child 1 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jon Stewart disses the bow tie (among other things) :eek:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fSDUQoM8G1k

Bow tie diss occurs circa 6:35. ;)

Warrior
11-11-2006, 06:42 PM
WASHINGTON (Nov. 11) - Republican Sen. John McCain intends to take the first formal step toward a White House run next week by launching a presidential exploratory committee, GOP officials say.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting a public statement from the four-term Arizona senator, who is considered the front-runner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.

McCain, the GOP maverick who unsuccessfully sought his party's nomination in 2000, already has opened a bank account for the committee, one official said.

"The senator has made no decision about running for president," said Eileen McMenamin, a McCain spokeswoman.

Aides to McCain say the senator will discuss whether to seek the presidency with his family over the Christmas holiday and decide thereafter.

Establishing an exploratory committee allows a potential candidate to raise money for a White House run and travel the country.

McCain is a former Navy pilot who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. He was elected to the Senate in 1986 and had served in the House for four years before that.

If McCain were to run, he would turn 72 on Aug. 29, 2008, at the height of the campaign. Only President Reagan was older - 73 at the start of his second term. McCain's health could be another issue. The senator has had several cancerous lesions removed from his skin.

Since losing to George W. Bush in 2000, McCain has alternately challenged and embraced the president, building an independent reputation as one who isn't afraid to speak his mind. At the same time, he's sought to mend fences with conservatives he alienated in his first presidential run.

After Republicans lost control of both the House and Senate on Tuesday, McCain called for a return to the conservative principles he said make up the foundations of the Republican Party.

"We came to Washington to change government, and government changed us," lamented McCain. "We departed rather tragically from our conservative principles."

He urged the party to return to a time when it was known for careful stewardship of tax dollars, less government, less regulation, lower taxes and a strong defense, as well as community and family values.

"I'm confident we will do that," he said.

The Republicans' loss of power in the Senate was a double blow to McCain, who had been in line to become chairman of the Armed Services Committee in January. The panel's top post overseeing the military would have given him a high-profile platform during wartime and in the year leading up to 2008.

McCain has spent the past year padding his Straight Talk America political action committee with supporters in the early primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and he has broadened his inner circle of advisers to include several strategists with ties to Bush.

During the 2006 election cycle, McCain worked to spread goodwill throughout the party, attending 346 events and raising more than $10.5 million on behalf of Republican candidates across the country. He also donated nearly $1.5 million to federal, state and county parties.

There's no shortage of Republicans vying to replace President Bush in 2008.

A full 15 months before the first primary contest in Iowa, McCain is considered the one to beat in a crowded field. Possible candidates include Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

An Associated Press-AOL News poll conducted late last month found Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Giuliani and McCain essentially tied for support. Rice has insisted she will not run.

Scotso
11-11-2006, 09:48 PM
I think Tucker is a cutie, although he's been gaining a bit of weight lately.

He seems to be gay-friendly, at least I got that impression when I saw him attacking some anti-gay idiot one day.

I don't mind economic conservatives. I just can't understand/tolerate social conservatives.

Scotso
11-11-2006, 09:52 PM
It's often a gay thing for me, which is why I almost never vote for Republicans. Gay rights isn't the only issue I care about, but as a gay person, I could never vote for someone who was anti-gay. I just couldn't do it, and I really don't understand how so many gay people can live with themselves after voting for Bush or someone like him. :tape:

mangoes
11-11-2006, 11:58 PM
And Rove is a pig. He respresnts the lowest point of politics. Sometimes I don't know how he avoids at the very least charges of libel.

Without a doubt, Karl Rove is the face of dirty politics. Even some Republicans acknowledge this fact.

Lee
11-12-2006, 12:03 AM
But that's not because they are cheating. :lol:



Whatever! It's pretty useless to argue with you since you're so in love with Clintons.

If a person can't even be truthful to one single person who he/she vowed to be faithful and who share his/her life, I don't know how you can trust that person to be truthful to anything he/she said and promised.

Of course, this is personal choice. But if my husband cheat on me, I will show him the door the very next second and won't look back. I am lucky that he has the integrity and I know he won't.

Sparko1030
11-12-2006, 04:00 AM
It's often a gay thing for me, which is why I almost never vote for Republicans. Gay rights isn't the only issue I care about, but as a gay person, I could never vote for someone who was anti-gay. I just couldn't do it, and I really don't understand how so many gay people can live with themselves after voting for Bush or someone like him. :tape:

There is one thing I really don't understand-that is how the question of whether gays being allowed a legal union/marriage can even go to a voter referendum? Its is a question of citizen rights, people who are just as American as anyone, pay their taxes, serve in our military (if they dare), are law abiding, have inalienable rights like all heterosexuals. Why do voters get to say what their rights are? Why are their rights dependant on whether other Americans are "comfortable" with gay unions? How much longer would it have taken to get rid of Jim Crow laws had it been dependant on winning a popular vote? I may just be ingorant here since I definalty do not have any law background, but it seems to me these voter referendums are not even constintuntioanal. :shrug: Its just something I've been wondering about since seeing all the states that put it to a vote.

Scotso
11-12-2006, 01:01 PM
No one will ever understand it, because it isn't logical nor is it really legal. It's just the social conservatives who think they know better scaring the people into believing that all their woes are due to homosexuals.

Thus, they vote to make gay people second class citizens. So in a few years after gays are assured no ability to form legal unions and we still have lots of problems, either the conservatives will have to admit they were wrong and that gay unions have nothing to do with a poor economy, etc., or they will declare that we didn't go far enough to eliminate the gay threat.

I try to hope for the best, but I have a feeling in a few years gay people will have numbers tattooed on their foreheads and live in concentration camps. :shrug: It seems to be the ultimate goal of these religious wackos.

savesthedizzle
11-12-2006, 03:07 PM
If McCain were to run, he would turn 72 on Aug. 29, 2008, at the height of the campaign. Only President Reagan was older - 73 at the start of his second term. McCain's health could be another issue. The senator has had several cancerous lesions removed from his skin.

Why did I not realize McCain was quite that old? :lol: He doesn't *seem* that old to me. I know Reagan dealt with the Alzheimers and all, but he just seemed so much older than McCain seems now. Okay that's a side note.

and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

An Associated Press-AOL News poll conducted late last month found Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Giuliani and McCain essentially tied for support. Rice has insisted she will not run.

Okay, so several things we haven't talked about yet...

a) Rudy Giuliani... as sentimental as everyone is about 9/11. That's all he's really got to run on. By that point what will he have done for the last 7 years? I live in NJ and I don't even know what that man has been up to except appearing places to make people sentimental about 9/11. :shrug:

b) My freshman year at Syracuse I had to go see William Safire speak for extra credit for one of my journalism classes. Anyway, at the end someone asked him about Hillary running for president (yes back in the fall of 2002.. lol) and he said that he predicted the 2008 election to be Clinton v Condoleeza Rice :p


There is one thing I really don't understand-that is how the question of whether gays being allowed a legal union/marriage can even go to a voter referendum? Its is a question of citizen rights, people who are just as American as anyone, pay their taxes, serve in our military (if they dare), are law abiding, have inalienable rights like all heterosexuals. Why do voters get to say what their rights are? Why are their rights dependant on whether other Americans are "comfortable" with gay unions? How much longer would it have taken to get rid of Jim Crow laws had it been dependant on winning a popular vote? I may just be ingorant here since I definalty do not have any law background, but it seems to me these voter referendums are not even constintuntioanal. :shrug: Its just something I've been wondering about since seeing all the states that put it to a vote.

Exactly. That's why the NJ Supreme Court decided as they did last week

In a 4-3 decision the New Jersey Supreme Court held that "although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this State, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution."

God why are we so smart. :lol: Anyway, unlike in other places, NJ doesn't have a law against out of state couples marrying here. So, right now they're deciding whether the rights will be called civil union or marriage. Most New Jerseyans favor civil unions, but if it is called marriage, then gay couples across the nation could come and get married in NJ and their home states would have to recognize it ;)

The distinction won't matter within NJ per se-- since the Court said that whatever the union is called, it must provide all the rights and benefits of marriage -- but it could have implications nationwide. A gay marriage bill from the legislature would open up the possibility that the federal government and other states would have to recognize same-sex marriages from NJ under the full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution. A civil union bill would not have such ramifications. Massachusetts has a law barring out of state couples from marrying within state if their home state would not recognize the union; New Jersey does not.

Anyway, even though about a quarter of NJ people support marriage rather than civil union, who knows what Corzine will really decide. This is the man who completely shut down our goverment last summer for a few days just to force people to raise our sales tax, lol. He's at times unpredictable. I would be soooo glad if we call it marriage. So glad. The only downfall to us having gay marriage vs. civil unions is how much it would jump start anti-gay movements in other more conservative states. If we had marriage and other states had to start recognizing, that base would get so pissed off *sigh*

NicoFan
11-12-2006, 04:48 PM
Whatever! It's pretty useless to argue with you since you're so in love with Clintons.

If a person can't even be truthful to one single person who he/she vowed to be faithful and who share his/her life, I don't know how you can trust that person to be truthful to anything he/she said and promised.

Of course, this is personal choice. But if my husband cheat on me, I will show him the door the very next second and won't look back. I am lucky that he has the integrity and I know he won't.

Whoa...sorry didn't mean to upset you. I respect your opinion, and I definitely am not justifying men cheating on their wives....and was trying to be funny with my opening remark, but it didn't quite work. :sad: And I agree with you - if my husband cheated on me, I'd kick his ass out of the door too. But I'm just not going to judge a woman who doesn't....everyone has to look in the mirror in the morning and decide for themselves if they are doing the right thing or not. :shrug: And I'm not going to base my vote on that issue. (And for the record, I'm not in love with the Clintons - there are many issues that I disagree with Hill on, and I didn't like some of the things Bill did in office (welfare and the environment) - although if Bill were able to run again, I'd vote for him in a second).

I'm more concerned with the guys dying in Iraq (and other issues).

And speaking of Iraq, did anyone see the show on CNN yesterday about the combat hospitals??? It was very upsetting. I understand what politicans are saying that we can't leave Iraq right away because we created the mess, but I wonder just how much of a difference our staying for few more months will make. I really wish we could bring our boys home right now.

NicoFan
11-12-2006, 04:53 PM
a) Rudy Giuliani... as sentimental as everyone is about 9/11. That's all he's really got to run on. By that point what will he have done for the last 7 years? I live in NJ and I don't even know what that man has been up to except appearing places to make people sentimental about 9/11. :shrug:

b) My freshman year at Syracuse I had to go see William Safire speak for extra credit for one of my journalism classes. Anyway, at the end someone asked him about Hillary running for president (yes back in the fall of 2002.. lol) and he said that he predicted the 2008 election to be Clinton v Condoleeza Rice :p


Rudy did some good things for NY - I love that the City is cleaner and definitely 100 times safer than before. But the way he went about it is debatable. And he hasn't done much since 9/11. He'll never get the Republican nomination though - he too socially liberal for the Republicans. Pro-choice, etc.

I think it will be Clinton but I doubt Rice. She's stood by Bush for too long - and people don't want anything to do with Dubya anymore. Anyone near him isn't going anywhere. But could be wrong.

Scotso
11-13-2006, 03:28 AM
Jess, I was shocked that the vote in New Jersey SC was only 4-3... until I saw that the three who dissented thought that the majority didn't go far enough, and that the state constitution required full "marriage" rights to gays.

Too bad one of the 4 didn't flop. I guess Civil unions are the moderate-conservative view in the North ;)

savesthedizzle
11-13-2006, 03:33 AM
Jess, I was shocked that the vote in New Jersey SC was only 4-3... until I saw that the three who dissented thought that the majority didn't go far enough, and that the state constitution required full "marriage" rights to gays.

Too bad one of the 4 didn't flop. I guess Civil unions are the moderate-conservative view in the North ;)

:lol: Yup that's how it is.

Pfloyd
11-13-2006, 05:11 AM
Karl Rove, he's the asshole of assholes.

He helped steal 2000.

He told Bush how to deal with Kerry in 2004.

One could almost say that Rove set the standard for the average political commercial nowadays.

Before they were bad, now there horrible.

Rove specialises in exagerating a story about a person and keep hammering them about it. A perfect example would be in 2004, making everybody call Kerry a flip-flopper.

Scotso
11-13-2006, 07:00 PM
Kerry was a pretty weak candidate, to be honest.

Pfloyd
11-15-2006, 04:09 PM
Yeah he was, but he was also much better than Bush, and I like him much better that Howard Dean

Sparko1030
11-15-2006, 06:56 PM
I thought Kerry was a good guy and I supported him but he just doesn't have that ability some people do to connect with others. Bill Clinton is the best example of a person who can do that. I'm afraid Kerry comes off as a bit aloof. Also, I think Kerry needed to show more "passion" about things and needed a firery response to the "Swift Boaters" accusations. People needed to hear a response to that. That (plus possible voting irregularites) are what cost him IMO.

I was miffed at him a week before these elecitons though-I thought that lame joke and his late/weak response was going to spoil a sure things for the Dems. but the voters were smart enough see it for what it was-nothing.

Thanks for the NJ info savestheday-I hope other state supreme courts have the same courage they did. Here in MN it didnt' make it to a referendum(thanks to the efforts of the dem. speaker here, who sorry to say, was not relected by his district- a minister and national guard capt-I should point out)

Scotso
11-15-2006, 08:02 PM
Of course I supported Dennis Kucinich for the Dem nomination :p I liked Carol Moseley-Braun, too. Both longshots.

I couldn't stand Howard Dean. I was :shrug: about Kerry.

Sparko1030
11-15-2006, 09:12 PM
:lol: I didn't like Dean either- I was relieved when he gave that over exuberant speech. My fav was Wesely Clark-I thought he was the most electable and maybe could have brought some much needed no nonesense intelligence to the Iraq war fiasco.

Scotso
11-16-2006, 01:17 AM
I didn't find Clark very intelligent, actually :lol:

Ex-generals can make great presidents (Eisenhower) and awful ones (Grant). The only ex-general or current general I would like to see as president is Colin Powell.

Sparko1030
11-16-2006, 03:50 AM
Yeah, Colin Powell would make a great president-too bad he was so badly used by the Bush cronies. :mad: I think he would be great for our country but I doubt he'll want the job.

Lee
11-16-2006, 04:58 PM
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1116mccain-billboard1116.html

McCain takes a big step

Billy House
Republic Washington Bureau
Nov. 16, 2006 12:00 AM


Today, it will be official.

Sen. John McCain, long considered a 2008 presidential contender, will file registration papers with the Federal Elections Commission to establish his presidential exploratory committee.

It's a first step toward a run for the White House because it lets him start raising money and create a potential campaign organization.

Scotso
11-16-2006, 08:17 PM
Yeah, Colin Powell would make a great president-too bad he was so badly used by the Bush cronies. :mad: I think he would be great for our country but I doubt he'll want the job.

Actually he did want the job. He would have been our president in 2000, but his wife, who was in a very poor medical condition, didn't want the exposure and persuaded him not to run. Very nice of him for doing that for his wife... too bad it !@#%ed the other 299,999,999 of us :p

Scotso
11-16-2006, 08:18 PM
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1116mccain-billboard1116.html

McCain takes a big step

Billy House
Republic Washington Bureau
Nov. 16, 2006 12:00 AM


Today, it will be official.

Sen. John McCain, long considered a 2008 presidential contender, will file registration papers with the Federal Elections Commission to establish his presidential exploratory committee.

It's a first step toward a run for the White House because it lets him start raising money and create a potential campaign organization.

:help:

I'm already writing my anti-McCain signs for the 2008 general election. I only need to fill in the Democrat's name.

Scotso
11-16-2006, 08:19 PM
But don't worry, Lee, I would forgive you if you supported him. If he was from Virginia, I would probably vote for him. I wouldn't have voted for Allen (douche), but I would vote for almost any Virginian in the presidential election... having a president from your state is one of the biggest advantages it can have.

Pfloyd
11-17-2006, 09:29 PM
As a promise to my commitment to this thread here's the latest in U.S Politcs:

Our Dumbass president went to Vietnam and stated that we will not make the same mistakes we did in that war (Vietnam) again in Iraq.

On the other hand, the dems stated that Abortion rights and gay rights are high in there lists of priorities.

On a funny political article, it acuses senator John Edwards (vice presidential candidate in 2004) of cutting in line in order to try and buy a PS3:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/17/edwards.ps3.ap/index.html

Sparko1030
11-18-2006, 12:47 AM
:haha: Yes, our dumbass pres!!! How in the world did such a idiot every get elected....my god, sometimes I cannot believe his ignorance....Yeah, let's not repeat the mistake of Viet Nam, which.according to the pres was leaving-that was the only reason the US lost there...:rolleyes: The mistake of Viet Nam (other than being there in the first place) was that the generals were not allowed to fight the war as they knew it had to be fought to win there-sound familiar???? Can he not recall all the generals he as fired or discreditied whenever their assesment would disagree with the genius Rumsfeld???? He has already made the same mistakes as were made in Viet Nam. And then in the news segment I saw, Bush going past the prison McCain was held at and he said something insipid and all I can think is here is this guy that did everything he could NOT to serve in Viet Nam, having the gall (and infinate stupidity) to use it to his own ends now....It is obvious he doens't even have a clue what really happened in Viet Nam-of course he was partying, partying, partying during that time in US history.....


Man, honestly, I think we, as a country, owe it to Iraq now to try and find a solution so the killing stops. I don't know if it possible and we never should have been there in the first place but leaving immeaditly would be irresponsible IMO. I have no idea what can be done to bring peace there now outside of letting the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites have their own country. All I can hope is that James Baker and the commitee find a workable solution and that moron listens this time.....

I have got to stop watching the news-there something that pisses me off almost every time! :lol:

Scotso
11-18-2006, 02:18 AM
Our Dumbass president went to Vietnam and stated that we will not make the same mistakes we did in that war (Vietnam) again in Iraq.

:haha: How can you go to Vietnam and talk about something like that? What a moron. (And for the record, Vietnam is probably a lot better off now under the victors than they would have been under the corrupt dictatorship that the U.S. supported.)

On the other hand, the dems stated that Abortion rights and gay rights are high in there lists of priorities.

:banana:

Pfloyd
11-18-2006, 04:30 AM
Yep, that's our Dubya...

Dude, John Edwards is evil, trying to get a PS3 for himself.

:lol:

NicoFan
11-26-2006, 08:06 PM
I saw the movie "Bobby" this afternoon. Cried through a lot of the movie. It got some bad reviews, but I loved it. I think Emilio Estevez did a great job. And loved the way he used actual film from that time.

Bobby Kennedy is my political hero (followed by his son, Robert Kennedy, Jr. who has done so much on environmental issues.) He's the big reason why I got involved in politics to begin with. Just to hear his words again was worth the price of admission. He was such a great man. Wish there was someone like him now. And with the war in Iraq and the immigration debate, some of the things are exactly the same, and we could use someone like him.

Pfloyd
11-28-2006, 01:14 AM
I don't think McCain is a good candidate for 08, he's pro war after all, who knows how long this war will last...

mangoes
11-28-2006, 01:16 AM
Good stuff, I agree, but I don't see a black man winnin' the presidency yet...unfortunatley....:sad:

I think Gore's a great candidate, though I do like Obama more

Edwards is way too plitician-y for me...


I'm not so big a fan of Obama. Since, I look pass color, all I see is a man who talks a good game, but that's all it is, talk. He has very little, in terms of actions, to back up his words. I would like to see a black man win the presidency in my lifetime. And, I'm not going to underestimate what Obama may still do in this upcoming election......given the fact that he has some powerful backers and money talks. I would like to see Hilary win, but that's going to be a challenge. The positive is if things keep going downhill, most voters may be willing to go with Hilary if they view this as getting Clinton to clean up the mess. It's really scary that Iraq is on the brink of a civil war and we are responsible.

I doubt Gore will run again. I think McCain time has passed. I look at him as just a sell out now. I think the governor of PA may be considering a run. Guliani's personal life will take him out of the equation. I can't see conservatives voting for him, even if he is a Republican.

Why don't you like Edwards?? I like him a lot :lol:

Pfloyd
11-28-2006, 01:19 AM
I really think Hilary isn't going to win, I go so far as to say that if she runs in 08 and wins the democratic primaries, the next president will be republican....

Don't get me wrong, she's ok and all, but i really don't see her winning...

Although, among republicans she has some support...

mangoes
11-28-2006, 01:23 AM
I really think Hilary isn't going to win, I go so far as to say that if she runs in 08 and wins the democratic primaries, the next president will be republican....

Don't get me wrong, she's ok and all, but i really don't see her winning...

I have that same fear too that Rep will win the presidency. I think the Republicans are better at spinning the political machine. I do, however, think Iraq can be an issue that would swing the elections in favor of the Democrats. Most people I speak to that are Republicans are just plain sick of the party. But, I won't underestimate Karl Rove. He can make anything smell sweet for the masses.

Pfloyd
11-28-2006, 01:26 AM
Karl Rove is an asshole....

Yeah, I mean Democrats have there democratic fan base, they almost always win with the Independant voters and they STILL don't win.

Democrats need republican votes, as can be seen in the congressional elections. There were various conservative democrats that won...

So yeah, I would say that Republicans may, believe it or not, win the White House again...

cmurray
11-28-2006, 01:26 AM
I really think Hilary isn't going to win, I go so far as to say that if she runs in 08 and wins the democratic primaries, the next president will be republican....

Don't get me wrong, she's ok and all, but i really don't see her winning...

Currently the dems are saying it's Hillary. And no, I don't see her winning either. I like McCain, actually. He's moderate and I don't feel like he's always lying to me, like most politicians.

Pfloyd
11-28-2006, 01:27 AM
Yeah, I mean, he's a like-able guy and he is quite moderate, but his pro-war status hurts him....

mangoes
11-28-2006, 01:35 AM
Currently the dems are saying it's Hillary. And no, I don't see her winning either. I like McCain, actually. He's moderate and I don't feel like he's always lying to me, like most politicians.

I'm actually putting my money on the Governor of PA being the next Dem Nominee. His name escapes me right now. But there is something about him that appeals to Republicans as evidenced by the ease with which he has won in PA.

I don't think Hillary is a done deal.

I like McCain too, but I've lost a lot of respect for him as he has begun to pander to the Right Wing of late.......something that I think can ultimately screw him depending on the atmosphere of 08. Most independents voted for Bush over Kerry because most viewed Kerry as an idiot. However, the independents are beginning to get annoyed with the amount of power this Right Wing has had of late. I am telling myself the Republicans will win because everytime I've said this, Democrats win. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Scotso
11-28-2006, 09:56 PM
Edwards strikes me as being too fake.

Now that Warner is out of the picture, I have no clue who to support.

Pfloyd
11-29-2006, 06:09 PM
Edwards strikes me as being too fake.

Now that Warner is out of the picture, I have no clue who to support.

I agree.

Again, if Gore participates in democratic party primaries, he'll be a good candidate.

Scotso
11-29-2006, 11:15 PM
I don't like Gore either, he puts me to sleep.

Pfloyd
11-30-2006, 12:55 AM
If somebody twisted your arm into forcing you to vote for a candidate, who would you vote for?

Sparko1030
11-30-2006, 02:44 AM
If somebody twisted your arm into forcing you to vote for a candidate, who would you vote for?

Hmmmm.....First I have to admit that there are many who are considering running that I really don't know anything about, but of those who I do know something I would say Gore (maybe his time is past but I still like him), Hilary (I am afraid though she will be too good of a target for Karl"if you don't have anything on em, make it up" Rove) and Obama (yeah, I know, not enough experience),so for me that leaves Colin Powell-I don't care what party he ran as, I'd vote for him-but of course he won't run.....OK, to choose one right now.....Obamagets my vote right now. Really, what we need, I think, is a no-nonsense- get things done person like Harry Truman-or an inovator like his predecessor Roosevelt. Maybe one of those unknowns will fill the bill.

I have to say one thing Bush has done for me is that pretty much no matter who runs and who wins, they've got to be better then him!!!! Despite the mess he will be leaving the country in, he will give the next president the "gift" of having very little to live up to.....(can't miss an opportunity to get a dig in at Dubya...;) )

Pfloyd
11-30-2006, 02:55 AM
Yeah, he's a good candidate, and he gives awsome speeches, his little expirience can hurt him though....

Sparko1030
11-30-2006, 03:00 AM
Yeah, he may do better to wait till the next election but he doe have enormous potential. I fully expect to change my mind many times before 2008! :p

Who would be your choice right now Lafuria?

Pfloyd
11-30-2006, 03:03 PM
I like Gore, to be honest. He talks well, and is a smart guy.

He was a big promoter of the internet back in the day when it was a promising technology.

He has also been one to mention the effects of global warming many years ago.

In other words, he has good intuition, talks very well, and quite frankly seems like a promising candidate.

Obama look good too.

I don't really like Hilary, to be honest.

I'll also have to wait and see which people will become official democratic presidential candidates and listen to what they have to say about contemporary issues to give you a better, more precise answer.

Scotso
11-30-2006, 09:42 PM
If I had to choose one, it would be Hillary, I guess.

Pfloyd
12-01-2006, 12:04 AM
:ras:

:)

Pfloyd
12-03-2006, 01:46 AM
New Info!

Rumsfeld warned Bush that Iraq war was failing, and also directed Bush on what to do next!!

www.cnn.com

Scotso
12-03-2006, 09:38 PM
That doesn't take a rocket scientist, though.

"I'm not into this detail stuff. I'm more concepty." - Donald Rumsfeld

Sparko1030
12-12-2006, 09:23 PM
Well, it looks like Obama is thinking seriously about being a candidate-he was in New Hampshire last weekend and it seems he had a warm reception. Again I really like this guy but wish he had more experience. I do think his departure from such bitter partisanship is very healthy for the country though. Even Rick Warren (the evangelical minister who wrote "The Purpose Dirven Life"-a book that really helped me define my faith- welcomed him to his church for a conferance on HIV. Warren took some flak from the extreme religious right for that as Obama is pro choice, but he didn't cave into the pressure.

Here is a report on Barak's visit to NH:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061212/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008

Scotso
12-13-2006, 03:49 AM
He shouldn't run, he can't win.

Sparko1030
12-13-2006, 01:22 PM
Well, Kucinich (sp?) is running again and I doubt he has a serious chance of winning either. I do think Obama does have a chance to win though-he has wide appeal-I'm just not 100% sure he is ready. For me Obabama represents a fresh start in US politics and I think that is why he is creating such a stir-I think the voters are weary of the us vs them prevailing attitude of the last 15years and just want good governing regardless of their political affiliation. I think those who represent extreme idealogies (or even if its just precieved) will be dumped by the voters overall. Pockets will remain of both wings but will not work to elect the next president IMO.

My head tells me Al Gore may be the person for the job though at this time. Its so early though, its impossible to tell who will come out the eventual canidate for the dems.

Scotso
12-13-2006, 07:24 PM
The difference between Kucinich and Obama is that Obama would be running to win, Kucinich would not be. He would use the nomination process as a platform for ideas.

NicoFan
12-14-2006, 11:59 PM
I hope Senator Johnson is okay. What a terrible thing to have happen to him.

But I have to admit that I'm also upset that the Democrats could lose control of the Senate. :bigcry:

Sparko1030
12-15-2006, 02:54 AM
I feel the same way Nicofan. :sad: I have a feeling he will hold on to his position though. Some legal person was on the NBC news and said that there isn't anything in the SD constitution about forcing a sick senator to resign. With a republican gov of SD, my guess is he won't resign. They said Sen Biden was absent for 6 months after brain surgery. Fingers crossed for his recovery and for the demecratic majority in the senate!

Sparko1030
12-15-2006, 02:57 AM
The difference between Kucinich and Obama is that Obama would be running to win, Kucinich would not be. He would use the nomination process as a platform for ideas.


I agree that is the difference b/t the two MatejBockoFan but unlike you I think Obamba would have a chance to win. :)

Scotso
12-15-2006, 10:11 PM
He would have a chance, but it's unlikely.

I would support him if he won the nomination... but I don't think he would, and I think he shouldn't run at this point. His popularity is likely only to grow... he should capitalize on that and run in 2012 or 2016.

I felt bad for Johnson, I suppose, but I felt more bad that the Democrats might lose the majority. Johnson is one man, but if the Democrats lose their hold on the Senate, it will affect billions of people.

ufokart
12-16-2006, 02:17 AM
I hope Senator Johnson is okay. What a terrible thing to have happen to him.

But I have to admit that I'm also upset that the Democrats could lose control of the Senate. :bigcry:

Last i heard was that there were good signs of recovery:)

NicoFan
12-16-2006, 08:15 PM
ufokart - thanks for the info. That's very good news. :yeah:

And TV alert everyone - on Monday night on Hardball, Chris is going to have on Robert DeNiro and Matt Damon doing a show at a college. In the preview, Matt had some controversial (but I agree with him) things to say about what he calls the "fighting class".

And DeNiro and Matt are going to also be on Larry King that night with Angelina Jolie.

Scotso
12-18-2006, 04:59 PM
Apparently Mark Warner is reconsidering his premature exit from the race. :D So if he jumps back into the ring I'll have someone to rally behind.

Sparko1030
12-29-2006, 05:36 AM
John Edwards has thrown his hat in the race. He's likeable but....just doens't get me fired up :lol: and I still dont' know what he stands for. ( I like his wife a lot though!)

Iraq War Update!!!! Surprise, surprise!!!! It seems Bush will ignore the election results and the the advice of the Baker comission (the very same man who was good enough to argue his side in the 2000 Florida election results before the Supreme Court no less). If you haven't heard, the good news is we can still "win" in Iraq, the bad news is we'll have to increase the number of troops there to accomplish it-just for a short time of though of course. Yeah, we trust you Mr. President, you've never misled us before. :rolleyes: Seriously, maybe he should be impeached.....OK, maybe not, then we would be left with Cheney.

Oh, speaking of Cheney, its so wonderful his daughter is having a baby. Of course she can't leagally marry her partner but I'm sure that doesn't bother Grampa. ;)

Oh, what a great time to be a comedian with all this hilarious irony in the news these days!!!

Pfloyd
01-08-2007, 02:07 AM
Brief Update:

Bush is claiming that the reason the U.S is not winning the war is because they do not have enough troops to win.

Bush is now calling for a recruitment of many thousand more soldiers to go fight a hopeless, long-lost war.

House majority Leader Nancy Pelosi clearly objected to Bush's decision and this may well signify the first major disagreement between the executive and legislative branch.

scoobs
01-08-2007, 02:15 AM
I wonder how the now-finally-put-out-to-pasture Mr Rumsfeld feels about that, given the "leaner, meaner" US military was very much his brainchild.

In any case, I disagree with him, but nothing new there. What they need is to find a way to stop Iraqis of all stripes, but mainly Sunnis, from hating the US troops and wanting to kill them. No easy solution to that problem. But sending more troops just offers up more targets.

Pfloyd
01-08-2007, 02:19 AM
I wonder how the now-finally-put-out-to-pasture Mr Rumsfeld feels about that, given the "leaner, meaner" US military was very much his brainchild.

In any case, I disagree with him, but nothing new there. What they need is to find a way to stop Iraqis of all stripes, but mainly Sunnis, from hating the US troops and wanting to kill them. No easy solution to that problem. But sending more troops just offers up more targets.

There is little remedy for hate, especially deeply rooted religious extreme-isms that have been fostered since early childhood.

Getting out is the best solution, but you can be sure there will be consequences for the states regardless of what Bush decides to do in Iraq.

scoobs
01-08-2007, 02:25 AM
They need to get out, soon. As soon as we can feasibly hand over security to the Iraqis, and that may have to be sooner than either they or the UK/US Govt would like.

The choices here are between shitty and really really shitty. But I don't think our presence is going to stabilise matters. We may already be beyond such a possibility. They're virtually in a state of civil war in some parts of the country anyway.

Pfloyd
01-08-2007, 02:26 AM
Yeah, agreed. There is no heroic way out of this at all.

scoobs
01-08-2007, 02:29 AM
It took Ford to finally get the US out of Vietnam. It may take the next US President to get the US and UK out of Iraq - I don't think Mr Bush is quite prepared to let go of the vision of how things were supposed to have gone in Iraq - US troops showered with flower petals from a gratefully liberated population.

Pfloyd
01-08-2007, 02:50 AM
It took Ford to finally get the US out of Vietnam. It may take the next US President to get the US and UK out of Iraq - I don't think Mr Bush is quite prepared to let go of the vision of how things were supposed to have gone in Iraq - US troops showered with flower petals from a gratefully liberated population.

I honestly don't know what Bush is thinking, but an interesting theory on Bush's decision of adding more soldiers to the current army in Iraq is that Bush is simply trying to find a final excuse in which for him to base himself as a reason to leave Iraq.

If the new soldiers do not help improve the situation in Iraq, Bush then may say to himself, I have done everything possible to win this war and it has failed.

Of course, I doubt that Bush will freely say this in public, but in the end, it may look less bad to retreat from Iraq with more soldiers, than with less, simply because the added effort may look good on his image...

Sparko1030
01-11-2007, 09:03 PM
Well, that's it. Our Commander in Chief, in all his wisdom, again ignoring all advice to the contrary, will increase the number of troops in Iraq, confindent that is all that is needed to establish a peaceful democracy in a country torn by sectarian violence. There is nothing this moron won't do to salve his ego. My god, right now I wish the US had a parlimentary form of government so we could get rid of him. Really, that's what the Nov. elections were, a vote of no confidnece, but he is deaf to the overwhelming voice of the voters.

Our only hope is that the new Democratically controled congress can weild enough power to curtail his plans, although other than cutting off $ to the military is their only outright means of stopping him and that is a drastic option. I was foolish enough to think the election results may bring changes to the way the executive branch dd buisiness, but once agian I underestimated the stupididty of our president. :mad: :sad:

El Legenda
02-10-2007, 04:39 PM
http://www.barackobama.com/

SPRINGFIELD, Illinois (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama stood before cheering crowds at the Capitol in his home state Saturday and announced he will seek the 2008 Democratic nomination for president.

Invoking the memory of fellow Illinoisan and the 16th president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, the first-term senator addressed thousands packed into the Springfield, Illinois, town square on a chilly day in America's heartland.

To chants of "Obama! Obama!," he told the crowd: "It was here, in Springfield, where North, South, East and West come together that I was reminded of the essential decency of the American people -- where I came to believe that through this decency, we can build a more hopeful America," said the 45-year-old Obama, who, if elected, would become the nation's first African-American president. (Watch how name recognition may be Obama's best weapon )

"And that is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a divided house to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for president of the United States of America."

Despite his brief tenure in the Senate, Obama has quickly gained popularity as he pondered his bid to break the Oval Office's color barrier.

According to a University of New Hampshire Survey Research Center conducted this month, Obama placed second, behind Sen. Hillary Clinton, among New Hampshire Democratic primary voters. Obama snared 21 percent of the vote in that popularity poll, trailing Clinton by 14 points.

Other Democrats seeking the office include Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware; Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut; former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina; Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson; Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and Sen. Clinton of New York.

While speculation abounds over whether a black presidential candidate can be viable, Obama -- whose first name comes from the Swahili word for "one who is blessed" -- has not let the color of skin hinder his career.

He attended Harvard and Columbia universities and was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. He entered politics in Illinois, where he practiced civil rights law and taught at the University of Chicago Law School.

His first foray into politics came in 1997, when he took his seat in the state Senate, where he served until 2005. He was sworn in as a U.S. senator in 2005.

'People who love their country can change it'
In his Saturday announcement, Obama acknowledged that he hasn't been in Washington long, but said he is familiar enough with the city's political machinations to understand that change is in order.

"I recognize there is a certain presumptuousness in this -- a certain audacity -- to this announcement," Obama said. "I know that I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington, but I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change.

He added, "People who love their country can change it."

Admitting the tactic is typical of aspiring candidates, Obama promised to overhaul a political system he says is dominated by lobbyists and special interest groups "who've turned our government into a game only they can afford to play."

"They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we're here today to take it back. The time for that kind of politics is over," he said. "It's time to turn the page right here and right now."

Obama, the son of a black Kenyan father and white American mother, then invoked Lincoln again.

"He had his doubts. He had his defeats. He had his setbacks, but through his will and his words, he moved a nation and helped free a people."

Obama told the crowd he would tackle problems like poor schools, economic hardships and oil dependence, saying "failure of leadership" is to blame for not meeting the nation's challenges.

He further called the Iraq war a "tragic mistake" and said, "It's time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war. That's why I have a plan that will bring our combat troops home by March of 2008.

"Letting the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Sunni and Shia to come to the table and find peace," he said.

R.Federer
02-10-2007, 05:11 PM
Don't know enough about his positions on some of the big U.S issues to comment on his suitability.

But he does come across as intelligent in the television interviews I have seen. He might stand a chance in the Democratic primary, but I just can NOT see him win the big race, primarily by racial issues. Deep down, I think he knows that too. Just my two cents.

Jim Jones
02-10-2007, 09:45 PM
It took Ford to finally get the US out of Vietnam. It may take the next US President to get the US and UK out of Iraq - I don't think Mr Bush is quite prepared to let go of the vision of how things were supposed to have gone in Iraq - US troops showered with flower petals from a gratefully liberated population.

Don't listen to what the liberal press tells you. The Kurds are grateful to the Americans and their region is generally peaceful. Inch Allah they will get Kirkurk by the end of this year. So Kurds are friends of the Americans. As for shiites and sunnis, well let us just say that their hatred has been running for centuries. The mistake was to have those regions united into one nation.

Pfloyd
02-11-2007, 02:01 AM
Good stuff!

Let's go Obama.

Hilary just dosen't do it for me.

case
02-11-2007, 02:11 AM
Don't listen to what the liberal press tells you. The Kurds are grateful to the Americans and their region is generally peaceful. Inch Allah they will get Kirkurk by the end of this year. So Kurds are friends of the Americans. As for shiites and sunnis, well let us just say that their hatred has been running for centuries. The mistake was to have those regions united into one nation.


What a joke. there is no liberal press.
AND DO HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT?
I think america just killed some of the friends kurds today.
death by "accident".
most americans paint all "arabs" "muslims" as terrorists and not friends.
I think the kurds are smart enough to figure that out. I think they are.
Apparently you arent.
So easy of you to write off the bloodshed in Iraq as centuries old hatred. Out of so many mistakes foreign interests have made in the region, this war against Iraq (actually a war against arabs for oil) is by far the worst mistake.

Sparko1030
02-11-2007, 02:37 AM
First a BIG WOOHOO Barak is running!!! I hate to desert Hilary, but he's my choice. I think he's what the US needs now. And I don't think race will be a problem overall-perhaps in the south yet :shrug: but I think he could be elected.


Don't listen to what the liberal press tells you. The Kurds are grateful to the Americans and their region is generally peaceful. Inch Allah they will get Kirkurk by the end of this year. So Kurds are friends of the Americans. As for shiites and sunnis, well let us just say that their hatred has been running for centuries. The mistake was to have those regions united into one nation.

I've said that from the begining-that the only way for these very different factions who have a long history of animosity between them was to let them form their own country. Iraq was in for the same fate as Yugoslavia. A country with ancient ethnic animostiy. Take away the repressive dictator and you don't have a newfound democracy but a visious civil war.

Of course Turkey didn't want to see the Kurds(who yes, regard the US as friends) with their own country so it was nixed. Well, that and of course the Pres and his cadre were too ignorant and arrogant to even consider there would be problems since they never took a the time to learn about the country and the people we were invading....Anyway, here we are 4 years later and what do we have???? Where is this wonderful, stable union????? Yes, indeed. MORONS every single one of the neo cons. :mad: And we and the people of the mess we call Iraq will pay for this blunder for many years to come. What is the way to peace now? How can it be "fixed"???? I'm not for immeadiate withdrawl but I have absoulutly no confidence this administration can work this out to some kind of solution.

Oh, but there is no liberal press though. That is a big myth. There is only the press looking to make a profit-devoid of any other real point of view or moral imperative :p

Pfloyd
02-11-2007, 02:41 AM
Yeah, but Hilary is the big preliminary favorite, according to the political experts of MSNBC.

Sparko1030
02-11-2007, 02:59 AM
But how many times does the early front runner win the nomination? Its so early in the race that that is fairly meaningless I think.

Pfloyd
02-11-2007, 04:17 AM
I hope your right.

If Obama becomes the official democratic candidate, I would be very happy.

That would be so cool.

ufokart
02-11-2007, 04:27 AM
Obama :rocker2: :rocker2:

I prefered Feingold, but since he's not running, i'll support obama :lol:.

Yeah, i can't vote in USA :o but he'll have my vote of confidence :p :rolls:

Jim Jones
02-11-2007, 02:09 PM
What a joke. there is no liberal press.
AND DO HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT?
I think america just killed some of the friends kurds today.
death by "accident".
most americans paint all "arabs" "muslims" as terrorists and not friends.
I think the kurds are smart enough to figure that out. I think they are.
Apparently you arent.
So easy of you to write off the bloodshed in Iraq as centuries old hatred. Out of so many mistakes foreign interests have made in the region, this war against Iraq (actually a war against arabs for oil) is by far the worst mistake.

People can be killed by friendly fire you know. I seem to know what I am talking about more that you since you do not seem to know that Kurds and Americans are natural allies.

If most Americans paint muslims as terrorists then I can also stereotype against muslims who paint westerners as infidels and aggressors who need to be fought.....Samuel Huntington was right, there is a clash of civilizations between Muslims and non-Muslims (not just westerners). neoither side is evil or good, just different.

No the worst mistake was for the Brits to have allowed the creation of Iraq and to have not prevented the radical wahhabbists from controlling Mecca in the 1920s. The Hashemites of which one faction now controls Jordan today are far more moderate than the wahhabists. Hejaz (which was the nation that Mecca was part of till 1920s) would have been a natural ally and not a make believe ally which sadly, Saudi Arabia is towards the West.

The nation that controls Mecca becomes the spokesperson for Islam. that is why Saudi Arabia has large influence thorughout the Muslim world. whabbism would have been not so prominent if Saudis did not control mecca......Iraq war had more to do with war on terror than control of oil.

Jim Jones
02-11-2007, 02:24 PM
First a BIG WOOHOO Barak is running!!! I hate to desert Hilary, but he's my choice. I think he's what the US needs now. And I don't think race will be a problem overall-perhaps in the south yet :shrug: but I think he could be elected.




I've said that from the begining-that the only way for these very different factions who have a long history of animosity between them was to let them form their own country. Iraq was in for the same fate as Yugoslavia. A country with ancient ethnic animostiy. Take away the repressive dictator and you don't have a newfound democracy but a visious civil war.

Of course Turkey didn't want to see the Kurds(who yes, regard the US as friends) with their own country so it was nixed. Well, that and of course the Pres and his cadre were too ignorant and arrogant to even consider there would be problems since they never took a the time to learn about the country and the people we were invading....Anyway, here we are 4 years later and what do we have???? Where is this wonderful, stable union????? Yes, indeed. MORONS every single one of the neo cons. :mad: And we and the people of the mess we call Iraq will pay for this blunder for many years to come. What is the way to peace now? How can it be "fixed"???? I'm not for immeadiate withdrawl but I have absoulutly no confidence this administration can work this out to some kind of solution.

Oh, but there is no liberal press though. That is a big myth. There is only the press looking to make a profit-devoid of any other real point of view or moral imperative :p
I agree with a lot of what you say...oh maybe except of your description of the neo cons. ;)
No seriously, Iraq was already a mess before the invasion. The Shiites and Kurds were massacred during different intervals. A lot of the casualities in Iraq today is as a result of bombings. Over 90% of those bombings are committed by Sunni Arabs. Why? Because they get a lot of funding from neighboring sunni arab groups and perhaps even with help from those governments.

Iraq invasion to me was still a necessary thing to do. Kurds and shiites now have their autonomy and we got rid of a madman. it is mostly Baghdad and sunni areas that are bombed. Basra is the 2nd largest city in Iraq. Have you ever heard of bombings over there? No but you have heard of bombings in Baghdad, Ramadi, Mosul and yes also sometimes in Kurdish areas (but much rarer then in sunni areas).

If the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq trhen they should have also stayed out of Yugoslavian war. One cannot say oh those guys are dems (Clinton adminstration) let them fight wars (Yugoslavia) but hey those guys are neo cons (Bush), if they go to war then it will be illegal. (never mind that UN resolution also did not authorize U.S. bombarding of Yugoslavia)

When LBJ attacked Vietnam it is mostly General Westmoreland that is blamed for the war. Bu when Nixon took over, automatically, the continuing american involvement in the war was credited to Nixon and not to the Generals. Samething can be said with Korea. The failures of that war are credited to General McArthur. But Truman was responsible for not negotiating with communists and not recognizing China.The Korean war could have been won by the West.

Thus, next time U.S feels it needs to go to war, perhaps Americans should wait till a Democrat is in power. Clinton was not held liable for the fiasco in Somalia. Or if so it was quicky forgotten. Reagan is still remembered and criticized for helping contras in Nicaragua (as if Sadinistas were better then the Contras). So yes, the press remains biased & liberal in many ways, Fox News being one of the rare exceptions.

Pfloyd
02-11-2007, 04:47 PM
I agree with a lot of what you say...oh maybe except of your description of the neo cons. ;)
No seriously, Iraq was already a mess before the invasion. The Shiites and Kurds were massacred during different intervals. There are more bombings now and over 90% of those bombings are committed by Sunni Arabs. Why? Because they get a lot of funding from neighboring sunni arab groups and perhaps even with help from those governments.

Iraq invasion to me was still a necessary thing to do. Kurds and shiites now have their autonomy and we got rid of a madman. it is mostly Baghdad and sunni areas that are bombed. Basra is the 2nd largest city in Iraq. Have you ever heard of bomings over there. No but you have heard of bombings in Baghdad, Ramadi, Mosul and yes also sometimes in Kurdish areas (but much rarer then in sunni areas).

If the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq trhen they should have also stayed out of Yugoslavian war. One cannot say oh those guys are dems (Clinton adminstration) let them fight wars (Yugoslavia) but hey those guys are neo cons (Bush), if they go to war then it will be illegal. (never mind that UN resolution also did not authorize U.S. bombarding of Yugoslavia)

When LBJ attacked Vietnam it is mostly General Westmoreland that is credited with the war. Bu when Nixon took over, automatically, the continuing american involvement in the war was credited to Nixon and not to the Generals. Samething can be said with Korea. the failures of that war are credited to General McArthur. But Truman was responsible for not negotiating with communists and not recognizing China.The Korean war could have been won by the West.

Thus, next time U.S feels it needs to go to war, perhaps americans should wait till a Democrat is in power. Clinton was not held liable for the fiasco in Somalia. Or if so it was quicky forgotten. Reagan is still remembered and criticized for helping contras in Nicaragua (as if Sadinistas were better then the Contras). So yes, the press remains biased & liberal in many ways, Fox News being one of the rare exceptions.

Good post!

Sparko1030
02-11-2007, 08:54 PM
I agree with a lot of what you say...oh maybe except of your description of the neo cons. ;)
No seriously, Iraq was already a mess before the invasion. The Shiites and Kurds were massacred during different intervals. A lot of the casualities in Iraq today is as a result of bombings. Over 90% of those bombings are committed by Sunni Arabs. Why? Because they get a lot of funding from neighboring sunni arab groups and perhaps even with help from those governments.

Iraq invasion to me was still a necessary thing to do. Kurds and shiites now have their autonomy and we got rid of a madman. it is mostly Baghdad and sunni areas that are bombed. Basra is the 2nd largest city in Iraq. Have you ever heard of bombings over there? No but you have heard of bombings in Baghdad, Ramadi, Mosul and yes also sometimes in Kurdish areas (but much rarer then in sunni areas).

If the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq trhen they should have also stayed out of Yugoslavian war. One cannot say oh those guys are dems (Clinton adminstration) let them fight wars (Yugoslavia) but hey those guys are neo cons (Bush), if they go to war then it will be illegal. (never mind that UN resolution also did not authorize U.S. bombarding of Yugoslavia)

When LBJ attacked Vietnam it is mostly General Westmoreland that is blamed for the war. Bu when Nixon took over, automatically, the continuing american involvement in the war was credited to Nixon and not to the Generals. Samething can be said with Korea. The failures of that war are credited to General McArthur. But Truman was responsible for not negotiating with communists and not recognizing China.The Korean war could have been won by the West.

Thus, next time U.S feels it needs to go to war, perhaps Americans should wait till a Democrat is in power. Clinton was not held liable for the fiasco in Somalia. Or if so it was quicky forgotten. Reagan is still remembered and criticized for helping contras in Nicaragua (as if Sadinistas were better then the Contras). So yes, the press remains biased & liberal in many ways, Fox News being one of the rare exceptions.

OK, if you're going to acuse the majority of the press of being liberal, you have to see FOX is biased to the right. If FOX is considered unbiased, then there is no hope for an objective press in the US. :lol: I still say, the press these days is all about profit margins and never offending anyone too much. Sell, sell, sell is the mantra today.

You make some good points but I have to disagree with on some. I can't argue getting rid of Hussien wasn't a good thing, but look at the price. He is dead now but is Iraq really better off? Are we in the western world safer? My anwer to those questions are a big no. So what have we really gained?

The civil war in the former Yugoslavia had already started and genocide was taking place before NATO and the US ever stepped foot in the country. The US invaded Iraq without any real provacation, the only excuse was what has turned out to be extremely flawed intelligence (talk about oxymorons...). The US invading and subsequent blundering policy allowed the current civil war to errupt. So I don't think what we did in Yugoslavia and Iraq are really analagous. The invasion of Iraq did not make civil war inevtible, but total mismanagement after did.

Reagan's administration's flak for helping the Contras has legs because what his administration did was illegal. Selling arms to Iraq (:eek: ) and passing the $ to the Contras (if memory serves me correctly.) What did Clinton do that was illegal in Somalia? And there is one Republican who had united support in a war-Bush I in the first Gulf War, the war to free Kuwait from Iraq, so its not all one sided against the republicans. Viet Nam was a mess with blame on both sides. I think LBJ and Nixon legacies have both been tarnished by it. It seems its the real reason Johnson didn't run for another term if memory serves me. Kennedy maybe getting off but you know, when you're assinated, many things get forgiven/forgotten. The real tradegy of Veitnam, to me now, is that we have not learned the lessons we should have from that conflict.

Lastly, I stand by my description of the Neo Cons. ;) A tragic combination of ignorance and arrogance. If you're going to go to all that work to make a war look necessary, at least have the wisdom to do some homework on the country first.....again, morons is the best word I can think of to describe the lot of the them. :devil:

Sparko1030
04-17-2007, 03:01 AM
Seems many old Clinton supporters have now put their support behind Obamba. I like both candidates but lean toward Barak. I just hope they don't start to fight dirty and divide the party in their quest for the White House. Here's hoping they keep their campaigns honest and about the issues. Here is a link to the story:

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1122611.html

Sparko1030
04-24-2007, 01:28 PM
:yeah: Go for it Dennis!!! Apparantly Dennis Kucinich is going to file articles of impeachment against Cheney. It's not confirmed and even if he does, I doubt that much will come of it, but its nice to know there is a fly out there annoying that smug, embodiment of evil Cheney. :devil:

here is a link

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_to_launch_Cheney_impeachment_push_0419.ht ml

mtw
12-06-2007, 03:24 PM
Sorry, but current American politics is real tragedy. It was big tragedy in times of Clinton, it is total disaster in times of Bush. It can not last longer.
Could you explain, what`s wrong with such politicians as Bush and Clinton is? Why do these people do not take care of own country and own citizens? Why do they lead plundering, stupid politics?
For instance Bush and H. Clinton ( her husband was very bad politicians too, he made practically nothing for country, only sex - scandals with Monika L. and clashes with Iraq and Afghanistan. There were two his deserves for world and country politics ) Then happened Bush and he made bloody massacre in both these countries, ruined peace and balance of the world and practically ruined his own country. And what wonderful is in this woman H Clinton? What clever can see do? Practically nothing. Firstly, she voted for the war in Iraq. This chaos, ruininig od country is owned to her too. She voted for the sanctions against Iran and as practically own democrate she defends her stupid, mindless politics or unprejudice. I don`t understand how such agressive, stupid politicians can rule in such big country as USA and what sort of people vote for them. It is a big mistake.
Besides I don`t understand it, but these both politicians have no worry about own coutry and own citizens: collapsing bridges, homes destroyed by disaster ( it has not yet been rebuilt? ) and such politicians as Bush and Clinton what do they do? Why did they take care of it earlier? It is real usual negligence. They sent troops on occupying wars, they think how to destroy a new country, because something does not fit in to them - nobody knows what.
Besides, can these people such complicated subjects as nuclear physics? It seems that comprehensions of these both politicians G Bush and H. Clinton is very limited, nuclear energy means according to them nuclear bomb. All people: specialists ( nuclear physics ) say to them there is no programm of nuclear weapon, their spies say to them: there is no programm of nuclear weapon ( even they have enough such politicians ). But these two morons defends their mindless opinions, their ill sanctions. Sorry but such politicians as Bush and Clinton are very bad, incompetent people and they never should hold such positions in country. It is very dangerous for the world and for own country. Clinton and Bush are people of the same kind nd probably they are supported by the same lobby.
Sorry, but no normal person should give chance for such politicians again. They had own time in politics and they wasted it.

Pfloyd
02-11-2008, 11:28 PM
Bump.