Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Surprised no Hillary threads yet...Follow

#27 Jan 23 2007 at 9:13 AM Rating: Default
Ted Kennedy and CNN have already called him Osama.
#28 Jan 23 2007 at 9:28 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,196 posts
annabellaonalexander wrote:
Quote:
people are much more positive about Bill now than they ever were during his adminstration.


Interesting perspective - I remember how it was more of the repetitive attacks and loud criticisms from the shouting conservatives than from anyone else. They were constantly gunning for him. During it all, he got things done. Moderates and liberals were very happy with Clinton's time in office. While recklessly stupid in his personal life with the Lewinsky scandal, I think he was one of our best presidents. History will prove (if it hasn't already) this out.

G. W. Bush, on the other hand, will go down in history as one of our worst if not the worst president ever.

As for Condi, I agree that she'll never be voted into office with her close association with our current president. Not that she'd be inclined to do so. She doesn't seem the type to run for elective office.
____________________________
'Lo, there do I see, the line of my people, back to the beginning, 'lo do they call to me, they bid me take my place among them, in the halls of Valhalla, where the brave...may live...forever.

X-Box 360 Gamer Tag - Smogster
#29 Jan 23 2007 at 9:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bill Clinton consistantly polled well in job approval ratings, even in the heart of Lewinski-mania.

You could certainly do worse than an average approval rating in the mid 60's.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#30 Jan 23 2007 at 11:40 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,870 posts
Metastophicleas wrote:
he reminds me of the black Vulcan on Star Trek...Voyager...I think


Is THIS the vulcan of which you speak?

The similarity is striking.
#31 Jan 23 2007 at 2:19 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
Yeah, they do look similar in some ways, but I was thinking more the mannerisms, and way they speak. Very proper, which is commendable, but a little too stiff. I imagine that once we hear Obama more, that may change, though.
#32 Jan 23 2007 at 9:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Is it justme or are the democrats trying to lose the next election already? Imean the republican candidate is going to suck and have issues to deal with, but most people will blame that on bush himself not the party. But come on. Hillary? She couldn't weild enough power to reign in one guy. What the hell makes her think she can handle running a country. And Obama or whatever his name is, I dub thee "Howard Dean II". It's very amusign to watch though.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#33 Jan 23 2007 at 10:30 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

Apparently the only retort many people have to Obama is to make fun of his name.

#34 Jan 23 2007 at 10:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Apparently the only retort many people have to Obama is to make fun of his name.

Of course. His lack of experience and his "landslide" victory in the Senate race ( I mean, Jack Ryan and Alan Keyes? C'mon, I could have won!) are only secondary to a coincidental name similarity with the Bin'Laden.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#35 Jan 23 2007 at 10:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Well his official policy on the Iraq conflict is that, and i quote directly from his website "The only hope to end this burgeoning civil war is for Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds to come together and resolve their differences" Yeah. Good luck with that.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#36 Jan 23 2007 at 11:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Or, to quote the whole thing,
Obama wrote:
Since 2002, and now, as a U.S. Senator, Senator Obama has continued to critique the Administration's mishandling of this war, and believes that while our troops have done an outstanding job in Iraq, there can be no military solution to what is inherently a political conflict between Iraq's warring factions. The only hope to end this burgeoning civil war is for Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds to come together and resolve their differences, and that's why Senator Obama agrees with the Iraq Study Group's conclusion that we must begin a phased redeployment of American troops to signal to the government and people of Iraq that ours is not an open-ended commitment.
Which I pretty much agree with.

It may not be sunshine and flowers and everyone holding hands in a circle but, before there's peace in Iraq, either the factions have to come to some sort of understanding or else one faction needs to overwhelm the opposing factions until they can't possibly continue a conflict. So, unless the plan is, "Dominate the Sunnis and Kurds" (which is where the Shiite-protectionist government is currently headed) they'd better come to some sort of terms that sound better to them than "Suicide car bomb" does.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#37 Jan 24 2007 at 7:35 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
HERE'S A SHOCKER:

As a conservative, I agree with those that say we need to allow the seperate groups to figure thier own problems out. Though, I imagine once the head cleric is kicked in the ***, or killed, much of the violence they're seeing now, will fall off, and it'll be just like Iran, without the nutjob in charge (i.e. we can ignore them again). Once the people in Iraq learn that they can make their voices heard without violence, I wouldn't be surprised to see that country floursih. The people are smart, industrialist, and slowly starting to realize that they're actually free.

We've done what we set out to do, we toppled Saddam, and left the country FREE. We built them a government, and helped to secure their country. We can't do it all. Hell, we can't even secure our own borders from invasion (mostly because the buck keeps getting passed). I think it is time that we re-deploy into Afghanistan. Eliminate the problems that are arising there, and finish what we started: Find and destroy OBL. W. made that promise five and a half years ago, and it seems that he's forgotten it.

This war effort has been mishandled from jump. You cannot fight a "war" with the "fewest troops possible". You have to use maximum force, and use it all at once, no dilly dallying around saying that we're going to "stay the course". Once you're staying the course, you've lost. You're not adapting to the enemy, nor are you adapting to the situation at hand.

I'll admit that I was one of the strongest supporters for finishing the job in Iraq, but I think that based on the original plan, we did that already. If their people want to protect their country, they'll do it, or they'll be under the bootheel of another tyrant.
#38 Jan 24 2007 at 9:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I don't know that Obama would be a great president but I am interested in hearing him in speeches and debates (especially debates) detailing why he thinks he'd be a good choice and what his detailed thoughts on the issues are. Single paragraph statements on a website are a start but I look forward to seeing him with his feet to the fire, having to detail and defend.

Largely though, I roll my eyes at the number of people who clamor for a "new" choice and who ***** that each presidental candidate is the same guy in a different skin, holding onto the hope that one day Mr. Smith will run for executive office. As soon as someone who is new to the arena shows up, the immediate criticism is "He's not experienced enough in Washington!" Are we waiting for the mythical figure who has spent twenty years in office, amassed a great record, remains untouched by scandal and still holds the same ideological zeal as they did when they first got to the capital? 'Cause we might be waiting a while.

Good or bad, I want to hear him try to prove himself before I dismiss (or vote for) him.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#39 Jan 24 2007 at 11:13 AM Rating: Default
Uh, it's like the movie Gladiator. Rome (aka Washington) is corrupt. Who knows, if the terrorists had solely focused on Washington rather than the Twin Towers we might've been hailing them as liberators.
#40 Jan 24 2007 at 11:31 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
You have a point, Joph. I suppose I'm waiting for that mythical figure that has actually read the Constitution, and will adhere to it.

Not likely to happen, but I'll wait for it.
#41 Jan 24 2007 at 11:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Metastophicleas wrote:
and will adhere to it.
More, more accurately, to your interpretation of it Smiley: wink2

That's not a personal slam. Everyone is pretty much the same way. Myself included.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#42 Jan 24 2007 at 12:02 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
Hell, at this point I'd just love a candidate that has read the damn thing.

I saw a poll somewhere a while a go, right before the election, where something like 60 some % of current elected officials haven't even read the Constitution.

As far as my interpretation, I don't think there's much room to sway on it. The words are there in black and white. If taken a face value, and followed, I think the country would be in FAR better shape than it is.

Then again, maybe you're right, and my view of it is just that, an interpretation.

/sigh
#43 Jan 24 2007 at 12:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Metastophicleas wrote:
Hell, at this point I'd just love a candidate that has read the damn thing.

I saw a poll somewhere a while a go, right before the election, where something like 60 some % of current elected officials haven't even read the Constitution.
Barack Obama has his law degree from Harvard and taught Constitutional Law at University of Chicago for ten years before running for the Senate.

If it makes you feel any better, it's a good bet that he's glanced over the document once or twice. Whether or not his feelings on it align with yours is another story entirely.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#44 Jan 24 2007 at 12:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
True. I only dislike some of his politics. Well, most, however, he will get an open mind from me, even if I joke the living crap out of his name, because that's just fun damnit.
#45 Jan 24 2007 at 2:52 PM Rating: Good
Hey, Kennedy started it.

" just ask osama obama". What a drunken POS.
#46 Jan 25 2007 at 8:19 AM Rating: Decent
**
503 posts
This is how you learn that there is no such thing, really, as democracy in the United States anymore. The only way you can be president is if you are stinking, filthy rich. We might as well just acknowledge that now and sell the post to the highest bidder.
#47 Jan 25 2007 at 8:23 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
NEWSFLASH:


The United States of America is NOT, and I repeat, NOT a democracy. It IS a Constitutional Republic. There are several differences, not the least of which, the general population doesn't vote for the president.
#48 Jan 29 2007 at 10:17 PM Rating: Decent
Bill might not have been the most moral person in the world, but the self-esteem of the US seemed to rise considerably when he was in office. I am looking forward to hearing more of what Hillary has to say. Sadly, I agree that the US might not be ready for a woman president. We might not be ready for a black president either. Obama will probably get elected before Hillary though.
#49 Jan 31 2007 at 5:36 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

There are several differences, not the least of which, the general population doesn't vote for the president.


NEWSFLASH:

There are, indeed, several differences, fuckstick. Not the least of which being that in a Democracy the office of President wouldn't exist.

If you're going to be a pedantic ****, at least try to be vaguely on target. See also: Jophiel.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#50 Feb 06 2007 at 7:36 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
Smash, bite my ****. It drives me nuts when everytime I hear that the U.S. is a democracy, as it's just wrong.

Second note for the day: Anyone hear Clinton's speach this weekend, specificly the part about "taking" oil company profits?

I'm also starting to think that Ron Paul should run for president in '08. More research is needed, but so far he seems to be Constitutionalist.
#51 Feb 06 2007 at 8:46 AM Rating: Decent
Surprised no one has mentioned Bill Richardson yet. With everyone freaking out over immigration, a mostly sane border governor could have a good shot. Richardson also has been in favor (or at least, not actively against) medical marijuana in the past, and that could make a very interesting debate on the national level.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 211 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (211)