Our next President?
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=151712
Printed Date: 14 November 2025 at 9:45pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Our next President?
Posted By: djrox
Subject: Our next President?
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:09pm
|
So who do think it will be? I saw the Republican Primaries or whatever they have are coming up soon. I'd like to see John McCain, or Barak Obama. ------------- campaignforliberty.com - campaignforliberty.com |
Replies:
Posted By: Bounty
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:11pm
| same |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:13pm
|
Hillary Clinton '08
------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:13pm
|
Feingold
EDIT: Obama is too young ------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:13pm
|
Bin Laden
------------- 
|
Posted By: djrox
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:14pm
|
Or maybe not. ------------- campaignforliberty.com - campaignforliberty.com |
Bolt3 wrote:Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:14pm
How about yes. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: pimptastik
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:15pm
|
Hades
------------- <no ginormous sigs please> |
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:15pm
|
McCain/Giuliani ------------- |
Posted By: the flanker
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:18pm
|
who would want hillary clinton as president???? ------------- 
perhaps the greatest movie ever |
Posted By: *Stealth*
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:19pm
| Mbro |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:19pm
I would like to see her in office. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: kuhndog599
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:22pm
|
if hillary clintons elected (which i doubt she will be) but if she does were moving to canada. ------------- model 98 - homemade handguard solid stock - opsgear mag polished internals homemade sling - paintjob operator barrel progressive barrel opsgear mag - stock |
Posted By: PaintballkidEPS
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:22pm
damn ya beat me to it |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:24pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:30pm
Coming from an intelligible, quick witted, astute reader such as yourself, I assume you voted for Bush, right? CONGRATULATIONS. You've made the most moronic statement, ever. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:37pm
PFP Who it WILL be - Clinton or McCain, maybe Giuliani. Obama isn't up until next time around. Feingold is too far left to get elected. But hard to tell, since many wannabes are still waiting in the weeds. Who it SHOULD be - I'll accept McCain. I think he would make a fine President. I wouldn't mind Feingold either, I guess, but that will never happen. |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:48pm
|
McCain is a great choice. Hillary would be a useless choice, she would get stonewalled as much as Bush does from the other party. Im looking for someone who would get things done, not someone just looking to give their party some jollys. Hillary seems like nothing but a party whore. McCain, atleast seems like he cares for the people. Obama too, next time, would be a great choice, but I can only assume that an African American Democrat from the North would be limited in votes he would get. Another person on the Democratic side I would like to see take a chance would be North Carolina governer Mike Easley. Hell, I would vote for Bill Clinton if he ever ran again. ------------- 
|
Posted By: oreomann33
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:49pm
|
Walken.
------------- 
|
Posted By: whack-a-mole
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 5:57pm
|
what is the proper age? ------------- NASA and the Americans spent millions of dollars and hundreds of hours to develop a pen that would write in space.....The Russians used a pencil. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:00pm
|
I don't think that Clinton could get elected, even if the Dems
nominated her. Isn't the Dem. convention before the Republican
one? If the Democrats nominated Clinton, am I the only one who
could see the Republicans putting Condi up? I wouldn't mind that
anyways, I like her views. And she hasn't made a bad mistake in
my eyes yet.
------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:08pm
|
The day Aunt Jemima is my president is the day I'm ashamed to be an American.
------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:10pm
| Condi = Aunt Jemima? Please elaborate. |
Posted By: paintbusta
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:13pm
|
mbro for pres ------------- 
|
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:14pm
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6530925/ - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6530925/
------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:15pm
|
Wow - how did I miss that? |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:16pm
|
Hillary is likely to get the nomination, but hell will freeze over before she wins the presidincy.
Seriosuly, with all the backlash against Bush and the republicn party LAST election, and STILL not being able the win.. the dems are in an up hill battle. Not like : =- uphill... more like / / / / / / / / / / Where each slash = a not very likely victory. It will be hard enough for a guy to win, let alone a woman. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:17pm
| Too hard to predict specifics yet, though, I think. A lot will depend on how the Congressional elections go this fall, and two years is an eternity in political-time. |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:21pm
|
I think it will be another really close election.
------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: Strife_17
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:39pm
Being somewhat moderate I think I speak for a good amount of people here bush wasn't great by any strech of the imagination, but come on, anyone but Hillary |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:56pm
| Can the Hillary-haters here point to some particular policy or trait of hers that makes her so extremely unsatisfactory? |
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 6:58pm
Shes a woman. -------------
|
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:07pm
"When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about." -Sen. Hillary Clinton during MLK Day speach ------------- |
Posted By: piranhakiller
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:15pm
I agree. I mean obviously bush has his downfalls come on what president truthfully hasn't? But I would much rather have Condelessa(Aunt Jemina) over Hill. ------------- ~Marker setup~ 2K1 Autococker Rt Feed 12in Freak ANS 3-Way Black Houge Grip Shocktech Drop Forward TippmannA5 16in J&Jceramic r/t 2X trigger Blue Dye c4 |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:18pm
|
Agreed that this is a rather idiotic statement. But (a) not enough in itself for the level of hatred directed at her, and more importantly (b) the Hillary dislike precedes that statement by at least a decade, so that statement cannot be the foundation. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:18pm
bahahahahaha. *insert foot in mouth* hillary was already president once. i don't care for that again. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:19pm
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:20pm
|
i thought it was 35 for Congress. president is over 40 eh?
-------------
|
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:21pm
|
Farily certain it is 35 for president ------------- |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:22pm
edit- http://www.dos.state.pa.us/bcel/cwp/view.asp?a=1099&q=431784 - proof ------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:24pm
i stand corrected.
c'mon clark, are you going to tell me that everyone who hates someone all started at the same time? -------------
|
Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:24pm
| too bad colin powell wouldnt run for pres, i think he'd be really good....but basically anyone who tells the american public that theyll pull out of iraq will probably get elected, thats what people want |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:25pm
| HV: Nope - but the "anti-Hillary" view has been getting significant press for a decade+. 90+% of the people that dislike her intensely already disliked her intensely before this year. |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:28pm
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:34pm
Possibly because of her associations with Bill. A lot of people don't like Bill. Im not going to debate over whether this is warranted or not, but it seems to be the truth. It also seems that a lot of people resent the democratic party (see "Sore/Loserman") Also, Hillary has been spewing "idiotic statements" for quite some time now. And last but not least: She tried to get San Andreas taken off the shelves Edit: some feminists probably resent her for not standing up and divorcing Bill after he, well you know ------------- |
Posted By: kuhndog599
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:39pm
------------- model 98 - homemade handguard solid stock - opsgear mag polished internals homemade sling - paintjob operator barrel progressive barrel opsgear mag - stock |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:40pm
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: kuhndog599
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:44pm
|
why yes yes it is
------------- model 98 - homemade handguard solid stock - opsgear mag polished internals homemade sling - paintjob operator barrel progressive barrel opsgear mag - stock |
Posted By: Apu
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:45pm
------------- I need a new Sig... |
Posted By: kuhndog599
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:48pm
i think it would be too much of a responsibility for a woman. at least some of them. not all of them but i wouldnt trust hillary. ------------- model 98 - homemade handguard solid stock - opsgear mag polished internals homemade sling - paintjob operator barrel progressive barrel opsgear mag - stock |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:54pm
|
Ok - philll provided some reasonable speculation for why the Hillary-hatred. But we have at least two people that posted "anyone but Hillary" in this very thread - kuhndog and strife. So - my question directed specifically at kuhndog and strife: Why do you feel so strongly about Hillary? Why "anyone but" Hillary? A feeling as strong as this must have some basis. |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 7:55pm
|
You know, it's fun to joke about women belonging in the kitchen, but I think you were serious...?
------------- 
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:20pm
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton - Controversies Surrounding Hillary Clinton
Black Panther Party Claims are sometimes made that in 1969, Hillary Rodham helped shut down Yale University as part of helping to defend, and get acquitted, members of the Black Panther Party on trial in New Haven for torture and murder. In reality, Rodham was only a law student at the time, and her involvement was limited to "organizing other students to help the American Civil Liberties Union monitor the trial for civil rights violations." [1] Her peripheral involvement had no effect on Yale activities or on the outcome of the trial. [edit] Cattle futures In 1979, Clinton's trades in cattle futures contracts generated criticism regarding conflict of interest and allegations of disguised bribery. [2] Her initial $1,000 investment generated $100,000 (a "wildly successful" 10,000% return) when she stopped trading ten months later. Marshall Magazine, a publication of the Marshall School of Business, found that "Two-thirds of her trades showed a profit by the end of the day she made them and 80 percent were ultimately profitable." search on "Hillary" Chicago Mercantile Exchange records indicated that $40,000 of her profits came from larger trades initiated by Clinton's lawyer and friend, James Blair, an experienced futures trader and outside counsel to Tyson Foods. According to exchange records, Robert L. "Red" Bone, the commodities broker that facilitated the trades on behalf of Ray E. Friedman and Co. (Refco), reportedly because Blair was a good client, allowed Clinton to maintain her positions even though she did not have enough money in her account to cover her activity. For example, she was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time. [3] Refco was fined for violating Chicago Mercantile Exchange rules governing margin trading. After an investigation, Leo Melamed, chair of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, concluded that Clinton had not violated the rules [4]. [edit] Whitewater scandal The Whitewater scandal was a series of events and actions that had its origins in 1978. While in Arkansas, the Clintons were partners with Jim and Susan McDougal in a real estate venture known as the Whitewater Development Corporation. According to reports, the Clintons lost their financial investment in the Whitewater business projects. At the time the McDougals operated a savings and loan that retained Hillary Clinton's legal services at Rose Law Firm. When the McDougals' savings and loan failed in 1994, federal investigators subpoenaed Clinton's legal billing records for auditing purposes. Hillary Clinton claimed to be unable to produce these records. After an extensive, two-year search, the records were found in the first lady's book room in the White House and delivered to investigators in 1996. The delayed appearance of the billing records sparked intense interest and another investigation about how they surfaced and where they had been; Clinton attributed the problem to disorganization that resulted from her move from the Arkansas Governor's Mansion to the White House as well as the effects of a White House renovation. [LH p. 331] After the discovery of the records, on January 26, 1996, Clinton made history by becoming the first first lady to testify before a grand jury. [5] The Whitewater investigation was initiated by Independent Counsel Ken Starr and concluded by Independent Counsel Robert Ray. Several other allegations were also investigated under the Whitewater umbrella. The investigations, which took place during Bill Clinton's presidency and cost an estimated $40 million, resulted in the McDougals being jailed and Webster Hubbell pleading guilty to felony charges of lying to federal investigators about Clinton's role in both Whitewater and the savings and loan failure. No criminal charges were brought against the Clintons themselves, as Robert Ray's final report on September 20, 2000 stated that there was insufficient evidence that either of them had engaged in criminal wrongdoing. [6] [edit] Travel office firings On May 19, 1993, several long-time employees of the White House Travel Office were fired for alleged incompetence or illegal activities. Accusations were made that Hillary Clinton was involved in the firings and that they were unjustified and were done in order to give the business to friends of the Clintons; she denied any role in the firings. The affair became known as "Travelgate". On June 23, 2000, Whitewater Independent Counsel Robert Ray stated in a final report that while there was substantial evidence that she was involved in the firings, it could not be proved that she had deliberately lied about the matter, and so no charges would be brought. [7] [edit] Vince Foster On July 20, 1993, White House Deputy Counsel Vince Foster committed suicide. The general Whitewater investigation included an examination of Foster's death and the circumstances around it. Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's investigation, as well as investigations by the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the U.S. Park Police, all concluded that Foster's death was indeed a suicide. In 1996 Hillary Clinton was accused by the Senate Special Whitewater Committee of ordering the removal of potentially damaging files (related to Whitewater or other matters) from Foster's office on the night of his death. [8] Independent Counsel Starr investigated this, and by 1999 Starr was reported to still be holding the investigation open, despite his staff having told him there was no case. [9] When Starr's successor Robert Ray issued his final Whitewater reports in 2000, no claims were made against Hillary Clinton in this regard. Other critics of the Clintons have made more lurid allegations: that Foster's death was not a suicide, that it was connected to Whitewater, and that Hillary Clinton was somehow involved by covering up activities together with Foster before his death [10] or in that her relationship with Foster was an intimate one [11]. Some conspiracy theories even claimed that she had killed Foster herself [12] or had him killed [13]. No credible evidence or charges were ever brought forward in connection with any of these allegations. [edit] FBI files In June 1996, White House security head Craig Livingstone improperly asked for and received several hundred FBI background files, including ones on White House personnel from former Republican administrations. Accusations were made that Hillary Clinton had requested these files and that she had recommended hiring the supposedly unqualified Livingstone; she denied these charges. The affair became known as "Filegate". On July 28, 2000, Whitewater Independent Counsel Robert Ray stated in a final report that there was no substantial or credible evidence that Hillary Clinton had any role or showed any misconduct in the matter. [14] [edit] Embrace of Suha Arafat On November 11, 1999, at the dedication of a U.S.-funded health program in the West Bank, Hillary Clinton exchanged an embrace with Suha Arafat, wife of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, after Suha Arafat had delivered a speech criticizing Israel for deliberately poisoning Palestinians through environmental degradation and the use of poison gas. [15] This caused immediate controversy among some Israeli supporters, who said that Clinton never should have hugged the wife of someone they viewed as a terrorist leader, especially after such inflammatory remarks. The following day, Clinton denounced Suha Arafat's allegations, and Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that Suha Arafat had misspoken in regard to poison gas. [16] The embrace itself became a campaign issue the following year, but Clinton defended it as a formality akin to a handshake, saying that not to do so would have caused a diplomatic incident. [17] [edit] Book contract In December 2000, Simon & Schuster agreed to pay Hillary Clinton a reported $8 million advance for a memoir of her years as First Lady, which was later published in 2003 as Living History. Critics charged that the book deal, coming soon after her election to the U.S. Senate, but before being sworn into office, was not in adherence to the ethical standards required for members of the U.S. Senate. [citation needed] However, in February 2001, the Senate Ethics Committee gave Clinton approval for the deal. [18] [edit] Ghostwriters Clinton has been criticized for not giving credit to the ghostwriters she uses to write her various published works. For example, the 1996 book It Takes a Village, was largely written by ghostwriter Barbara Feinman [19]. Originally the publisher and the White House had indicated that Feinman would be assisting Clinton in preparing the manuscript, perhaps using audiotapes dictated by Clinton. Feinman spent seven months on the project and was paid $120,000 for her work [20]. However, Feinman was not mentioned anywhere in the book. Clinton's acknowledgment section began: "It takes a village to bring a book into the world, as everyone who has written one knows. Many people have helped me to complete this one, sometimes without even knowing it. They are so numerous that I will not even attempt to acknowledge them individually, for fear that I might leave one out." [It Takes a Village, p. 319] This led Feinman to complain at the time to Capitol Style magazine over the lack of acknowledgement. [21] In 2001, The Wall Street Journal reported that "New York literary circles are buzzing with vitriol over Sen. Clinton's refusal, so far, to share credit with any writer who helps on her book." [22] Later, in a 2002 article for The Writer's Chronicle [23], Barbara Feinman Todd (now using her married name) related that the project with Clinton had gone smoothly, producing drafts in a round-robin style. Feinman denies that Clinton was uninvolved with the project, but also states that, "Like any first lady, Mrs. Clinton had an extremely hectic schedule and writing a book without assistance would have been logistically impossible." Feinman reiterates that her only objection to the whole process was the lack of any acknowledgement. As of 2005, a web page for Feinman states that It Takes a Village was one of "several high-profile books" that she has "assisted, as editor, writer and researcher." [24] Clinton also reportedly used three ghostwriters for her 2003 Living History memoirs, veteran ghostwriter Maryanne Vollers, speechwriter Alison Muscatine, and researcher Ruby Shamir. [25]. This time, Clinton's acknowledgment section stated: "This book may not have taken a village to write, but it certainly took a superb team ... The smartest decision I made was to ask Lissa Muscatine, Maryanne Vollers and Ruby Shamir to spend two years of their lives working with me. Lissa [was] responsible for many of the words in my speeches as First Lady and in this book ... Maryanne [has] the rare gift of understanding how to help another's voice emerge ... Ruby [had the job of] amassing, reviewing and synthesizing millions of words written about me." [LH p. 529] However, the three women did not receive co-writing credit on the book's cover, unlike for example, the co-writing credit fellow Senator John Edwards gave to ghostwriter John Auchard on his book Four Trials [26] and fellow Senator John McCain gave to administrative assistant Mark Salter on his books Faith of My Fathers, Worth the Fighting For, Why Courage Matters, and Character is Destiny. [edit] Hasidic pardons In 2000, two months after Clinton's election to the Senate, President Clinton pardoned four residents of the New Square Hasidic enclave in Rockland County, New York, who had been convicted of defrauding the federal government. The New Square community had voted over 99 to 1 in favor of Mrs. Clinton, raising allegations of conflict of interest. A federal investigation launched by critics of the pardon cleared both Clintons of any illegal activity. [edit] Attendance at funerals after September 11 Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Senator Clinton was criticized in November 2001 by commentator Bill O'Reilly, among others, who claimed that she "didn't go to one funeral or one memorial service of any of the regular folks killed at the World Trade Center" and that "the only events we know she attended were three highly publicized memorial services." [27] Clinton responded on an interview program that she did, in fact, attend several memorial services and funerals of people she knew, but that she did "not believe, after a long lifetime in and around politics, that people should thrust themselves into private grief just because they're politicians." [28] [edit] Gandhi comment Clinton came under criticism in 2004 after saying that Mahatma Gandhi "ran a gas station down in Saint Louis." Many[citation needed] took Clinton's words as stereotyping South Asians living in the United States. Clinton apologized, blamed "a lame attempt at humor," and claimed that she "admired the work and life of Mahatma Gandhi and had spoken publicly about that many times [29]." Michelle Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence said she didn't think Clinton was trying to demean Mahatma Gandhi and credited both Clintons as long having supported the Gandhi message. However, Naef said that Clinton's remarks were offensive and could be "incredibly harmful [30]." [edit] Rosen's indictment and acquittal Clinton's former finance director, David Rosen, was indicted on January 7, 2005 on campaign finance charges related to a fund-raising event produced by Peter F. Paul. Paul, who was convicted on stock fraud charges after being extradited from Brazil, claims he spent $1.2 million to produce the "Hollywood tribute to honor President Clinton" event, which was both a tribute to honor President Clinton and a fundraiser for Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign. The Justice Department indictment charged Rosen with filing false reports with the Federal Election Commission by reporting only $400,000 in contributions. On May 27, 2005, the jury acquitted Rosen on all counts [31]. On January 5, 2006 it was reported that Clinton's campaign group agreed to pay a $35,000 fine related to the underreporting of the fundraiser's expenses. [32] Peter Paul has also filed a civil suit in this matter. [33] [edit] 2006 Martin Luther King Day comments During a speech at the Rev. Al Sharpton's annual Martin Luther King Day National Action Network conference at the Canaan Baptist Church of Christ in Harlem on January 16, 2006, Clinton sparked a potential political firestorm when she said: "When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about. It has been run in a way so that nobody with a contrary point of view has had a chance to present legislation, to make an argument." [34] [35] Clinton's remarks drew immediate criticism from some politicians and commentators, exemplified by New York Representative Peter King's denunciation: "It's wrong to use the word 'plantation' in any political context because it's cheap racial politics. But to do it on Martin Luther King Day is really disgraceful." [36]. It subsequently transpired that in 2004, Clinton had made the same simile: "I mean they're running the House of Representatives like a fiefdom with Tom DeLay as, you know, in charge of the plantation." [37] Her comparison in this case to fiefdoms and thus feudalism made any racial connotation less obvious. As another example of the same simile (or in this case, metaphor), in a Washington Post article from October 1994, future Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said of the Democrats who at that time were in control of the House, "Since they think it is their job to run the plantation, it shocks them that I’m actually willing to lead the slave rebellion." [38] -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Da Hui
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:24pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:25pm
|
wikipedia really is one of the great gifts to mankind.
-------------
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:37pm
Are you kidding? You do know that major economic changes take 4-10 years to take real effect right? The economy during almost all of Bill's reign was the effects of Bush Sr. That's the problem with our system, people get the wrong ideas about who does good work because things like the economy take time to change. And who was the president for 4/5 years that 9/11 was being planned? But no, it's Bush's fault for not catching them in the last 7 months. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:43pm
|
You don't happen to have any sources for that claim, do you?
-------------
|
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:47pm
I dislike Hilliary because she and Bill cursed this world by giving birth to the monstrosity of a beast and named her, Chelsea.
 ------------- 
|
Posted By: phillll227
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:53pm
Thank God that Firefox can block images ------------- |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:55pm
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Brian Fellows
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 8:58pm
| I wouldn't mind seeing someone like Ben Nelson in office. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 9:00pm
you mean deficit? -------------
|
Posted By: kuhndog599
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 9:36pm
------------- model 98 - homemade handguard solid stock - opsgear mag polished internals homemade sling - paintjob operator barrel progressive barrel opsgear mag - stock |
Posted By: blackdog144
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 9:36pm
|
anyone for the war, and thats republican would be fine
------------- http://imageshack.us">  
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 10:07pm
Colin Powel wouldnt run for president, his family life would suffer, he loves his wife a lot, and shes been in and out of phsyciatric hospitals for years. Colin Powels dedication is to his wife and family now. But i would vote for him. Ide love to see Giuliani as president. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors"> 
|
Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 10:23pm
So you would vote for Cindy Sheehan? Michael Moore? |
Posted By: Shub
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:14pm
|
I think MBro's list summed it up. I am not a Clinton-basher, but between Bill and Hillary, they have a lot of controversial stuff going against them, that doesn't exactly make me comfortable about them watching the henhouse.
That said, I realize the dirty business of politics, and I'm not going to attempt to say that there aren't many other prominent politians who have plenty of scandal and buried skeletons. I also believe that despite Hillary's moderate record in Congress, she falls in the more liberal side of the spectrum. In these uncertain and trying times, I would like to believe that we could find a more neutral candidate for President that both parties could back. It would be great for our politians to understand that the enemy isn't across the aisle of the Capitol, and stop the mindless bickering and finger-pointing and actually try and try to solve some problems for a change. Heh, like that'll happen... |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:23pm
|
And I can understand that position. But "doesn't exactly make me comfortable" is a far cry from the Hillary-Hysteria I see on occasion. I can think of many reasons not to want Hillary in charge. It's the "anybody but Hillary" sentiment that baffles me. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:27pm
|
Anyone who tells the public that America will pull out of Iraq is a liar. They destroyed the previous stable (albeit tyrranical) regime, and thrw the country into chaos. They have a moral obligation to see it through until there is stability and peace. post bellum is as critical a phase of a just war as before and during the war. The U.S. cannot pull out, as Iraq would descned into cvil war- and I don't mean this couple-hundred-people-killed-in-sectarian-violence bullcrap, I mean a genuine civil war with hundreds of thousands of dead. Iraqi security is contingent on the continued presence of foreign troops until the government establishes its own securiy forces sufficiently to do the job themselves, and until the political coalition of the various ethnic groups has solidifed and gotten used to the voluntary relinquishment of power at the end of their elected term. There any hundreds of valid issues for voting on a president, but pulling out of Iraq is not one of them. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:43pm
|
I agree with what Shub said. We really need someone that both sides can back without getting bogged down with petty differences. Until such a candidate comes along, I really don't feel like voting.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Shub
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:46pm
I agree with you...I think too many people can't see beyond their prejudices to see why they're so hateful in the first place. |
Posted By: Panda Man
Date Posted: 13 March 2006 at 11:59pm
|
Jeb Edit - Florida will screw us agian. ------------- 
|
Posted By: XenoSabre
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 12:07am
|
I hope its McCain personally. If he is on the ticket then he has my vote already. ------------- [IMG]http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f76/Xeno-Sabre/kutaragi.png"> http://xeno-sabre.deviantart.com/ - http://xeno-sabre.deviantart.com/ |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 8:10am
Ditto. We need a president with a military background, that will support our troops in Iraq. Helll, if there was a moderate democrat that could gain the support of both parties(I cant think of any democrat in a positition to get on the ticket like that right now) I would vote for them. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mephistopheles
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 8:28am
My fellow New Yorkers who actually pay attention to politics will tell you about lady Clinton. Here is her most recent picture I scanned from the newspaper...
Now I would like for Christopher Walken in 2008. But if he doesn't quite make the run then I'm tippin my hat to McCain. ------------- http://www.tippmann.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=166647&PN=1"> 
|
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 9:19am
|
Honesty I dont know enough about Walkens politics to be confortable voting for him this time around. But if I got some more info on his positions I would consider voting for him.
-------------
|
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 11:52am
|
If California can vote in Arnold, the United States can manage to elect Walken. -------------
|
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 11:58am
I don't think that he will win. He is not a Celeberty, or a member of a major political party. His lack of funding shows in the quality of his website. I would be VERY surprised if he gets on the ticket in the majority of the states. -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 12:03pm
|
Well, he made a great secretary of finance in Wedding Crashers, but sadly, Walken's presidential aspirations were a hoax by some website...
------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 12:06pm
Are you sure? http://www.walken2008.com - http://www.walken2008.com Look Pretty legit to me. If it was not, I believe that it would have been closed down before now. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 12:21pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 1:14pm
Damn. I was hoping. -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 1:16pm
|
If he would have voted for Walken he isn't TAHT retarded.
------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 3:26pm
Hey, I never said Bush Jr was better.. but look.. proof in the numbers. Clinton wasnt as good as dems claim.
-------------
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 14 March 2006 at 4:05pm
|
See that bump in your curve during the Clinton years? That is the rate of debt increases SLOWING. During Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, national debt increased faster every year, as the deficit kept increasing (and again this year). During Clinton, the deficit and rate of debt was decreasing. Your chart undermines your point, Linus. |
Posted By: Shub
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 12:02am
| However, there is a difference between reducing deficit, and reducing the rate of deficit. |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 9:21am
|
Clark, you, of all people, should see the thing that makes that so. Since 9/11 we have HAD to spend more money becuase of the War on Terror (Battle on Oppression, w/e). Clinton fought only a couple of conflicts during his terms and look at how much it rose.
2.8 through 5.7 trillion. Look at how much it rose during Reagans/ Bush 1's terms COMBINED. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 9:36am
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Pump Scout
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 9:41am
|
I think the Dems are going to try to put someone on the ticket that won't get elected. It'll be an emotional race, with either a female or minority as the candidate. That will give them another four years to either clean up Hillary's skeletons, or put Obama in position to run next time around.
Life imitating art. See: Head of State, Chris Rock. Personally, I'd love to see someone get into the White House with the sole purpose of serving four years and getting out. In those four years, he/she should be totally focused on fixing AMERICA's problems. Fix the USA first, then we can worry about the rest of the world. ------------- http://www.geocities.com/limitedpump - Limited Pump Paintball |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 9:47am
I can't say that is a good Idea. While this magical person is fixing domestic problems, someone is going to pull some crap abroad that we have to get involved with. I personally don't want a domestic issues only president, because when the president has to make Military decisions he wont be able to make them. -------------
|
Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:30am
Now, lets look at this. Im not the smartest person when it comes to politics, but basic math is something I can handle. From 1940 to 1945, WWII if you didnt know, our national debt rose roughly 11%. One of the biggest wars in recent history, and it only rose 11%. Flash forward to Bush Jr. In four years, our national debt has grown 75%. In WWII, we were fighting 3 different countries on quite a few fronts. Now, we arent even fighting a single nation, just a group of people, and its costing us more than vietnam, korea, and WWII ever did in terms of growth of national debt. Feel free to correct me if I managed to fubar the information i used. -------------
|
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:50am
|
Too simplistic, Linus. First, you are confusing debt with deficit again. During Clinton's last couple of years, there was no deficit at all - at least by the most common counting methods. That bump in the curve reflects that. Clinton didn't get around to reducing debt, but at least the debt stopped piling up momentarily. During every year of Bush II's tenure there has been a record deficit. And even if you take out all military and homeland security spending (which is overly favorable to Bush, but hey), you still get an increasing deficit under Bush. During Clinton's years, the deficit decreased. Under Bush, the deficit increased - war or no war. And, of course, there is a war (or two). Normal people cut back on other stuff to make up for that extra expense. Maybe veto a bill that spends millions on bridges that go nowhere. One can discuss how much credit belongs where, and that is a complicated subject, but it is quite clear that Bush likes to spend money. He has never vetoed any spending bill of any kind. Even his own party members and supporters think he is a reckless spender. The Economist called his fiscal policy "irresponsible". To call Bush II anything other than a spendthrift flies in the face of fact. |
Posted By: Zesty
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:54am
|
As anyone with any sort of intelligence knows, if you can run California, you can run the world!
My vote, Arnold Schwarzeneggar(?) ------------- "People who see the future earlier than others are always feared and misunderstood." - Jose Canseco |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:55am
|
Zesty, he does not qualify. Sorry.
-------------
|
Posted By: Zesty
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:57am
|
yeah I knew that, but still man, the dude's like the greatest ever ------------- "People who see the future earlier than others are always feared and misunderstood." - Jose Canseco |
Posted By: Snake6
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 10:59am
|
Ill give him a Meh.
-------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 11:10am
|
FWIW, Reagan's massive spending bankrupted the U.S.S.R. and ended the cold war. I think he can be excused. Reagan FTW ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Clark Kent
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 11:13am
|
I would absolutely vote for Schwarzenhofer. From what I can see from here, I like what he is doing.
Reagan certainly had good cause for spending (and it appears to have worked, like you say), but I suspect he would have been spending lots anyway. He was not exactly a thrifty sort either. But I though Reagan was definitely the right president for that moment in time. This country needed John Wayne in office. He wasn't available, but Reagan was. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 11:26am
|
Exactly. And then after he kicked the Commies' butt, the 'peace dividend' came along and decimated OUR militaries, but there ya go...
------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Zesty
Date Posted: 15 March 2006 at 11:28am
I voted for him, and can honestly say I am proud to have him representing my state! He is a no BS politician, which is kind of an oxymoron but nonetheless the guy just does what he feels is right and best for the state, and I respect that fully. He isn't a born and bred politician, so he doesn't have all these people to be loyal(crooked!) for. ------------- "People who see the future earlier than others are always feared and misunderstood." - Jose Canseco |