1
   

Let's Agree On One Thing

 
 
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 10:07 pm
With the exceptions of Giuliani and Thompson, at this point ANY republican in the race is better than those of the democratic field.

Agreed?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,976 • Replies: 57
No top replies

 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 10:10 pm
@Freeman15,
Leave them in the mix. I lean toward Thompson.
0 Replies
 
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 10:11 pm
@Freeman15,
Thompson is anti-gun, pro lobbyist, and pro fiscal irresponsibility, he belongs with the DNC.
0 Replies
 
briansol
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 12:55 am
@Freeman15,
i'd take edwards over Giuli.... but neither will be getting my vote
0 Replies
 
rugonnacry
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 08:57 am
@Freeman15,
Edwards over Giuli? Holy hell Why? I dont want to debate your personal choice, but I would like to know why.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 09:02 am
@Freeman15,
Freeman15;35588 wrote:
With the exceptions of Giuliani and Thompson, at this point ANY republican in the race is better than those of the democratic field.

Agreed?

I agree with you including G and T.
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 09:04 am
@rugonnacry,
rugonnacry;35644 wrote:
Edwards over Giuli? Holy hell Why? I dont want to debate your personal choice, but I would like to know why.


Because Edwards is more of a republican than Giuliani. He is a DINO to GIuliani being a RINO.
lancesorbenson
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:24 am
@Freeman15,
Freeman15;35588 wrote:
With the exceptions of Giuliani and Thompson, at this point ANY republican in the race is better than those of the democratic field.

Agreed?


I could almost agree. It's too bad all of them except Ron Paul support the irrational policy of a sustained occupation of a sovereign nation that never attacked us.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:43 am
@Freeman15,
Never attacked us? What do you call shooting at our planes?
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:46 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;35714 wrote:
Never attacked us? What do you call shooting at our planes?


Shooting at our planes....which were enforcing a "no-fly zone" mandate, none of which were ever shot down. Yeah, that action warrants invasion.
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:50 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;35714 wrote:
Never attacked us? What do you call shooting at our planes?


Here's a question I think you are cabable of answering, maybe not.

If your neighbor said from his living room, he was going to kick you ass, would you go break down his door and kill him? If the guy across hte street said that you couldn't walk on the sidewalk in front of said agressive neigbors house, and when you did, he threw rocks at you, would you break into his house and kill him?
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:51 am
@Freeman15,
If somebody shoots at you in a plane should you be able to shoot back?
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:55 am
@Freeman15,
Rudy for Pres with McCain as VP
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:55 am
@Freeman15,
I was hoping for once you could answer a simple question, I guess I was wrong.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:59 am
@Freeman15,
my answer is No, because Ron Paul isn't better then Hillary, isn't worse either

Rudy and McCain, is a vote for Proven Results coupled with Experience
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:59 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;35722 wrote:
If somebody shoots at you in a plane should you be able to shoot back?


Yeah. But if somebody throws a stick at you, should you be allowed to put rounds down range?

Not only that, we didn't attack Iraq because of their firing on our planes (who DID bomb them in return during the 1990's), we attacked them because they were supposed to have had wmd's and terrorist links. The 9/11 commission found neither to be true. READ THE BOOK.
0 Replies
 
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:01 am
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;35731 wrote:
my answer is No, because Ron Paul isn't better then Hillary, isn't worse either

Rudy and McCain, is a vote for Proven Results coupled with Experience


Ron Paul has been named a "taxpayer's best friend", and served 10 terms in the House, and in a member of the foreign relations committee. I'd call that experience.

McCain supports gun control, amnesty for illegals, and more of the same from Iraq. Giuliani falls in the same boat, but he'd torture prisoners. You can't mean what you just said.
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:01 am
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;35731 wrote:
my answer is No, because Ron Paul isn't better then Hillary, isn't worse either

Rudy and McCain, is a vote for Proven Results coupled with Experience



RP isn't better than Hitlery? Back that up....we'll be waiting to destroy any thing post that tries to be factual.
0 Replies
 
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:29 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;35650 wrote:
Because Edwards is more of a republican than Giuliani. He is a DINO to GIuliani being a RINO.


I see Edwards a a re-hashed Bill Clinton...a southern moderate Democrat (minus the negative baggage, going in), smart, articulate, very Kennedy-esque, who learned something his go around as Kerry's choice for VP in 2004. He not as abrasive as Hillary, who is tied to Washington political machinery, and is trying desperately to be an "everywoman", and a "good ol' boy" when the occasion calls for it. Still, she has Bill, and despite what people say...the man is brilliant, and she could have a worse adviser than him. I'd settle for "Bill-light", which is probably "more filling" and "less satisfying", but infinitely better than a Republican, who, undoubtedly, would follow Bush's status quo (otherwise, there would have been at least one maverick, who "bucked" Bush throughout his presidency, and pointed out his gross mistakes...alas there was "none"....not one person, Republican, ever took Bush to task, "for real"....and to me that's just unconscionable....the Republicans can't even scold their own, and make endless excuses for past mistakes....remember when a reporter asked Bush in a press conference, if he could name a mistake he regretted...and he couldn't think of one, and told the reporter, he'd have to get back to him later...??????? Unbelievable . I digressed.
I like Obama....truly a fresh face...and if "inexperience" is a hindrance, look no further than the inept Mr. Bush. Enough for now.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:45 am
@Freeman15,
I would never vote for a demonrat, er, democrap, er sorry democrat. They are for the most part, shysters, seeking to socialize America. The real problem is that moset republiscams are looking to do the same thing.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Let's Agree On One Thing
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 08:19:51