1
   

Ever Have A Feeling You Can't Explain About A Politician?

 
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 07:43 pm
I think I liked him better before he was running for president. Maybe that's what Bear's saying. Once a candidate is a contender, they have to fake a lot of **** to keep the money coming in. And it's all about the money. Why do you think the only candidates who actually answer questions and make any damned sense are the ones without any chance of winning? They're free to tell the truth, and we like that, but they don't have any money. If Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich had the backing that Hillary or Giuliani have they would suddenly sound very mealy-mouthed and vague.

So yeah, he's a politician and he's faking it. But I still like him enough to vote for him in the absence of a truly independent and honest candidate.
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 07:49 pm
sozobe wrote:
The general election is a ways away, but the Democratic primaries are coming up scary-soon. And if Obama doesn't get through those, a presidential bid is moot.

What exactly do you want to know more about, HokieBird?

Found this:

Quote:
Obama Response to Supreme Court Decision
| April 18, 2007

Chicago, IL-- Senator Barack Obama today made the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding abortion.

"I strongly disagree with today's Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman's medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women."


http://www.barackobama.com/2007/04/18/obama_response_to_supreme_cour.php


Yeah - I saw that on his website. But it's more his voting record on the issue I'm curious about. He's either voted "present" or no on the ban. (Maybe just "present" - can't remember). If he's the nominee, he'll have plenty of opportunity to answer all these issues - if he's not, then it won't really matter.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 07:52 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I agree. I think that the current administration, with our "fearless leader" Rolling Eyes has screwed up, big time. I think that his premise was correct, but he did not have the wherewithal to think the whole thing through, and come up with a solution that would not entail destroying the lives of 19 year old Americans.


If you agree then why in God's name would you vote for Gulianni?

Yeah! I'm baffled too.

I just watched the Republican debate, and when it comes to Iraq and foreign policy in general, if there is one guy, one single guy, that repeats all the stuff Bush said, that is pushing the same rhetoric as Bush, the same policies, the same ideas, its Giuliani.

All the other candidates seem to at least have learned something from the fiasco - different lessons, but each of them has reflected and reconsidered things.

Listen to Giuliani, and its like you're listening to Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney anno 2003 all over again!
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 07:54 pm
Ooooh, sorry, Phoenix, didnt realise that half a dozen others had already gone at it too, didnt mean to pile on.
0 Replies
 
HokieBird
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:00 pm
Hillary was pretty hawkish on the subject of Iran last night, as I remember.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:01 pm
i may not be clear here... i have no qualms about him as a person... i find him quite likable... i'm taking about as a president....
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:02 pm
If Hillary gets the nomination then my vote will be up for grabs. Just about any other Democratic candidate will get my nod over a Republican until they get their house in order. I'll probably go back to voting Libertarian or independent.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:07 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:

My main concern is the security of the U.S. I will never vote for someone whom I believe can't keep the U.S. (relatively) safe from those who would destroy her.


Not to single you out, Letty. This is actually heard quite a bit from those that voted for Bush again and those planning to vote for Guliani.

Every time I hear it I have to go "What? 9/11 happened on their watch! Why do they get credit for keeping us safe when we already know they didn't?"
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:50 pm
uh honey.... that's phoenix not letty.... well into the cabernet are we tonight?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 08:51 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
If Hillary gets the nomination then my vote will be up for grabs. Just about any other Democratic candidate will get my nod over a Republican until they get their house in order. I'll probably go back to voting Libertarian or independent.


i like hillary better than any of them. sorry.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 06:37 am
Maporsche wrote:
Phoenix, do you think Hillary would be tough on terror?


I think so. She is one tough cookie. I think that she would do what is necessary to keep us safe. She is a canny politician, and very bright.

nimh wrote:
Ooooh, sorry, Phoenix, didnt realise that half a dozen others had already gone at it too, didnt mean to pile on.


Not to worry. I'm a pretty tough cookie myself! :wink:
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 07:06 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:
If Hillary gets the nomination then my vote will be up for grabs. Just about any other Democratic candidate will get my nod over a Republican until they get their house in order. I'll probably go back to voting Libertarian or independent.


i like hillary better than any of them. sorry.


Is that a gut feeling? How does that square with your opposition to the Iraq war? Do you think she would roll back any of the anti-liberty measures that have been taken in the last 7 years?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 07:15 am
vote early
vote often
vote Kucinich;
but cereally folks taking the various platforms on the table what, exactly, can you say about Kucinch that you don't approve of?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 07:16 am
Quote:
Rudolph W. Giuliani, who criticized the absence of a database in the immigration bill that would track the movement of foreigners out of the country, said he was "very uncomfortable" with Tancredo's views. The New Yorker noted that Abraham Lincoln had fought the Know Nothings, the name applied to the anti-Catholic, anti-foreigner movement of the mid-19th century.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 07:51 am
yes free duck i think she would roll back some of the anti liberty measures... i also think the reality is we're not going to pull out of iraq immediately no matter who is president.

i think we need a president who wants peace and diplomacy but if pushed to the fire will actually kick ass for real, and then walk away from the ruin saying"told you not to f**k with us, now fix yourselves". bush has not done that. he's a paper tiger, no matter what all these strutting crowing pretend tough guys around here and elsewhere say.

I don't mind a president willing to go to the mattresses, in fact we need one because that is the unfortunate way things are proceeding, but I want a president who goes reluctantly not waving his dick like some John Wayne wanna be who then can't or won't wrap up the job and bring some closure.

I also can't discount having a "first husband" who is brilliant and well loved and respected everywhere except among American right wing nuts
whose diplomatic skills are second to none and would be utilized fully.

Of course, there's always the chance that while helping bring peace to the Middle East he might get a hummer and then what would the peace be worth..... nothing. :wink: Laughing
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:01 am
I guess I don't really think she'd be all that reluctant. She didn't show any reluctance when she voted to let little Georgie have his way. It shows poor judgment, IMO, to have voted for that war. (Yes, I know lots of people did.) First, it was clear from the attitudes and the political atmosphere that it was a rubber stamp for Bush, no matter what the actual text said. Second, anyone with an ounce of sense could see that Bush and his admin were incompetent. To abdicate their constitutional responsibility to such a bumbler is, in my opinion, almost unforgivable.

Yeah, I'd like to see Clinton in a diplomatic role. And I'd love to see a female president. I just don't think she'd do the right thing and I think she's beholden to all the same special interests. I could be wrong, though.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:06 am
I think we need to move past the "You voted for the war". Most everyone did. They were sold a bill of goods. Lots of republicans who voted for it have recanted as well.... unfortunately none of the ones running for president. Evil or Very Mad
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:16 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I think we need to move past the "You voted for the war". Most everyone did.

Not in Germany we didn't. Not in France they didn't. Our governments looked at Mr. Bush's case for war, correctly found it threadbare, and endured the ridiculing, bullying, and slandering that the Bush slime machine spewed on them. It is a very fair question of FreeDuck to ask why only half of the Democratic members of Congress made the same judgment and had the same courage to stand up for it. And in my ever so humble opinion, it's wrong to let those who didn't off the hook for it.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:17 am
sorry thomas I forgot this is an international forum for a minute. I meant here in DC.

have a freedom fry and forgive me. :wink:

Or maybe some hush puppies.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2007 08:18 am
Well, I understand what you mean but for me personally it's not so easy. Let me see if I can explain.

The atmosphere in the lead up to the war was one of almost mob-like excitement. There was this attitude as if it was a forgone conclusion and already the feeling that if you didn't support it you were being unpatriotic. Nobody wanted to debate it for fear of being called a coward, ironically. That sort of mob frenzy is something I fear -- especially when it's in our government. Giving in to that, even feeding it, to me is a sign of no backbone, no principle, no balls. It will always be an issue for me.

That said, if it's her or Giuliani, and Rudy looks like he has a chance, she'll get my vote.
0 Replies
 
 

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
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/04/2024 at 05:46:13