Who will have the Winning Ticket?
There is NO PolticaL Bias intended for the listing of Both Party, simply listed them Alphabetically
Printable View
Who will have the Winning Ticket?
There is NO PolticaL Bias intended for the listing of Both Party, simply listed them Alphabetically
Ok, I'm for McCane. Here's why. Obamma is very inexpierenced. He can be led around by the nose by powerful Democratic figures, without the expierence to control them. So, if I ellect a president, I want to know the president I ellect. Second, what change is Obamma talking about? McCane is a changer. He bucks everyone even his own party. So too his running mate. I want a real change, I vote MaCane.
True but Palin is also as inexperienced as he is if not more, only been governor for less the 2 yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Sea_Hunter
If you saw his acceptance speech last night he layed everything out, and the rating were higher the the opening and closing of the Olympics, he pulled in 38 million plus viewers and
Thanks for your remakrs, much appreciated
I disagree with Sea_Hunter
I think this election shouldn't even be close. Barack Obama is the best candidate the Democrats have had since Bill Clinton ( and yes I'd have voted for him again, despite all that stuff with Monica Lewinksy). And speaking of Clinton, what experience did he have before the presidency? Or for that matter, how much experience did George W. Bush have? Yes the aforementioned presidents were both governors, but what did they know about running the federal government?
I have liked Obama since he announced his candidacy. He's smart, affable and loquacious, and if picking Joe Biden as his running mate is any indication of the way he will run the country, he will be an outstanding president! He will restore the United States' standing in the world, which has taken a tumble under the present administration. We can't afford another four years like the last eight! John McCain has voted for Bush's policies 90% of the time. Furthermore McCain can't even remember how many houses he has.
McCain was going to throw a HUGE before Convention at his house, But everyone showed up to the wrong one
(sorry could not resist that DungeoMaster6)
McCain is the wisest choice. I was with him before the primaries concluded and I am still for him today, he is a moderate if not liberal republican. His stand on issues doesnt pander to the party so much as what is the best course of action despite how his detractors want to "spin" things with sopphist rehtoric.
If anything Barrak Hussien Obama has proven that he lacks the experience and the wisdom to be president. His reach in effect out strips his ambitions ability to see things through. He makes no tough choices and only panders to public preceptions much like most of his democratic peers. This will not change if he is ellected. Proclamations calling for "change" don't put gas in the tank of your car or food on the table or defend our country or our freedoms.
McCain on the other hand does and has made many tough choices throuout his long career in the senate and as a former Admiral in charge of the entire Pacific Fleet in the Navy where our very wellfare as a nation was allready held in his hands on numerous occasions (his military credentials are not soley contained within his time as a POW). His track reccord in a leadership role is well established. He even promptly sent his men in response to Russia's invasion of Georgia to get a first hand look, while his opponent yucked it up on a beach enjoying himself while vacationing oblivious as to what to do until told how to spin a response for the media by his aides.
Face it folks Hillary at least had a real plan and knew more than Obama about leadership. McCain has chosen a very good VP that can learn from him while he runs the show. She just also happens to be a woman and don't think for one second that she won't be getting some votes for that. As well she should, afterall it was B.H. Obama that threw the double standard race card himself whenever he could to get votes when he ran against Hillary.
If Barrak was serious about uniting his party he would have picked Hillary, (Just as Reagan chose his primary competetor for VP to unite the republicans once)but then he would have to allways look over his shoulder wondering just when she would have him taken out like she did the "White Water" Judge.
Experience may not be everything, but it sure as hell speaks louder than mere political double talk and unrealistic aspirations.
i disagree, Bush has made a mess out of the Economy, The Ill Concieved War, did nothing for Katrina Victims, ect, and McCain voted with Bush, 90% of the time, that alone can scare somone
If McCain wins as some have said it will be like 4 more years of Bush and 8 is more then enough already
And Obama may lack experience, but so did JFK, and he cerainly has more the Sarah Polin, wh has only been Governor for les the 2 years and was the mayor of a town of 9,000, hardly enough for me experieince wise, my guess is McCain choose her to try and attract Hillaries femal follwers which probably will not work, no to mention if anything happend to Obama as President, I would certainly feel more comfortable with Joe Biden as President then Sarah Polin
I just wanted to add whichever party gets elected this November--either ticket is going to make the history books even though they have made them already. It is a choice that the democratic party could elect Hillary Clinton as the running mate but with McCain doing this I feel that this is a big step for both parties. Either way..its going in the books. I really don't know which way I am going to vote this year. It will be interesting to see the debates over the next month or so.
and as someone said, due to Palin's lack of experience, that kills McCain's ability to say the same about Obama anymore but yes this will be 1 for the books and i bet the national turn out of voters this year will be far and away the biggest this country has seen in years if at all alot of new 1st time younger one also
Far cry between an experienced president and an experienced vice president. Which would you rather have?
I do believe my predictions conserning obamas choice of vp bears out here, from another thread i stated he would never pick someone that would overshadow him and at least add some credibility to his campagin, if he was more bold and not just full of talk he would have picked hillary instead, now that would have made history,
i was vacilating before, but after seeing obama flop so many times just to apeal to more voters and go for the spotlight more than deal with the issues and show his true colors as a pedagouge instead of a real leader , especially when he didnt embrace hillary and truely unite the party i am leaning heavaly towards mccain now
history will be made one way or the other now it will be eaither a victory for womans rights or one for the african american minority. the effects on our children that grow up and or are influenced by seeing a leader from eaither of these formerly oppressed groups being in power will be a benifit in any event
as for mccain going with bush 90% of the time, some people may want to check the actual facts (foot in mouth diesease is rampant in political dogma especially when the media is involved as a scource)
correct but Biden as a VP has more expeience the Palin does, she was mayor of a town of 6,000 for a number of years, the Governor for just under 2 years Biden has been in the Senate over 30,
if push came to shove, Yes I would much preffer Biden as a President then Palin
the question was which would yu rather have an experienced president or an experienced vice president, lol
and experienced President, but that still does NOT qualify McCain as experienced nor Biden, being in the Senate regardless of years is not the same as being a President
To be honest the choice in November is not a real good one either way, but through our primary system this is who the people of the country selected
lol, i see,,yet mccain despite not being a govenor has more executive experience from his time in the military than biden and obama combined, i wont mention the 20months of excutive experience on his vp's behalf as adding much to the mix, considering even though that by itself is still more than thier oponents have by your reasoning
i do not see what executive experience McCain has? none of the Candidates have any executive expeieince
Just being in Congress alone does not give one executive experience, nor does being the military as a POW, this is NOT meant to discredit Mccain for his years of torment as a POW it just simply means that none of the candidates have any expeience
You can be in the Military for years, that does not automaticly qualify you to be President, nor does 30 years in Congress
At least Bush and Clinton had been long term Governors prior to thir elections and i hardly view Palins 1 1/2 years as a governor gives her the experience
Yes it is more then the other 3 but not nearly enough to be a President
However your comments are appreciated
Big clarification here. The highest naval rank John McCain achieved was Captain, and that was only through the influence of his family. He was never in charge in the Pacific or any other fleet. In fact, his naval career was almost over before it started but, like Bush, he had the influence of his famous father and grandfather (both Admirals) to keep him from washing out and to give him chances to beyond what other officers received.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuskovian
For example, he graduated fifth from the bottom of his class from the Naval Academy in Annapolis and, through family connections, moved into flight school where he crashed several planes and did more partying than actual flight instruction. Yes, we all know he paid a terrible price for the final crash by spending horrific years as a prisoner of war. Worse for the nation, though, is that he fantasizes that a sure victory in Vietnam could have been achieved with just a little more bombing and just a little more will to win at home. This is very scary considering the two wars that Bush already has us fighting.
And talk about his qualifications in politics, exactly what were his achievements there? He had the initial election as a US Representative bought for him by his wealthy, new father-in-law (considering that he hadn't even lived a day in Arizona until the election). There is no real record of his doing anything during his two terms there before running for the Senate seat vacated by Barry Goldwater.
And just what has he managed to do while a Senator? His campaign finance law failed to significantly reduce the role of money in politics. He failed to get a big tobacco bill through the Senate. He's failed to change the way Congress spends money; his bill to give the president a line-item veto was declared unconstitutional, and the system of pork and earmarks continues unabated. He even failed to reform the immigration system.
Every senator who runs for president misses votes back in Washington, but between the beginning of 2005 and mid-2007, no senator missed more roll-call votes than McCain did, except Tim Johnson, who was recovering from a near-fatal brain aneurysm. What does that say about his dedication to the job he already has? We've already had a president in Bush who has taken more vacation time than any other in history. Do we need another?
Further, his womanizing is worse than Bill Clinton's and is the one constant through his history at the Naval Academy, flight school, the deployments and after his return from Vietnam. Further, his treatment of his disabled first wife is not the thing you would expect from someone who had even an ounce of integrity.
McCain is not the paragon he wants us to believe he is. He is shallow and self serving and not fit to be Commander in Chief.
Talk about a flip flopper--McCain is one of the worst. There is no principled stand that he has ever taken that he hasn't changed his mind and now goes for the other side. Whether it was on taxes, immigration, oil drilling, abortion or the dangers of the Religious Right -- he's changed his views.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Usually, I think that politicians who change their mind when the facts change show maturity, judgment and flexibility. I respect that as a person gains more experience and knowledge, they might adjust their stands. But those are not McCain's reasons. He has only changed to suit the prevailing winds of the presidential campaign.
Well said Euryleia!
Actually, he's probably right about that. The North Vietnamese government was on the verge of suing for peace when the US Government caved into anti-war protesters and stopped the bombing of North Vietnamese cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Euryleia
Understand, that doesn't mean we were right to be in Vietnam in the first place (we weren't) nor does it mean we are right to be in Iraq and Afghanistan now (we probably shouldn't be). What it means is that the American people need to support their military much more actively than they are now, and be more careful of who they put in power.
Personally, I don't give a rip which party gets the presidency. I don't believe it's going to make all that much difference one way or the other. It's far more critical for us to elect Senators and Congressmen who are honest and capable. We don't seem to be able to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I agree with 99% of what you said except about Afganistan, we need to be there, the Talibn and Bin Laden are hiding somewhere near their in the Tora Bora Mountainds and they are the one responsible for 911, I beileve we invaded Iraw because Bush saw his failure in even locating Bin Laden so he needed to change the thinkin process of the American People.
I also do not unstand how we have been unable to locate Bin Laden, if he is in Pakistan whivh many have suggested, how do we miss a Man who i wel over 6 feet tall, long grying beard ect, he wols stick out like a sore thumb
I agree we have no reason to be in Iraq(But Bush never needs any valid or offers and valid reason for anything he does or does not sdo) bu we do need to track Binladen down and distroy the Taliban
:( I'm not American so I can't vote.
Hope you all do the right thing though.
Thanku Euryleia i dont think i have ever seen my man blush like that before,my owner says he got Mcains rank wrong quite by acident and wasnt able to edit the post before he realized his mistake, he is sitting here beside me now shaking his head, he says he doesnt know why he mixed him up with the pacflt commander, multitasking is a bitch ,, it is indeed 06 captian, is only one step away from "flag rank"which is still a very respectable rank and full of senior responsibility
the following is not directed at any one here so dont be offended please, we are just trying to explain some of our positions and reasons for our own personel views and dont wish to upset our fellow members here
leadership in the military is more than congruent to management and administration of people which is more than just executive experience its also legislative and judical all in one, Mccain has indeed held resonsibility for his fellow americans very lives
anyone thats been an officer or nco in charge of men in the united states military knows this, and of course we expect his opponents to downplay this vital fact and attempt to reduce his experience level to that of only being a POW, unlike bush juinor and obama ,Mccain has walked the walk
despite all of the ussually mudslinging ,it doesnt change the fact that McCain served his country with distinction and was willing to put his very life on the line to do it, where as his opponent has not
a note on political flipfloppery: ALL Politicians flip flop especially as they transition from apealing to thier base in the primary to apealing to the center in the main campagin, thier are no exceptions to this, thier positions on issues change to apeal to the most voters,,
we are just saying if people look at the actual facts McCain has flip flopped less in his overall message and obama has changed messages as often as he changed countires on his so called world tour
if any one bothered to listen to both sides of the media, (conservative and or liberal and independent scources not just thier favorite channel or paper) they will recall the republican conservatives hard core right as labeling Mccain as too liberal, to willing to cooperate with the democrats on issues like imagration, abortion etc, in fact thier was a hudge debate and most conservative pundents were dead set against electing him, (yet we the people have defied them and chose him instead ...there is a silent war being waged in the GOP for the future of our party and our country) heck he has Lieberman at his side all the time a former democratic cantidate for high office, and his choice of Palin, who herself is an opposition leader in the party only confirms that He is aiming at changing the republicans away from the former administrations bi partisan direction
to presume that choice to alter some of his views as being soley for the sake of vote is pure sophistry in lite of his struggle against bipartisan politics in his own party
America has been bruising for a change in normal party politics for decades, since ross perot and the formation of the reform party to today, i simply dont see obama as rising above the tide and reforming anything, he lacks the clout the auctoritas and dignatis to keep his party in line and biden isnt going to help him do it so much as act as his nanny and keep him well behaved, his efforts to climb americas cursus honorum alltough laudable are not going to actually yield any real fruit, his message calling for change (without making clear his actual positions on the issues) is a classic example of political wool pulling, he has the nessesary skills of a good prepared public speaker (so far lacks impromtu debateing clout) and his demogougary has its appeal but little to back it up if anything his efforts will not go any further than tiberius grachccus's did in rome and biden will end up succeeding him as Tribune of the plebs, Hillary however did have the backing but her naked ambition clouded her public apeal too much
i belive obama is an idealist but not a realist, he simply wont be able to get the job done he isnt strong enough to break through and be acepted by the people that actually run the country (the american aristocracy that has existed mostly silently and dominated our politics since before our countires formation as a soviergn nation) will never allow him to lead so much as follow, where as we beileve McCain is walking both tracks of the plebian and patrician roads to power in america
this doesnt mean a leader doesnt surface in opposition to the elite and sometimes wins, its just that they very rarely establish a lasting change to the political infrastructure with out also embracing the patricians wishes at the same time
and my use of roman terminology and honorifics to describe this struggle is no acident, the study of history can give us unique insights into our own society as our founding fathers did design our government to function more like the roman republic than a true democracy
hindsight is afterall 20/20
Let's go back though this multi-color response and see where we can agree and disagree,
Military experience has some great attributes, but it does not teach diplomacy nor consensus building. It has very little equivalence to practical civilian management techniques. A Navy Captain (06) is the equivalent in other services of a full Colonel, so he never reached the Admiral/General level. For some reason the military powers that were in command at that time did not feel Capt McCain was suited for flag rank. Wonder why?
John McCain served his country bravely and to the very best of his ability. I salute the strength and determination it took for him to survive in the POW prison camp. He is to be commended and honored for that service.
I have commanded men (Army) in combat. I served for 25 months in a combat zone with an Infantry MOS and was twice wounded. I'm proud of that service and the military has a special place in my heart. I'm not going to vote for John McCain just because he served, as millions of us have served honorably and many with distinction and uncommon valor.
McCain-2000 was an interesting figure in the Republican party. I was very intrigued with his views on campaign finance reform in particular. When he was demonized in SC by Bush's machine I was incensed. We are all aware of his flirtation with switching parties after that debacle. Of course, and understandably ,that has been re-done so that it doesn't ring too true to the Republican faithful.
McCain-2004 was a different animal. He turned his back on his previous positions, pro-choice, immigration reform, etc. etc and embraced the right-wing views fBush/Cheney/Wolfowitz, et al. He worked hard for Bush's reelection. Claimed to be a Baptist (when his family, himself included, had been Episcopalians for generations) because it would appeal to the Evangelical wing of the party. To me that just proved that he was so desperate to be president he was willing to do or say whatever was needed. The end justifies the means to him.
I pride myself on listening to a variety of news sources both domestic and foreign to try and get as balanced a view as I can to help me make decisions and to understand what's going on. I look askance at those that quote Fox News as their only source as I do those that quote MSNBC as their only source.
Not to be a smart-ass but you're using "bipartisan" incorrectly. That means working with both parties. I believe you mean to use "partisan".
I agree that Obama was for the longest time much stronger in oratory than substance. However after his speech in Denver he laid out a detailed plan for what he planned to do. I was impressed.
Your statement that there's a"american aristocracy" dominating politics that won't let Obama make the changes but that by some magical formula McCain can institute changes when just earlier you point out how despised he was by the main-stream Republican powers doesn't make sense to me. If such a cabal exists please explain how we went from Clinton's type governance to Bush's type governance. They are diametrically opposite. I don't buy it.
If we are a country of Patricians and Plebeians (and I don't agree with that) wouldn't it be better for those of us in the great unwashed to elect a leader like Obama that is obviously not of a Patrician stature, instead of an obviously big-business connected McCain? I don't follow your logic.
I enjoy history as well although I shy away from including Latin phrases as I tend t get the verb form wrong too often. We've never been a pure democracy. We are a representative democracy and that design was based primarily on John Locke and Baron de Montesquieu (who used Polybius work with the development Roman Republic as a foundation).
As for me and mine, we are going to support Senator Obama as I believe that is our best hope to undo the evils (and I use that term purposefully) perpetuated by the 8 years of the current administration.
Apparently as ussual with polarized political debates, as proven so many times before, we shall have to simply agree to disagree. lol
I respect that your "opinions" shall differ from my own, and that your mind will not be changed by what I write becuase you don't want it too, no matter what i post including this. (and I am speaking to all those that want to disagree not just the above poster"
There is a signifigantly vast number of influeneces that the founding fathers expoused in thier mascications to bring our country forth, all i did was point out a few of them, thier isnt enough space (without writting whole text books) for me to accurately indulge you with all of them, at least not and expound upon them all.
McCain and Palin hold the best hope for our future. Unlike Obama (as Palin just said in her speach last night) they are not using the word "change" to foster thier careers, but using thier "careers" to foster change.
It is glaringly apparent that Obama is not the "Messiah" he would have us think he is, he didn't even consider asking Hillary to be the vice president and unite his party, he has never reached accross the aisle with any success, nor pushed any majior legislation through, or even held a real job save that of the comittee he was on with a criminal that he conviently "forgets" involvement with and the media of course gives him a pass on. Typical liberal agenda sycophants.
Obama serves himself first, the country second if not third. His actions have proven it a hundred times over, despite his silvery words.
That being said, I am out peeps. No true debate of any objective fashion exists here, I have looked at the facts on both sides, spent long hours in reaserch and played evils advocate, given the benifit of the doubt etc etc and supported both sides for too long in too many posts on this and other threads conserning everything from gun control, politics, religion and torture to animal rights and sex education in schools.
Every single time someone takes it personel or wants to make it that way and close minded near flaming has been used to vehemently oppose any opinion that differed from that of the left.
No wonder Socrates freely drank the hemlocke. Sophistry reigns still today.
Peace out.
Thanks I agree he is using with your remarks about Obama and his carrerQuote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
and i also find it intresting that the "Religious Right" accepts the fact the Bristol, at 17 unmarried is pregnant because as they said she is planning to marry the babies father
if it was a demcratic say a child of Obama or Biden ans the situation was the same the "Religious Right" would be all over then like cancer in your body
Also, when baies are first born, they need bonding time with their mother, even more so one who has special needs, so what does Palin, do she accepts the Nomination for VP and travels all over the country, eithertaking the baby with her or having her husband "raise him" which is wrong SHE needs to bond with the baby, so much for her FAMILY FIRST stand
apparently being a VP is more important to her then her newborn, you do not take a new born espicaly one with Down Sydrome all over the country with you while you campaign, this just simply wrong
just my 2 cents worth
And in addition to her family values stand, she opposes SEx Education in High School, yet she has a 17 year old daughter who i assume is a High School Senior, who is unmarried and 5 months Pregnat, another case of Preaching one thing and practicing another, if she preaches certain things, she needs herself to pratice them
Actually, this is probably more a case of getting what you asked for. Perhaps, just perhaps, if she had allowed her daughter to learn about contraceptives, rather than demanding abstinence, there might be no pregnancy. Either way, though, you cannot blame the parents for the failings of a sexually active child. Despite all that you can do, or all that you can want, there comes a time when the child will do what he wants. I have two children, both grown now, and I know what I'm talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by mkemse
Don't blame the mother. Blame the system instead. And hopefully, despite her very conservative values, Palin will support her daughter, get her through the pregnancy, and accept the baby as a part of the family. And if she becomes Vice President, then I imagine the father will be having some nice, long chats with the Secret Service!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
No you can't blame the parent for the behavior of a sexualy active teen BUT you can support sex education in school which Palin strongly opposes
What bother me most on this is Palin is a Conservative Republican and the Religious Right accecpts th fact the Bristol at 17 ans unmarried and pregnant is going to marry the babies father, however if this situation involved a DEMOCRATIC Candidate the Religious Right would be all over them
Paretns need to pratice what they preach or not preach
So muc for family values
Sorry, mkemse, but as I see it she is practicing what she preaches. She preaches against sex education, her daughter didn't (presumably) have sex education, and now they are both paying the price of what she preaches.Quote:
Originally Posted by mkemse
And I don't see the problem with their family values. They are going to keep the baby, right? Or at least carry it to term? Palin hasn't disowned her daughter, has she? Sounds to me like good family values, there.
I'm not a big supporter of the Republican or the Democratic tickets. I don't see any good choices in this race. I haven't yet decided which would be the lesser of two evils. But don't go painting anyone with such a broad brush. As near as I can tell, Palin has made the best of a bad situation. I have to give her credit for that, at least. I'm not sure there's anything else I can give her credit for, though.
Here's my very brief analysis:
The Republican have controlled the House and the Senate 12 out of the last 14 years.
The Republicans have been in the White House for the last 8 years.
Are we as a country better off now that we were before the Republicans took over? A long poorly decisioned war, a recession (8 straight months of job losses meets the criteria) the largest deficit in U.S. history, extraordinary health care cost increases, inflation with an actual reduction in middle-class family incomes, abuses of civil liberties, etc.
Isn't the classic definition of insanity doing the same things the same way and expecting different results?
I believe its time to give the other party a chance and see if they have learned enough from being out of power to actually do things that benefit us and our country.
I agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar
I have a very hard time coming up with anything either party has done in my lifetime that benefited us or the country more than their own pockets. I don't foresee any changes in that until the American voters get enough common sense to toss out the crooks in Congress and replace them with honest politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar
But, is there any such thing as an honest politician?
Yes honest Politicans come from the same place a honest Lawyers :dQuote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I really don't dislike McCain as a person and I surely respect his military background. It's nice to hear that he puts his country before party.
But why then has he flip-flopped on abortion rights and off shore drilling? To get the votes of Catholics and right-wingers. Sounds like nothing but the same old politics to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DungeonMaster6
Exactly, he will say what he needs to for th supoort of who he is seeking
I agree his love of Country and his Military Experience speak from themselves
Actually an Experienced VP is a greater asset than an Experienced President.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
The Vice President is more than just a backup should the President die. He is the Statesman, The Negotiator, The Deal Maker.
Look at Cheney, everyone in Washington knows he is the Power behind the Throne.
Biden has 30 Yrs of contacts, a reputation of honor and integrety that even the Media cannot crack and knows the ropes in Washington.
Sara Palin, on the other hand has No Contacts, Did not have a REAL background check, has several questionable decisions on her record ( the bridge to nowhere, troopergate ect). Things that will probably come back to haunt her and McCain. Next Palin has "Jumped over" how many Washington Insiders who will think they should have been considered for the VP Chair instead of this unknown, how many will try and sandbag her while she tries to learn the Ropes of Washington?
No an Experienced VP can be a Presidents greatest asset.
An Inexperienced VP can be a disaster in the making.
Thanks to everyone who voted and expressed thier views
Hi! I have been sick and absent from the forum for a few months but am recovering well now. So many things have stayed the same. No person seems willing to say anything good about the Republicans since I have been gone. What's going to occur in Nov.? Good question. My prophesy is as was before I left.
1. Just like in 2000 and 2004 the Democrats will believe the lies of the 93% liberal press and be left (Pun) crying in their beer in 2008. That my actually kill the Bush Bashers to see McBush win a third term.
2. Sarah will be the first woman to be vice president and soon the first woman to be president. Just think, the Rep. have things rapped up for the next 12 years or so.! Do you think the liberals will start a civil war?
3. In Nov. the 73% of voters who do not trust or believe the liberal press will swing the political gates open (and rejoice while doing so) for the Republican faithful.
I have a question: if the Clinton dissatisfied, if the racial bigots, if the military majority, if the middle of the road Democrats. if the right wing religious majority, if the disenfranchised Michigans & Floridians, and all other God fearing Americans vote Republican, how will the Dem. left wing explain the Republican victory?
Indeed. I am happy to be back and hope this is the beginning of some good natured fun.
No need to, TheRepublicans will not win, look at Wal STreet right now, no the Republicans did not cause the problem, but based on the way our WHOLE country is right now, people seem to be clamering for a change
And I would rather have a Joe Biden take over the Oval Office if need be , then Sara Palin who has NO expeirieced, unless you wantto call 2 yewars of being a governor experience and 4 years as Mayor of a tiwn of 6,600 1/2 of who did not even for any major
And imagine, the "Conservative Right Wing" must be thrilled that Sara Palin has a 17 year old unmarried daughter 4 momnths Pregnant,the Anti Abortion, Pro Gun, Family Values Candidate, I see no family values in a 17 year old unmarried daughter carrying a baby, do you?? makes no difference if they plan to marry, she is still a Minor and he could be charged with Satutory, Statatory Rape charges can be level whether she consented to the Sex or not she is still a minor and Palin opposes Sex Education in Public Schools
In 2001 when Bill Clint left office We had $450 Billon Dollar SURPLUS when Bush leaves we will have a $1.3 TRILLION Dollar deficet
When Clinto left office gas was$1.45 a gallon, whe Bush leaves office we will be paying $3.75-$.20 depending on where you live
When Clinton left office we were at Peace in the Wolrd, when Bush leaves office will be engaged in 2 Wars, and the Iraq war has nothing to do with Oil, it was Bush who wanted to finish what his Father George Sr. could not finish
When Clinton left office we could afford Gas for our Cars, Groceries for our house ect can we do that now
Simply put are we better now after 8 years of Bush then we were when Clinton left office, NO we are far worse off, 500,000 people files for unemplyed in August of 2008, the largest month increase in 7 years, and guess who was President 7 years ago... George W Bush
Have a niced night :)