Page 2 of 5 [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

UncleBeer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: temporarily trapped in Holland

23 Jan 2008, 5:02 pm

AspE wrote:
I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.

Powerful??? A powerful woman doesn't let her significant other cheat on her with impunity.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

23 Jan 2008, 5:55 pm

snake321 wrote:

...
But there it is, laid out for the pc police, chav, a black man says it is stupid to vote for someone just because their black. I wouldn't vote for someone because their white either, or male.


OK, but if you really believed that race is irrelevant, why point out that a black man says don't vote on color? Does the fact that he is 'black' make any difference? If not, why call it to our attention?

And how do we know that Chav is of any race or the other ... his avatar has changed since I have been here.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

23 Jan 2008, 6:03 pm

UncleBeer wrote:
AspE wrote:
I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.

Powerful??? A powerful woman doesn't let her significant other cheat on her with impunity.


Do you know that she granted him a license to walk all over her? Would it have been better if she divorced him? How should a spouse that is the victim of infidelity act? Always forgive, never forgive, maybe forgive?

If this type of questioning and innuendo is fair game, then we should focus on marital infidelity in all candidates. Let's have a clear standard and apply it to ALL candidates equally.



KOOPA
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13

23 Jan 2008, 7:00 pm

AspE wrote:
I think she would make a great president. If you think the other candidates don't play politics too, you're fooling yourself. I do not understand all the irrational hatred of her, it goes beyond any political policies she expounds. I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.
s

congratulations! you are the first person I've EVER heard said that. Now, if you could, please explain to me why she would make a great president? And no, there is actually some candidates that don't "play the game of politics" -- Paul, Kuni, & Gravel. 13 outta the 16 candidates are in the same pro-establishment groups that determine foreign policy. And hose are the 3 that aren't.

she pro war
pro torture
pro patriot act
she's in AIPAC (Israel lobby, that she serves before OUR interest)
CFR
wants to regulate the internet, etc

bush-clinton-bush-clinton-bush (jeb bush, once her term run out :? ) We need to get these neo-conservative crooks out of office cause they don't give a damn about you at all.

But if that is a GREAT president, go you.



Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

23 Jan 2008, 7:33 pm

KOOPA wrote:
AspE wrote:
I think she would make a great president. If you think the other candidates don't play politics too, you're fooling yourself. I do not understand all the irrational hatred of her, it goes beyond any political policies she expounds. I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.
s

congratulations! you are the first person I've EVER heard said that. Now, if you could, please explain to me why she would make a great president? And no, there is actually some candidates that don't "play the game of politics" -- Paul, Kuni, & Gravel. 13 outta the 16 candidates are in the same pro-establishment groups that determine foreign policy. And hose are the 3 that aren't.

she pro war
pro torture
pro patriot act
she's in AIPAC (Israel lobby, that she serves before OUR interest)
CFR
wants to regulate the internet, etc

bush-clinton-bush-clinton-bush (jeb bush, once her term run out :? ) We need to get these neo-conservative crooks out of office cause they don't give a damn about you at all.

But if that is a GREAT president, go you.


Your sorta right. I hoped that if she won, she'd be more emotionally-fluent, because of maternal instinct. But I'm not sure if that's Hillary.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

23 Jan 2008, 10:20 pm

KOOPA wrote:
And no, there is actually some candidates that don't "play the game of politics" -- Paul, Kuni, & Gravel. 13 outta the 16 candidates are in the same pro-establishment groups that determine foreign policy. And hose are the 3 that aren't.

Agreed on those, even though I would hate Gravel as president simply because I don't believe his proposals are a very good idea. Still, I have to respect the man for his honesty and integrity. He stands up for what he believes in, and that is something to admire even if you don't believe the same things. Kucinich is a little more palatable, but I still don't like his stances on certain issues (very anti-second amendment without realizing all the implications of that, and wants more federal control). I plan to vote for Dr. Paul in the Ohio primary, and also in the general election- when the Republican party bosses have ensured that the media blacklist prevents him from winning their nomination, he'll still be nominated by about half a dozen minor parties, so I'll still vote for him.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


UncleBeer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: temporarily trapped in Holland

24 Jan 2008, 1:02 am

monty wrote:
UncleBeer wrote:
AspE wrote:
I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.

Powerful??? A powerful woman doesn't let her significant other cheat on her with impunity.

Do you know that she granted him a license to walk all over her?

The facts are plain and public: Bill's a serial cheater. Anyone who hangs around for more o' that is weak. No other word for it.



Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

24 Jan 2008, 2:30 pm

KOOPA wrote:
AspE wrote:
I think she would make a great president. If you think the other candidates don't play politics too, you're fooling yourself. I do not understand all the irrational hatred of her, it goes beyond any political policies she expounds. I think most of it is a deep hatred of powerful women.
s

congratulations! you are the first person I've EVER heard said that. Now, if you could, please explain to me why she would make a great president? And no, there is actually some candidates that don't "play the game of politics" -- Paul, Kuni, & Gravel. 13 outta the 16 candidates are in the same pro-establishment groups that determine foreign policy. And hose are the 3 that aren't.

she pro war
pro torture
pro patriot act
she's in AIPAC (Israel lobby, that she serves before OUR interest)
CFR
wants to regulate the internet, etc

bush-clinton-bush-clinton-bush (jeb bush, once her term run out :? ) We need to get these neo-conservative crooks out of office cause they don't give a damn about you at all.

But if that is a GREAT president, go you.


she is anti gun and the most evil person to ever run for the white house, she is the B behind Bill.

EXPLAIN
no liberals can explain anything, they just go with their heart, not their head, ask one to explain what Bill Clinton did that was so great and how he achieved the things he took credit for ? Just ask one to name the acts he passed into law and the days they where signed that made a differance.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

24 Jan 2008, 2:37 pm

Johnnie wrote:

she is anti gun and the most evil person to ever run for the white house, she is the B behind Bill.

EXPLAIN
no liberals can explain anything, they just go with their heart, not their head, ask one to explain what Bill Clinton did that was so great and how he achieved the things he took credit for ? acts he passed into law andJust ask one to name the the days they where signed that made a differance.



The Clinton 'triangulation' strategy involved centrism and compromise, and it worked. It was not a new, bold change in course ... more like a way of steering the state that involved incrementalism.

Nightmare for conservatives: she is the liberal version of Margaret Thatcher!



Odin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,475
Location: Moorhead, Minnesota, USA

24 Jan 2008, 3:40 pm

Orwell wrote:
KOOPA wrote:
And no, there is actually some candidates that don't "play the game of politics" -- Paul, Kuni, & Gravel. 13 outta the 16 candidates are in the same pro-establishment groups that determine foreign policy. And hose are the 3 that aren't.

Agreed on those, even though I would hate Gravel as president simply because I don't believe his proposals are a very good idea. Still, I have to respect the man for his honesty and integrity. He stands up for what he believes in, and that is something to admire even if you don't believe the same things. Kucinich is a little more palatable, but I still don't like his stances on certain issues (very anti-second amendment without realizing all the implications of that, and wants more federal control). I plan to vote for Dr. Paul in the Ohio primary, and also in the general election- when the Republican party bosses have ensured that the media blacklist prevents him from winning their nomination, he'll still be nominated by about half a dozen minor parties, so I'll still vote for him.


I generally like Kucinich's positions on the issues (gun control and his lame "Department of Peace" idea being the main exceptions), but he is not pragmatic enough nor willing to compromise enough. Unless the Dems get 60 senators we will always need to do some compromising in order to keep the Republicans from filibustering. Another thing that annoys me about many of my fellow progressives, especially those of the Baby Boom generation, is the tendency to demonize everyone who doesn't agree with them, thus making compromise impossible. This is a big reason why I like Obama, he doesn't demonize people just because they are Republicans.


_________________
My Blog: My Autistic Life


Odin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,475
Location: Moorhead, Minnesota, USA

24 Jan 2008, 3:47 pm

monty wrote:
Johnnie wrote:

she is anti gun and the most evil person to ever run for the white house, she is the B behind Bill.

EXPLAIN
no liberals can explain anything, they just go with their heart, not their head, ask one to explain what Bill Clinton did that was so great and how he achieved the things he took credit for ? acts he passed into law andJust ask one to name the the days they where signed that made a differance.



The Clinton 'triangulation' strategy involved centrism and compromise, and it worked. It was not a new, bold change in course ... more like a way of steering the state that involved incrementalism.

Nightmare for conservatives: she is the liberal version of Margaret Thatcher!


The problem with triangulation is that it is the wrong kind of compromise. Poll-driven policy making on the Democratic side just gave the Republicans free reign to frame the issues in a way that favored them, resulting in a vicious spiral pulling the Democratic Party to the right.


_________________
My Blog: My Autistic Life


Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

24 Jan 2008, 6:44 pm

monty wrote:
Johnnie wrote:

she is anti gun and the most evil person to ever run for the white house, she is the B behind Bill.

EXPLAIN
no liberals can explain anything, they just go with their heart, not their head, ask one to explain what Bill Clinton did that was so great and how he achieved the things he took credit for ? acts he passed into law andJust ask one to name the the days they where signed that made a differance.



The Clinton 'triangulation' strategy involved centrism and compromise, and it worked. It was not a new, bold change in course ... more like a way of steering the state that involved incrementalism.

Nightmare for conservatives: she is the liberal version of Margaret Thatcher!


Quote:
The Clinton 'triangulation' strategy


that is a sound bite, not an actual event

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(politics)

Quote:
in his 1996 State of the Union Address, Clinton declared that the "Era of Big Government is over."


so did he actually mothball the department of something or other or just throw out another sound bite ? he took credit for fewer government employee's, but most offices replaced human labor with computers in the 90's, so he took credit for something he had no part of.

direct deposit for social security checks, e-file taxes and direct deposit of refund are two examples of fewer people needed that Bill Clintoon had nothing to do with but took credit for down sizing government anyways.

No choice but to compromise when the republicans took over the congress, so he had nothing to do with that either, was backed into a corner after the voters had enough of him the first two years and made sure he couldn't do much. 1996 the voters decided gridlock worked just fine, so let him stay and play with his office girl.



ghostgurl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,328
Location: Orange County, CA

24 Jan 2008, 8:25 pm

I don't really trust her, although I could say the same for most politicians. If she wins the presidency, I will eat my foot.


_________________
Currently Reading: Survival by Juliet E. Czerneda
http://dazed-girl.livejournal.com/
Vote Kalister 2008


IdahoAspie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 726

25 Jan 2008, 12:36 am

I don't know about you guys but a country of presidents named Bush and Clinton seems less like democracy and more like monarcy.

1980 Regan/Bush

1984 Regan/Bush

1988 Bush/Quail

1992 Bush/Quail
Clinton/Gore

1996 Clinton/Gore

2000 Bush/Cheney

2004 Bush/Cheney

2008 Clinton/?

2012 Clinton/?

2016 Bush/?

2020 Bush/?


I cannot stand Hillary. There is NO DOUBT in my mind that woman would drop an A BOMB on a school yard of children to have power without a moments thought. She is a very self centered woman. She let her husband do whatever he wanted with whatever woman he wanted so she could have power.

She has had millions of dollars of cosmetic surgery done so she wouldn't be as ugly as she was at 30 as when she runs for President at 60.

She was a corporate lawyer for Wal-mart. Wal-Mart sealed her records to protect her involvement.

Bill sealed White House records to protect her from her involvment in W house scandels during the Clinton administration.

She is a sell out on every issue, Autism, Health Care, the War, whatever. What ever the poll, that is what she states. She totally plays honest hardworking women in this country. She is immoral and has not realy values as a human being.

Idaho Aspie



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

25 Jan 2008, 11:05 pm

I have nothing against her, but I will never trust her after she voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

26 Jan 2008, 4:47 pm

fabshelly wrote:
Why would you hate someone you never met? Waste of hate.


Ok, well by that merit, why would you hate Hitler or Stalin? You've never met them. But you know they've got bad intentions and they were greedy, selfish, inhumane a**holes who had too much power.