DO NOT VOTE FOR HILARY CLINTON!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!

Page 4 of 4 [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

13 Nov 2007, 8:07 pm

DeaconBlues wrote:
snake321 wrote:
Is this any surprise? Everyone thinks democrat automatically = good, I've got news for you though she plays on the same ball team as Bush.

She wants to sleep with Laura??? 8O

:wink:


<LOL< That is what I thought snake meant, too!



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

13 Nov 2007, 8:13 pm

I like Nobody for president


Who will fight for the working people? NOBODY!
Who will stop the corruption in Washington? NOBODY!
Who will stop the pork barrel politics? NOBODY!
Who will be the best president for ALL the people? NOBODY
Who will bring the country together again??

you got it. . vote NOBODY for president!

thank you Pat Paulsen



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

13 Nov 2007, 8:54 pm

Plutonian_Persona wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I'll vote for the person who actually does what they say they are going to do and not just give lip service to the American people! :twisted:

An impossible dream???? :lol:



so i take it you won't be voting for hillary or barak or rudy or mitt....considering they all just give lip service and have their own agendas that are opposing to that of the american people.


I've been voting 3rd party ever since I could vote...the two-party system is a sham.


the biggest sham is the idea of voting third party considering the rules for media coverage and debate.



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

13 Nov 2007, 9:11 pm

skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I'll vote for the person who actually does what they say they are going to do and not just give lip service to the American people! :twisted:

An impossible dream???? :lol:



so i take it you won't be voting for hillary or barak or rudy or mitt....considering they all just give lip service and have their own agendas that are opposing to that of the american people.


I've been voting 3rd party ever since I could vote...the two-party system is a sham.


the biggest sham is the idea of voting third party considering the rules for media coverage and debate.



I'd rather vote for someone who I believe in but has no chance of winning than a tyrant who is likely to win. At least I have voiced my opinion, even if my vote doesn't count.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

13 Nov 2007, 9:55 pm

snake321 wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I'll vote for the person who actually does what they say they are going to do and not just give lip service to the American people! :twisted:

An impossible dream???? :lol:



so i take it you won't be voting for hillary or barak or rudy or mitt....considering they all just give lip service and have their own agendas that are opposing to that of the american people.


I've been voting 3rd party ever since I could vote...the two-party system is a sham.


the biggest sham is the idea of voting third party considering the rules for media coverage and debate.



I'd rather vote for someone who I believe in but has no chance of winning than a tyrant who is likely to win. At least I have voiced my opinion, even if my vote doesn't count.



i don't mean it to sound like i'm discouraging third party voting...i started out registered as libertarian. i just think that with the current "rules" written up with regards to fair media time and all that, third parties get screwed over and they don't get nearly the coverage and therefore casts an image of "they can't win" on them. but that could change with the internet considering how well the ron paul campaign has been going so far.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

14 Nov 2007, 12:42 am

Ragtime wrote:
Joybob wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
psych wrote:
it doesnt matter who you vote for: the government still gets elected

http://www.strike-the-root.com/4/wasdin/wasdin5.html


That's why it's best to buy your own private island-nation. Think about it: no taxes, no people, no BS. And yet, you can still probably get internet via satelite. Also, you and your significant other need not wear clothes unless you just feel like it. All-in-all, sounds nice. All I need is the $.


It's not like we need roads, or sanitation, or water treatment facilities or any sort of infrastructure.


Exactly. Ever seen Survivor Man, or Man vs. Wild? If those guys can handle the Sahara and the Amazon, with no base of operations whatsoever, I think can we can handle a relatively tame island for which we've brought countless crates of supplies.
I don't need the government to hold my hand and do things for me, do you? All I need is the proper equipment. And if you really need some form of government to feel safe, you just create your own! You'd be the leader.


and you would be effectively taking your selves away from the rest of us, so it is a win-win situation! :wink:

Merle



Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

14 Nov 2007, 1:30 am

skafather84 wrote:
snake321 wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I'll vote for the person who actually does what they say they are going to do and not just give lip service to the American people! :twisted:

An impossible dream???? :lol:



so i take it you won't be voting for hillary or barak or rudy or mitt....considering they all just give lip service and have their own agendas that are opposing to that of the american people.


I've been voting 3rd party ever since I could vote...the two-party system is a sham.


the biggest sham is the idea of voting third party considering the rules for media coverage and debate.



I'd rather vote for someone who I believe in but has no chance of winning than a tyrant who is likely to win. At least I have voiced my opinion, even if my vote doesn't count.



i don't mean it to sound like i'm discouraging third party voting...i started out registered as libertarian. i just think that with the current "rules" written up with regards to fair media time and all that, third parties get screwed over and they don't get nearly the coverage and therefore casts an image of "they can't win" on them. but that could change with the internet considering how well the ron paul campaign has been going so far.


We need to pass a law like they have in France where all the candidates get equal airtime.



KoiInAFrozenPond
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21

14 Nov 2007, 6:16 am

boring......who cares? this does not mean anything, just that people with autism is likley to win nobel prizes. And that hillary is running for president.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

14 Nov 2007, 9:17 am

Cyanide wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
snake321 wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I'll vote for the person who actually does what they say they are going to do and not just give lip service to the American people! :twisted:

An impossible dream???? :lol:



so i take it you won't be voting for hillary or barak or rudy or mitt....considering they all just give lip service and have their own agendas that are opposing to that of the american people.


I've been voting 3rd party ever since I could vote...the two-party system is a sham.


the biggest sham is the idea of voting third party considering the rules for media coverage and debate.



I'd rather vote for someone who I believe in but has no chance of winning than a tyrant who is likely to win. At least I have voiced my opinion, even if my vote doesn't count.



i don't mean it to sound like i'm discouraging third party voting...i started out registered as libertarian. i just think that with the current "rules" written up with regards to fair media time and all that, third parties get screwed over and they don't get nearly the coverage and therefore casts an image of "they can't win" on them. but that could change with the internet considering how well the ron paul campaign has been going so far.


We need to pass a law like they have in France where all the candidates get equal airtime.


Actually we have our own, but it doesn't apply to cable. See more Broadcast News Laws

The "Equal Time" Law
47 USC Section 315

(a) If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall have no power of censorship over the material broadcast under the provisions of this section. No obligation is imposed under this subsection upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate. Appearance by a legally qualified candidate on any--

(1) bona fide newscast,

(2) bona fide news interview,

(3) bona fide news documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary), or

(4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto),

shall not be deemed to be use of a broadcasting station within the meaning of this subsection. Nothing in the foregoing sentence shall be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-the-spot coverage of news events, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.

(b) The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election, to such office shall not exceed--

(1) during the forty-five days preceding the date of a primary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or special election in which such person is a candidate, the lowest unit charge of the station for the same class and amount of time for the same period; and

(2) at any other time, the charges made for comparable use of such station by other users thereof.

(c) For purposes of this section--

(1) the term "broadcasting station" includes a community antenna television system; and

(2) the terms "licensee" and "station licensee" when used with respect to a community antenna television system mean the operator of such system.

(d) Rules and regulations

The Commission shall prescribe appropriate rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this section.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Federal Candidate Access Law
47 USC Section 312

(a) the Commission may revoke any station license or construction permit--

(7) for willful or repeated failure to allow reasonable access to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for the use of a broadcasting station by a legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office on behalf of his candidacy



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

14 Nov 2007, 2:28 pm

no regulations on cable other than that they can't host presidential debates. i think that'd be fair and ensure freedom of speech for the cable channels who are outside the FCC regulations for the time being....and i think they should remain outside the FCC (afterall, it's not free airwaves like broadcast television...it's privately paid television).



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

14 Nov 2007, 3:19 pm

Cyanide wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Can anyone name the song in the video? And the singer?

For What It's Worth by Buffalo Springfield....very good oldies song....if not a bit depressing sounding.


Thanks very much!



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

15 Nov 2007, 1:36 am

pandabear wrote:
Cyanide wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Can anyone name the song in the video? And the singer?

For What It's Worth by Buffalo Springfield....very good oldies song....if not a bit depressing sounding.


Thanks very much!


"For What It's Worth" was written by Stephen Stills about the Sunset Strip curfew riots. Bruce Palmer and Neil Young were also part of the band along with Goldie McJohn, later of Steppenwolf.
Stills went on to Crosby Stills & Nash; Furay and Messina formed Poco; and Neil Young began his brilliant and idiosyncratic career solo, with Crazy Horse, and with Crosby Stills Nash & Young.

Iconic music.

Merle



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

15 Nov 2007, 1:43 am

still doesn't change the fact that listening to neil young sing is like listening to an 8 year old girl getting raped.


can't stand his high pitched whiny voice.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

15 Nov 2007, 1:58 am

skafather84 wrote:
still doesn't change the fact that listening to neil young sing is like listening to an 8 year old girl getting raped.


can't stand his high pitched whiny voice.


I personally can not abide Neil Young. and I am helpless, helpless, helpless, helpless to feel any other way.


Merle



Pandora
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,553
Location: Townsville

17 Nov 2007, 10:37 am

Aw, Neil Young had some good songs - he even went techno for a while with his song "Transformer Man" in the 1980's.


_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon