Romney drops out of race

[Pete Serotta]

Romney dropped out of presidential race. That was a surprise and I wonder what Huckabee will do now.

Yeah I am probably nuts starting a thread like this...(just got back from a walk on the SANTA BARBARA beach with my wife.) have been out on coast for a week and it has been wonderful (as well as meeting some great folks and seeing my good bud TOM)


PETE

[paulh]

Coulter says she will support Hillary over John. Let's see her pony up.

[Climb01742]

bet his wife cut him off, spending-wise, like when ours say no more bikes.
:D

no more $35 million campaigns for you! go buy a $21k bike!

[J.Greene]

bet his wife cut him off, spending-wise, like when ours say no more bikes.
:D

no more $35 million campaigns for you! go buy a $21k bike!


Not a bad analogy. He is like one of the freds with the perfectly matching kits on the high dollar bike that gets dropped long before the real ride starts.

JG

[GoJavs]

Romney was played by the Mac and Huck show. Nothing democratic about that as far as I'm concerned.

Don't care for any of our choices this year....at all. :butt:

[Grant McLean]

...

So now who's going to keep reminding everyone that the USA is the best country in the world?

:rolleyes:

-g

[saab2000]

The Canadians. :D

[J.Greene]

Romney was played by the Mac and Huck show. Nothing democratic about that as far as I'm concerned.

Don't care for any of our choices this year....at all. :butt:

Didn't he only win the states he had lived in? It could have been more states, but not many.

JG

[Tony Edwards]

It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. I know all politicians are phonies, but he takes phoniness to its logical extreme. He leaves you no real way of knowing what he believes in, so you're basically electing an expensive suit and an even more expensive haircut. I have found it remarkable through this campaign season how he has somehow managed to stake out the conservative side of the Republican race given his record - maybe he hypnotizes the pundits with his extra-shiny hair and elaborate makeup.

[michael white]

Coulter says she will support Hillary over John. Let's see her pony up.


Coulter says, in writing, that she will actively campaign for Hillary. I predict she will hang herself in a closet before actually doing that.

[saab2000]

Just waiting for Bloomberg.

[thwart]

I see a Mac-Huck ticket.

Dems would be lucky to do well against it, I'm afraid.

I predict she will hang herself in a closet before actually doing that. I'll donate the tie... a red one. :rolleyes:

[Grant McLean]

Coulter says, in writing, that she will actively campaign for Hillary. I predict she will hang herself in a closet before actually doing that.

I can make some space by taking some shirts to the drycleaners if that will help...

:banana:

-g

[Chris]

Coulter says, in writing, that she will actively campaign for Hillary. I predict she will hang herself in a closet before actually doing that.

And what would be so bad about that?

[J.Greene]

I see a Mac-Huck ticket.

Dems would be lucky to do well against it, I'm afraid.

I'll donate the tie... a red one. :rolleyes:

At this point I'm leaning towards Mac. But the old man needs to pick a running mate that is agreeable too.

JG

[catulle]

I can make some space by taking some shirts to the drycleaners if that will help...

:banana:

-g

Your comment is the only smart thing that has come out of these primaries so far.

[fiamme red]

At this point I'm leaning towards Mac. But the old man needs to pick a running mate that is agreeable too.

JGJeb Bush maybe?

[J.Greene]

Jeb Bush maybe?

God I hope not. While he left my state better than he found it as Govenor, I prefer that the Bush's be in the past.

If Jeb would not have lost his first election for FL Govenor we'd probably have a different Bush as our current Prez. I'd like to think things would have been different. He is the smarter brother.

JG

[onekgguy]

Didn't he only win the states he had lived in? It could have been more states, but not many. JG

Yes, but how often do we see candidates not win their own states...Edwards and Gore come to mind.

Not a Romney guy...not an anybody's guy this time around...a man without a candidate. :confused:

Kevin g

[paulh]

My memory is a little hazy, but why is Mac good enough now but was not in 2000? Other than the fact the W and the Rove attack dogs swiftboated him and questioned Mac's military record. Didn't Mac a couple years ago pander to the religious right by speaking at Falwells "college". That wasn't enough to salve 'em?

[Viper]

Just waiting for Bloomberg.

:confused:

(not in a million years). Bloomberg for President is like having a conversation about which powdered milk is the most tasty; Bloomberg is a nobody going nowhere. Michael Bloomberg is a three dollar bill at a one-day sale, he was a 'D', then an 'R' and now an 'I'...he ran a big business, made lotsa money, bought the Mayorship of NY and has been milk toast since day one. He's a smurf, just over 4' tall, ugly as sin, his voice sounds like Gilda Radner on SNL. There is no Bloomberg campaign and if there is, it's much ado about zippo.

I'm a New Yawker, trust me on these things. :)

[Seramount]

...a different Bush as our current Prez. I'd like to think things would have been different. He is the smarter brother.



believe that last comment is referred to as 'damning with faint praise'...

[fiamme red]

:confused:

(not in a million years). Bloomberg for President is like having a conversation about which powdered milk is the most tasty; Bloomberg is a nobody going nowhere. Michael Bloomberg is a three dollar bill at a one-day sale, he was a 'D', then an 'R' and now an 'I'...he ran a big business, made lotsa money, bought the Mayorship of NY and has been milk toast since day one. He's a smurf, just over 4' tall, ugly as sin, his voice sounds like Gilda Radner on SNL. There is no Bloomberg campaign and if there is, it's much ado about zippo.

I'm a New Yawker, trust me on these things. :)Well said.

Bloomberg is a robot. He has as much personality as the Chase branches that are popping up on every corner in Manhattan. And he's a square:

http://lostnewyorkcity.blogspot.com/2007/10/our-mayor-is-square.html

One reason that Bloomberg is so tragically unhip, so socially maladroit, so un-New York, is, well, he's not from New York. He's from Boston!

[z. beeblebrox]

anyone ever give a thought to a mac-ahnold ticket? That would be funny.

edit: 12th amendment says no.

[davids]

:beer: :banana: :beer: , etc.

[Viper]

Well said.

Bloomberg is a robot. He has as much personality as the Chase branches that are popping up on every corner in Manhattan. And he's a square:

http://lostnewyorkcity.blogspot.com/2007/10/our-mayor-is-square.html

His voice is ****ing maddening. And he resembles the alien from 'Enemy Mine' atmo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvmv2J-Zr6Q

Winning NY and Florida cannot make a candidate run atmo. Any talk about Bloomberg is just that, talk.

[SoCalSteve]

anyone ever give a thought to a mac-ahnold ticket? That would be funny.

Cannot happen:


Eligibility

The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires the vice president to meet the same eligibility requirements as the president. That is, the vice president must be at least 35 years of age, have been born a citizen of the United States, and have been a resident of the U.S. for at least the 14 years preceding election.

In addition, the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." This applies to the above criteria and possibly to the removal of eligibility afforded by the Presidential term limits defined in the Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

However, that is not to say that the two-term limit itself applies to the Vice-Presidency. There is no restriction on the number of terms a person can serve as Vice President.

Just sayin'

Steve

[Viper]

anyone ever give a thought to a mac-ahnold ticket? That would be funny.

arnold = not born in USA
not born in usa = no go to white house except as guest
arnold = would be the next Prez if the law was changed atmo

[J.Greene]

.

[sspielman]

arnold = not born in USA
not born in usa = no go to white house except as guest
arnold = would be the next Prez if the law was changed atmo

...actually, I am convinced that Sonny Bono would be president had it not been for his tragic accident.....

[MilanoTom]

arnold = would be the next Prez if the law was changed atmo

Probably dead on correct. That's what scares me about the American electorate. They seem to by and large pick the candidate first (based on Lord-knows-what), then rationalize whenever the shortcomings are raised.

Tom

[Viper]

Any libbie who is excited about this news needs to know that Romney's dropping out only serves to strengthen McCain. Thinkmo. And a few months from now if the political scene gets ugly and Hillary feels she's getting picked on, let us remind her of the disgusting tactics use against Obama by Bill/Hill. Lefties should root for their person, not against Romney or his hair. If you're bald, get over it. If you're not over 6' and a stud, get over it; root for your candidate (Obama or Shillary) not against the other guy.

[J.Greene]

Viper Pal,

Forums are a contact sport.

JG


Any libbie who is excited about this news needs to know that Romney's dropping out only serves to strengthen McCain. Thinkmo. And a few months from now if the political scene gets ugly and Hillary feels she's getting picked on, let us remind her of the disgusting tactics use against Obama by Bill/Hill. Lefties should root for their person, not against Romney or his hair. If you're bald, get over it. If you're not over 6' and a stud, get over it; root for your candidate (Obama or Shillary) not against the other guy.

[Viper]

Probably dead on correct. That's what scares me about the American electorate. They seem to by and large pick the candidate first (based on Lord-knows-what), then rationalize whenever the shortcomings are raised.

Tom

We with our eyes, vote for good looks = true
We vote with our ears, vote for someone who sounds confident = true
We vote with our wallet, vote for someone who prentend$ to care = true

Arnold has it all, the American story, the America dream come true, the money, the family power and he's charming to the camera. Arnold is an Austrian Reagan in front of the camera/media, he's just a little more liberal socially than Reagan.

2020 = my turn

[sg8357]

Biden pegged Romney early on, "The Ken Doll Candidate"

Cheney will seize control of the Republican convention,
I'm sure there is something in the Patriot Act to allow it.

I checked Cheneys netflix account, he has only rented
two movies recently.

The Manchurian Candidate.
Gabriel over the White House.

Scott G.
McConnell/Cheney '08, your read it here first.

[Viper]

Biden pegged Romney early on, "The Ken Doll Candidate"

Cheney will seize control of the Republican convention,
I'm sure there is something in the Patriot Act to allow it.

I checked Cheneys netflix account, he has only rented
two movies recently.

The Manchurian Candidate.
Gabriel over the White House.

Scott G.
McConnell/Cheney '08, your read it here first.

Biden = bad hair plugs dude (he's jealous).

[Viper]

Viper Pal,

Forums are a contact sport.

JG

And I'm a clydesdale atmo. :D

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4258794138972547179

[Tobias]

I see a Mac-Huck ticket.

Dems would be lucky to do well against it, I'm afraid.

I'll donate the tie... a red one. :rolleyes:I'd prefer McCain's good friend Joe Lieberman. That would mix it up a little -- make it interesting.

[Viper]

I'd prefer McCain's good friend Joe Lieberman. That would mix it up a little -- make it interesting.

Lieberman was chosen by Gore for one reason...to win Florida (the Jewish vote). This is fact. Lieberman would be or not be chosen for the same reason. Me? I'd choose Sonny Crockett/Don Johnson or Jimmy Buffett, I'd win Florida for sure.

Lieberman = pawn used by parties for the Florida vote.

[MilanoTom]

Any libbie who is excited about this news needs to know that Romney's dropping out only serves to strengthen McCain. Thinkmo. And a few months from now if the political scene gets ugly and Hillary feels she's getting picked on, let us remind her of the disgusting tactics use against Obama by Bill/Hill. Lefties should root for their person, not against Romney or his hair. If you're bald, get over it. If you're not over 6' and a stud, get over it; root for your candidate (Obama or Shillary) not against the other guy.

I suppose I am a "libbie" (although I would prefer the term "fellow American") and have no problem with McCain. While some self-proclaimed conservatives would say that it proves their point that McCain is really a liberal, I base my opinion on something else. As far as I can tell, McCain loves this country and wants what he thinks is best for it. I don't see the ruthless power lust that seems to permeate Clinton, and he never caved when in the most horrendous of circumstances (Obama may be a decent person, but to me he's an unproven commodity). He also didn't pander to the talk show folks who seem to think that anyone to the left of them is unpatriotic.

It should make for an interesting election.
Tom

[Grant McLean]

. And a few months from now if the political scene gets ugly and Hillary feels she's getting picked on, let us remind her of the disgusting tactics use against Obama by Bill/Hill.

Billary needs to remember they is running against Bush, not Mac.
If she forgets this, she'll lose.

-g

[Tobias]

Any libbie who is excited about this news needs to know that Romney's dropping out only serves to strengthen McCain.I disagree. Romney's campaign reminded Americans that McCain is in the center, which makes him more viable to the majority, including many Democrats. It's too early for him to stand alone as the target for Obama and Hillary IMHO.

[Viper]

I suppose I am a "libbie" (although I would prefer the term "fellow American") and have no problem with McCain. While some self-proclaimed conservatives would say that it proves their point that McCain is really a liberal, I base my opinion on something else. As far as I can tell, McCain loves this country and wants what he thinks is best for it. I don't see the ruthless power lust that seems to permeate Clinton, and he never caved when in the most horrendous of circumstances (Obama may be a decent person, but to me he's an unproven commodity). He also didn't pander to the talk show folks who seem to think that anyone to the left of them is unpatriotic.

It should make for an interesting election.
Tom

Tom, that is cool. Me? I am a passionate conservative, but super cool still :) and I have yet to get pumped up about this election. In fact, I root for Obama (and not out of simple hatred for Hillary) I like the dude. I also root for DavidS. Bigtime.

McCain in 2000 was a cool cat. McCain in 2008? What doesn't he get, Americans want Iraq over, ended and out. They want gas at $2.00 a gallon or less. And we want the writer's strike over in Hollywood so we can sit back, eat McDonald's, pizza, fries and soda while in front of the boob tube.

[J.Greene]

And we want the writer's strike over in Hollywood so we can sit back, eat McDonald's, pizza, fries and soda while in front of the boob tube.

I don't want any of this. $2.00 gas would be nice though.

JG

[Tobias]

Lieberman was chosen by Gore for one reason...to win Florida (the Jewish vote). This is fact. Lieberman would be or not be chosen for the same reason. Me? I'd choose Sonny Crockett/Don Johnson or Jimmy Buffett, I'd win Florida for sure.

Lieberman = pawn used by parties for the Florida vote.Again I disagree on his impact on this election. Lieberman was chosen to compliment Gore because Gore is about as liberal as you can get (except maybe for Hillary), so bringing in Lieberman as one of the most conservative Democrats helped balance the ticket.

Lieberman would indeed help with Florida in 2008, but more importantly would balance the ticket by placing it at very center. That would leave either Obama or Hillary on the fringes.

[davids]

The very best aspect of this is that McCain won't need to pander to Huckabee anymore. No Mitt to neutralize, so talk about balancing the ticket with a gay-hating creationist will hopefully fade away.

[dbrk]

I suppose I am a "libbie" (although I would prefer the term "fellow American") and have no problem with McCain. ..snip..
It should make for an interesting election.
Tom

Well, I suppose I should not weigh in here because none of these candidates are progressive enough for me. But just as I believe conservatives will vote for whoever has the R if it is anti-Hillary vote, I will vote for whoever as the D because R=more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy, no health care changes of any real consequence, more what's good for big business is good for America, more ScaliaThomas judges. I think McCain is ALL of those R-things and I oppose them all. The Ds may not make any of these changes I seek but the Rs won't think they have a mandate to continue. What MilanoTom says as a liberal scares me more than the Rs, because McCain IS scary to me...because it will be more of the past seven years and, btw, they have sucked.

Of course, I would move to another planet if I could, such is my current and likely future faith in humankind. If we get another R then I will finish learning the words to O, Canada and hope they might take me.

dbrk

[MilanoTom]

The very best aspect of this is that McCain won't need to pander to Huckabee anymore. No Mitt to neutralize, so talk about balancing the ticket with a gay-hating creationist will hopefully fade away.

I don't recall an election in which the nominee picked one of his rivals, so I don't expect it had any real potential to happen this time, either. Heck, they never even pick someone predicted by the pundits (Spiro WHO?!?).

Tom

[Grant McLean]

If we get another R then I will finish learning the words to O, Canada and hope they might take me.

dbrk

You're always welcome stay at my place,
but we'll need to rent some more storage space if Curt 'the decider' comes
with you!

-g

[davids]

I don't recall an election in which the nominee picked one of his rivals, so I don't expect it had any real potential to happen this time, either. Heck, they never even pick someone predicted by the pundits (Spiro WHO?!?).

TomClinton and Gore, just to name the most recent example.

And I've been hearing this idea (McCain-Huckabee) for the last few days. The Globe even had an editorial (http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2008/02/07/the_huckabee_temptation/) on the subject this morning.




p.s. Prescient Dan Wasserman, patriot & cyclist: http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Graphic/2008/02/07/1202361809_8699.gif

[MilanoTom]

Well, I suppose I should not weigh in here because none of these candidates are progressive enough for me. But just as I believe conservatives will vote for whoever has the R if it is anti-Hillary vote, I will vote for whoever as the D because R=more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy, no health care changes of any real consequence, more what's good for big business is good for America, more ScaliaThomas judges. I think McCain is ALL of those R-things and I oppose them all. The Ds may not make any of these changes I seek but the Rs won't think they have a mandate to continue. What MilanoTom says as a liberal scares me more than the Rs, because McCain IS scary to me...because it will be more of the past seven years and, btw, they have sucked.

Of course, I would move to another planet if I could, such is my current and likely future faith in humankind. If we get another R then I will finish learning the words to O, Canada and hope they might take me.

dbrk

I'd hate to see you go... the nation always seems to manage to survive the the worst that the political spectrum has to offer. Democrats survived Bush; Republicans survived Clinton. It continually swings back and forth.

I didn't see any "D=" in your post. You don't think that they're all sweetness and light, do you?

You need not be frightened by what I think or say. I care deeply about this country and in particular what the Constitution says it should be. The rub is that some of it could easily be classified as "liberal" and other parts "conservative." Unfortunately, too many people either cherry pick what suits them or haven't bothered to read it at all. (By the way, Scalia and Thomas have proved to be partisan, not the "strict constructionists" that Republicans claim they are.) Beyond the Constitution, I care that America doesn't base what it does on what the "other side" does. It disgusts me that we would keep suspected terrorists without the right to trial or even counsel, and the best excuse is that it's better treatment than we would get from terrorists. If we're going to use terrorists as our benchmark for conduct, we're already screwed.

Tom

[sg8357]

Well, I suppose I should not weigh in here because none of these candidates are progressive enough for me.
dbrk

I'd settle for someone playing with a full deck and willing to abide
by their oath of office. Hillary may be deficient in the "plays well others"
category and the "vision thing", but she will get some useful stuff done.
That would be change enough for me.

Scott G.
Who doesn't expect Howard Zinn to be Sec Ed anytime soon.

[saab2000]

I want someone who is prepared to speak the truth to the American people, even though it might not always be popular and some folks' feelings will be hurt.

Speaking the truth would transcend politically pigeonholing labels like "Dem" or "Republican" or "Liberal" or "Conservative".

This country has all it needs to be a world leader on anything (that doesn't mean this is a race between countries) it wants to be, yet falls far short of the rest of the world in many, many basic ways.

[Fixed]

Well, I suppose I should not weigh in here because none of these candidates are progressive enough for me. But just as I believe conservatives will vote for whoever has the R if it is anti-Hillary vote, I will vote for whoever as the D because R=more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy, no health care changes of any real consequence, more what's good for big business is good for America, more ScaliaThomas judges. I think McCain is ALL of those R-things and I oppose them all. The Ds may not make any of these changes I seek but the Rs won't think they have a mandate to continue. What MilanoTom says as a liberal scares me more than the Rs, because McCain IS scary to me...because it will be more of the past seven years and, btw, they have sucked.

Of course, I would move to another planet if I could, such is my current and likely future faith in humankind. If we get another R then I will finish learning the words to O, Canada and hope they might take me.

dbrk
you are my very smart brother
I won't be around much in the future
I'm doing everything i can for obama like a million phone calls , for the first time I feel really proud and it feels good
cheers

[catulle]

I wonder why it is that human nature is of the do-what-I-say-not-what-I-do kind? I wonder why it is that humans are pious and pray and teach their children to share and pretend to be good and then act like the corrupt and greedy and base beings they are? I wonder what it is that they teach at Harvard and Yale and at all those prestigious institutions of learning that churn out these military-industrial-complex political bastards? I wonder why we pray for peace but pay for war? I wonder why is greed more powerful than love? I wonder if we call ourselves human just because we hate calling ourselves apes which is what we really are? I just wonder...

My girls at home will be voting for Billary. I kind 'a like Obama; hell, why not let a black man carry the wip for a while?

[ClutchCargo]

.
.
.
After Giuliani dropped out, they asked Huckabee for his reaction.
He said he thought that was ok, but that, actually, his greater
hope was tht Romney and McCain would withdraw. :)


He got half his wish!
.
.
.

[cadence231]

Well, I suppose I should not weigh in here because none of these candidates are progressive enough for me. But just as I believe conservatives will vote for whoever has the R if it is anti-Hillary vote, I will vote for whoever as the D because R=more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy, no health care changes of any real consequence, more what's good for big business is good for America, more ScaliaThomas judges. I think McCain is ALL of those R-things and I oppose them all. The Ds may not make any of these changes I seek but the Rs won't think they have a mandate to continue. What MilanoTom says as a liberal scares me more than the Rs, because McCain IS scary to me...because it will be more of the past seven years and, btw, they have sucked.

Of course, I would move to another planet if I could, such is my current and likely future faith in humankind. If we get another R then I will finish learning the words to O, Canada and hope they might take me.

dbrk


I wonder why it is that human nature is of the do-what-I-say-not-what-I-do kind? I wonder why it is that humans are pious and pray and teach their children to share and pretend to be good and then act like the corrupt and greedy and base beings they are? I wonder what it is that they teach at Harvard and Yale and at all those prestigious institutions of learning that churn out these military-industrial-complex political bastards? I wonder why we pray for peace but pay for war? I wonder why is greed more powerful than love? I wonder if we call ourselves human just because we hate calling ourselves apes which is what we really are? I just wonder...

:) Can there be two POTD's? :)

[Kahuna]

His voice is ****ing maddening. And he resembles the alien from 'Enemy Mine' atmo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvmv2J-Zr6Q


There you go, insulting aliens again.


-K :)

[norman neville]

Again I disagree on his impact on this election. Lieberman was chosen to compliment Gore because Gore is about as liberal as you can get (except maybe for Hillary), so bringing in Lieberman as one of the most conservative Democrats helped balance the ticket.

Lieberman would indeed help with Florida in 2008, but more importantly would balance the ticket by placing it at very center. That would leave either Obama or Hillary on the fringes.

there is no way you can really think that either al gore, son of a senator, steeped in the status quo, friend of the energy industry, or hillary clinton, goldwater gal, stern hawk, wholly-owned subsidiary of the insurance industry (among others), is a liberal?

liberal? liberal!

no. at best, they are center-right, corporate stooges, perhaps not as vile as some of the more strident wing-nuts, but in no way liberal.

it's a sad political world where those folks would be liberals.

fwiw, the democrats are a center-right party for the most part, while the rebublicans are right-wing. that's not an opinion. honestly analyse their positions and goals, honestly compare them to an objective political scale and see what happens.

[DukeHorn]

As a moderate liberal with a military background, I didn't want to go into Iraq but now that we're in, I don't think we should leave. So do I vote for McCain on the Iraq issue, or do I vote Democrat because there's already a conservative tilt on the Supreme Court--reading last year's Supreme Court decisions have been painful.

Hmmmmm.

And Norman, you are correct. Hilary and Al would be part of a centrist party if they were running in Europe.

[stevep]

late breaking,
romney still had enough money left over to buy canada.
he's after grant...

[michael white]

[QUOTE=Viper]Tom, that is cool. Me? I am a passionate conservative, but super cool still :) and I have yet to get pumped up about this election. In fact, I root for Obama (and not out of simple hatred for Hillary) I like the dude. I also root for DavidS. Bigtime.

McCain in 2000 was a cool cat. McCain in 2008? What doesn't he get, Americans want Iraq over, ended and out. They want gas at $2.00 a gallon or less. And we want the writer's strike over in Hollywood so we can sit back, eat McDonald's, pizza, fries and soda while in front of the boob tube.[/QUOTE

I'm Dem and down with most of the above. I don't have a problem with McCain, really, except for his stance on the war. He's just a more old-school Republican, unlike the Neocons who've run the party into the ground, and who despise him as an unacceptable freak, and that's ok by me. I wouldn't vote for him, but wouldn't lose much sleep if he were elected. But that won't happen.

[Mr. Butterworth]

There you go, insulting aliens again.


-K :)


What the Huck?

[Grant McLean]

late breaking,
romney still had enough money left over to buy canada.
he's after grant...

If he brings me a box of RS lugs, and a gift certificate for a JB paint job, I'm in.

-g

[norman neville]

But just as I believe conservatives will vote for whoever has the R if it is anti-Hillary vote, I will vote for whoever as the D because R=more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy, no health care changes of any real consequence, more what's good for big business is good for America, more ScaliaThomas judges.

dbrk

the lesson of history says we get all that and more with the r's and the d's as well. certainly clinton did everything a republican would have, since he himself admitted that in 1972, he would have been a republican based on his positions and policies. he killed healthcare reform with his conservative position, failed to nominate progressive or liberal judges because of conservative ideals, passed the wretched trade agreements at the command of big business, and failed totally to undue any of the regressive tax structure of this country because he served the beneficiaries of that very system.

mccain, barack osama and hillary are chattel slaves to those interests who truly rule. one's as useless as the other.

[kgreene10]

McCain in 2008? What doesn't he get, Americans want Iraq over, ended and out.[/QUOTE]

McCain has been campaigning on close to the opposite -- the "possibility" in his mind of "winning" in Iraq and "staying until the job is done," whatever that means at this point.

[saab2000]

I see a lot of very disingenuous hand washing regarding Iraq 5 or 6 years down the road. The Americans want to be done with it. Hmmmm.......

To very many on the outside it was obvious from the outset that how it is now is how it would be. Yet now they want out because it is a quagmire costing thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of other lives, billions of dollars and has resulted in a Middle East situation probably less stable than before.

But everyone was pounding the drums of war 6 years ago. I'm sorry, but the Americans made their bed in Iraq and now must deal with it. As much as I am a quasi-pacifist, the idea of the Dems to just pull out ain't gonna work.

Anyway...... :no:

If we spent a fraction of the money that goes into the war on educating young Americans on the world and its people and traditionsn and politics maybe we wouldn't have to spend so much money and so much blood fighting for .......? Someone remind me again what we're fighting for?

[Fixed]

the lesson of history says we get all that and more with the r's and the d's as well. certainly clinton did everything a republican would have, since he himself admitted that in 1972, he would have been a republican based on his positions and policies. he killed healthcare reform with his conservative position, failed to nominate progressive or liberal judges because of conservative ideals, passed the wretched trade agreements at the command of big business, and failed totally to undue any of the regressive tax structure of this country because he served the beneficiaries of that very system.

mccain, barack osama and hillary are chattel slaves to those interests who truly rule. one's as useless as the other.


bro that only happens if we are cattle if the people use their voices and take a stand and 100% vote ..YES WE CAN make a difference
if we don't turn out to vote and we don't care who wins they are all the same..and they will be all the same ..
imho cheers

[J.Greene]

If he brings me a box of RS lugs, and a gift certificate for a JB paint job, I'm in.

-g

save anwr, ruin Canada!

JG

[sspielman]

:) Can there be two POTD's? :)
:no:

Confucius say, bird with two left wings can't fly...

[mso]

Ditto dbrk

Lets see Blue in November :banana:

[97CSI]

Romney was played by the Mac and Huck show. Nothing democratic about that as far as I'm concerned.Believe it was a republican thing and not a Democrat thing. Had nothing to do with what is good for the republican party. Only had to do with his bank balance. IIRC, the campaign finance law states that the candidate may keep any money he/she raises after he/she loses. It can be quite lucrative to run for office if you are careful to not spend all your $millions. Of course, the great majority of Romney's money either came from him or his coreligionists. And the Mormons are nothing if they aren't good business people. Time to cut the losses.

Coulter says, in writing, that she will actively campaign for Hillary. I predict she will hang herself in a closet before actually doing that.If she would just stay in the closet for a very long time (many years), that would be good enough.

[Tobias]

I kind 'a like Obama; hell, why not let a black man carry the wip for a while?That's fine if he is the best person for the job, but not because we haven't had a black president before.
If we follow that logic we should push for an all-black team in de Tour, regardless of whether they are competitive or not. :rolleyes:

[Tobias]

Hillary may be deficient in the "plays well others"
category and the "vision thing", but she will get some useful stuff done.
That would be change enough for me.Like what?
Anyway, it's about others not wanting to play with her. Apparently not even Bill. Seriously, that says a lot about her.

[sspielman]

Believe it was a republican thing and not a Democrat thing. Had nothing to do with what is good for the republican party. Only had to do with his bank balance. IIRC, the campaign finance law states that the candidate may keep any money he raises after he/she loses. It can be quite lucrative to run for office if you are careful to not spend all your $millions. Of course, the great majority of Romney's money either came from him or his coreligionists. And the Mormons are nothing if they aren't good business people. Time to cut the losses.

If she would just stay in the closet for a very long time (many years), that would be good enough.


She probably won't have to campaign too much....Hillary's campaign is broke..and there are some "Obama-friendly" contests just around the corner which will not aid her fundraising efforts. It may be that Super Tuesday inflicted mortal wounds on both sides after all.....

[97CSI]

She probably won't have to campaign too much....Hillary's campaign is broke..and there are some "Obama-friendly" contests just around the corner which will not aid her fundraising efforts. It may be that Super Tuesday inflicted mortal wounds on both sides after all.....Hope you are correct. Hillary is better than anyone else left in the race, other than Obama. But, still too much of the 'same old thing'.

[Grant McLean]

That's fine if he is the best person for the job, but not because we haven't had a black president before.


Unfortunately, the best kind of people for the job of Prez don't apply.
Anyone who actually wants the job, should be immediately disqualified...
That's the sad truth.

-g

[Tobias]

And Norman, you are correct. Hilary and Al would be part of a centrist party if they were running in Europe.More like North Korea. :rolleyes:
Hillary's first move is to let the Federal Gov. move in and solve all problems.
Her latest solution to solve the housing problem is simplistic and a joke IMO.

[Viper]

Hillary is evil.

There, I said it. Monotone. Monotone. Monotone. She disgusts me. She's say and do anything to win, sell her soul, offer fake tears and a fake cackle on cue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zODHaIDfPXU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poUEHzPOiMk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0uHybfmmY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Fr1dm2Qdls

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etk_O-nhlA4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3gQfz8GC0o

[Tobias]

If we spent a fraction of the money that goes into the war on educating young Americans on the world and its people and traditionsn and politics maybe we wouldn't have to spend so much money and so much blood fighting for .......? Someone remind me again what we're fighting for?GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist.
Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do.
There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek.

[norman neville]

More like North Korea. :rolleyes:
Hillary's first move is to let the Federal Gov. move in and solve all problems.
Her latest solution to solve the housing problem is simplistic and a joke IMO.

huh?

dude?

what one move has hillary made to allow the fedgov to move in and solve any problem, let alone all problems?

name one, please. i'm genuinely curious, since i apparently just landed on your planet.

[norman neville]

GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist.
Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do.
There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek.

our kids are being 'educated' to become soldiers for the us, so what's the problem? jrotc does a good job at getting (some of poorer) kids ready for a life in the military. fair is fair.

[norman neville]

bro that only happens if we are cattle if the people use their voices and take a stand and 100% vote ..YES WE CAN make a difference
if we don't turn out to vote and we don't care who wins they are all the same..and they will be all the same ..
imho cheers

obama is a talented orator, but the sad truth is that behind the talk he is owned by the same folks that own all the rest of the political class. perhaps it is a good enough reason to choose him over someone else, but his core is just a empty and his soul is just as beholden to the interests in charge as hillary, john mac, huck a bee or anyone else above the level of dog catcher.

[johnnymossville]

I'm going to have to lean towards McCain at this point even though he does tend to lean a bit to the left. Clinton and Obama still believe govt. is the solution for every single problem we face, when in fact in most cases, it's the SOURCE of the problems we face. Education, healthcare, welfare, immigration, outsourcing, taxes, etc,... They'll only mess it up more, not because they don't mean well, it's just well,... human nature to butt into other people's business and wallets.

[norman neville]

I'm going to have to lean towards McCain at this point even though he does tend to lean a bit to the left. Clinton and Obama still believe govt. is the solution for every single problem we face, when in fact in most cases, it's the SOURCE of the problems we face. Education, healthcare, welfare, immigration, outsourcing, taxes, etc,... They'll only mess it up more, not because they don't mean well, it's just well,... human nature to butt into other people's business and wallets.

????

examples please, pertaining directly to obama or hillary. or bill clinton for that matter.

[Viper]

"GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist.
Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do. There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek."
~Tobias

our kids are being 'educated' to become soldiers for the us, so what's the problem? jrotc does a good job at getting (some of poorer) kids ready for a life in the military. fair is fair.

Norman, whoah, hold on there bigtime!

You are equating/comparing our military with terrorists? :confused: Why? :confused: How? :confused: Explain and be very, very specific atmo.

"Fair is fair", regarding "Our (American) kids are being educated to become soldiers for the US, so what's the problem (in comparing our kids with children abroad trained in terror groups)."

Norman, this is horrific stuff here, waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy left and a radical approach on your part. Radical. Berkeley stuff.

1). America does NOT train it's children with guns to be terrorists.
2). Our military is 100% voluntary, sign up or not, it's up to you.
3). Comparing our military with terror groups abroad is a very scary approach, very. Very.

NOT here, this is somewhere far, far away dude. Hint: know who the real bad guys are in the world NN, it's not the US military. Know your bad guys. Grab a big shovel and pull yourself out of this one. :rolleyes:

Here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,328832,00.html

[Tobias]

huh?

dude?

what one move has hillary made to allow the fedgov to move in and solve any problem, let alone all problems?

name one, please. i'm genuinely curious, since i apparently just landed on your planet.Start with the housing mess.
Her solution (as of this morning, but will probably change) is to bail out the lenders who made stupid loans.
And also to help out the people who bought very expensive houses they couldn't afford because it was an easy way to make money. They gambled and it didn't work out as planned, so now they want the rest of taxpayers to fund their mistake. And Hillary is right there to help. :rolleyes:

[Ray]

I want someone who is prepared to speak the truth to the American people, even though it might not always be popular and some folks' feelings will be hurt.

Speaking the truth would transcend politically pigeonholing labels like "Dem" or "Republican" or "Liberal" or "Conservative".
I don't think its that easy Saab. I find both McCain and Obama to be fundamentally honest and appealing people, although given the differences between the 2000 and 2008 McCain models, I'm a little less sure about him. But they're both willing to tell hard truths to constituent groups that don't want to hear them. But that's not enough by itself, because what they want to do are VERY different things. I tend toward the liberal perspective and find Obama's positions on Iraq, foreign diplomacy in general, taxes and the economy, civil liberties, and social issues like rights for gays, abortion rights, supreme court appointments HIGHLY preferable to McCain's positions. So I still think democrat vs republican and liberal vs conservative positions DO matter, whether the labels are used accurately or not. So I'm an Obama guy.

I don't find Hillary or Romney (RIP) to be honest or appealing, but here still, if I have to settle for someone I don't like, I'd rather have Hillary who at least will be sleazy in the service of positions I fundamentally share. Her husband was as sleazy as they come, but I thought he was a pretty good president, even if I wouldn't want my daughter working as an intern for him.

Honesty matters but so do positions. I find Obama to be the best of both worlds in that he's honest and I like where he stands. The bonus is he may be the most inspiring speaker we've had the White House in my lifetime, which can be a wildly effective skill when you're trying to marshal public opinion behind ideas that are tough to sell. If Hillary beats him, I'll vote for her but I'll be holding my nose. If McCain wins, I'll live with it because he can't be worse than Bush and might be a whole lot better. But I can't vote for the guy, despite my respect for him.

-Ray

[Fixed]

obama is a talented orator, but the sad truth is that behind the talk he is owned by the same folks that own all the rest of the political class. perhaps it is a good enough reason to choose him over someone else, but his core is just a empty and his soul is just as beholden to the interests in charge as hillary, john mac, huck a bee or anyone else above the level of dog catcher.
bro orator, yes, but also inspirational and passionate enough to push through the American peoples interests - that is why he needs us to be behind him we can be the special interest lobbyists .. ..the folks that put him there
. bro there can still be special people with the fire in the soul to do good .. that still burns in some cats ..imho
thanks for the nice way you put it :beer: cheers

[3chordwonder]

Norman, this is horrific stuff here, waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy left and a radical approach on your part. Radical. Berkeley stuff.

Your statement there says so much more about you than it does about Norman.

Keep digging.

[Louis]

Seems to me there's really only one option for the conservatives:

Kinky

[KeithS]

To paraphrase DBRK's post re D=good R=Bad. I think its' more like D's will vote for D's and R's will vote for R's. I don't know too many people in the middle just people who are motivated to vote or disinclined to vote.

By the way...

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.

With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!

From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

Hope I got it right Grant, I've been to a few hockey games in my life and I work for a Canadian company.

[97CSI]

Clinton and Obama still believe govt. is the solution for every single problem we face, when in fact in most cases, it's the SOURCE of the problems we face. Education, healthcare, welfare, immigration, outsourcing, taxes, etc,...Am wondering what you think we would have without government intervention in these areas? We are seeing what private enterprise is bringing to our military. By far the highest military budget ever with the fewest people in uniform since WWII. We are paying 3-10 times the per person cost for civilians to supply support in Iraq so a few of dubya's buddies can get richer. We pay ~45 cents of every healthcare dollar to bureaucrats in the insurance companies. By far the highest overhead costs in the industrialized world. Medicare costs about 10 cents per dollar. So much for the efficiency of private enterprise. Dubya is and always has been a shill for the rich. He continues to attempt to do the same thing with public education. Thankfully, he and his ideas will be gone shortly.

[Len J]

obama is a talented orator, but the sad truth is that behind the talk he is owned by the same folks that own all the rest of the political class. perhaps it is a good enough reason to choose him over someone else, but his core is just a empty and his soul is just as beholden to the interests in charge as hillary, john mac, huck a bee or anyone else above the level of dog catcher.

Sorry Norman that's just not true.

Look at the Dec contributions data for Hillary and Obama........For Hillary something like 55% of her individual contributions were at the $2,300 max. For Obama, 55% of his individual contributions were less than $200.......they both raised approx $32 million. What does that tell you?

Len

[Grant McLean]

What does that tell you?

Len

that too many people are watching TV

-g

[saab2000]

GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist.
Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do.
There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek.

Why does the rest of the world feel the need to destroy us? If we spent some time analysing that question maybe we wouldn't engage in policies which alienate and destroy other cultures and civilisations. I strongly believe that many US policies around the world since WWII have led to our current situation. And I am not talking about Israel either. There's more to it than that.

US policies and business don't know the meaning of 'tread lightly' around the world and many Americans have made themselves unwelcome by their 'bull in a china shop' behavior.

Education will help to solve some of this.

That's what I mean. I am not ignorant or naïve about our need to defend ourselves but I truly believe that we can do a better job in handling ourselves around the world than we have the past 60 years or so.

And that is what I am looking for in the next president. And the only one I see left who has a chance there is Obama.

[sspielman]

Speaking of Hillary and Obama......In tight races, "interesting" things sometimes happen...Here is the scenario that is shaping up. Obama is leading in the delegate count...and is likely to widen that margin over the next couple of weeks....BUT there is the issue of the "super delegates". These delegates do not serve the voter but serve the PARTY....So, since Hillary is clearly the choice of the old party establishment, there is the possibility shaping up that that at the convention these super delegates will exert their influence and select Hillary against the wishes of the majority of their party's voters. Usually, the parties limit the choices of the voter way earlier in the process, but they have that option. It would not surprise me a bit....

[Ray]

Speaking of Hillary and Obama......In tight races, "interesting" things sometimes happen...Here is the scenario that is shaping up. Obama is leading in the delegate count...and is likely to widen that margin over the next couple of weeks....BUT there is the issue of the "super delegates". These delegates do not serve the voter but serve the PARTY....So, since Hillary is clearly the choice of the old party establishment, there is the possibility shaping up that that at the convention these super delegates will exert their influence and select Hillary against the wishes of the majority of their party's voters. Usually, the parties limit the choices of the voter way earlier in the process, but they have that option. It would not surprise me a bit....
Oh yeah, the Democratic race is shaping up to be a real clusterf*ck. Neither Hillary or Obama can win enough delegates to close it out. So its going to come down to some fierce and ugly battles over superdelegates and attempts to get the Florida and Michigan delegates seated. If Hillary goes into the convention with a slight delegate lead, then she'll win and she should. But if Obama goes in with a slight lead, look out. Everything is stacked against him and that will split the party worse than anything since '68. And if she wins it that way, even I won't vote for her. The only two acceptable outcomes I see are either for Hillary to go in with a delegate lead (not counting Florida / Michigan or super delegates) or Obama to get on a role, win the next few and then actually win one or two of the remaining biggies (Ohio, PA, and Texas) to where not even the super delegates would have the balls to deny him the nomination. But if he goes in only slightly ahead in delegates, bar the damn door.

-Ray

[Viper]

Your statement there says so much more about you than it does about Norman.

Keep digging.

1). Do you think it's balanced to intimate, compare or contrast the United States of Amercia's ROTC (or JROTC) to Al Qaeda's recruiting of children, their training with children for terrorism?

2). Do you think it's not wise to throw that back at the orator with current events in Berkeley, California?

3). What say you about Norman Neville's extreme statement? Speak to that, I'm awfully curious.


"GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist. Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do. There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek."
~Tobias


"our kids are being 'educated' to become soldiers for the us, so what's the problem? jrotc does a good job at getting (some of poorer) kids ready for a life in the military. fair is fair."
~norman neville

[michael white]

I think the Democrat race is just what you want: vigorous and competitive. The GOP should be so lucky as to have such strong turnout for strong candidates. I think Obama is positioned well, as long as he holds up to the challenge, and if he doesn't, he doesn't deserve the nomination anyway. It's supposed to be like this, it'll reveal character and fire everyone up like never before. People think they know Hillary and/or Obama: they don't. It's the first time for both. We'll see.

[Tobias]

That's what I mean. I am not ignorant or naïve about our need to defend ourselves but I truly believe that we can do a better job in handling ourselves around the world than we have the past 60 years or so.

And that is what I am looking for in the next president. And the only one I see left who has a chance there is Obama.saab, I didn't mean to imply you are ignorant or naive -- I know better.
BTW, I wouldn't be too hard on the good old US of A.
There have always been conflicts and wars. Always will be.
There are plenty of hot zones around the world right now that have very little to do with us.

[1centaur]

Why does the rest of the world feel the need to destroy us? If we spent some time analysing that question maybe we wouldn't engage in policies which alienate and destroy other cultures and civilisations. I strongly believe that many US policies around the world since WWII have led to our current situation.

I believe this sentiment is naive. First, rich and powerful countries are always hated by some of the have nots. Second, there's a difference between dislike of powerful countries that throw their weight around clumsily, which frankly is to be expected, and "feeling the need to destroy us." Third, the "rest of the world" does not feel extreme hatred for the US, let alone the need to destroy us. We have many allies that respect us and like us to some extent, or even more than that, and others that respect and put up with us. Those who "need to destroy us" are to blame for that sentiment, not us. You know America. You know Americans. You know that Democrats and Republicans come and go and mostly try to protect what we have. Do YOU feel any need to destroy us? Presuming you do not, why would you accept that sentiment from others and feel WE are to blame? Sure, we could be smoother diplomatically, sure we could provide even more aid to the ROW, sure we could bend over whenever anyone criticizes us (while they profit from our enemies themselves). But really, is there that much to hate? Are the other superpowers SO much better that they deserve to live while we don't?

[norman neville]

.

[norman neville]

Start with the housing mess.
Her solution (as of this morning, but will probably change) is to bail out the lenders who made stupid loans.
And also to help out the people who bought very expensive houses they couldn't afford because it was an easy way to make money. They gambled and it didn't work out as planned, so now they want the rest of taxpayers to fund their mistake. And Hillary is right there to help. :rolleyes:

the plans to bail out the mortgage mess is not to help the PEOPLE that can't pay the mortgages, but to help the LENDERS and the BANKS who will not be getting the money.

so, strike one on hillary is a big-government liberal since the LENDERS and the BANKS and the MORTGAGE INDUSTRY are not the little guys, typical targets of republican abuse.

if anything your example says exactly the opposite: hillary supports socializing the risk (lending) and privatizing the profits (tax money paid instead of missed payments to private companies). that's all the way to the right.

next.

[norman neville]

1). Do you think it's balanced to intimate, compare or contrast the United States of Amercia's ROTC (or JROTC) to Al Qaeda's recruiting of children, their training with children for terrorism?

2). Do you think it's not wise to throw that back at the orator with current events in Berkeley, California?

3). What say you about Norman Neville's extreme statement? Speak to that, I'm awfully curious.


"GMA had a piece this morning on how little kids are being "educated" in camps to become terrorist. Sadly, whether we educate our own youth or not won't change what our enemies do. There must be a solution but I doubt it's turning the other cheek."
~Tobias


"our kids are being 'educated' to become soldiers for the us, so what's the problem? jrotc does a good job at getting (some of poorer) kids ready for a life in the military. fair is fair."
~norman neville


what is the difference? they recruit kids. we recruit kids.

is the difference that they are the bad guys and we are the good guys?

tell me.

[HSG Racer]

Romney never had a chance and he came across as a phony with meaningless speeches. But, what was really so appalling about him was his positions on anti-immigration. They were vicious and down right mean. And this from someone who calls himself a Christian. He talked about immigrants as if they were subhuman who didn't deserve to be treated with any dignity.

Romney's positions were either designed to pander to the anti-immigration Joe six-packs who harass immigrant workers in parking lots where they gather to find work or he actually believes such rhetoric. Either way, it doesn't say much about his core values or respect for human dignity.

One thing that has impressed me about Mac and GWB for that matter is that they do want to solve the immigration issue in a way that would maintain the dignity of those immigrants who are already here and contributing to our economy. Say what you will about GWB but he has been much more of a friend to immigrants when compared to most other Republicans.

:no:

[norman neville]

Sorry Norman that's just not true.

Look at the Dec contributions data for Hillary and Obama........For Hillary something like 55% of her individual contributions were at the $2,300 max. For Obama, 55% of his individual contributions were less than $200.......they both raised approx $32 million. What does that tell you?

Len

individual contributions?

to a campaign?

do you think that is how they are owned?

sorry, but that is not the case at all, and it is quite naive to believe so.

long before anyone decides to run, they have become beholden to the vested interests who control the government.

[Viper]

what is the difference? they recruit kids. we recruit kids.

is the difference that they are the bad guys and we are the good guys?

tell me.

You made the statement dude, own up to it.

normanneville = al qaeda teaching young kids to put guns to other kid's heads in the name of Allah is the same/no different than America's JROTC.

Norman, I'll buy you a one-way ticket to Berkeley if you like. Just explain your own statements regarding Al Qaeda and our JROTC program.

[Dekonick]

bro that only happens if we are cattle if the people use their voices and take a stand and 100% vote ..YES WE CAN make a difference
if we don't turn out to vote and we don't care who wins they are all the same..and they will be all the same ..
imho cheers

I'll bet that just about anyone who reads the Serotta forum votes. It is the remaining apathetic populace that needs a swift kick in the toosh..

VOTE!

[Ray]

individual contributions?

to a campaign?

do you think that is how they are owned?

sorry, but that is not the case at all, and it is quite naive to believe so.

long before anyone decides to run, they have become beholden to the vested interests who control the government.
Norman - yours is a fairly common radical critique of America. It's clear what you don't like. I don't like some of the same things you don't, but I don't see the same level of nefariousness that you do. And plus, I don't have a better idea. So what the hell do YOU suggest?

-Ray

[norman neville]

You made the statement dude, own up to it.

normanneville = al qaeda teaching young kids to put guns to other kid's heads in the name of Allah is the same/no different than America's JROTC.

Norman, I'll buy you a one-way ticket to Berkeley if you like. Just explain your own statements regarding Al Qaeda and our JROTC program.

i don't need to own up to anything.

my statement is clear and too simple to misunderstand: we recruit kids and they recruit kids.

answer the question: what is the difference?

put a gun to a kid's head in the name of allah or put a gun to a kid's head in the name of jesus? what is the difference?

is the difference that our country is run by white men and their nations are run by non-white men?

answer the question.

[saab2000]

We have many allies that respect us and like us to some extent, or even more than that, and others that respect and put up with us.

Our own president said you are either with us or against us. Didn't leave some places much choice, did it? Many 'allies' of the US are so in name only or because it allows them to escape the greater tyranny of the former eastern bloc.

But the US is not as well loved worldwide as some would believe. And it doesn't need to be hated either. I have live in 4 countries, visited about 20 countries, speak 3 1/2 languages (Swiss German is an offshoot of German that even many Germans can't understand so I call it a 1/2 language) and grew up with a father who has been to about 75, including many 'hostile' nations. Call me anything you wish, but naïve is not one of them that really fits.

Anyway....... I am a firm believer that our policies of the past 60 years or so have led us to our current position of quasi isolation. There has been good, but there has also been bad.

Just my $.02 and I could be wrong. I am just a beatnik airplane driver so I can eat but a cyclist at heart. And a political junkie by birth. :banana:

[norman neville]

Norman - yours is a fairly common radical critique of America. It's clear what you don't like. I don't like some of the same things you don't, but I don't see the same level of nefariousness that you do. And plus, I don't have a better idea. So what the hell do YOU suggest?

-Ray

ray, i disagree that saying that politicians and the political class are owned part and parcel is a radical critique, and given the level of political discourse on display here and across the nation, it is certainly not a common one.

i believe it is a simple fact that any successful politicians, especially on a national level, are beholden to money. certainly see kucinich, paul, nader as the recent examples of politicians whose ideas would be popular with many, many folks, but since they get no coverage from the corporate media, they are easily marginalized and made into jokes before their messages can seep out. that's not a radical critique, just a simple statement of reality. it may be characterized as a critique, but i disagree with the radical part, even moreso given the negative connotation of radical among the rushdoony's and madhannity's of the world.

nefariousness. i dig that. nefariousness. chunky word.

the wickedness i see is not in the system per se, but in the hypocrisy of the true believers and apparachiks. if those purported 'men of the people' and 'own bootstrap pullers' would tell the truth about themselves and the system they serve, that would be fine. the evil is in the lies. pretending you believe in anything just to get elected, when in fact you only follow orders in office--and not the orders of the people--is nefarious.

politics is intramurals. all the players are on the same team.

the simplest solution would be to start another team, but that takes ALOT of players, and they all have to know the rules AND want to play the game. it's a rough game.

[Tobias]

the plans to bail out the mortgage mess is not to help the PEOPLE that can't pay the mortgages, but to help the LENDERS and the BANKS who will not be getting the money.

so, strike one on hillary is a big-government liberal since the LENDERS and the BANKS and the MORTGAGE INDUSTRY are not the little guys, typical targets of republican abuse.

if anything your example says exactly the opposite: hillary supports socializing the risk (lending) and privatizing the profits (tax money paid instead of missed payments to private companies). that's all the way to the right.

next.Next? :confused:
How about you get real? :crap:
Not that I wish to defend the Bush plan because it is no better -- it's just as misguided.
You can call Hillary a conservative all you want to promote her, but the American people know better.
They may vote for her anyway, but not because you paint her to the far right. That's a joke.
Since when are the little guys targets of republican abuse?
Last I checked Democrats are wealthier than Republicans. So who do Democrats abuse?
Next you'll be saying little guys like billionaire Warren Buffett is being picked on. If so, maybe Bill Gates can come to his rescue.
You have to get real if you want to be taken seriously -- at least by me.
There is no way anyone can be so wrong unless it's intentional.

[BBB]

Why does the rest of the world feel the need to destroy us? If we spent some time analysing that question maybe we wouldn't engage in policies which alienate and destroy other cultures and civilisations. I strongly believe that many US policies around the world since WWII have led to our current situation. And I am not talking about Israel either. There's more to it than that.

This is a question that should have been asked and answered post 11 September before or, alternatively, depending on your political views, instead of invading two countries and Bush stating that you are either with us or against us - atmo.

From where I sit - in a modern, democratic, affluent western nation - it is not that the US is rich and powerful as others have suggested. Rather, it is the hypocritical policies pursued by the US that cause negative reactions ranging from the shaking of heads in dis-belief (me) through to flying planes into buildings (religious fanatics). So for example, while we hear a lot from Bush (and his allies including a certain former Australian Prime Minister) about democracy and the rule of law, we also hear about renditions, torture and prison camps in legal black holes. Or a war in Iraq in respect of possible WMDs when the US has the greatest cache of these weapons and supports an ally in the Middle East that has secretly developed these weapons over a number of years.

I guess some people just don't like the 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude that comes from the US. In rather extreme and unfortunate cases this has led some rather mis-guided people, as Saab suggests, to want to destroy you.

Peace, tolerance and understanding, religion, history, national security and realpolitik (and I use this term in a negative fashion) are not exactly good bed fellows. Hopefully the next bloke (or women) can do a better job at dealing with a tricky international situation.

[Louis]

Last I checked Democrats are wealthier than Republicans.

T, I'd be interested in seeing your reference for this.

L

[Viper]

i don't need to own up to anything.

my statement is clear and too simple to misunderstand: we recruit kids and they recruit kids.

answer the question: what is the difference?

put a gun to a kid's head in the name of allah or put a gun to a kid's head in the name of jesus? what is the difference?

is the difference that our country is run by white men and their nations are run by non-white men?

answer the question.

So you see no difference between children being trained to tear down the next World Trade Center and say...American Boy Scouts?

Wow! Put down the Kool Aid, remove the tin foil beret.

"We recruit kids, they recruit kids" by NormanNeville = It's all relative, everything is relative, everything.

"We recruit kids, they recruit kids" = :argue:



.

[saab2000]

Since when are the little guys targets of republican abuse?


I am a little guy. The "Rs" are not my friend. Why? because I work for some very rich people. Those very rich people don't have to pay me or my colleagues very much. The rich have gotten MUCH richer and we have taken paycuts. Literally.

I won't go into it in depth. But the concessions me and my professional colleagues were basically forced to give under the guise of "Bankruptcy" have gone nowhere to save the businesses, but sure have looked good for the multi-million dollar bonuses of some CEOs and executive VPs.

The excesses of big business at the expense of the customers and employees is what turns me off the Rs heavily. The Ds are not far behind.

As I said, for me the most important issue of this campaign is foreign policy. But corporate excess is not far behind and I am with others who say that the Ds and Rs are not that different. Comes down to personal accountability and responsibility.

I like profit as much as the next guy. But I also like some sense of ethics and honesty.

Oh well. Time to STFU.

[Louis]

SAAB, everyone knows that all pilots make way up in the six figure and spend half their time hanging out in Paris and Rome shacked up with 30-something Swedish stewardesses. Don't try to fool us.

[Viper]

i don't need to own up to anything.

my statement is clear and too simple to misunderstand: we recruit kids and they recruit kids.

answer the question: what is the difference?

put a gun to a kid's head in the name of allah or put a gun to a kid's head in the name of jesus? what is the difference?

is the difference that our country is run by white men and their nations are run by non-white men?

answer the question.


atmo:

[Elefantino]

.

[saab2000]

SAAB, everyone knows that all pilots make way up in the six figure and spend half their time hanging out in Paris and Rome shacked up with 30-something Swedish stewardesses. Don't try to fool us.

Actually, it's only Swiss stewardesses. in my case at least. What's MY airline?

After all Swissair is just an acronym. Sex With International Stewardesses Surpassing All International Regulations.

:banana:

Yvette, Francesca, Illaria. :D Yum!

[vaxn8r]

Romney never had a chance and he came across as a phony with meaningless speeches. But, what was really so appalling about him was his positions on anti-immigration. They were vicious and down right mean. And this from someone who calls himself a Christian. He talked about immigrants as if they were subhuman who didn't deserve to be treated with any dignity.

Romney's positions were either designed to pander to the anti-immigration Joe six-packs who harass immigrant workers in parking lots where they gather to find work or he actually believes such rhetoric. Either way, it doesn't say much about his core values or respect for human dignity.

One thing that has impressed me about Mac and GWB for that matter is that they do want to solve the immigration issue in a way that would maintain the dignity of those immigrants who are already here and contributing to our economy. Say what you will about GWB but he has been much more of a friend to immigrants when compared to most other Republicans.

:no:

That's a very shallow view IMO. Romney is a smart man who has proven success in salvaging major corporations from going under (this is a good thing for US jobs) and saved an Olympics from corruption and bancruptcy when it looked like they were going in the toilet. He was willing to speak his mind over a bunch of difficult issues rather than wave the vague "CHANGE!" sign it seems is the safe way to run these days.

You and I may disagree with some of his views but I have no doubt he would have done his best to solve real problems facing Americans. Everybody left is more of the same ATMO.

Of course I've voted independant for the last 20 years. I'm no R. But I do respect the man and I might have voted for him if I'd had the chance.

[Ray]

ray, i disagree that saying that politicians and the political class are owned part and parcel is a radical critique, and given the level of political discourse on display here and across the nation, it is certainly not a common one.

i believe it is a simple fact that any successful politicians, especially on a national level, are beholden to money.

......the simplest solution would be to start another team, but that takes ALOT of players, and they all have to know the rules AND want to play the game. it's a rough game.
First of all, no negative connotations associated with MY use of 'radical critique'. Take back the word - Rush don't own it. Second of all, politicians are beholden to money just like ALL of us are. Its the currency that America spins on. We can't expect politicians to live in a different world - just a more intense version of the one we live in. Where I mostly disagree with you is that I believe there ARE real differences between an Obama or Edwards and a Romney or Huckabee or McCain. Or between Bush and Gore, for example, which poor little Ralph Nader got just enough press coverage to muck up for eight years.

That does not imply that I think the ones I agree with are perfect or even anywhere close. But they're better. Do you really believe that Gore would have been as beholden to oil companies and would have invaded Iraq. I don't. He'd have tried to start the transition away from oil. It wouldn't have gone as quickly or as far as I'd have wanted (and we could have certainly blamed 'monied interests', but he'd have started it and moved it as far as he could have. Bush didn't even start giving it lip service until about a year ago. Clinton was FAR from perfect, but he was much better (from my perspective, obviously) on the environment, the economy, and civil liberties than Bush 1 had been or would have continued to be. And I'll take Clinton's Supreme Court appointments over W's ANYday.

So, until real honest-to-pete public financing of elections can be enacted (not likely anytime soon, given the Supreme Court's money=speech decisions), politicians are gonna have to raise money. All of them take some money from folks I don't like, but some of them take a lot less of it and a lot more from jerks like me. That matters. To me at least.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but I wish you'd engage the discussion of how to attack specific issues sometimes without just constantly whining about how corrupt and broken the system is. It is, we are, and its not going to change overnight and it does make sensible solutions more difficult. But not impossible. We can't just keep going back and blaming everything on original sin.

-Ray

[97CSI]

+1 What he said.

[Tobias]

I am a little guy. The "Rs" are not my friend. Why? because I work for some very rich people. Those very rich people don't have to pay me or my colleagues very much. The rich have gotten MUCH richer and we have taken paycuts. Literally.Saab, I know exactly what you are saying and agree with you to a point (a young family member is a pilot), but you are making a mistake in thinking that all these rich people who are screwing you over are Republicans -- they are not.

As I stated above, Warren Buffett is one of the very riches American and he is a Democrat. And if you know about him, he has been investing in Asia for a very long time, building their economy at the expense of American jobs and salaries. Whether we are better of (i.e. -- higher standard of living) because of cheap goods from China and India is another subject, but the point is that wealthy Democrats are just as guilty as wealthy Republicans in that sense.

The premise that Republicans are evil and Democrats saints is flawed.

[cadence231]

:no:

Confucius say, bird with two left wings can't fly...


Confucius say wagging finger side to side indicates one goes both ways.

[sspielman]

Confucius say wagging finger side to side indicates one goes both ways.

...I can't find that quote in the "Unabridged Writings of Confucius"

[norman neville]

First of all, no negative connotations associated with MY use of 'radical critique'. Take back the word - Rush don't own it. Second of all, politicians are beholden to money just like ALL of us are. Its the currency that America spins on. We can't expect politicians to live in a different world - just a more intense version of the one we live in. Where I mostly disagree with you is that I believe there ARE real differences between an Obama or Edwards and a Romney or Huckabee or McCain. Or between Bush and Gore, for example, which poor little Ralph Nader got just enough press coverage to muck up for eight years.

That does not imply that I think the ones I agree with are perfect or even anywhere close. But they're better. Do you really believe that Gore would have been as beholden to oil companies and would have invaded Iraq. I don't. He'd have tried to start the transition away from oil. It wouldn't have gone as quickly or as far as I'd have wanted (and we could have certainly blamed 'monied interests', but he'd have started it and moved it as far as he could have. Bush didn't even start giving it lip service until about a year ago. Clinton was FAR from perfect, but he was much better (from my perspective, obviously) on the environment, the economy, and civil liberties than Bush 1 had been or would have continued to be. And I'll take Clinton's Supreme Court appointments over W's ANYday.

So, until real honest-to-pete public financing of elections can be enacted (not likely anytime soon, given the Supreme Court's money=speech decisions), politicians are gonna have to raise money. All of them take some money from folks I don't like, but some of them take a lot less of it and a lot more from jerks like me. That matters. To me at least.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but I wish you'd engage the discussion of how to attack specific issues sometimes without just constantly whining about how corrupt and broken the system is. It is, we are, and its not going to change overnight and it does make sensible solutions more difficult. But not impossible. We can't just keep going back and blaming everything on original sin.

-Ray

no.

gore would have been/is just as bad, beholden, corrupt as bush is. look at the way he surrendered to the theft of the election. a patriot would have fought on, demanded that the traitorous supreme court be dissolved, the corrupt judges shot for treason, or at least an honest count and the adherance to law, something. you can't blame nader for gore's surrender to the system that nutured him and raised him from a pup. also, gore is a stalking horse for the nuclear power industry, the biggest socialize the risk, privatize the profits folks in the known universe, so he certainly is a big of an energy industry stooge as bush.

granted, gore is not as much of brain-damaged, learning-disabled, drunken cokehead as bush is. gore would have put a better spin on it. clinton gave us war, ghw bush gave us a war, raygun, carter, ford, nixon, lbj, jfk...there is a pattern. gore would have as well...somewhere, somehow. it's good for business.

unless the fine folks who flew the planes had decided not to because they feared a more competent, violent response to the 911 attacks under a gore presidency and not some inane toppling of a secular leader in the middle east and the legitamizing of a petty general president, stripping gore of the great 21st century pretext. that is a distinct possibilty. at that point, we would have just the little wars, like kosovo or middle-period iraq.

i'm not whining about the system or blaming original sin, simply attempting to bring a bit of reality into an otherwise naive political discussion. until you know the rules, you can't play the game to win.

that was my point. you asked what I WOULD DO. the simple answer, one that doesn't require radical action, constitutional alterations or divine intervention is simply to start a new team. play the game to win, not just throwing the ball around in the front yard. start a new party. call it the pocketbook party. start at the bottom, convincing everyone in lower 80-90% of the population wealth-wise that they all have something in common. fight the jingoists and the soft-headed patriots and the petty racists man to man. make the truck driver in texas realize he is in the same boat as the single mother in newark as the fruit picker in california as the office manager in chicago as the school teacher in miami as the soldier in virginia. run canditates, raise money, play the game. stay on message. stand up for your rights. campaign for votes. get elected. fight. win some. change the rules to your advantage. fight more. win more.

not easy, though. not quick. lots of (most) folks are easily distracted. you have to mean it. believe it. stick to it. play hard.

not going to happen.

but it is possible, according to the rules. right now the game is being played by just one team. just a distraction. no contact.

[mschol17]

that was my point. you asked what I WOULD DO. the simple answer, one that doesn't require radical action, constitutional alterations or divine intervention is simply to start a new team. play the game to win, not just throwing the ball around in the front yard. start a new party. call it the pocketbook party. start at the bottom, convincing everyone in lower 80-90% of the population wealth-wise that they all have something in common. fight the jingoists and the soft-headed patriots and the petty racists man to man. make the truck driver in texas realize he is in the same boat as the single mother in newark as the fruit picker in california as the office manager in chicago as the school teacher in miami as the soldier in virginia. run canditates, raise money, play the game. stay on message. stand up for your rights. campaign for votes. get elected. fight. win some. change the rules to your advantage. fight more. win more.

not easy, though. not quick. lots of (most) folks are easily distracted. you have to mean it. believe it. stick to it. play hard.


Don't give us too many actual details...

[norman neville]

Don't give us too many actual details...

well, some folks need it to be. but it is simple, not simplistic.

1) understand the reality.

2) care about a better outcome.

3) work to educate.

4) run a candidate.

5) campaign hard.

6) repeat 3.

7) repeat 4.

8) repeat 5.

9) when you win an election, no matter what it is, hold the winner to 1-3.

10) repeat 1-9.

again, it won't happen, simply because it's too much and the improvements would be slow to be realized, and the other side would sow hatred and division and violence and lies.

if that's not detailed enough for you, you ain't payin' attention.

if you want to get in the game, i can recommend some books or some folks who are working 1-3.

[norman neville]

Don't give us too many actual details...

most folks fail #1.

[mschol17]

if you want to get in the game, i can recommend some books or some folks who are working 1-3.

Please indulge us with some titles

[norman neville]

Please indulge us with some titles

start with economics: principles, problems and policies. standard textbook type stuff.

then try off the books by sudhir vankatesh. good fun, practical ecomomics lesson. benefit of being current, too. i laughed, i cried, i couldn't get enough.

next, read all of a people's history of the united states, 1492-present, by howard zinn. the real deal.

then, a generic american history textbook, like american history. boring but common, conventional stuff taught in highschool and college. everybody's had this.

followed quickly by huck finn, great gatsby and catcher in the rye. these books should be read yearly anyway.

rush to the man in the high castle by philip k. (fat). it was the 60's.

then, valis trilogy, also by philip k. (fat). valis, divine invasion and transmigration of timothy archer. yummy. trippy. pkd is an american treasure.

finish lesson 1 with ulysses, just cuz. consider it an art lesson in addition to a lesson on human nature. if you aren't familiar with it, there's tons of resources on the web.

very simple, obvious, ground-floor type stuff, vaguely orbiting the american experience. very vaguely in the case of ulysses, but it was banned here, and thus is an object lesson in that sense as well. after a couple of weeks of reading, you should have one or two things you didn't know before and maybe one or two new perspectives on the old stuff. that's the start. let me know when you're through. we'll move on to accessories and ladies shoes.

[Louis]

rush to the man in the high castle by philip k. (fat). it was the 60's.

I had such high expectations when I read this a year or two ago, and I have to say, it was a major let down. Somewhat interesting, but with no real fizz.

[mschol17]

I felt the same way about the Great Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, and Ulysses.

(I'll give you Huck Finn, though)

[97CSI]

I felt the same way about the Great Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, and Ulysses.Believe you are a candidate for 'War and Peace'.

[norman neville]

I felt the same way about the Great Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, and Ulysses.

(I'll give you Huck Finn, though)

you gotta learn the alphabet before you can learn to read.

oh, well.

[Viper]

you gotta learn the alphabet before you can learn to read.

oh, well.

Liberals are trying to re-write and edit the Tolstoy classic; yes libbies want to have it named, 'Peace and Peace'.





.

[norman neville]

Liberals are trying to re-write and edit the Tolstoy classic; yes libbies want to have it named, 'Peace and Peace'.





.

a is for apple.

that's enough for now. don't want to get a headache.

still can't answer the previous question? goodness, that's rich.

[1centaur]

norman:

would you care to share a platform for the pocketbook party? I presume taxes, labor laws, environmental laws and budget priorities would shift vastly under your agenda. Would you support central planning of the economy?

[Viper]

a is for apple.

that's enough for now. don't want to get a headache.

still can't answer the previous question? goodness, that's rich.

And J is for Jack. Here's a lefty classic jack, atmo:

[norman neville]

norman:

would you care to share a platform for the pocketbook party? I presume taxes, labor laws, environmental laws and budget priorities would shift vastly under your agenda. Would you support central planning of the economy?

since the party hasn't been formed yet, since nobody has learned the alphabet or done the work.

what would the priorities of 250 million americans be, economic or otherwise? probably the normal stuff most folks worry about: economic security, freedom, good health, equal rights.

scary, right?

[norman neville]

And J is for Jack. Here's a lefty classic jack, atmo:

is that the best you can do? head hurts?

come on, what is the difference between the usa recruiting a kid and the idf, the iss, the mujahideen or the mahdi army recruiting a kid? some kids don't shoot? some kids don't die? what?

[97CSI]

And J is for Jack. Here's a lefty classic jack, atmo:Yep.....staring dubya, cheney and all the rest of the yellow, chicken-hawks who have never served their country. dubya is famous for being yellow. Unless, of course, he is sending someone else's children into harm's way.

[Viper]

is that the best you can do? head hurts?

come on, what is the difference between the usa recruiting a kid and the idf, the iss, the mujahideen or the mahdi army recruiting a kid? some kids don't shoot? some kids don't die? what?

I think you need a few weeks in Gitmo to figure it all out, the difference between the good guys and the bad guys.

[Viper]

Yep.....staring dubya, cheney and all the rest of the yellow, chicken-hawks who have never served their country. dubya is famous for being yellow. Unless, of course, he is sending someone else's children into harm's way.

Yer boy Clinton wrote the book on yellow atmo. But you knew that atmo:

http://www.objector.org/conscription/clinton1969ltr.html

PS. MsCain is a War hero, bet you still hate em', right?

PSS. Did your girl Hillary serve?




.

[norman neville]

I think you need a few weeks in Gitmo to figure it all out, the difference between the good guys and the bad guys.

good guys recruiting kids to kill and die is great? bad guys recruiting kids to kill and die is bad? is that it?

weak, dude. the force is weak, dude, weak.

us, good guys? them, bad guys?

why is that exactly?

come on, rush. weak.

[Viper]

good guys recruiting kids to kill and die is great? bad guys recruiting kids to kill and die is bad? is that it?

weak, dude. the force is weak, dude, weak.

us, good guys? them, bad guys?

why is that exactly?

come on, rush. weak.

normanneville = normanneville = normanneville

[norman neville]

normanneville = normanneville = normanneville

you don't eat cheesypoof.

lame.

[norman neville]

normanneville = normanneville = normanneville

sad.

[Viper]

you don't eat cheesypoof.

lame.


N squared = N squared = N squared

lame = equating Al Qaeda's recruiting of children to America's JROTC program


Good young men and women who will defend America:

http://www.jrotc.org/

Sick ****s who want to terrorize and kill:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23176675-5006009,00.html

[norman neville]

N squared = N squared = N squared

lame = equating Al Qaeda's recruiting of children to America's JROTC program


Good young men and women who will defend America:

http://www.jrotc.org/

Sick ****s who want to terrorize and kill:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23176675-5006009,00.html

can't answer a question. snake with no bite.

lame, hannity.

[Viper]

can't answer a question. snake with no bite.

lame, hannity.

Michael Moore much? Make a movie with little facts, a straw movie.

Tis' you lad who have said that Al Qaeda's recruiting of children is the same/no different than America's JROTC program.

Tis' you professor who need to defend and support his outrageous statement. Me? I've made my stance on your Al Qaeda comment, it's up to you to show us you're not the original bloviator, Michael Moore...cause fyi Norm, comparing Al Qaeda's recruiting of 8 year olds, handing them guns, teaching them to kill is WAY off base, off balance and faaaaaarrrrrrrrrr to the radical left. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

[norman neville]

N squared = N squared = N squared

lame = equating Al Qaeda's recruiting of children to America's JROTC program


Good young men and women who will defend America:

http://www.jrotc.org/

Sick ****s who want to terrorize and kill:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23176675-5006009,00.html

where in that pointless story to which you linked did you see any evidence that the iraqis were using children? the only statements came from the puppet government and the us military, so it is not exactly credible.

lame.

no evidence.

lame.

cites a press release.

lame.

even the guy who wrote the story was smart enough to refrain from reporting the us assertions as fact.

lame, hannity.

[norman neville]

Michael Moore much? Make a movie with little facts, a straw movie.

Tis' you lad who have said that Al Qaeda's recruiting of children is the same/no different than America's JROTC program.

Tis' you professor who need to defend and support his outrageous statement. Me? I've made my stance on your Al Qaeda comment, it's up to you to show us you're not the original bloviator, Michael Moore...cause fyi Norm, comparing Al Qaeda's recruiting of 8 year olds, handing them guns, teaching them to kill is WAY off base, off balance and faaaaaarrrrrrrrrr to the radical left. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

can't answer the question. how is it different?

lame.

no evidence.

lame.

[Viper]

where in that pointless story to which you linked did you see any evidence that the iraqis were using children? the only statements came from the puppet government and the us military, so it is not exactly credible.

lame.

no evidence.

lame.

cites a press release.

lame.

even the guy who wrote the story was smart enough to refrain from reporting the us assertions as fact.

lame, hannity.

Which one of these is not like the rest?

In other words NN, we save children, we protect them, we don't hand them guns at age 8, hand them knives at age 5, teach them to blow up buses or become suicide bombers; no Norm, America does not do such things. And you ought to know better and be less apt to offend America, veterans and our military.

right > wrong (and you know better, you're just trying to be Campy 11 speed)

[norman neville]

Michael Moore much? Make a movie with little facts, a straw movie.

Tis' you lad who have said that Al Qaeda's recruiting of children is the same/no different than America's JROTC program.

Tis' you professor who need to defend and support his outrageous statement. Me? I've made my stance on your Al Qaeda comment, it's up to you to show us you're not the original bloviator, Michael Moore...cause fyi Norm, comparing Al Qaeda's recruiting of 8 year olds, handing them guns, teaching them to kill is WAY off base, off balance and faaaaaarrrrrrrrrr to the radical left. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

how did mm get into this? is he on the forum? lame, hannity.

where is your evidence that iraqis are using 8 year olds?

come, on, it's a simple question.

everyone uses their kids as cannon fodder and foot soldiers. why is bad when someone else does it and super-duper when we do it?

use the force.

[norman neville]

Which one of these is not like the rest?

In other words NN, we save children, we protect them, we don't hand them guns at age 8, hand them knives at age 5, teach them to blow up buses or become suicide bombers; no Norm, America does not do such things. And you ought to know better and be less apt to offend America, veterans and our military.

right > wrong (and you know better, you're just trying to be Campy 11 speed)

we save the children?

whose children?

we save the children.

except for the ones we kill.

except for the ones we send to kill.

except for the ones we mutilate.

except for the ones we abandon.

we save children.

except for the ones we don't save.

that's the difference. you see our kid with a gun and you think it's grand. you see their kid with a gun and quake in fear.

i see any kid with a gun, or in a box, or in a shallow grave, and i mourn for what is lost or what may soon be.

[J.Greene]

I love the irony here. Serotta Pete starts a thread that really should be killed.

JG

[97CSI]

Yer boy Clinton wrote the book on yellow atmo. But you knew that atmo:http://www.objector.org/conscription/clinton1969ltr.html

PS. MsCain is a War hero, bet you still hate em', right?

PSS. Did your girl Hillary serve?

.Have considerably more respect for Bill (as bad as he is). He stood up and did what he believed was right at the time. No comparison to the chickens**t dubya crew who only have to balls needed to send others to die. Especially as it is only about them and theirs getting richer. Yellow, through and through.

No problem at all with McCain's service. In fact, we both served in the USN in the Vietnam war zone (he was on the Forrestal while I was on the Enterprise). Luckily, I came out it a little better than he did.

And, I prefer Obama. If it comes down to Hillary, I'll hold my nose and vote. Not too sure for whom, though (am really tired of the best of the bad lot choices). I might actually prefer McCain's honesty to Hillary's supposed liberal leanings.

[norman neville]

Which one of these is not like the rest?

In other words NN, we save children, we protect them, we don't hand them guns at age 8, hand them knives at age 5, teach them to blow up buses or become suicide bombers; no Norm, America does not do such things. And you ought to know better and be less apt to offend America, veterans and our military.

right > wrong (and you know better, you're just trying to be Campy 11 speed)

to the little green snakes and other trifles, as tonight is a night for the grown-ups in the reality-based community to play some games that might scare legless reptiles. good night. good night. dream of bono. and your toys. remember, the kids with the guns aren't real. they're just stories the generals tell to scare you. sleep tight.

[Ray]

.