[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Did anyone notice that I added not ONE WORD of commentary to the original post? I didn’t expect tme to get it, but Pete, you seem to at least use your head for something besides a hat rack!?[/quote]
I noticed your thread title of “Obama: Secret Plant?”. Combined with your opposition to Muslims holding government positions it’s obvious what you’re doing. Nobody falls for the strategic use of a question mark.
Headhunter: Closet Homosexual?
[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:
Hillary Clinton is a piece of shit.
I hope Obama beats her to a pulp.[/quote]
I agree. I love that its killing her that Obama is out in front, and will win the nomination.
If she wins it, I’ll vote Republican in 2008.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I agree. I love that its killing her that Obama is out in front, and will win the nomination.
If she wins it, I’ll vote Republican in 2008.[/quote]
Now that is a bold statement from Irish, given his ideology.
You really dislike her that much? How come?
Not saying you are wrong by any stretch - just curious what guys like you think of her. I know a lot of Blue Doggish types - especially out West - don’t like her.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I agree. I love that its killing her that Obama is out in front, and will win the nomination.
If she wins it, I’ll vote Republican in 2008.
Now that is a bold statement from Irish, given his ideology.
You really dislike her that much? How come?
Not saying you are wrong by any stretch - just curious what guys like you think of her. I know a lot of Blue Doggish types - especially out West - don’t like her.
[/quote]
What’s “blue doggish?”
She fucked up the medicare thing, which to me kind of proved her imcompetence on a level.
On another level, she’s a carpetbagging bumpkin who is only a Senator from New York for one reason- Nothing fucking grated on me more than hearing her say, “We the people of New York…” Bitch, you’re not from New York.
Besides this, she’s just a typical grimy politician. After the whole religious awakening bullshit, I remember her throwing God into every speech because she knew the biblethumpers would like it. She is a political whore, and I ain’t voting for her.
Plus, I’m not gonna lie, I’m kinda sexist.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
What’s “blue doggish?”[/quote]
Blue Dog Democrats - moderate/conservative Democrats of the old school variety.
Well, I am no New Yorker, but I am still baffled about how pround New Yorkers could vote for her after that ploy. She is about as New Yorker as I am Californian - I mean, I have visited there and I know people who live there, but am I somehow qualified to represent California in the US Senate?
[quote]Besides this, she’s just a typical grimy politician. After the whole religious awakening bullshit, I remember her throwing God into every speech because she knew the biblethumpers would like it. She is a political whore, and I ain’t voting for her.
Plus, I’m not gonna lie, I’m kinda sexist.[/quote]
Heheh - that’s what like about Irish: he’s gotta be honest about who he is, no pretentious horseshit.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
On another level, she’s a carpetbagging bumpkin who is only a Senator from New York for one reason- Nothing fucking grated on me more than hearing her say, “We the people of New York…” Bitch, you’re not from New York.
Well, I am no New Yorker, but I am still baffled about how pround New Yorkers could vote for her after that ploy. She is about as New Yorker as I am Californian - I mean, I have visited there and I know people who live there, but am I somehow qualified to represent California in the US Senate?
Besides this, she’s just a typical grimy politician. After the whole religious awakening bullshit, I remember her throwing God into every speech because she knew the biblethumpers would like it. She is a political whore, and I ain’t voting for her.
Plus, I’m not gonna lie, I’m kinda sexist.
Heheh - that’s what like about Irish: he’s gotta be honest about who he is, no pretentious horseshit.
[/quote]
Haha. Thanks.
It’s alot more about character issues with her…I’m sure that I agree with her on most issues, but the way she goes about promoting herself at every turn and the things she does… she’s not my kind of person.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Haha. Thanks.
It’s alot more about character issues with her…I’m sure that I agree with her on most issues, but the way she goes about promoting herself at every turn and the things she does… she’s not my kind of person.
[/quote]
This is Exhibit A-1 as to why I don’t think Hilary has a prayer of winning a national election in 2008.
You say you agree with her stances and in the next breath claim you would never vote for her. You are most certainly not alone in that sentiment.
Next you throw in the people who are against her policies, and think she’s a slimeball to boot.
Finally, you add in the voters (excluding those already counted in the first two populations) who are simply not willing to vote for a woman for President.
Add it all up, and Clinton is sitting behind the 8-ball before she ever even starts her campaign.
While she’s a popular pick, the Democrats would be foolish, IMO, to pick her as their Presidential candidate in 2008.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
She fucked up the medicare thing, which to me kind of proved her imcompetence on a level.[/quote]
At least she realized that the health care system was a big concern (and this was back in 1993 if I remember right). She was ahead of the curve on that issue, and I give her a lot of credit for trying to tackle it. She showed some foresight there. What has Bush done to address the health care crisis, besides expand the prescription drug program in a way that actually costs seniors more money for drugs, as well as bloating the federal bureacracy?
Also, for the conservatives here… Hillary’s 1990’s health care plan had more of a pro-industry slant than the plans that are being tossed around today. In other words, the ideas which are being considered by Democrats now are more liberal than what Hillary proposed.
Anyway, all of the Democratic candidates (so far) can win (Obama, Edwards, Clinton) and they would all do a better job than Bush and Cheney IMO. I’m hoping Wesley Clark decides to run though. I think we need some military experience in the White House, in order to solve Bush’s mess in Iraq. My ideal ticket is Clark for president and Hillary for VP. Then after 8 years of President Clark, Hillary can run for president.
Big deal… we have a president who pretends he’s a Texas cowboy, even though he was born into a wealthy East Coast blueblooded family, grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, and went to Ivy League schools.
I guess we have a personal attack campaign to look forward to in 2008, since the Republicans can’t run on the old GOP platform (without anyone laughing) of
-reducing the size of the federal government
-reducing spending
-bringing integrity back to Washington
-protecting personal freedom/govt. off your back
-better when it comes to military/defense
None of those ring true anymore.
[quote]Petedacook wrote:
I heard something about Hillary getting kick backs from power companies in new york for some she played in authorizing a nuclear power company to charge OPEC prices for power.
Anyone know anything about it?
I am seriously concerned with hillary’s honesty. it seems she has been caught up in some shady dealings. [/quote]
As in Vince Foster leaving the White House, one of the most secure compounds on earth, and no one saw him leave? I guess its hard to sign out when you’re in the trunk of a car.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
hedo wrote:
And yes the Hillary machine is working overtime to dig stuff up on Obama. He’s got a lead and if she doesn’t nail him now the lead will grow.
Wrong again. Obama’s not leading the Democratic pack in any national polls. It’s not even close.
The GOP is screwed for 2008 and probably beyond. Bush will still be the president during the 2008 elections, and will still be an anchor around the GOP’s necks.
As far as smear campaigns go, Hillary Clinton is the most-smeared Democrat in America. She’s tough and it hasn’t stopped her. And at this point, it’s unlikely that any new dirt on Hillary can be dug up. So if it becomes a smear-heavy election, Hillary will probably win, because there are no surprises with her.[/quote]
Obama is the percieved frontrunner. Tell the MSM Hillary is…they’ll be pleased to know.
Th oppositon hasn’t even started on Hillary. This is her own party.
The anemic democratic leadership and outright obstructionism on Iraq will be their downfall. The voters don’t back a strategy of defeat and the dems don’t have a plan other then being against everything. That trick only works once then you have to deliver.
The bills they have approved in the house so far are turning in to disasters. Energy Independence by raising the tax on Domestic production…yeah boy that will encourage it.
Regardless of the motives, this kind of discussion of the candidates (all of them), who they really are and what they really stand for occurs far too infrequently in American society today. The last several elections it would seem the majority vote for a slick candidate who tells them what they want to hear, even if what they want to hear is far from what reality could ever be and often amounts to a load of bullshit.
It will be interesting to see the Hillary-Obama battle play out over the rest of 2007…it’s not inconceivable that they will both end up very bruised by 2008…which is what the rest of the Democratic field is counting on.
[quote]JT43 wrote:
Regardless of the motives, this kind of discussion of the candidates (all of them), who they really are and what they really stand for occurs far too infrequently in American society today. The last several elections it would seem the majority vote for a slick candidate who tells them what they want to hear, even if what they want to hear is far from what reality could ever be and often amounts to a load of bullshit.
It will be interesting to see the Hillary-Obama battle play out over the rest of 2007…it’s not inconceivable that they will both end up very bruised by 2008…which is what the rest of the Democratic field is counting on.[/quote]
I agree with you JT. Vigorous debate leads to better insight.
I wish the candidates would debate a little more free form then they do.
[quote]hedo wrote:
Obama is the percieved frontrunner. Tell the MSM Hillary is…they’ll be pleased to know.[/quote]
You’re joking, right? Ever read a newspaper, or maybe watch the news?
[quote]The bills they have approved in the house so far are turning in to disasters. Energy Independence by raising the tax on Domestic production…yeah boy that will encourage it.
[/quote]
Wow, the bills are disasters already? They haven’t even been enacted yet! That’s just incredible.
Your blind pathological hatred of Democratic Party is pretty sad. You’re also showing signs of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. Sorry, but the slogan “Anybody But Hillary” is not a political platform, and it’s going to be a loser at the polls.
Oh yeah, the story about Obama is a phony smear from the right wing… No big surprise, everybody could see that one coming.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Your blind pathological hatred of Democratic Party is pretty sad. [/quote]
Wow - did you just accuse someone of blind pathological hatred of a political party?
Wow!
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Well, I am no New Yorker, but I am still baffled about how pround New Yorkers could vote for her after that ploy. She is about as New Yorker as I am Californian - I mean, I have visited there and I know people who live there, but am I somehow qualified to represent California in the US Senate?[/quote]
Yeah right, like length of residency is a huge issue with the voters. Really insightful analysis there!
Kind of like John McCain, eh? In 2000 he called the Christian fundamentalists in the GOP scary and weird… just being honest, I guess. A few years later he figured out he’ll need their vote, and he went to speak at Bob Jones University with his hat in his hands, all humble and friendly-like.
Hmmm, I wonder why Hillary has been going to church all these years… probably because it looks good, eh? I bet she sneaks out the back door and goes to the racetrack.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Yeah right, like length of residency is a huge issue with the voters. Really insightful analysis there![/quote]
Well, it clearly isn’t much of an issue for New Yorkers, but elsewhere it is - otherwise, states wouldn’t have length of residency requirements for certain offices.
George Soros is now backing Obama. Hillary may be in trouble.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
hedo wrote:
Obama is the percieved frontrunner. Tell the MSM Hillary is…they’ll be pleased to know.
You’re joking, right? Ever read a newspaper, or maybe watch the news?
The bills they have approved in the house so far are turning in to disasters. Energy Independence by raising the tax on Domestic production…yeah boy that will encourage it.
Wow, the bills are disasters already? They haven’t even been enacted yet! That’s just incredible.
Your blind pathological hatred of Democratic Party is pretty sad. You’re also showing signs of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. Sorry, but the slogan “Anybody But Hillary” is not a political platform, and it’s going to be a loser at the polls.
Oh yeah, the story about Obama is a phony smear from the right wing… No big surprise, everybody could see that one coming.
[/quote]
Can’t you think of anything original boy. ALL of these insults have already been hurled AT YOU.
It’s obvious you are in over your head, now quit embarrasing yourself or you’ll have to change your screen name yet again.
Try and back one of your OPINIONS up with reason or a reference and then maybe the men will let you back in the conversation…back to class now.
[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Wow!
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Well, I am no New Yorker, but I am still baffled about how pround New Yorkers could vote for her after that ploy. She is about as New Yorker as I am Californian - I mean, I have visited there and I know people who live there, but am I somehow qualified to represent California in the US Senate?
Yeah right, like length of residency is a huge issue with the voters. Really insightful analysis there!
[/quote]
Where are you from? Because I’ll bet my left fuckin ball that it ain’t New York or New Jersey. Aside from Texas, no one is prouder of their states then we are.
If you don’t know what it’s like to come up in Jersey, then don’t tell me that you know what my problems are, how I think, or who I should be voting to represent me.
Because personally, I don’t want some hillbilly motherfucker who grew up in Shitsville, Arkansas telling me about the gang problem in Paterson and how they think we can fix it. If you’re not from here, then you don’t know.
An office in Harlem does not a New Yorker make, especially when it’s a stepping stone to where that carpetbagger wants to be.
[quote]
After the whole religious awakening bullshit, I remember her throwing God into every speech because she knew the biblethumpers would like it. She is a political whore, and I ain’t voting for her.
Kind of like John McCain, eh? In 2000 he called the Christian fundamentalists in the GOP scary and weird… just being honest, I guess. A few years later he figured out he’ll need their vote, and he went to speak at Bob Jones University with his hat in his hands, all humble and friendly-like.
Hmmm, I wonder why Hillary has been going to church all these years… probably because it looks good, eh? I bet she sneaks out the back door and goes to the racetrack.[/quote]
I don’t like McCain either, and I don’t think he’s any less a pawn of the GOP than Hillary is of the Democrats.
Of course, the whole thing with Democrats is supposed to be keeping God and the Bible and all that other crap where it belongs- in their personal life, and out of politics. Hillary began mentioning her “love for the lord” right after she figured out that there was alot more religious crazies out there than we all thought.
It’s a good strategy provided no one realizes the inherent hypocrisy, especially considering how liberal she is supposed to be.
I’d rather have a dumb fuck like Bush who makes no bones about who and what he is than someone like Hillary who lies and twists about it constantly.