Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Moose Jaw, in between the Moose's butt and nose.
5,152 posts, read 8,527,286 times
Reputation: 2038
Advertisements
Come on, it is not at least, humorous that Barack Obama sounds just like Iraq Osama?
I just say it to myself for a laugh.
Seriously, though, why are all the media outlets saying that Clinton won NH last night (which she did with the total # of votes) without mentioning that Obama and her got the same number of delegates (they actually determine who is nominated, don't they) out of last nights primary?
Come on, it is not at least, humorous that Barack Obama sounds just like Iraq Osama?
I just say it to myself for a laugh.
Seriously, though, why are all the media outlets saying that Clinton won NH last night (which she did with the total # of votes) without mentioning that Obama and her got the same number of delegates (they actually determine who is nominated, don't they) out of last nights primary?
I think Obama is a breath of fresh air and Hillary Billary is like a stale cigar
I agree with about 1% of Obamas political philosophy... He is a leftists leftist and even though all the talk about "hope" and "change" is extremely appealing during these times, it doesn't change the fact that he is what he is. Leftists don't bring hope. They bring taxes, more 'well-intentioned' government and more regulation on anything and everything. They call it "hope" just like the "Patriot Act" used the word "Patriot".
With that said, of the Democratic candidates, other than Kucinich, I like him the best as a person. He is refreshingly honest and I do actually believe that he believes what he says. In order to exist in American politics, you must be a calculating politician and Obama is, but unlike the others, at his center lies a truth that he genuinely believes in.
I always judge candidates as such; if this were 1930's Germany and they were running for office, how would they have addressed the Jews, in the face of popular support for their removal/extermination?
There is no question in my mind that if being anti-abortion would ensure 65% of the vote, Hillary Clinton would be pro-life.
There is no question in my mind that if being anti-abortion would ensure 65% of the vote, Hillary Clinton would be pro-life.
Did it ever strike you that not every candidate feels passionate about EVERY issue? That there are issues that they don't particularly feel one way or the other about personally? That they can change their mind on an issue?
I personally don't give a c*ap about bike paths. I could be for or against bike paths. Just because I pick a position ("for bike paths") doesn't mean I can't change my mind when someone says "having bike paths will raise taxes." And it doesn't mean that I couldn't change my mind the other way too ("Having bike paths will mean less polution.") Frankly, bike paths just don't mean that much to me. Whatever the majority of the public wants, well, I could support that.
I believe we should allow our candidates to pick sides on positions the same way. Usually they have a couple of issues that they are passionate about and they simply aren't that passionate about the rest of them.
It's OK to change ones mind on an issue as a result of a deep, philosophical examination contrasted against ones own life experiences. Liberals growing up to become conservative would be an example of this. Conservatives realizing, over time, that life isn't quite as rigid as their political dogma suggests would be another.
It is not a particularly flattering thing when your belief structure is based around whatever makes you "most popular" and "most likely to be elected", or, when you really believe something but take a different position in public for the benefit of political gain.
Political animals are what they are. Hilliary Clinton is such an animal. She is the picture in the dictionary next to the definition.
Any changes or variances in her beliefs don't come from a core set of morals or a finite structure of beliefs- those changes come from pollsters and political strategists that ultimately dictate what she thinks and believes. Romney, much the same.
So, it isn't that she doesn't care about bike paths and is willing to take the 'populist" position in order to have the least unfavorable impact... it's that she doesn't care about bike paths but is deeply concerned about convincing cyclists that she does so they will vote for her, but let the pollsters tell her that political voting calculations have shifted away from supporting bike paths and the very cyclists that she once did photo-ops with and supported with all her vigor are suddenly a "past mistake" and she has now "rethought the issue".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
