2008 American election

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
```what would you America haters do if the U.S. suddenly converted to Islam en masse?```


While your question is directed to ''America haters'' I hope you don't mind if I reply since your question is not directed to me.

While I personally find 'Sharia' equally objectionable to les talionis {which as you know, is demanded by certain 'biblical' fanatics}, I will allow people overseas to determine for themselves what their standards of conduct and morality are to be. Like President Washington, I believe that non interventionism is ideal for the USA just as it was in our Founders's days.

And like our Founders, I am a STRONG believer in disestablishment. Therefore, there will NEVER be any such massive conversions here. Let's thank our Founders' wisdom for that.:angel8:
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Democracy has to be secular, otherwise you end up with priveledged classes. Even if Muslims did overpopulate America somehow, wouldn't your constitution protect against applications like Sharia Law?
 

RomSpaceKnight

Council Member
Oct 30, 2006
1,384
23
38
62
London, Ont. Canada
All American politics is so far right of Canadian. Harper and his lot look like pinko-commies compared to Democrats. Republicans look like the German National Socialist Party when compared to the center of Canadian politics.

The war will be upfront in American voters minds. Followed by the deficit and religion in politics.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
my opinion of what george bush is doing right now, is a set up for the republican
party to be free of criticism by 2008 election

I think he is willing to sacrifice however many of the 20,000 soldiers who are
going to be sent to Iraq, along with however many are allready there, so that
when the Iraqi government "fails" to bring about any "peace"
whatsoever, they, then will be blamed for the failure, and the republicans
will be "off the hook", as the Iraq government will not have done what the
president told them they had to do by November 2007.

They, then can go into the 2008 run for the presidency claiming that they did
everything possible, and had no co operation from the Iraq government.

I believe he knows they will fail, but has to have a way of shifting the blame,
and of course, at least half of the american people will be sucked in, and
that is all he needs.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Republican Leading Candidate For 2008

Rudy Giuliani makes a striking pose ... in drag!

 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Aw Gopher.... not your finest argument.....but worth a try

But then the following isn't mine either....just thought I'd plop Hillary in for another stir of the pot....


http://www.nypost.com/seven/01302007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/i_really_resent_opedcolumnists_john_podhoretz.htm?page=0

'I REALLY RESENT'

HILLARY'S NEW IRAQ TAKE



Sen. Clinton: Starting to show her true feelings?




January 30, 2007 -- SEN. Hillary Clinton said over the weekend that "I really resent" the fact American troops may be tied up in Iraq in January 2009 - when she hopes to be president of the United States.
"I am going to level with you," she said. "The president has said this is going to be left to his successor. I think it is the height of irresponsibility, and I really resent it."
That's actually an interesting, even thought-provoking, formulation. It's rare to hear questions about difficult policies discussed in terms of personal resentments, but perhaps this is one of the areas where Hillary Clinton will blaze a new presidential trail.

**Imagine, for example, that President Bush had given a speech a few days after 9/11 declaring he really resented the fact that Bill Clinton didn't kill Osama bin Laden before Bush became president.
**Or that President Bill Clinton, in the wake of the slaughter of 18 American servicemen in Somalia in 1993, informed Americans about his real resentment of George Bush the Elder, who sent those servicemen into Somalia at the tail end of his administration.
**Really Resenting doesn't have to begin and end with foreign policy and military matters. President George Bush the Elder could have made public his profound resentment at the consequences of the Reagan tax-reform bill on the real-estate market, whose crumbling value in the late 1980s led to the recession that helped do Bush the Elder in.
**For that matter, Ronald Reagan could have spent 1982 expressing resentment at the recession caused by the necessity of choking off the stagflation of the Carter years. And on it goes.
**Now, of course, what Hillary means here is that since Iraq is "Bush's war," it's not cricket of him to let it go on past the conclusion of his presidency. The war is supported by no one but him, its presumed failure is solely his fault and his responsibility - and he should get it off the next president's plate.
Strange. You might think that if the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq in 2009 is unnecessary, the new president might take great relish in being the person to bring them home immediately. Under those circumstances, Hillary could begin her presidency as a hero, at least to her own voters.
What's more, if the war is going badly during the presidential campaign next year, with troops still in Iraq, the entire campaign will revolve around the question of how soon after Bush leaves office the big Bug Out can commence.
Not that the specifics of the campaign will matter all that much under those circumstances. If Iraq doesn't look much different in September 2008 from the way it looks today, nominee Hillary could show up at a debate against the Republican nominee stoned on mushrooms and start singing "Don't Fear the Reaper" while accompanying herself on the air guitar and still get elected in a walk.
Alternately, if there happens to be a major turnaround in the war and in Iraq's ability to build a civil society, then she (or whoever our next president is) will be under very little public pressure to draw down the troops on an excessively accelerated schedule.
So why the resentment?
There's a lot of talk on the Left these days about how inauthentic Hillary is as a candidate. But there's nothing inauthentic about her expression of resentment against Bush. After all, if he hadn't asked her and other senators to vote for a resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, she wouldn't have had to make a choice that she now regrets.
That original choice was almost certainly inauthentic: Hillary became a hawk, in all likelihood, because she wanted (as her husband once said during another war) "to maintain my political viability."
You want the real Hillary? The real Hillary is the Really Resenting one. Enjoy. jpodhoretz@gmail.com

The Wal-Mart Maiden of political trash talk ... and she is going to level with the people? LOL.. I wonder what the meaning of "is" is again again
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Commentary on Hillary's speech re her candidacy whine of blame against predecessors...

The presidency is not about Hillary, or any of her distinguished colleagues in the race. If anything, the presidency when established was about George Washington, whom the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they constituted the office. For any candidate, entering this contest to assure the nation that at least one of the two parties would nominate someone who holds at least as good a prospect as all candidates do of providing the leadership, maturity, stability, and dignity the presidency demands.​


In life we all start out, not with a blank slate, but with the cards we were dealt in the way of assets and liabilities, of strengths and weaknesses, of worries and opportunities. Just so with an administration - every administration finds some things on its plate going in, and leaves things on the plate for his or her successor.​

The Nixon Administration inherited the Vietnam War - already politically lost here in America when Nixon took office, though neither Nixon or Humphrey fully understood that in 1968. The Reagan Administration inherited the Cold War with Soviet influence at high tide, the military weakened, hostages being held by the warlike act of Iran, the Energy Crisis simmering, inflation roaring, and the economy stagnating.​

The current president inherited a stagnating economy and a country which had not been led to understand the simmering hatred of the Middle Eastern reactionaries who are determined to turn back the clock by a thousand years. Not to mention an opposition party which presumed to resent the judgment of the people of the several states which had conferred the presidency on him.​
The President of the United States should never whine about his or her predecessors or shift the blame away from himself for his or her own decisions.​

Anyone who presumes to whine now about burdens the office may present in 2009 should frankly confess that America need the leadership of someone else - that they themselves are not mature enough to face reality in that capacity.
 
Last edited:

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
Any more guesses needed on where the debate will go? If Hillary passes gas it will be written about by bloggers and adversaries. They will write about her attempt to implement the Red China healthcare plan back in the 90's. A bunch of old whitewater allegations will reappear. The word Liberal will be used in every second sentence, and if she says something negative about Bush she will of course be "against us" and thus earn a nickname like Taliban Hillary. An all out smear campaign will be engaged. They will be giving her purple hearts just so they can use it against her.

This political science stuff is easy.
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Hillary has been in the news quite often with dozens of engagements regarding her "I'm not sure yet" candidacy lol.

I have been listening to her thinking she may have something new because she is far smarter and way more slick than her husband ever was and thought she might spark my interest.... but strangely enough there seem to be three or four different Hillarys campaigning.

When I figure out which one is going to be the real Hillary..... well......I'll have to think on that one...

The democrats have enough candidates to make a football team.... none has been a sure shot for me.... the pubbies have a couple.... but maybe they are still sleeping.... who knows?

I just wish we could invent a television "polygraph" so we could catch the lies as they beam out across the nation....all the things they never get to.

You should compare some of the campaign speeches after they have left office.... it's a hoot.... A Grimm's Bros. Fairy Tale collection if their ever was one for modern times.

Still ... I don't have a vote either yet...maybe....someday.... sigh
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
She ain't no Slick Willy and she certainly ain't no Tammy Wynette.
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Kreskin

It would be easier if some where telephotogenically appealing eh?

Well I guess sex and politics are an historical mix.... hehe
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
Kreskin

It would be easier if some where telephotogenically appealing eh?

Well I guess sex and politics are an historical mix.... hehe

True. But did you see her at the Martin Luther King funeral (spouse..can't remember her name)? What a yawner of a eulogy. That was standup material for Slick Willy, Bush Sr etc. Easy pickins for those guys to bring the house down with tears of sorrow or laughter. She was quite uninspiring in tone and content. She had better crank it up a notch in her ability to inspire. Those past Presidents, including her slick hubby, could sell icecubes to the Eskimos by the caseload.
 

missile

House Member
Dec 1, 2004
4,846
17
38
Saint John N.B.
Just one comment on Bill: if every man received the sorts of sexual action he did, well, we'd be the happiest men in the world.:wave:
 

gc

Electoral Member
May 9, 2006
931
20
18
Perhaps you could explain what Clinton achieved, besides selling missile technology to the Chinese, getting BJs, sexualing harassing and assaulting women, firing missiles into deserts in Afghanistan and central Africa, stumping any attempt to interfere in the Rwandan genocide, ignoring the Constitution, lying under oath, and stealing furniture from the Parks Service, as his last act of his Presidency?
More importantly, what didn't he do...he didnt' spend $400 billion dollars killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis based on lies, running up the debt faster than president in history. He didn't set the reform movement in Iran BACK 10 years. He didn't veto a bill which could have potentially saved/improved lives based on purely idelogical reasons. He didn't spy on his own citizens (that we know of). He wasn't elected by the supreme court. The list goes on... ...although I will give you one more about Clinton, he pardoned 140 people (many controversial) on his last day.
 

mapleleafgirl

Electoral Member
Dec 13, 2006
864
12
18
35
windsor,ontario
More importantly, what didn't he do...he didnt' spend $400 billion dollars killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis based on lies, running up the debt faster than president in history. He didn't set the reform movement in Iran BACK 10 years. He didn't veto a bill which could have potentially saved/improved lives based on purely idelogical reasons. He didn't spy on his own citizens (that we know of). He wasn't elected by the supreme court. The list goes on... ...although I will give you one more about Clinton, he pardoned 140 people (many controversial) on his last day.

do you think his wife stands a chance of winning as their next president?
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
More importantly, what didn't he do...he didnt' spend $400 billion dollars killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis based on lies, running up the debt faster than president in history. He didn't set the reform movement in Iran BACK 10 years. He didn't veto a bill which could have potentially saved/improved lives based on purely idelogical reasons. He didn't spy on his own citizens (that we know of). He wasn't elected by the supreme court. The list goes on... ...although I will give you one more about Clinton, he pardoned 140 people (many controversial) on his last day.

Bush wasn't elected by the Supreme Court. If you're going to throw a jab, know what you're talking about.