Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by Spencer, Jan 5, 2007.
Well, EXCUSE ME, Markos/Huffington Jr.... but it aint the conservatives painted her as liberal. It's her own freaking words.... I said it several times... for the Dems, REALITY BITES!
Now they actually have to have a stake in it. And WTF CARES about a Senator's 'personality'?
I think your priorities are really screwed up
RE: Re: RE: Democratic Leadership
Well, it could have been worse... could have been John Kerry, He's got charisma... but they'd have to do a brain transplant first
Re: RE: Re: RE: Democratic Leadership
The democratic party is a joke right now, but that's hardly a newsflash. For me the root of the problem was AlGore rolling over in Florida for the good of the country. That was a pussy move, pure and simple. As much as Bush is an idiot, he would never have been so stupid and he would have fought to the bitter end.
If I had to vote today I'd probably go for Guilliani who is a sheep in wolf's clothing. Its funny, I'm a Democrat but I prefer the Republican presidential options at the moment: Rudy G or perhaps even McCain. Both would be leaders and Rudy G would be respected on the world stage.
I agree with you about Kerry, PFog. After all, look what a labotomy did for that joker Bush. I think its fair to say that the last presidential election was just plain embaressing, for both sides and for the country as a whole. Given that this is such a great country, were those two idiots the best we could muster???? C'mon, I'd rather have watched you and Don go toe to toe.
We do have amazing choreography.
Interesting take, NJGlen, but I wouldn't put too much stock in Rudy G. He's a ward-heeler politico at best. He was a master at creating fake controversy to keep in the spotlight. He was pretty much washed up as a politician until 9-11. His embodiment of NYC after that tragedy did him and the city and country great service, but he should have quietly left the stage by mid-2002. He's been out of his depth since he stopped being a federal prosecutor. True, he's more qualified than GWB was in 2000, but so is Jon Bon Jovi.
Yeah... and he ruined the 'ambience' of 42nd street and Times Square... Sheesh!
Two of the best mayors NY ever had were Koch and Giuliani
NYC homicides by Year
1989 1904 From Koch
1990 2245 Dinkins
1994 1561 rudy takes office
2001 649 (not including the September 11 terrorist attacks).
and, no, Rudy cant take credit for ALL of that... but it helped.
BTW: Spencer, kwitcher whining..... The Dems are gonna put on their show hearings! From tony's own home daily rag
Here's the rich part:
Yeah... the same Patrick Leahy that got kicked off the Intelligence committee for deciding for himself what should be secret or not and revealed classified documents. Which just might be why he didnt subpoena.
well, I just don't know if Rudy has enough energy. According to Fog's statistics, he was obviously running from door-to-door across the five boroughs stopping New Yorkers from killing each other. Don't know if he has the ability to do that nationwide.
But I suppose if that's what you want in a president ...
Naw, don... it's just called 'Leadership' which as a Dem you aint seen any of since Pat Moynihan....
You'll find that this is a rarity for me to post something on this sort of topic, because I normally DESPISE mixing politics with sports. Ugh, nothing worse than campaign volunteers handing out stickers and signs outside sporting events. But I noticed that NJ Glen said he might like to vote for McCain. I used to feel the same way, but now, it scares the hell out of me to think of any fellow Democrats voting for him...he is NOT the man he once was. Here's something my friend sent me yesterday:
"MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, reading a Think Progress post nearly word for word last night, reminded me that it’s time to update the list of John McCain’s flip-flops. From last night’s Countdown:
The winner [of the daily Worst Person in the World] is Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona, [who] told us today that he knew that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough,” and that he was “sorry” for anybody who voted it thinking it would be “some kind of an easy task.”
Sen. McCain on CNN on Sept. 24, 2002: “I believe that the success will be fairly easy.”
Sen. McCain on CNN on Sept. 29, 2002: “We’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.”
Sen. McCain on this network on Jan. 22, 2003: “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.”
What’s that’s called again? Flip-flopping? Senator, we keep all the tapes of these interviews. C’mon!
It’s time to update the list of McCain’s biggest flip-flops as he transforms himself from maverick hero to right-wing hack. We’re up to 13 now.
* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell’s debate coach.)
* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.
* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.
* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won’t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.
* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
And now McCain has gone from insisting that the war in Iraq would be easy to insisting that he’s always said the war in Iraq would be hard. And yet, you’ll still find most of the political establishment arguing that McCain’s strength as a candidate is his credibility."
I'm not posting this to start a debate on any of these topics. I don't suppose I'd ever convince somebody like PFog to adopt my politics and vice versa. My point is that I have serious questions about someone who was once very practical and someone that most Americans could identify with and definitely saw as a great potential leader of this country, but who has now abandoned many of his own personal principles (esp the campaign finance reform stuff...that would have been fantastic for US politics) simply to gain favor with the hardcore right wing in order to get the GOP nomination. Pathetic sellout.
btw, here's the website where that's from, with links to supporting articles, etc: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9541.html
Here's MY thinking on McCain... now you are seeing why conservatives dont like him.
Not that Olbermann has a single thinking brain cell in his head, but that's another issue.
I don't know much about Olbermann, but he was was really secondary, or maybe even tertiary, to the story. The blogger who compiled all that info just happened to be watching him and whatever it was the KO read on the air triggered the blogger's urge to compile the list. So you're right, it's a different issue altogether.
And you raise an interesting point w/ McCain as viewed by conservatives...why would he be willing to so easily pull a 180 on his beliefs and convictions when it's not going to win him any votes from 'true' conservatives anyway? Probably because the R party is no longer run by 'true' conservatives?