| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: Are Democrats Blind? Posted by: Jag - [14828255] Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 18:22 I am not a Bush fan, I defend unwarranted attacks, but I see a ton of flaws in him. I am curious if the Dems see what a lying, unscrupulous and maniacal person Hilary is or how Edwards preaching of class warfare is symbolic of communism. I am leaning towards McCain, even though the immigration bill he put together with Kennedy was a bit over the top. | |||||||
| 1 | Pancho Villa ID: 47161721 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 18:50 |
I am leaning towards McCain, even though the immigration bill he put together with Kennedy was a bit over the top. But you approve of his campaign finance reform bill written with ultra-liberal Russ Feingold? | ||||||
| 2 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 18:53 | Don't we already have multiple threads discussing our thoughts on political candidates? | ||||||
| 3 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 19:20 | Edwards preaching of class warfare? You mean, that he bothers to mention that those "with" institute policies to ensure they get to keep theirs and share as little as possible? That isnt communism...thats reality. | ||||||
| 4 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 19:54 |
My thoughts are so special I need my own thread. Campaign finance reform is not a big issue with me. I don't believe even comrade Edwards believes the crap he spews. | ||||||
| 5 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:15 | Re: Edwards, I agree. But at worst he's only the second-most integrity-challenged candidate in the mix. The top honor goes to Mitt Romney. | ||||||
| 6 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:21 | Mitt reminds me of a Tele-Evangelist. | ||||||
| 7 | Pancho Villa ID: 47161721 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:27 |
The top honor goes to Mitt Romney. Really? What has Romney done that's more integrity-challenged than taking boatloads of money from a recently convicted(13 felonies)phony defense contractor to steer contracts ala Duncan Hunter? Campaign finance reform isn't a big issue for Jag, but immigration is apparently. Maybe McCain is concerned about the economic health of his home state as Arizona fims brace for new immigration sanction laws. | ||||||
| 8 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:29 | And I'm not a Hillary fan, either. In fact, from what I've seen, there are very few here, certainly very few among the regular posters. | ||||||
| 9 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:32 |
What has Romney done that's more integrity-challenged I meant political integrity regarding campaign issues, which is what Jag was discussing regarding Edwards. | ||||||
| 10 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:41 | PV, that was a state law sign by a Democrat governor. Attacking businesses to solve immigration is among the top of the stupidest ideas ever. | ||||||
| 12 | Pancho Villa ID: 47161721 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:54 | The bill was written and sponsored by Republicans. | ||||||
| 13 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 20:55 | It is moronic no matter what side does it. | ||||||
| 14 | Perm Dude ID: 101123112 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 21:22 | Moronic is attacking a bill for partisan reasons, then claiming a non-partisan reason for being against it when you get your partisan facts wrong. | ||||||
| 15 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 21:28 | PD, it is a little early to be drunk, even on New Years Eve. I have always been against going after businesses for hiring minorities and have posted so. | ||||||
| 16 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 21:30 |
...and Jag is still Jag. Comforting in a way. Knowing what jag will do/say without having to take the time to read his posts. PD was spot on with #14. | ||||||
| 17 | Jag ID: 14828255 Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 21:33 | My new year's resolution is I want to be more like Sarge. | ||||||
| 18 | Tree, in BC ID: 10025114 Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 15:30 |
My thoughts are so special I need my own thread. and by special, i think we all know what you mean... 
| ||||||
| 19 | Jag ID: 14828255 Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 17:59 |
That bus actually looks cool. I meant to say illegal immigrants in my post. | ||||||
| 20 | Pancho Villa ID: 47161721 Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 20:00 |
Jag wants to be more like illegal immigrants? That would sound strange coming from anyone else. | ||||||
| 21 | Jag ID: 14828255 Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 21:12 | I was talking about post 15, but if a Dem gets elected president, give me a taco and call me Pedro, because I know you guys will be giving them the farm. | ||||||
| 22 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 21:37 | really? And the Rep plan is what again? Oh yeah...amnesty. | ||||||
| 23 | walk Dude ID: 32928238 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 11:29 |
I dunno, I think the whole immigration thing is just a scare tactic to get the party that's supposedly "tougher on security" more votes. Why is this such an issue now? I think t's bigotry. And why are the Democrats blind? They are wimpy, but blind? When someone like Mitt Romney critices Huckabee for criticizing Bush's foreign policy (which sorta has not worked) saying that (paraphrasing): "Republicans should stick together and stand by their President and not resort to Democrat arguments" -- who's blind? Not even close. | ||||||
| 24 | Khahan ID: 561119313 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 11:40 |
Blind? I don't think they are any more blind than republicans. And while they're at it, I don't think they are any more or less corrupt, dishonesty, untrustworthy, duplicitous, snakes-in-the-grass, unreliable, two-faced or underhanded than the republicans. They are just dishonest and corrupt about different ideals. That's the only difference. Regarding Washington DC I'm going to quote The Joker: "This town needs an enema!" Hand pick 5-10% of the least corrupt because we need some experienced leadership. Then fire everybody else in congress, the whitehouse, the senate etc and hold elections with 1 caveat: No experience required. | ||||||
| 25 | sarge33rd ID: 99331714 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 11:43 | Cant find much to argue about in post 24. | ||||||
| 26 | Jag ID: 14828255 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 16:02 |
Sounds about right, except McCain. I always thought Gephardt and Dole were pretty honest also, Kucinich seems to be a straight up guy, too bad he is a wacko. Chris Paul has the crazy eyes and is a bit 2 faced. I hear all the time from Dems, that they think their party leaders are wimps, I find the opposite to be true, they are annoyingly loud, I believe the term 'screaming idiots' fits Reid, Pelosi and Clinton to a tee. Hilary's shrill voice drives me nuts. I had the sound off on my TV and just seeing Hilary talk gave the finger nails on the chalkboard feeling. | ||||||
| 27 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 454491514 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 16:18 |
Talking loud doesn't make one 'not wimpy'. The wimp label comes from their (lack of) actions, not the strength or volume of their rhetoric. 'screaming idiots' - aside from the sound of their voices, that's primarily because you disagree with their politics. If Hillary Clinton was someone you agreed with 85% of the time, you'd probably appreciate her 'screaming', even if you didn't care much for the sound of it. | ||||||
| 28 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 454491514 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 16:20 |
Chris Paul has the crazy eyes and is a bit 2 faced. Ron Paul? | ||||||
| 29 | Jag ID: 14828255 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 16:53 |
Sorry was working my Fantasy Basketball at the same time. I would vote for Chris before Ron, Chris is having a much better year. You may be right, Mith, but I dislike Pelosi even more than Hilary and her voice doesn't make my ears bleed. | ||||||
| 30 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 18:33 |
I'm just saying, Jag: 1. a politician can be both loud and weak, and 2. if they annoy you it likely has more to do with their politics or political affiliation than it does how loud they are. Also, I don't see how you can call Ron Paul two-faced. If you mean to imply that he in some way betrayed his party, I'd suggest that it was his party that betrayed him and anyone else who at any point believed in the GOP as a party of conservatives. The man has the strongest conservative credentials among all the candidates from both parties. Still, the GOP's cable TV bulhorn has decided to exclude him from their nationally televised debate Sunday night in New Hampshire - despite crushing every one of his Republican opponents in fundraising dollars over the lastt 3 months. | ||||||
| 31 | sarge33rd ID: 99331714 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 18:38 | I honestly believe MITH, that the Rep power-brokers fear Ron Paul, the same way the Republican-man-on-the-street despises Hillary Clinton. | ||||||
| 32 | biliruben ID: 5610442715 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 18:46 |
I find some of Ron Paul's economic ideas interesting, but anyone who says things like: ""Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." and takes money from racist organizations can't be considered a serious national contender. That said, I love to watch him shake up the Republican race, and the more debates he can worm his way into the better. | ||||||
| 33 | Jag ID: 14828255 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 18:48 |
I was referring to his stance of refusing to vote for any special programs, but then tries to get funding to promote Texas Shrimp. The guy has no chance because he looks goofy (beady little crazy eyes). I know it shouldn't matter, but it does. Leiberman would be a great Presidental candidate, if he didn't look like a nerd and sound like Eeyore. Ron Paul | ||||||
| 34 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 19:09 |
Bili Paul claims those aren't his words. Jag I don't know that you'll find an more steadfast opponent of earmarks. Find me a 10 term Congressman with no such blemishes. For the record, I don't think I could support Paul. I found him very intriguing as his campaign gained steam in the fall but I don't think I could get behind such an ardent isolationist foreign policy. And don't mind admitting my trouble getting past the idea of a creationist in the Oval Office. | ||||||
| 35 | Pancho Villa ID: 47161721 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 19:44 |
I don't think I could get behind such an ardent isolationist foreign policy. Paul is not an isolationist. He's a non-interventionist. | ||||||
| 36 | biliruben ID: 5610442715 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 19:51 |
Just to be clear, I'm not calling him a racist. He may or may not have written that, but it had his name on it. I guess we have to take him at his word, but either way it, and other similar statements, make him not-viable. He's not in the race to be viable, I don't think. He's using it as a platform to drum up support for his libertarian message. I don't like his present statements on race either, BTW. It's not racist, it's just deluded and naive. | ||||||
| 37 | Mattinglyinthehall Leader ID: 01629107 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 20:42 |
PV isolationist/non-interventionist Agreed. My sloppy use of the term. Bili Sounds like there's probably a bit more there than I've looked into. | ||||||
| 38 | biliruben ID: 4911361723 Wed, Jan 02, 2008, 22:54 |
This is what I read about it. The group over at VC are libertarians I can often agree with. | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | ||||||||