I think Obama is truly dangerous. Hillary isn't non-volatile either, and McCain's no safe route. But Obama sounds dangerous to me.
He speaks nothing but change, but peace, and yet through all these inconsistency, he still has the audacity to do some more of the same crap.
I think all 3 prospective candidates are bad. Not a single one is good. Ron Paul should be up there, not any of these idiots.
Bravo, bravo!
Amazing how we get three different examples of bad politics in one campaign. Obama, the schemer, trying to keep his hands clean while letting others do his dirty work (Mr. North, have a seat over here...), Hillary, who at this point is just digging as deep as she can for any toehold in anything, and McCain, who is laughing all the way to the bank as the Dems chew each other up, and meanwhile he's doing all the things the other candidates are being accused of, but not being called on it.
Ron Paul, imo, is about the only one who's even talked about trying to steer America back on the path of being a loose capitalist democratic republic. Even McCain is seeming like he wants more of an oligarchy or dictatorship, and don't get me started on Hillary Marx or Che Obama.
Yes, and made a suitably arrogant speech about it as well. Why did we even bother to have delegates when he can just declare himself winner before the DNC anyway?
Posts: 810
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Maine, USA
IGN: Bleudrgn2010
Server: Lawolf
Guild: celestia
06-04-2008, 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIrP3r
I rather see a black "man" as president of the united states than seeing a white trash woman (who also looks ugly) to be the president.
So no women as president, will only fuck things up.
Women is supposed to do bussnies shit and soft things like that. Not lead USA.
I mean comon, Hillary is a arrogant bitch who only wants the power.
Her attidude looking at her campains says it all.
"We already won", "We are there". Pure bullshit.
If I could vote, I would vote for Obama, he is atleast not a arrogant bitch like Hillary.
Erm, that's utterly, completely, and ridiculously wrong. Unless you have solid scientific proof that women's brains are less competent than men's, women have the exact same potential and right to be the president of our country than anyone else. I pity to no end ANY women who end up being in a relationship with you or are involved in any way with you for that matter.
And I personally do not like Obama, nor McCain. It's a good thing our government is set up to not allow presidents too much power, based on what some of you guys have said, I doubt some of those radical things are going to happen (like stopping us from leaving the country or becoming a dictatorship or anything else like that o_O). Out of the three, I'd've wanted Hillary to be president, but that obviously won't happen. I've heard great things about Ron Paul and I think it would've been interesting to see how things would go if he got further in the race, but of course that didn't happen either. I guess we can just sit back and watch what happens with (I'm assuming) Obama.
Last edited by Bleudrgn2010; 06-04-2008 at 03:31 PM.
Posts: 5,121
Join Date: May 2006
Location: MS, USA
06-04-2008, 03:40 PM
It's not going to be good. He says "It's time to change the policies of the past". I'm sorry, but the past was working. It's until Bush came into office that our country was good.
If he changes the 'policies of the past' and leads America down a 'new road'....I fear he may be indirectly reffering to the constitution, and legal rights. He could mean a new road as in Government control. I do remember Clinton's candidacy, and Bush's. Even Bush didn't scare me as much as Obama does. Bush I knew what was going to happen, War.
Obama on the other hand...May show us things worse than War.
Posts: 810
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Maine, USA
IGN: Bleudrgn2010
Server: Lawolf
Guild: celestia
06-04-2008, 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidanRyuko
It's not going to be good. He says "It's time to change the policies of the past". I'm sorry, but the past was working. It's until Bush came into office that our country was good.
If he changes the 'policies of the past' and leads America down a 'new road'....I fear he may be indirectly reffering to the constitution, and legal rights. He could mean a new road as in Government control. I do remember Clinton's candidacy, and Bush's. Even Bush didn't scare me as much as Obama does. Bush I knew what was going to happen, War.
Obama on the other hand...May show us things worse than War.
Would Congress really allow things like that to happen? Obama, after all, hasn't really been in politics a huge amount of time and thus can't have amazing relations with the other people of the rest of the US government, right?. Is the trust in the Congress really so low that you guys believe things like that would happen? >_< I really don't know much of politics, but I know the US government is set up quite strong and to make such radical changes as what you guys are suggesting would take a lot of corruption, time, effort, power, threats, convincing and probably everything else a person can possibly do to make those things happen. I don't know much of the state of our Congress, but personally, I trust they will not allow things like that to happen.
But also, 'policies of the past' makes me think of simply the things Bush has done. Though that statement does seem to make the impression of further in the past, I'm not sure.
Last edited by Bleudrgn2010; 06-04-2008 at 04:03 PM.
Would Congress really allow things like that to happen? Obama, after all, hasn't really been in politics a huge amount of time and thus can't have amazing relations with the other people of the rest of the US government, right?. Is the trust in the Congress really so low that you guys believe things like that would happen? >_< I really don't know much of politics, but I know the US government is set up quite strong and to make such radical changes as what you guys are suggesting would take a lot of corruption, time, effort, power, threats, convincing and probably everything else a person can possibly do to make those things happen. I don't know much of the state of our Congress, but personally, I trust they will not allow things like that to happen.
But also, 'policies of the past' makes me think of simply the things Bush has done. Though that statement does seem to make the impression of further in the past, I'm not sure.
Well, in the past eight years they've given really unprecedented powers to the Executive Branch, in complete contravention of the Constitution, including the right to declare military action, the right to illegal search and seizure, and the rights to ignore habeus corpus and the Geneva Convention, so maybe it's not so hard to see after all.
U.S. governement used to be slow to change, but new technology and increasing propoganda from some and pressure from the public is changing that, unfortunately.
Posts: 4,040
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
IGN: Squishface
Server: Mushpoie
Guild: Solstice
06-05-2008, 04:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moshineko
U.S. governement used to be slow to change, but new technology and increasing propoganda from some and pressure from the public is changing that, unfortunately.
The whole of point of 'checks and balances' was to force the government to move slowly and with careful thought towards constitutionality. Unfortunately, the short-sightedness of the average citizen along with the influences americans are subjected to through various media outlets, doesn't build to a slow moving government.
The best I can hope for from someone like Obama is that he become another Clinton - all talk, no action. The worst I fear from him is another Jimmy Carter - something this country really could not afford.
Posts: 79
Join Date: Dec 2006
IGN: Reflector
Server: Lawolf
06-06-2008, 05:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleudrgn2010
Erm, that's utterly, completely, and ridiculously wrong. Unless you have solid scientific proof that women's brains are less competent than men's, women have the exact same potential and right to be the president of our country than anyone else. I pity to no end ANY women who end up being in a relationship with you or are involved in any way with you for that matter.
Yes, they have the right to be canditate.
But comon, "hillary" is a bitch, simple as that.
If women run USA, everything would just fuck up.
They don't have the balls to bring war if it's needed, they will just sit around making clothes and pretend it didin't happen.
If I had to choose a woman (forced to, to save my own live) i would not fucking choose an ugly old bitch like Hillary.
06-03-2008, 08:00 PM
Linear Mode
