archenemy Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 And by saying that we haven't evolved to the point where we would elect a woman leader, one is stating that the US is lagging behind India, England, Phillipines, Ireland, Pakistan, Norway, Canada, Nicaragua, New Zealand, France, Switzerland, Turkey, Iceland, Bermuda, Finland, Liberia, Peru, etc etc etc. Can you really be serious to think that we are so backwards? I refuse to believe this assertion. We refuse to accept the metric system. That ought to tell you something right there. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Metric system = mental fluoride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 the black helicopters' fuel guages display in liters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-rock Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 People often cite the criticism that Obama is too young and inexperienced as a reason why he may not receive the party nomination. However, experience in the Senate has not been viewed as a positive qualification. The last Senator elected president was JFK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 first Roman Catholic president. Was he black? I get JFK and MLK mixed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 You think Hillary would choose Taco Time or Taco Bell? She's more of a World Wraps kind of person. Now Bill...Taco Bell Chalupa with extra baja sauce all the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Yes, you can! This is the thing the Republicans have had on the Democrats. When people spoke of support for Bush, this was was what they cited. He held his views with conviction. He was a "strong leader". You've also just described Hitler. Frankly, her not taking a firm stand on the war ealier on is the only thing that really bugs me about her. Now as for her Republican analog McCain: I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. That fucker is shifty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Archenemy, have you ever visited a die hard blue state? Its backwards. I believe most of the countries you listed have multiple political parties. Could be wrong. I like Australia's voting system the best. You list each candidate in order of favorite to least favorite and then each canidate gets a percentage of your vote. So if you vote for someone in the green party who has no chance of winning you can list the democrate number two and your vote still counts. Brilliant!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 when I asked my mom why she was voting for Bush the second time around she said "He will protect me and he believe's in God!, did you hear about what Kerry did in Vietnam?" That was the end of the conversation for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 hillary was in fact taking the info that she was given. WMD's, etc. The White house gave the Senators bullshit "facts." As well as Democrat's did not want to appear soft about war in a post 9/11 climate. As for McCain I can't believe he is supporting anything that Bush has done after Bush smeared him in the '00 Republican Convention, saying he had an child with a "black" women. God forbid! Check this out, its hilarious. http://jack-orin.blogspot.com/2007/01/george-w-rap.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 hillary was in fact taking the info that she was given. WMD's, etc. The White house gave the Senators bullshit "facts." Don't think I buy that excuse. If I knew the war was bullshit in Oct 2002, and all my friends knew the war was bullshit, why can't a fucking senator figure it out? The "facts" were coming from the White House...that should have been a dead giveaway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 when I asked my mom why she was voting for Bush the second time around she said "He will protect me and he believe's in God!, did you hear about what Kerry did in Vietnam?" That was the end of the conversation for me. That is funny....same thing on my side. Ask a really good friend why they voted for Bush and the response is "I believe in morals and family values". That kind of response always has messed with me. Do the republicans have more family values than the Democrates? WTF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 when I asked my mom why she was voting for Bush the second time around she said "He will protect me and he believe's in God!, did you hear about what Kerry did in Vietnam?" That was the end of the conversation for me. That is funny....same thing on my side. Ask a really good friend why they voted for Bush and the response is "I believe in morals and family values". That kind of response always has messed with me. Do the republicans have more family values than the Democrates? WTF. You can explain the rationale of a good percentage of Bush voters with this statement: "I voted for Bush because I believe in insert RNC's meaningless platitude-of-the-week here. Can I resume shopping now?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 when I asked my mom why she was voting for Bush the second time around she said "He will protect me and he believe's in God!, did you hear about what Kerry did in Vietnam?" That was the end of the conversation for me. That is funny....same thing on my side. Ask a really good friend why they voted for Bush and the response is "I believe in morals and family values". That kind of response always has messed with me. Do the republicans have more family values than the Democrates? WTF. different, not necesecelery more. they voted for bush because the values line up with theirs. Dems should be doing the same. they just don't call them values - usually it's 'rights' or 'causes'...or something else that doesn't sound religious. how many threads will there be that put down bush voters because of this when it is AGAIN the same, but opposite as Dems. oh yeah..tolerance, right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 (edited) [how many threads will there be that put down bush voters because of this when it is AGAIN the same, but opposite as Dems. At least 30 or so. OMG Edited January 23, 2007 by kevbone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Oh, so now you're posting photos of the stupid southern hicks you like to bash. Look at that guy on the left (punny, eh?). He looks like a real goober. Bet he's got a stupid sounding accent en everythang! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 That kind of response always has messed with me. Do the republicans have more family values than the Democrates? WTF. different, not necesecelery more. they voted for bush because the values line up with theirs. Dems should be doing the same. they just don't call them values - usually it's 'rights' or 'causes'...or something else that doesn't sound religious. I have to say, underworld, I think you are fundamentally wrong. In my opinion, conservatives generally support legislation that codifies and supports their own morals, which are generally religiously-based, and attempt to prevent others from doing what they find "immoral." I can only speak for myself, but in my opinion, liberals generally support legislation permitting even actions which, they themselves, may find abhorrent. In this way, I believe liberals generally do a better job of supporting liberty, by preventing religious/demographic groups from using legislation to enforce matters of their own personal ethics. So, in this way, I do not think you can say that they are the same thing. Conservatism tends to support a single moral system at the exlusion of others , while liberalism tends to protect the free action of all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.