Obama Clinton

LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
edited July 2007 in Strut Central
So according to the press the big news is that Obama and Clinton disagree on meeting with bad guys.Q: Would you meet with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Syria... ?O: Yes. We need to change our strategy and start engaging other countries.C: No. It would just reward dictators.C: O is naive and inexperienced.O: C is Bush Lite.C: That's mean, your supposed to be nice.O: Your like Bush we need a change.Or something like that.What do you think?Should the next president meet with the leaders of North Korea, Iran, Zimbabwe?Should Bush have met with the leaders of Vietnam, Saudi Arabia and China?Is Obama Naive? Mean?Is Clinton Bush Lite?Is their fight news worthy?I'll be back.
«1

  Comments


  • keithvanhornkeithvanhorn 3,855 Posts
    they gave different answers, but essentially, they have the same view. the question was whether they would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Iran, N. Korea, etc, in their first year in office. both of them have advocated diplomacy and faulted bush for basically being childish in refusing to speak to these countries. however, the issue got blown out of proportion because obabama simply said "yes", while hillary said that she would wait to make sure those leaders wouldnt use the meeting as "propaganda".

    to me, those answers are near identical. i dont think obama is going to fly down to cuba without knowing that Castro has good intentions. clinton wants to portray herself as tough, so i think she got a little carried away by labeling obama "naive". accordingly, she got what was coming to her with the "bush lite" comment.

    hopefully this will blow over because i'd rather see them talk about important issues than trade one-liners in the newspapers.

  • rootlesscosmorootlesscosmo 12,848 Posts


    hopefully this will blow over because i'd rather see them talk about important issues than trade one-liners in the newspapers.

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    obama is going to loose.

    america is more racist than sexist.








    AND WE ARE OFF!


  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    obama is going to loose.

    america is more racist than sexist.








    AND WE ARE OFF!


    If you want to thread hijack you need something that is less stupid that Obama=Black Clinton=woman.


  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts

    america is more racist than sexist.

    they are neck and neck...misogyny has been alive in well in this country since the beginning

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    Naw naw, definetly not trying to thread-jack or get all sabadolo in this thread. I would love to have Obama as a president but honestly it's not going to happen for the reason being Americans are more racist than sexist. It would please a large segment of the American population to see a white woman in power rather than a black man. Well, I don't know about "please" but you get my point Laserwolf.

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts

    america is more racist than sexist.

    they are neck and neck...misogyny has been alive in well in this country since the beginning

    I'm not a woman so i can't speak on it. Girly at times, but never a woman. But I will say, people rarely clutch their purse, cross the street, or bust some she speaks so well bullshit to a white woman.

  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts

    america is more racist than sexist.

    they are neck and neck...misogyny has been alive in well in this country since the beginning

    I'm not a woman so i can't speak on it. Girly at times, but never a woman. But I will say, people rarely clutch their purse, cross the street, or bust some she speaks so well bullshit to a white woman.

    no one bats an eye at misogynist lyrics, wifebeater jokes, clothing named after wifebeaters, the words bitches and hoes are uttered without resistance, phrases like "she pretty good...for a girl" are used without reservation, James Brown and Ike Turner, Jerry Lee Lewis, notorious woman beaters, but hey, they can write catchy tunes,so its overlooked(Im guilty of that one)(the old bullshit line, "They are from a different time and place" is always used by apologists)...its out there dood.

  • rootlesscosmorootlesscosmo 12,848 Posts

    america is more racist than sexist.

    they are neck and neck...misogyny has been alive in well in this country since the beginning

    I'm not a woman so i can't speak on it. Girly at times, but never a woman. But I will say, people rarely clutch their purse, cross the street, or bust some she speaks so well bullshit to a white woman.

    I am afraid of white women. VERY AFRAID.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    Not sure if America will elect a female or black president in 2008

    But I don't believe they would elect the following..

    Obese President = Everyone hates fat people.

    Bald President = has one ever been elected??

    "Little Person" President = Height Makes Might

    Dreadlocked President - The barber lobby is too powerful

    Openly Gay President = Most of his cabinet would have to come out of the closet.

    Narcoleptic President = College kids would create a drinking game based on how far into a Presidential Address the dude would fall asleep.

    Two-Headed President - Personally I would vote for one, but only if one head had far left ideals and the other had far right ideals.

  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    Not sure if America will elect a female or black president in 2008

    But I don't believe they would elect the following..

    Obese President = Everyone hates fat people.

    Bald President = has one ever been elected??

    "Little Person" President = Height Makes Might

    Dreadlocked President - The barber lobby is too powerful

    Openly Gay President = Most of his cabinet would have to come out of the closet.

    Narcoleptic President = College kids would create a drinking game based on how far into a Presidential Address the dude would fall asleep.

    Two-Headed President - Personally I would vote for one, but only if one head had far left ideals and the other had far right ideals.

    Eisenhower was bald, but then again that was 50 years ago...

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    Eisenhower was bald, but then again that was 50 years ago...

    Greatest use of a hat in U.S. history...



    Plus his opponent was just as bald as Ike...but apparently didn't own a cool hat.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    Naw naw, definetly not trying to thread-jack or get all sabadolo in this thread. I would love to have Obama as a president but honestly it's not going to happen for the reason being Americans are more racist than sexist. It would please a large segment of the American population to see a white woman in power rather than a black man. Well, I don't know about "please" but you get my point Laserwolf.

    The press is more interested in the fight between Clinton and Obama than they are in the issues that divide them.

    Soulstrut is more interested in racism and sexism than it is in discussing issues.

    Democratic voters will be pulling for Clinton because they will buy your stupid analysis.

    Given the choice most voters, left, right and independent will judge the candidates as individuals on the merits.

    Joe Racist may think that Blacks as a group are too dishonest (or lazy, or whatever) to be president. But they will judge Obama as an individual and decide whether he has what it takes.

    Likewise with Joe Misogynst. He may think women are too emotional (or delicate or whatever) too be president. But they will judge Clinton as an individual.

    Most or these racists and sexist voters will be voting against who ever the Ds run anyway.

    On the other hand, many people will use your calculus to vote for Clinton over Obama even though they like Edwards best. The racist and sexist voters are at least voting their beliefs.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts


    hopefully this will blow over because i'd rather see them talk about important issues than trade one-liners in the newspapers.

    Agreed. In part.

    I think the question was about an important issue.

    I would like to know when a US president talking to a world leader was used for propaganda against the US.

    I would like to know which countries have changed their ways because the US president refused to meet with their leader.

    I'm thinking that talking to people is better than not talking to them. Given that, I like what Obama says more than what Clinton says.

    To expand, I see Clinton embracing the War On Terrorism as a new global cold war where countries are either with us or against us. I think, that like Bush, she will be going after countries more than after AL Qaeda. Like Bush, she will be trying to expand US interests in the Muslim world by backing dictators and sheiks with horrendous human rights records.

    I don't know, but maybe Obama would chart a smarter course that would target AL Qaeda and other terrorist groups and support democracy and self determination in the Muslim world.

    American is bellicose than pacifist so Clinton wins that match up too I suppose.

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    Not sure if America will elect a female or black president in 2008

    But I don't believe they would elect the following..

    Obese President = Everyone hates fat people.

    Bald President = has one ever been elected??

    "Little Person" President = Height Makes Might

    Dreadlocked President - The barber lobby is too powerful

    Openly Gay President = Most of his cabinet would have to come out of the closet.

    Narcoleptic President = College kids would create a drinking game based on how far into a Presidential Address the dude would fall asleep.

    Two-Headed President - Personally I would vote for one, but only if one head had far left ideals and the other had far right ideals.


    why do i even bother.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    Not sure if America will elect a female or black president in 2008

    But I don't believe they would elect the following..

    Obese President = Everyone hates fat people.

    Bald President = has one ever been elected??

    "Little Person" President = Height Makes Might

    Dreadlocked President - The barber lobby is too powerful

    Openly Gay President = Most of his cabinet would have to come out of the closet.

    Narcoleptic President = College kids would create a drinking game based on how far into a Presidential Address the dude would fall asleep.

    Two-Headed President - Personally I would vote for one, but only if one head had far left ideals and the other had far right ideals.


    why do i even bother.

    To remind us all that racism is alive and well???

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    Naw naw, definetly not trying to thread-jack or get all sabadolo in this thread. I would love to have Obama as a president but honestly it's not going to happen for the reason being Americans are more racist than sexist. It would please a large segment of the American population to see a white woman in power rather than a black man. Well, I don't know about "please" but you get my point Laserwolf.

    The press is more interested in the fight between Clinton and Obama than they are in the issues that divide them.

    Soulstrut is more interested in racism and sexism than it is in discussing issues.

    Democratic voters will be pulling for Clinton because they will buy your stupid analysis.

    Given the choice most voters, left, right and independent will judge the candidates as individuals on the merits.

    Joe Racist may think that Blacks as a group are too dishonest (or lazy, or whatever) to be president. But they will judge Obama as an individual and decide whether he has what it takes.

    Likewise with Joe Misogynst. He may think women are too emotional (or delicate or whatever) too be president. But they will judge Clinton as an individual.

    Most or these racists and sexist voters will be voting against who ever the Ds run anyway.

    On the other hand, many people will use your calculus to vote for Clinton over Obama even though they like Edwards best. The racist and sexist voters are at least voting their beliefs.


    uhh. dude it's not it's not my stupid calculus it's reality. It fucking sucks and it's depressing but that's how shit is going to end up.

    Racist democrats exist, they're usually uber-patronizing.

    Joe Racist may think that Blacks as a group are too dishonest (or lazy, or whatever) to be president. But they will judge Obama as an individual and decide whether he has what it takes.

    Likewise with Joe Misogynst. He may think women are too emotional (or delicate or whatever) too be president. But they will judge Clinton as an individual.

    Uhh...okay. I hope i'm wrong and you're right that yes the black hatteur will be revealed to just hate blacks as a whole but as individually think they're swell.

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    Not sure if America will elect a female or black president in 2008

    But I don't believe they would elect the following..

    Obese President = Everyone hates fat people.

    Bald President = has one ever been elected??

    "Little Person" President = Height Makes Might

    Dreadlocked President - The barber lobby is too powerful

    Openly Gay President = Most of his cabinet would have to come out of the closet.

    Narcoleptic President = College kids would create a drinking game based on how far into a Presidential Address the dude would fall asleep.

    Two-Headed President - Personally I would vote for one, but only if one head had far left ideals and the other had far right ideals.


    why do i even bother.

    To remind us all that racism is alive and well???

    i guess so since you always seem to come out on cue just to belittle the problems of racism in america.

    where's mikeseaversnikes?

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    Some people see fire and throw water on it.....others throw gasoline.

  • izm707izm707 1,107 Posts
    To say that Obama was wrong and Hilary was right is just a poor attempt from Hilary's supporters to make Obama look like a rookie. But seriously, i think everybody knows meetings do not happens because the president decided it. No need to give diplomacy 101 to the masses, they dont give a shit...They just wanna know if POTENTIALLY he would meet Castro or Chavez, right here, right here...Meaning would he have the balls to do it. And for me, the answer was clear. Hilary have no balls, but we all knew that alreaydy. And he just meant "i would meet them". That's all people wanted to know. Now if someone don't want his president to meet Castro then he don't vote for him...Simple. There's plenty assholes scared to deal with Cubans running for presidency so it's not like there's no choice.

  • keithvanhornkeithvanhorn 3,855 Posts
    Enough about race, or gender.

    Unless you've been living under a rock the past year, you should know that the polls all say that Obama and Hillary are electable. Case closed. If and when the country does not elect either of them, then go ahead and revisit this thread. Until then, lets talk about something else.

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  • Young_PhonicsYoung_Phonics 8,039 Posts
    Some people see fire and throw water on it.....others throw gasoline.

    why do i even bother

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

    Uhh...okay. I hope i'm wrong and you're right that yes the black hatteur will be revealed to just hate blacks as a whole but as individually think they're swell.

    When I lived in Oklahoma in the 70s I met the most virulent openly racists people. All these people had a neighbor or co-worker who was Black. Okmulgee Oklahoma has/had a large Black population. (Because nearby Henryetta had expeled all Blacks back in the 60s.) These racist people all belived that they knew the one good Black. They were happy to have their co-worker or neighbor over for dinner, give them a ride to town or help them paint their house. So yes, in the South, as other Southerners will attest, Black hatteurs hate Blacks as a whole, but as individuals think they are swell.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    So yes, in the South, as other Southerners will attest, Black hatteurs hate Blacks as a whole, but as individuals think they are swell.

    Not only is it true, the opposite is generally true about the North.

  • DuderonomyDuderonomy Haut de la Garenne 7,794 Posts
    Would America vote in an atheist[/b] president?

    More or less likely than a black president?

    More or less likely than a female president?

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    Would America vote in an atheist[/b] president?

    More or less likely than a black president?

    More or less likely than a female president?

    Atheist is the least likely. Unless her opponet is fat.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    Would America vote in an atheist[/b] president?

    More or less likely than a black president?

    More or less likely than a female president?

    Atheist is the least likely. Unless her opponet is fat.

    Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that Young Phonics stands a better chance at becoming President than I do.

    God Bless America!!!


  • america is more racist than sexist.

    they are neck and neck...misogyny has been alive in well in this country since the beginning

    But I will say, people rarely clutch their purse, cross the street, or bust some she speaks so well bullshit to a white woman.

    saba does


    thats actually a pretty good zing.


    I think.



    and yeah, there will never be an athiest president. people would rather have presidents make decisions because "god told me to!"

  • sabadabadasabadabada 5,966 Posts
    The New York Times will be presenting more positive news from Iraq (and so will follow the rest of the heard) because Hillary is the only top tier democratic candidate who hasn't completely drank the surrender cool-aid on that issue and the New York Times is clearly and unabashedly supportive of Hillary. She will be able to reposition herself in time for the democratic primary as the candidate who, although she supported ending the war, did not support a precipitous withdrawal and had the foresight to allow the surge to work, blah blah blah. Obama, Edwards, the smirk from Delaware, are all too far to the left and too wedded to the notion of failure in Iraq to correct themselves. After the primary, the bad news flood gates will be reopened for the general election.

  • The New York Times will be presenting more positive news from Iraq (and so will follow the rest of the heard) because Hillary is the only top tier democratic candidate who hasn't completely drank the surrender cool-aid on that issue and the New York Times is clearly and unabashedly supportive of Hillary. She will be able to reposition herself in time for the democratic primary as the candidate who, although she supported ending the war, did not support a precipitous withdrawal and had the foresight to allow the surge to work, blah blah blah. Obama, Edwards, the smirk from Delaware, are all too far to the left and too wedded to the notion of failure in Iraq to correct themselves. After the primary, the bad news flood gates will be reopened for the general election.

    you don't know what your talking about.

    1) kucinech and gravel are the only candidates talking about an immediate withdrawl of all troops. obama, clinton and edwards are for some troops being pulled immediately, but a gradual total troop withdrawl that is on a time table. biden wants to establish 3 seperate provinces in iraq which would require that we not withdraw right away.

    2) i'm guessing you dont read the nyt but heard that there was an op-ed piece on monday where the author said that the military was making progress in iraq. aside from the fact that the author ignored all of southern iraq in making his determination, this had nothing to do with the nyt editorial page. it was an op-ed. there is news today that the total death toll in iraq was 74 for the month of july. some might consider that positive news, but i don't think people are standing up and cheering.
Sign In or Register to comment.