yea, go evangelicals! i don't know what this says about republicans. if i had no choice but to elect a republican, romney is a no brainer. i know mccain is left of the extreme right on certain issues, but i don't trust that guy any farther than i can throw his grumpy Bush loving ass.
hillary is looking better than i expected. if she gets California i think obama is gonna have an uphill battle.
yea, go evangelicals! i don't know what this says about republicans. if i had no choice but to elect a republican, romney is a no brainer. i know mccain is left of the extreme right on certain issues, but i don't trust that guy any farther than i can throw his grumpy Bush loving ass.
hillary is looking better than i expected. if she gets California i think obama is gonna have an uphill battle.
huckabee is looking for a vp nod or something, hes basically throwing romney under a bus
as vulgar as it is, it does reveal the possibility that sexism superscedes racial bias in a presidential candidate? dont know if i used the term supercede correctly but you know what i mean. anyhow i see a black/female/any other ethnicity as prime minister here in canada before america ever gets close to the same with their president, you guys(i mean your country as a whole) did kinda elect bush 2 terms in a row?!?!
Ah, we already had a female PM. Not that she lasted long. But still...
I totally forgot about that! but there's the proof. Canada for president!
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
as vulgar as it is, it does reveal the possibility that sexism superscedes racial bias in a presidential candidate? dont know if i used the term supercede correctly but you know what i mean. anyhow i see a black/female/any other ethnicity as prime minister here in canada before america ever gets close to the same with their president, you guys(i mean your country as a whole) did kinda elect bush 2 terms in a row?!?!
Ah, we already had a female PM. Not that she lasted long. But still...
I totally forgot about that! but there's the proof. Canada for president!
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
BILL KRISTOL: Look, the only people for Hillary Clinton are the Democratic establishment and white women. The Democratic establishment -- it would be crazy for the Democratic Party to follow an establishment that's led it to defeat year after year. White women are a problem, that's, you know -- we all live with that.
(laughter)
JUAN WILLIAMS (National Public Radio correspondent and Fox News contributor): Not me!
HUME: Bill, for the record, I like white women.
KRISTOL: I know, I shouldn't have said that.
HAHAHA! I read that on salon. I love Juan Williams response, It's a good thing for Kristol Superbowl was happening that day.
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
This says a lot more about you than it does about world history.
lol. how's that? I'd say given the extremely small pool of female leaders from which to choose a "good" one, it actually says more about world history than it says about anything else, i.e there's been pitfully few female leaders in world history.
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
This says a lot more about you than it does about world history.
lol. how's that? I'd say given the extremely small pool of female leaders from which to choose a "good" one, it actually says more about world history than it says about anything else, i.e there's been pitfully few female leaders in world history.
in any case, O, I am open to your suggestions.
Portia Miller kept the status quo in Jamaica for a while there, if that counts for anything. And Jamaica's economy is pretty volatile...
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
This says a lot more about you than it does about world history.
lol. how's that? I'd say given the extremely small pool of female leaders from which to choose a "good" one, it actually says more about world history than it says about anything else, i.e there's been pitfully few female leaders in world history.
in any case, O, I am open to your suggestions.
Portia Miller kept the status quo in Jamaica for a while there, if that counts for anything. And Jamaica's economy is pretty volatile...
man you're not really presenting a strong argument for historically good female leadership with your posting of a fictional president. that's actually sorta fucked up.
anyone else bugging that Idaho, home of White supremacy in America, is going nuts over Obama?
Maybe some perceived stereotypes of white people based on media reports of a very vocal, very minority, far right fringe lunatic contingency will be dispelled this year.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
also harvey needs to stfu cuz hes advocating for fuccking ron paul
Actually, I'm advocating for some significant change and it just so happens that Paul is the only one really talking about that.
And lately I've been seriously considering giving my vote to Obama. He's certainly presidential. I like the anti-war rhetoric he was spouting when I saw him speak last year. And I'm all for having the right black president.
But anytime I've voted for a major party candidate, I've been burned badly. Bill Clinton was an especially hard pill to swallow in that in '92 when I saw him speak he sounded much like Obama does now...especially with the anti-war rhetoric. Yet as president, Clinton went on to bomb Baghdad anytime he damned well pleased.
I very much want to believe Obama, but if he's really aligning himself with a bunch of One World, eugenicist scum...then Paul it is.
At the very least, he's addressing how foul the IRS really is. And if you talk to anyone actually interested in change, withholding our collective tax dollars almost always ends up where that discussion leads. Paul cuts right to the chase, wishing to empower common citizens against a corrupt system that illegally takes advantage through brute power and brainwashing-levels of coersion.
Meanwhile, Obama throws the word "change" around like a Nerf boomarang...and I've still yet to hear what any of his "change" would actually look like beyond a friendlier face at the podium.
Clinton went on to bomb Baghdad anytime he damned well pleased.
please be serious.
He's getting reality and Tom Clancy novels confused again.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Clinton went on to bomb Baghdad anytime he damned well pleased.
please be serious.
On June 26, 1993, Clinton bombed Baghdad in retaliation for an alleged but unproven Iraq plot to assassinate former President George Bush. Eight Iraqi civilians, including the distinguished Iraqi artist Layla al-Attar were killed in the raid, and 12 more were wounded. This kind of unilateral action in response to an unproven charge is a violation of international law. The legal excuse given by U.S. officials, which they relied on in justification of the bombing of Libya in 1986, is the right to self defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. But that Article requires that the response be to an immediate threat to the retaliating party, clearly not the case, and therefore a legal fraud.
Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.
I'm hoping the Calif. numbers will tighten up as more results come in. The news just said Alameda Co. polls are staying open till 10 if there's still a line of people waiting to vote.
Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.
Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.
Comments
yea, go evangelicals! i don't know what this says about republicans. if i had no choice but to elect a republican, romney is a no brainer. i know mccain is left of the extreme right on certain issues, but i don't trust that guy any farther than i can throw his grumpy Bush loving ass.
hillary is looking better than i expected. if she gets California i think obama is gonna have an uphill battle.
I can't think of a good female leader in world history.
(THAT'S SEXIST!)
seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.
U Dunny. Thatcher ruled!
HAHAHA! I read that on salon. I love Juan Williams response, It's a good thing for Kristol Superbowl was happening that day.
I think Mit's done a pretty good job of wedging himself in there to begin with but yeah, so far,
This says a lot more about you than it does about world history.
lol. how's that? I'd say given the extremely small pool of female leaders from which to choose a "good" one, it actually says more about world history than it says about anything else, i.e there's been pitfully few female leaders in world history.
in any case, O, I am open to your suggestions.
Portia Miller kept the status quo in Jamaica for a while there, if that counts for anything. And Jamaica's economy is pretty volatile...
oh yeah, Arroyo and Aquino in the Philippines.
man you're not really presenting a strong argument for historically good female leadership with your posting of a fictional president. that's actually sorta fucked up.
Maybe some perceived stereotypes of white people based on media reports of a very vocal, very minority, far right fringe lunatic contingency will be dispelled this year.
Actually, I'm advocating for some significant change and it just so happens that Paul is the only one really talking about that.
And lately I've been seriously considering giving my vote to Obama. He's certainly presidential. I like the anti-war rhetoric he was spouting when I saw him speak last year. And I'm all for having the right black president.
But anytime I've voted for a major party candidate, I've been burned badly. Bill Clinton was an especially hard pill to swallow in that in '92 when I saw him speak he sounded much like Obama does now...especially with the anti-war rhetoric. Yet as president, Clinton went on to bomb Baghdad anytime he damned well pleased.
I very much want to believe Obama, but if he's really aligning himself with a bunch of One World, eugenicist scum...then Paul it is.
At the very least, he's addressing how foul the IRS really is. And if you talk to anyone actually interested in change, withholding our collective tax dollars almost always ends up where that discussion leads. Paul cuts right to the chase, wishing to empower common citizens against a corrupt system that illegally takes advantage through brute power and brainwashing-levels of coersion.
Meanwhile, Obama throws the word "change" around like a Nerf boomarang...and I've still yet to hear what any of his "change" would actually look like beyond a friendlier face at the podium.
wow she looks slightly evil
Ground zero for Clinton hatred.
please be serious.
He's getting reality and Tom Clancy novels confused again.
U.S. Attacks Baghdad for Four Days During Ramadan
December 16-19, 1998
Read up on your read ups...
http://www.ccmep.org/usbombingwatch/1998.htm#ramadan
He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?
What if he wins Texas and Pennsylvania?