Clinton
 

better be shot, because she better not win this damn election,
and who the hell votes for mccain
New Hampshire has some very backwards hicks

Clinton will be your first female President...mark my words.

Who the hell votes for McCain? Who would you have the republicans vote for instead? Or are you going to suggest they not be republicans?

Clinton only won New Hampshire b/c she turned on the water-works and pulled the sympathy card. NH voters are infamous for voting crazy, so don't let this primary be any indication of the upcoming 11 months.

For the Democrats, the safest thing to do would be to run Hilary with Obama as her VP.

The republicans are basically f*cked in this election. Romney is a mormon, which won't quite draw that evangelical vote that the Republicans usually count on. Mike Huckabee is the only candidate that has any chance whatsoever of not making an embarrassment of himself in the polls.

And don't even get me started on Ron Paul...

So Clinton only won because she cried and NH is crazy and we shouldn't pay attention to them, but our best chance is Clinton, so we should all do what they did?

What the hell does that mean?

Mike Huckabee has no chance until SC and he'll burn out of money if she sneezes in Michigan. You may be looking at Rudy Rising once we hit Michigan, and the Super Tuesday states will show much promise for a lot of folks.

Whats wrong with Ron Paul and where John McCain in your estimation?

Hilary Clinton is always a front-runner for the mere fact that her last name is Clinton. And you know darn well that NH voters historically vote weird in comparison to the other states. I'm just saying that had she not cried in an attempt to humanize herself, she would not have pulled it out in NH. Women are a sucker for the waterworks, and Clinton snagged the majority of the women's vote in NH.

And I didn't say that OUR (America's) best hope is for Clinton to win. I said that the best chance for a Democratic victory in the 2008 elections would be to run Clinton, with Obama as VP. I personally feel that our nation is not ready for an african american president. Nothing racist to it, I simply feel that most americans would feel more comfortable with Clinton in office than Obama. With Obama as VP, he could dull the talk of him not having enough experience, and then run for president and win in 4 or 8 years.

Mark my words, THE REPUBLICANS WILL LOSE THIS ELECTION. Bush has been too wreckless in the last 7 years for America to vote in another republican. I think that americans see through the hype of McCain and Gulianni. Huckabee is a new face in the presidential picture and brings real republican values to table. He's not concerned with making the other candidates look bad or feuding with them, he is, in my summation, the best man for the job in 2008.

And on to Ron Paul. Paul is a damned Libertarian, he has absolutely no business gunning for the GOP nomination. If he wins, we may as well kiss our asses goodbye. Paul would single-handedly dismantle our government and everything that our nation hasworked for for the last 232 years. Ron Paul winning would be the worst thing to ever happen to America. Texans must be loony to elect him for like 10 straight terms.

Its not so much what you’re saying that I’m arguing with, its how you’re saying it. Like for example, “NH historically vote weird.” I’m missing what’s weird here. Half the time they catapult candidates to victory, and every time they vote for who they think is the best candidate. I think we can look at everyone they’ve rallied behind and say, with a win or a loss, that they were the correct choice. New Hampshire is one of the better parts of America for the sheer fact that they ignore the headlines, the media hyping, and the wallet and vote for the best viable, “weird” candidate.

I’m not sure why you’d think the country is more ready for a woman (where there are vast and inherent differences) than an African-American. And what does McCain have in the way of hype? By August his campaign was in the dust. I’d say there was almost no base in that statement. Huckabee’s last pickup will be South Carolina if anything at all.

Real republican values? From Huckabee? On what position? I’m not sure what values the republicans have when half of them believe in big government and interventionist policy, and the other half want anti-federalist policies and non-interventionist policy. I really need you to tell me what the values are.

Ron Paul is more republican than the rest of the damn party in my opinion. If the Big Government Spendocrats are your opposing party, why then are you all for big government.

The issue is no longer that we tax and spend, its how we tax and spend. And really with the republicans, its more no-tax and spend and increase the deficit.

did any one think that Clinton's crying seemed contrived?

she’s a politician. And a Clinton, and I love them but...I mean did ya have to ask?

By NH voting "weird" all I was saying that they usually vote independently of the rest of the nation.

And it's just a perosal belief that our nation would be more willing to accept a woman in office than an african american, especially is that woman's last name happens to be Clinton. Nothing against Obama, I would personally rather see him win it than Hilary, but I don't feel that the rest of the nation shares that sentiment, but I could be wrong, who knows what the 300 million other people in this country are thinking.

And how can you say that McCain's campaign has no hype? He's been bragging that he's going to run for the last 4 years. How's that for hype?

So you believe Ron Paul is a Republican? He's a LIBERTARIAN. He ran on their ticket in '88. He's basically a constitutionalist, which is not a bad thing, but adhering strictly to the constitution w/o any wiggle room is quite ignorant in today's world.

As far as Huckabee goes, he seems the least interested with all the political bullsh*t, and most interested in actually standing for something. He brings to the table a strong christian background (he was actually a former baptist miniser), leadership experience, he's anti-abortion, he's anti-g@y marriage. I do disagree with him on some points, like his amnesty proposals and his advocation of the Fair Tax (like it would ever get passed anyways), but overall he seems like the best man for the job in my opinion.

Obama-rama!!! All the way.

Actually I can't vote yet, but the only thing I ask of you is not to vote for Romney. I live in a mormon family and I can tell you first hand that he'll outlaw alcohol, tea, tobacco, tats the whole nine yards. :P

But seriously.... he will.

So based on your support of his cadidacy, you're pro-life, anti-*** marrige, and anti-amnesty.

Not to start the subsequent bitch fight when the 15 year old army comes with their bumper sticker arguments, but what is your opinion on these, if I may.

Me?

WHY TEA?

Because the prophet wants to control his sheep. :P (ya mormons are told not to drink tea its true)

but tea does nothing bad

I know. In fact studies have shown it to be good. Sigh... I wish people wouldn't be so god**** blind in their obedience

im sorry dude but mormons are kind of ridicolous, with the leader having found some plates, then losing them showing no one

Someone really needs to sneak a snuke up the bitch's snizz. Obama sucks too though.

I really want to give my two cents in here because I love following politics especially American but I feel that nothing I say will have any value because I am from Canada although it will affect me it’s not up to me .

With that said I am a big fan of both if I had to vote right now I would vote for Obama-rama but that could change


But I admire Hilary a lot I mean come on her husband is a total babe/

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f2...ll-clinton.jpg

nice south park reference. :thumb:

What does alcohol or tabacco do thats bad?


less to do with your nationality...more to do with the lack of grammar and foolish arguments.

plenty of things
but i picked the most unusual one out

I was kidding sorry next time I will check my spelling and grammar......sir

No worries, I'm not much for bitch fighting:beer:

I am pro-life. I feel that abortion is wrong, and constitues murder. I agree that the mother has the right to do with her body as she pleases, but when her choice affects the life another, albeit an unborn life, it is wrong.

I am not necessarily anti-g@y marriage, but I do believe that marriage SHOULD be between a man and a woman. But it is not my place to tell a grown person what to do with their body. If homosexuals want to say their vows, exchange rings and have a beautiful ceremony, I am all for it. Everyone deserves to be happy. But throwing the "marriage" label on it is what seems wrong to me, call me old fashioned.

And I am not necessarily anti-amnesty, but I believe it should b done right. Entering this country illegally is a felony. Felons should not be rewarded with amnesty. I believe that the illegals should be deported back to their home country, and then alloted a route to re-enter the country LEGALLY. This would be the best way to handle the situation, but it wouldn't be logical. Rounding up all of the illegals (estimated at 5-25 million) would be an impossible task. I don't know, I guess that's why I'm not president..

It's her unborn, unthinking fetus and will end up being her child, no one elses. It's hardly fair to stick a rape victim with a child she doesn't want, hell it's hardly fair to stick anyone with birthing something they want. Plus banning abortions just leads to back alley abortions which is very messy and will cause not only problems for the mother but problems with society in general. Clean abortion clinics with professionals who know what they're doing are a very good thing. Though I tend to stay away from argument this subject because I'm not the one carrying it for 9 months.

It's not like someone can control their sexual desires and I think everyone should have the chance to be married. It's good for a relationship and offers a sense of fidelity and security that all happy couples deserve. We can't keep clinging to old traditions especially ones that just encourage prejudices and close-mindedness. Homosexuals deserve every right heterosexuals deserve just like african americans deserve every right white americans deserve.

I think it's ridiculous it's even an issue and we should stop listening to christians on this subject, the bible is wrong on many things and half them don't understand the bible. Also dictionary definitions have been changed several times throughout the history of it, why can't we change this one too? The dictionary isn't law and basing an argument on it is ridiculous (I realize you didn't say this I'm more just stating something that bugs me when people argue against it.)

Our economy would be fucked over (even more so) if you got rid of all the illegal immigrants in our country. Aside from that I can hardly blame them for wanting to come over. The majority of Mexicans that are middle aged to older men who cross the border on there own to get a job and then they send cash to their families over the border because they just can't make fair wages over there which is The United States's fault and we have no interesting in fixing it or trying to help. America launched a huge predatory lending spree on Mexico like 35 years ago and it's been a huge factor in Mexico's now poor economic situation. Then Mexico hired an America accounting group to help sort it out and with the help of the US Government Mexico began building all the low wage malquiladoras and they working conditions are pretty sub standard for every country and have turned back allies of cities like Juarez into basically killing fields for Mexican women. Anyway, the farmers from Mexico are being forced from there land and sent to work in factories. This smashes possibly generations of culture and history for these people and take away the only life that they have ever know. Many people simply move to the city and work in the factories there for sub standard wages so they can go home to there 3 room shitty houses and try to raise there family, but many also seek the border as a possibility. Meanwhile the US continues to push Mexico into a minimum pay war with other countries to establish them as a low cost alternative to Asian manufacturing. This way US companies can keep up with there slave labor wages and at the same time save on sending it over sea by sending it across the border. The United States has put Mexico into a complete quagmire and leaves them no practical solutions to get out.

I don't really get the whole abortion argument. Personally, I don't think it constitutes murder, but why would it matter even if it did? Hunting constitutes murder, war constitutes murder, the death penalty constitutes murder, going to KFC and grabbing a bucket of chicken wings constitutes murder. In the United States, it would appear that murder is generally considered a-ok so long as it's benefiting society in some way or another, and the legalization of abortion bears far too many benefits for it to be justly held down by these imbecilic Christians.

It obviously belongs to the father as well.


I agree somewhat. I just think that in cases like this the baby could be put up for adoption, rather than aborted. I realize that our adoption and foster care system is already packed to the brim, but even in cases of rape as you stated, there's still an innocent child's life at stake. Maybe I'm a bleeding heart, I dunno. I just think abortion is wrong.

I think your just being a wee bit stereotypical. If abortion is banned, I don't think women will be troliing around back alleys with a coat hanger trying to abort their unborn children left and right. If it's banned, they will simply birth their children. Perhaps I'm an optimist, but I believe that even if you don't want your child, someone else does.


I agree 100% that every person has the right to be happy (within reason, we've all seen "To Catch A Predator" on DateLine lol).I'm all for homosexuals joining together in a life-long bond, but I just have trouble calling it a "marriage." But they most certainly deserve the same rights and securities as a heterosexual couple. I hate to seemingly be close minded, but that's just how I feel about it.

You have every right to your own opinion. I didn't base my stances on the bible or christianity, just on my own personal beliefs.

Our economy always needs all the help it can get, but hiring illegals is not the answer to economic prosperity.While these illegals make more than they would ever make in mexico, they still earn very meager wages here in the states, which is unfair to them. They also pay no income tax, which is unfair to the other hard-working americans who do. I do realize that we need these immigrants in order to make the cogs of our economy turn, but we must do things right, These people came here ILLEGALLY. I realize that had good reason to leave mexico, but they sill broke the law nonetheless, and should not be rewarded with full amnesty for that.

What I personally believe we should do is to offer illegals a ROAD to amnesty. Give them the option to either go back to their home country and return here legally, or let them serve in the armed forces for 4 years, and then grant them their amnesty.

I agree that they have little incentive to stay in mexico, but that is hardly America's fault. How is it our fault that mexico has no minimum wage or labor laws? I'm stumped on this one.


A predatory lending spree? You do see the contadiction with that statement, right? No one forced mexico to do anything.


This is a sad truth. Mexico does nothing to take care of it's impoverished. I have been to mexicao before and seen it first hand. It is not america's fault that mexico is in such poor shape, but we should be doing much more to help. We need to expedite and simplify the process of coming to the US legally, no excuses.


The US has been infamous for pimping out our labor. I doubt that Mexico is a "low cost alternative" in comparison with child-filled factories in cambodia and loas, but they still do the work for an unfair wage. While the wage is undoubtedly unfair, it is still money. Pimping our workload out to mexico only puts more money into their weak economy, which is helps them.

Did you seriously just compare taking the life of an unborn child to scarfin' down a KFC chicken wing? How does killing a child benefit society?

Hunting is obviously murder. I only condone hunting when it is a way to obtain food. If you're just sittin' on your porch and shooting cats with a shotgun, then there's obviously something wrong with you.

Abortion is murder. It is taking the life of another human being w/o their consent. There's no way around that. It has nothing to do with imbecilic Christians, or imbecils of other religions.

Serious question: Does anyone believe in compramise around here? Is anyone a moderate?

There is no compromise when it comes to unwarranted murder.

They both constitute murder. Killing a child generally wouldn't benefit society, but aborting an unborn one could have its benefits. First, as Crowquill mentioned, legalizing abortion would leave us with far less rape victims giving birth. Second, legalizing abortion would leave us with far less women unfit to raise children giving birth. Third, and most importantly, legalizing abortion would provide an avenue out of some situations in which a pregnant woman's health is at risk (or situations in which the fetus' health is at risk).

Unwarranted? It's absolutely warranted in most cases. Christ, it's not like women are going around getting pregnant, waiting a couple of months and aborting the fetuses for the hell of it.

The problem with the abortion argument is that it is one mother of a grey area. It's all about where you think the line is of what is "life" and what's not, and honestly there's no real way to judge so we are left with a conundrum.

For instance you could compare a fetus to a person who is in a coma who will wake up. They both are unconscious. Neither can feel. But obviously neither want to die.

While I see the argument for why some might think its okay, I truly don't think it is. There are just so many better answers. The movie "Juno" immediately comes to mind. Very good movie BTW.

In situations like teenage pregnancy which are primarily in my experience where abortions happen the father usually leave. This just happened with a friend very recently in fact and you can hardly expect a rapist to stick around now can you? Also childbirth is painful not many woman want to go through with it.

I repeat, childbirth is painful. If it was just likeshitting out a child more people would probably go through with it and then if more people went through with it we'd start having problems housing all these children because everyone who didn't want their child would put them up for adoption. I'm not big on population control type theories, in fact I detest them, but fetuses aren't humans they could be but so could other things I won't get into that is unnecessarily vulgar yet we don't impose a ban on self-pleasure.

Um...most people going to abort their child usually feel pretty strongly about getting it aborted and in some cases birthing the child isn't an option for both the fetus and the mother. There would be back alley abortions and it would be a mess, it would be a very huge problem. I realize everyone wants to believe the best for people but being optimistic and thinking everyone wants to have a child is being very naive.

If they deserve the same rights and securities as a heterosexual couple they deserve marriage. Seeing as thats both a right and a sense of security in the relationship.

It's not like we went into Mexico and said "Hey guys! Come to America and help our economy!" They just illegally crossed the border yeah for very understandable reasons and got jobs. Now theres a lot of them working, millions if you were to tell them all to go back we'd start having a lot of problems.

A meager US wave is much higher than a meager Mexican wage you realize that right? It's not like they're getting an extra dollar a year over here, that wouldn't be worth it. They're making much more over here.

So what do you want us to do? Send them all the millions back and then face the even more serious problems we would be facing? Like what to do with all the jobs Americans won't do but need to be done?

I'm sorry but are you serious? I wouldn't even want to serve in the armed forces for a year let alone four and I would hardly expect anyone else to want to serve in the armed forces especially for this war that is fucked up in too many ways to get into. Also in many ways you're sending them off to their death. I don't think I need to get into the issue of racism in the army (remember all those lovely photos in certain jails a few years ago?) They wouldn't be treated fairly in the army and that war is disgusting and should never have happened. These people just want to support themselves and their family, they don't want to die for a country they may never receive citizenship for because they didn't live long enough.

Argh did you decide to completely ignore nearly everything I typed? Mexico DID have a thriving economy at one time. Mexico had vast oil reserves that made them a country in strong competitions with others in the oil market but as I said America started its little lending campaign and held the oil as collateral putting Mexico in somewhat of a fix. We expected them to pay off loans while taking there main source of income, which isn't a surprise we've always put oil first.

Mexico's government is partly to blame for there problems but you aren't listening America can't just sit here and say "It's Mexico's problem" when it was also very much the fault of America. I'm sure if the Mexican government had the ability to just magically eliminate poverty in their country they would in a second but the fact is they don't. They aren't able to offer low interest loans or create good industry wages for people at factories, it's not like they're in the situation for kicks.

I don't think you really understand the problem with malquiladoras. These are factories set up by AMERICAN BASED COMPANIES IN MEXCIO FOR LOW WAGE LABOR. That's the key thing, people are working in conditions very similar to some asian factories. The Mexican government doesn't have the ability to say no to these factories because they're owned by major American companies like walmart and if they were to say something they run the risk of finacial and diplomatic seclusion from the US in a time when aid is very much needed but we won't give it because we have no interest in serving anyone else but ourselves. More people need to realize just how much of a pile of crap these "War on Terrorisms" and "Getting Rid of Sadams" missions are. If we really had interest in helping countries we would be in Darfur right now and we would also have been in Mexico along time ago.

How do slaughter houses benefit society? By pumping up obesity and blood pressures and creating some of the most disgusting industries ever? Anyway there's a difference between animals and unborn and unthinking fetuses. I think Animal abuse and the meat industry is more akin to child abuse than abortion anyway and if we're going to continue to argue abortion we shouldn't sit here with our apples and oranges when the oranges aren't necessary.

I'd hate to further the off topic but I feel compelled to interject here and ask if you wouldn't mind clarifying what marriage is to you? I'm only assuming that it's not just about a life long commitment, but also about procreation. If I'm right, does that mean couples that can't have kids (or don't want any) shouldn't be allowed to call their union marriage either?

Marriage in modern terms is simply a way of expressing a higher degree on the commitment scale than a simple long-term relationship.

My opinion on the abortion matter is very departed from the norm, but as a smart man once said, "when everyone thinks alike; no one thinks."

The only solution to the moral dilemma in this country known as abortion is to stop people from procreating. I don't know if we have to tie every guys tubes, or remove women's ovaries, but the fact is that there are too many unintelligent people having babies, and that actuall leads to many of societies problems - murder, drugs, you name it. How could you say any crime committed was not in some way linked to a lack of intelligence. I believe people who are interested in reproducing should be required by law to take an I.Q. test. The minimum score would be 100, and in some cases a person could have a slightly lower I.Q., but generally have good character and the ability to refrain from anger, which would make a good parent.

I am like a slightly liberal moderate, but one issue I just don't agree with liberals on is being pro-abortion, because no one can, or has ever been able to prove that a baby inside the womb doesn't having feelings or thoughts, and therefore cannot be considered a living human person.

As I see it, there is only one solution, and that is for so many unsmart people to stop having babies, and they can have all the sex, and I'm sure they will. Also rape cases are a tricky one; I guess I don't understand why women don't take a morning after pill any time they are raped. (grant it, they might not have their thoughts together, but I wish it would cross their mind)

You cannot take away a persons moral right to create life. Simple as that. You can encourage safe sex and educate people but you cannot take the right away.

Intelligence isn't directly connected to murder and drugs. I know plenty of smart people who do drugs and there's plenty of smart murders. Most serial killers while messed up have to be pretty intelligent to get away with a series of murders. Your logic is, well illogical. Also not letting people have children because of their IQ is ridiculous and unfair Adolf. IQ tests are flawed anyway and you'd have to know for sure what the smart gene is and isn't and we can't know so it wouldn't be accurate. The proof of genetic hereditation is scant and weak, do some research.

That logic can go both ways you realize that right?

You can't get the morning after pill until you're 18 and I don't know remember right but I don't think it's a guaranteed to work thing so once again, bad logic based on shaky ground. Maybe before saying things like this you should really research to make sure you know what you're talking about.

Yes I know I cannot;

There is no law in place forbidding people from procreating due to a lack of intelligence

Also, you cannot take away a mother-to-be's right to abort due to Roe V. Wade.

I was merely offering up an alternative solution to a problem that we both know exists. You believe abortion is wrong. I believe abortion was wrong and am interjecting on a societal point about how I feel there are way too many unintelligent people in our society, and due to many people's quickness to anger; they are incapable of raising kids who have the courage to think for themselves:
on that point, let me elaborate:
When parents have a quickness to anger, and beat their kids, they are setting them up forever to have low self-esteem, and also a belief that all authorities are out to get them. This latter belief also leads them to be forever the victim in this world of governmental lies, and corruption.
Now, don't get me wrong there are plenty of governmental lies and corruption, but when people begin to look for lies and corruption to validate their world view, then there starts to be a problem.
So, we have unintelligent people breeding and creating unintelligent children who lack the courage to think for themselves, due to low self-esteem, from being abused (in many cases), and desperately want the government or the church to tell them what to do, and how to live their life, and yet love complaining about that same system at the first sign of corruption or problems.
I don't know about you pal, but I just don't like the thought of living in a world full of victims.