colin
|
posted on January 28, 2003 06:35:22 AM new
Okay, This is a simple one. Who do you think should be the next President and why. Lets see if we can do this without flaming each other.
Amen,
Reverend Colin
|
mitch3
|
posted on January 28, 2003 08:01:06 AM new
Let's just make sure that George Bush is a One term President
|
Helenjw
|
posted on January 28, 2003 08:44:34 AM new
Right!
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on January 28, 2003 09:55:32 AM new
WHO CAN BEAT HIM?
HAVEN'T SEEN ANYONE OFFERED UP I WOULD VOTE FOR...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND... 
|
snowyegret
|
posted on January 28, 2003 09:56:00 AM new
<singing>Gooooddddfiiiingeeeeeerrrr</singing>
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
Linda_K
|
posted on January 28, 2003 10:11:17 AM new
snowyegret - You're tone deaf. 
|
mlecher
|
posted on January 28, 2003 10:31:48 AM new
Anybody with a lick of sense could beat Bush.....
The big problem is all the other candidates tend to beat themselves because of a lack of sense. And those with sense, don't run.
.................................................
We call them our heroes...but we pay them like chumps
|
snowyegret
|
posted on January 28, 2003 10:36:17 AM new
Hey, those with sense run away!
Linda, Live and Let Die. 
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
Linda_K
|
posted on January 28, 2003 10:38:44 AM new
snowy -
Don't like making a prediction this early, but we'll probably vote for Bush if he runs.
Somewhere in my gut, I've had the feeling he might not.
Edited because you asked for a 'why'. Because I believe him to be a moral man. I like his 'family values' beliefs. I believe he takes seriously his enormous responsibilities. My judgement is that he's handled the terrorist as well as any other might have. And though I didn't vote for him, I have found myself agreeing with most of what he has tried to impliment.
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 28, 2003 10:44 AM ]
|
bear1949
|
posted on January 28, 2003 02:23:58 PM new
AMEN Linda.
|
scrabblegod
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:21:37 PM new
I think it is way to early to decide who the next President will be, after all it is still 6 years away........
|
Linda_K
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:25:24 PM new
LOL scrabblegod - Now...that's positive thinking!!!!
|
junquemama
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:38:16 PM new
LindaK,You didnt vote for Bush?.. .
|
Linda_K
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:52:06 PM new
LOL junquemama - No, we really didn't. I'm registered as an Independent. But since I first voted, my guy has never been elected.
So as each president is sworn in, I give them a chance. I gave Clinton a chance too, but too many things happened I didn't agree with. With Bush, I've been pleasantly surprised and unless something major happens between now and 2004, he'll most likely get my vote.
NOW....get up off the floor. ROFLHO
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 28, 2003 04:54 PM ]
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 28, 2003 04:55 PM ]
|
junquemama
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:57:49 PM new
How did you know I hit the floor?Thats the first time I ever used the eek guy.LOL
|
gina50
|
posted on January 28, 2003 04:59:08 PM new
Bruce Springsteen !!
|
gravid
|
posted on January 28, 2003 05:05:24 PM new
"Because I believe him to be a moral man."
There is a whole lot more to morals than not getting a blow job in the oval office.
What kind of morals does a man have who's buddies are given free sweep to rape the pension funds and stockholders of America?
What kind of morals wants absolute iron fisted control of our private communications?
Sex is a minor matter of morals compared to lust for power and ill got gain. How narrow sighted.
[ edited by gravid on Jan 28, 2003 05:07 PM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on January 28, 2003 05:34:33 PM new
Gravid - My opinions of Clinton had very little to do with a BJ. But you are right in the sense I don't tend to approve of behavior where anyone steps outside their committment they made when they married. So...in a very tiny, tiny way...yes, his sexual behavior was an embarassment to many in our country. Didn't bother you and many others here? Fine...this place isn't the best representation of our country.
You guys say that all the time when morals are mentioned. Morals are the way a man and a women lead their lives and come into play in many many areas of their lives, not just their sex life.
What kind of morals does a man have who's buddies are given free sweep to rape the pension funds and stockholders of America?
What kind of morals wants absolute iron fisted control of our private communications?
If this is EVER proven to be true, he will go to jail. Accusations only. And gravid, do you really think Clinton's palms weren't greased? Come on.
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 28, 2003 05:37 PM ]
|
gravid
|
posted on January 28, 2003 05:52:21 PM new
I think by the time they get that far up in politics NONE of them can have any morals.
It is like a basic job requirement.
So it's not a Bush/Clinton or Republican/Dem. thing for me.
As some people like to say - the system is broken.
People with money don't go to jail in this country unless other people with more money are mad at them.
Tell the people who worked and invested in Enron and K-Mart and the rest of the list how if anybody actually did wrong they'll go to jail. (Just as soon as they have the final report from A.Anderson)They'll be laughing too hard to call you a fool.
[ edited by gravid on Jan 28, 2003 05:57 PM ]
|
mlecher
|
posted on January 28, 2003 05:56:53 PM new
Didn't Pia Zadora win some elected office in Italy? Why don't we do that here...
I open the floor to nominations!
I hereby nominate....ANNA NICOLE SMITH! She will be able to locate Osama Bin Laden, she can find any rich, old bastard who is ready to die...
.................................................
We call them our heroes...but we pay them like chumps
[ edited by mlecher on Jan 28, 2003 05:58 PM ]
|
canvid13
|
posted on January 28, 2003 06:18:42 PM new
Betcha if Mr. Clinton were allowed to run he'd kick Mr. Bush all the way back to his mommy.
|
Borillar
|
posted on January 28, 2003 07:52:21 PM new
Actually, that was suggested back during the last election cycle. There is no law that prevents Mr. Clinton from running for President again. He is a known quantity and we all know just how he works and what his flaws are. You can't say that about most Presidential candidates. Since Bush would run as an incumbent and Clinton would re-run on the Democratic ticket, an analysis of the two adminstrations would indeed make Americans come to some drastic conclusions. Bill Clinton would indeed win hands-down and the stock market would rebound to 11,000 the very next day!
|
KatyD
|
posted on January 28, 2003 08:24:32 PM new
Joe Lieberman.
KatyD
|
NearTheSea
|
posted on January 28, 2003 08:27:01 PM new
Who should be the next President?
Bush
[email protected]
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on January 28, 2003 08:43:50 PM new
I love your picture Helen!! You always come up with some good ones!
|
saddamhussien
|
posted on January 28, 2003 10:54:08 PM new
Condi Rice for president in 2008!
With a good conservative Latino (Cuban?) for vice-prez.
If she runs, the democrats' days are numbered. Minorities are more conservative than democrats would prefer and once Republicans shake off their image of being a party of old white guys, it will be one party rule.
|
Borillar
|
posted on January 28, 2003 11:57:49 PM new
It all depends upon the voting public's willingness to listen to the full facts instead of listening to the demagoguery of paid entertainers quoting partial facts or outright lies; such as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and O'Riely of FoxNews. If they will let themselves be educated; that is, that Bush or other candidate said THIS and then did THAT instead, that this policy was BAD for these factual reasons, etc. If they do that, then the Democrats have a very good chance of sweeping Mr. Bush and the Oil Companies out of the White House.
A debate came up last week that I thought was both interesting and also, very telling about the political climate in America. The question was, "Would Liberals like to have a Rush Limbaugh-type radio personality?" Since Rush has done so much to promote the Republican Party and the Ultra-Right agenda so successfully, it was a question of whether Liberals would also benefit from such an entertainment personality spewing out their own demagoguery.
The answer was that Liberals are swayed by information and facts, so demagoguery is out of the question there. That Liberals do not go in for the Coach giving the pep speech in the dressing room before the game, but would rather have all of the factual information laid out for them to read and to make up their own mind. That Liberals would not tolerate the type of distortions and outright, bald-faced lies that come from Rush Limbaugh pretty much says it all.
While I am not a Liberal, I would rather not be lied to in a "pep talk" nor would I need it to make up my mind.
What is so telling is that Liberals rely upon the truth as much as they can get to make up their own minds and New Conservatives tend to want to be told what to think and what opinion to hold. That is why these lazy New Conservatives can never hold their own in a debate and so they resort to name calling and making personal attacks on their opponents - which has nothing to do with the fact that they can't defend their opinions.
|
colin
|
posted on January 29, 2003 06:01:33 AM new
I was hoping someone would suggest Sponge Bob Square Pants. Honest, integrity and high Morals.
Springstien was good. Pia Zadora, Anna Nicole Smith and Condi Rice show an enlightened and progressive group.
Lieberman...I don't think he's got much of a chance. Only time will tell. He just doesn't have that Oomph. A brilliant man and middle of the road.
I doubt that Bush will run again. Can't give a reason but just have that feeling.
I know Clinton will not run again. I thought he was a great president. Did more for men then even JFK.
I was hoping the Democrats, on the board, would offer up someone that actually had a chance. I don't see anyone at the moment. I'm very happy no one suggested Al Sharpton.
Amen,
Reverend Colin
|
austbounty
|
posted on January 29, 2003 06:44:04 AM new
We had it all wrong about Clinton,
I have it on good authority that he actually said-
Sack my cook and Hold my calls.
Hasn't dubya got any heirs to the monarchy.
If its a 2 party election, (here too) at least most of us get a choice between a kick in the head or a kick in the guts.
Its bound to be a tough choice.
|
calamity49
|
posted on January 29, 2003 09:35:30 AM new
I'll be darned, Linda, I would have sworn you were a Republican.
I expect I'll vote for Bush again. It all depends on what happens in the next 2 years.
I like Lieberman. In fact had he run instead of Gore last time I might have voted for him.
By the way, anyone notice who was sitting by him at the speech last night???
calamity
|
