If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   Conservative thinks that Howard Dean wants a running mate who can't legally be vice president until May 2005   (newsmax.com) divider line 319
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

14747 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Dec 2003 at 3:36 AM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



319 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-12-19 08:28:07 AM  
mr_entropy:
The amendment says 'inhabitant' it does not say 'resident,' and that is critical. The amendment talks about where you actually live. Cheney voted in Texas, paid taxes in Texas, had a homestead in Texas.

Cheney rushed to Wyoming to register to vote the day before Bush announced him as his running mate. It was a transparent attempt to evade the Constitution.
 
2003-12-19 08:28:17 AM  
The neocons will now respond by bashing Clinton. It's the only defense they have, because they can't defend their own President's actions.

And in the end, Bill Clinton will still be getting $200,000 to read a thirty-minute speech, and his book will recoup every cent of the $10 million advance he got several times over, while Bush will be relegated to the Fox News circuit with Newt Gingrich, G. Gordon Liddy, and all the other washed-up neocons.

The best revenge of all is to live well.
 
2003-12-19 08:30:12 AM  
I have a vacation home in New Mexico. Does that mean if I go register to vote there tomorow, I could be McCain's running mate (I live in AZ)?
 
2003-12-19 08:41:50 AM  
Dean's entire campaign is based on fear mongering and is nearer Socialist than Democrat. Dean has plugged into a vibrant far left constituency which may get him the nomination but will never win the general election. Now if Gore showed some of the emotion demonstrated when he endorsed Dean he would have won the 2000 election.
 
2003-12-19 08:42:02 AM  
There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the President and Vice President from being from the same state.

There *is* a provision that prevents electors from a given state for voting for both a President and a VP from their state, which is commonly confused with a prohibition. Check the 12th amendment.
 
2003-12-19 08:42:32 AM  
MikeWealth Cheney can't "rush" anywhere, he has heart trouble. He has ties to Wyoming. He grew up there, owes property there, and was elected from there. For a time he lived, worked, and voted in Texas. When he was chosen by Dubbya, he followed the law prohibiting both candidates from the same state, so he returned to his original domicile. If you want to biatch about moving to get elected, check out Hillary. She never lived a day in New York, but wanted to be senator from a powerful state.
 
2003-12-19 08:45:09 AM  
SirOblivion:

Oh, get over it. Every campaign with every politician is based on fear-mongering and smear tactics. It's no different with any candidate. Democrat, Republican, Green, whatever. And yes, Dean does have the ability to beat Bush and after the primaries he will have the backing to do so.

Your labelling him a "socialist" shows your lack of understanding of him and his campaign and would make Bush a fascist.
 
2003-12-19 08:46:06 AM  
Diamond:

New York also has a history of electing carpetbaggers to the Senate.
 
2003-12-19 08:50:25 AM  
Diamond: "When he was chosen by Dubbya, he followed the law prohibiting both candidates from the same state, so he returned to his original domicile."

Which is exactly what I said. A transparent attempt to evade the Constitution. Or are you going to argue the ammendment was only meant to prevent them from living in the same state at the time of the election, ans not to prevent one state from having that kind of sway over the Executive branch.

"If you want to biatch about moving to get elected, check out Hillary."

I'm not familiar with New Youk's constitution.


Dorsai: I should have carified it only pertains to Texas' 32 votes.
 
2003-12-19 08:50:29 AM  
2003-12-19 08:13:20 AM mchawking


"Ford, the popular African-American from the 9th District of Tennessee... is much sought-after by TV producers as a talk show guest because he is so well spoken...."

Leave it to NewsMax to dust off this racist gem.


Racist gem? Have you heard Ford speak? He's not only well spoken, he's one of the most well spoken politicians, be it black or white. I'd almost call him right down the center as far as politics are concerned. In fact, he's nowhere near left enough for any of the socialist nutsacks running for president to want to choose him.
 
2003-12-19 08:50:53 AM  
SirOblivion,

You sir, are an idiot.
How does support from the NRA along with a strong conservative fiscal history = Socialist?

This election won't be about Democrats vs. Republicans. It'll be about the rational majority vs. dunderheads such as you.

Spooge
-Conservative former GOP supporter
 
2003-12-19 08:51:56 AM  
IamEvil:

Lieberman is a "socialist nutsack"? Please. He's a Republican in a Democrat's suit. The only far-left candidate is Kucinich.
 
2003-12-19 08:52:44 AM  
Regarding the black vote...here's an article that appeared in The Michigan Citizen last week...eat it, neocon trash!

Black voters ready to get even for 2000 fiasco

Sanctified Seven campaign under way

By Hazel Trice Edney
Special to The Michigan Citizen

WASHINGTON (NNPA) One popular saying in politics recommends: Dont get mad, get even.

Many African Americans are still mad at how the Black vote was undermined in 2000 and they want to get even.

I think there is still a lot of anger out there after what happened in Election 2000, peoples votes not getting counted, said Melanie Campbell, president and CEO of the National Coalition for Black Voter Participation, a non-profit group of more than 80 organizations that encourages civic activism in the Black community.

This is the very first presidential election that well be faced with. Were going to do a media launch right at the top of the New Year.

NCBVP is working with the nations nine major Black fraternities and sororities, and with UniverSoul Circus, a traveling Black production, to urge people to register to vote and to encourage a high voter turnout.

The Washington, D.C.-based organization is also on the verge of launching its Unity 04 project, a coalition of a dozen Black organizations that hope to use their collective strength to implement a series of voter initiatives leading up to the November election.

With the election slightly less than a year away, some groups are already active.

Voting and registration ought not be centered around election time, but it ought to be continuous, said the Rev. Arnold W. Howard of Baltimore, chairman of the African-American Ministers Leadership Council, a non-partisan arm of People for the American Way.

The group of about 100 ministers from around the country has organized a voter registration drive in seven states. The program, called Sanctified Seven, is aimed at making a strong impact in states where statewide races are normally tightly contested.

The group is also paying special attention to states where the Black voting-age population is so high that it can influence the outcome of elections.

The ministers are encouraging individual parishioners to register at least seven people every few days and, equally important, get them to show up at the polls.

The states, with their 2000 Black turnout rates in parenthesis, are: Florida, with a Black voting age population (BVAP) of 76.2 percent (43.2 percent); Illinois, with a BVAP of 66.8 percent (67 percent); Michigan, with a BVAP of 67.6 percent (60.9 percent); Missouri, with a BVAP of 67.9 percent, (68.2 percent); Ohio, with a BVAP of 67.4, (53.7 percent); Pennsylvania, with a BVAP of 68.1 percent (61.3 percent); and Wisconsin, with a BVAP of 70.8 percent (62 percent).

In just one month, the group has already registered more than 2,000 new voters in Cleveland, said the Rev. Romal J. Tune of Washington, the national field organizer for the ministers program.

People are very energized. People are interested in the issues, Tune said. Ministers groups and congregations have been doing registration at malls, shopping centers, grocery stores.

They do what we call walks around the community, in a seven-block radius of the church. We call them Jericho walks, knocking on doors.

And then we have people in the pews who have influence in their workplace. They start with registering the entire congregation. And then the congregation goes out into other places. One lady said, I went to my bowling league and I registered 20 people.

The Sanctified Seven campaign is reminiscent of Arrive with Five! the 2000 campaign that encouraged Black voters in Florida to carry five people with them to the polls, bolstering the Black vote by 15 percent in that state.

Still, the U. S. Supreme Court halted a recount of discarded voting ballots in Florida, effectively giving the states 25 electoral votes to George W. Bush.

I think it clearly showed the need for people especially African Americans - to get out and vote, and how even a couple of thousand votes can make a difference in the presidential election, said Cheryl Cooper, executive director of the National Council of Negro Women.

Nearly 200,000 votes in Florida alone were lost because of faulty voting machines and ballots, voter intimidation and confused poll workers, according to the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights.

The commission also reported that Black voters in Florida were nearly 10 times more likely than non-Black voters to have their ballots rejected.
Nationally, an estimated 4 million to 6 million votes were lost in 2000 because of voting foul-ups, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Intent on avoiding such problems next year, many groups are not only registering and educating potential voters early, but also planning major get-out-to-vote and voter protection campaigns, and including lawyers as watchdogs at the polls, Campbell said.

The Black youth vote will also be key in next years election, said Jehmu Greene, president of Rock the Vote, a Los Angeles-based organization that aims to get young adults to register and vote.

Especially with young people, its about the issues, Greene said. Our task is to connect the issues with a young persons daily life how the decisions of the candidates or the elected officials affect the young people.

Green said high-profile issues like the war in Iraq, the economy and affirmative action appear to be escalating youth interest in voting.

Your peers are out there on the front line. They are the ones fighting that war because they were looking at using higher education, which would put them in a better position to get jobs, she said.

And especially with this generation, tolerance and diversity is important anything dealing with civil rights.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, just over half of the 3.8 million Black youth between the ages of 18 and 24 were not registered to vote in 2000. And of the 1.8 million who were registered, 65.8 percent did not vote.

Similarly, white youths in the same age bracket had the lowest voter registration and turnout among white people. A slightly higher 51.7 percent of the 17.2 million white youths ages 18-24 were not registered. Of the 8.9 million registered, 62.8 percent did not vote, slightly lower than the Black youth rate.

Black Youth Vote aims to form a street team consisting of 25,000 registrars around the country who are specially trained to register and educate Black youth, Greene said.

Already, the group has electronic voter registration forms on the Web site of Black Entertainment Television and is planning a bus tour with registrars, traveling from Los Angeles to Florida between June and November and registering people at historically Black colleges and universities, concerts, shows and anywhere young people hang out.

The early drives, some activists say, are also aimed at educating people on national issues that affect them at the local level so they can make informed decisions in Democratic primaries beginning in January.

Cooper of the National Council of Negro Women said, When you look at the potential assaults on affirmative action, on womens rights, and when you look at the judicial nominees that are currently being put forth with this administration, there are some real concerns about turning back the clock, eroding some of the significant gains that people of color and that women have made in the past decade.
 
2003-12-19 08:53:08 AM  
Dean's entire campaign is based on fear mongering and is nearer Socialist than Democrat. Dean has plugged into a vibrant far left constituency which may get him the nomination but will never win the general election. Now if Gore showed some of the emotion demonstrated when he endorsed Dean he would have won the 2000 election.

If Gore had acted like a liberal instead of leaning toward the center, more liberals would have voted for him. If the Democrats pick a more conservative candidate again, they will lose the liberals to the Green party yet again. Had the Democrats not alientaed the liberals, they would have won in 2000.
 
2003-12-19 08:55:15 AM  
"The neocons will now respond by bashing Clinton. It's the only defense they have, because they can't defend their own President's actions.

And in the end, Bill Clinton will still be getting $200,000 to read a thirty-minute speech, and his book will recoup every cent of the $10 million advance he got several times over, while Bush will be relegated to the Fox News circuit with Newt Gingrich, G. Gordon Liddy, and all the other washed-up neocons.

The best revenge of all is to live well."

The only reason that clinton will get 200k to read a 30 minute speech is because liberals whine about the poor and downtrodden but when it comes to excepting large payments for speeches, they become capitalists real quick.

I also hope they run Dean in 2004. I would love nothing more than the college kids, the internet hacks and the general losers of the population to get their choice for president on the ticket. Then once reality strikes and they realize that the vast majority of Americans don't want a socialist hippy-type for President, maybe they will put down their cartoon drawing pens and their article spouting keyboards and go back to being bitter and marrying up all the ugly women.
 
2003-12-19 08:55:29 AM  
FARK will post any piece of crap headline that bashes the Conservatives...
But when it comes to posting Liberal untruths or expose their ridicules accusations... it never gets web space.
guess more total farkers are liberal?
 
2003-12-19 08:58:47 AM  
matto22:

Uh, it makes not one bit of difference what the political orientation of totalfarkers is. We get to read all links, we don't get to approve jack shiat. Much more pro-conservative material is posted to the fark main page than pro-liberal. Go back through the archives and see for yourself.
 
2003-12-19 09:00:53 AM  
FARK will post any piece of crap headline that bashes the Conservatives...
But when it comes to posting Liberal untruths or expose their ridicules accusations... it never gets web space.
guess more total farkers are liberal?


Maybe it's that many of the conservative news articles come from web sites like NewsMax, that are more propoganda than news, and which border on the comical.

Also, it seems to me that a great number of total farkers are free thinkers and to this type of person, the right is are much more offensive than the left.
 
2003-12-19 09:05:40 AM  
This is a moot point since Bush is going to win.
 
2003-12-19 09:06:41 AM  
Then once reality strikes and they realize that the vast majority of Americans don't want a socialist hippy-type for President...

It always amazes me how much terms like hippy, socialist, commie, pinko, tree hugger, etc. get tossed around here. What decade are we in? Can you guys discuss issues without resorting to such arcane and silly names/labels.
 
2003-12-19 09:07:07 AM  
OsirisOTheDead

Lieberman is a "socialist nutsack"? Please. He's a Republican in a Democrat's suit. The only far-left candidate is Kucinich.

Yup. That reminds me of Jon Stewart's quote about Lieberman: "He's the candidate for people who want to vote for Bush, but don't think he's Jewish enough."
 
2003-12-19 09:07:54 AM  
Osirs

its not that totalfarkers get to approve, but I think the headlines cater to the farkers who pay.
MHO
 
2003-12-19 09:08:01 AM  
"...could help soften the former Vermont governors image as a leader in the "bomb thrower" wing of the Democrat party."

Huh? The conservatives are now calling liberals "bomb throwers". That's just sad. And sick. Not to mention downright hilarious. Talk about incendiary phrases...
 
2003-12-19 09:11:14 AM  
matto22:

If that were the case, there would be a "political stance" part of the totalfark signup form. And the articles that totalfarkers post would be approved. I've posted damn near 100 articles and only had one approved -- and that wasn't a political article. There are conservative totalfarkers too. The debates within totalfark are much like the debates on regular fark, just on a much smaller scale. And I doubt the mods/admins are going through each thread to figure out which way a totalfarker sways politically. I think you're being a bit paranoid.
 
2003-12-19 09:11:39 AM  
You know, with all the right-wing screaming that "Howard Dean is not electable!", one has to wonder why they're bothering to get so upset. They're obviously running scared.

An angry little guy from the most liberal New England state who can't control what he says, and has already done his best to polarize the populace. He's a huge mistake for the Dems. Has everyone forgotten the lesson of Clinton and capturing the moderate middle?

Even when Dean makes his inevitable move to the right for general election, he's done enough damage with his stupid statements to keep Karl Rove handily supplied. The insinuation on national TV that Bush might have known about the Sept. 11th slaughter is fatal. He's unelectable. Sorry.
 
2003-12-19 09:12:35 AM  
Reglar-Roger writes:

They key part of that headline are the first few words...
Conservatives think that...


oh boy...here we go again....

Lets look at some other examples:

Conservatives think that Bush is doing a great job.


As do about 60% percent of the American people. Does this mean that 60% of Americans are Conservatives?

Conservatives think that starting a war based on lies and then making profit on it is morally sound.

As opposed to Democrats, who started Vietnam based on lies.

Iraq got done, get over it. Someone has to help them rebuild. What's your proposal, let the Russians and French do it?

Conservatives think that revealing the name of an American spy is good politics.

No Conservative ever said that. Indeed the person who revealed the name may have been Liberal. Truth is we don't know.

Conservatives think that spending record amount of tax dollars while giving tax breaks to the rich is good economics.

The tax cuts were designed to stimulate the economy, something that has been tried before by both Democrat and Republican administrations with success. With the economy stimulated, people spend more and revenues increase, thus much of the spending increases are covered. Aside from that, there is a *war* on. Naturally the government is going to spend more than it otherwise should. That said, I personally find it asinine that we are creating new entitlement programs (i.e. prescription drug benefit for senior citizens) and spending billions that should be going elsewhere.

Conservatives think that there is nothing wrong with having an Attorney General whose been found guitly of violating the laws he's supposed to enforce (as long as it's a Republican).

Excuse me, but I don't recall John Ascroft being found personally guilty of anything, any more than Janet Reno who ran a similar ship was personally found guilty of anything.

This is not to say that I necessarily approve of everything that Mr. Ashcroft's department has done--I don't. But it's completely hypocritical for Liberals to call Mr. Ashcroft a 'Nazi' while laying laurels on the head of Ms. Reno.

Conservatives think that Enron executives are perfectly qualified to be put in charge of America's energy policy.

Amazing...care to quote your source for this information?

If by chance someone with past ties with Enron is doing something with the Energy Department in that regard, I personally would be curious what that person brings to the table in the way of expertise, but I wouldn't dismiss them out of hand automatically as a crook. Otherwise everyone who worked for Enron should now be in jail from the mailroom staff up.

Conservatives think that spending 45 million tax dollars to investigate a Democratic President's sex life is good. But no crime done by a Republican President, no matter how many people die, is worth investigating.

That would be the 45 million dollar investigation conducted by a Janet Reno appointee that was dragged out and was made far more costly in part because the President and his staff refused to fully cooperate with the investigation, and when they "cooperated" used delaying tactics at every opportunity, thus further increasing the cost of the investigation over him "merely" farking an intern and lying about it...right?

As for the current President, if you care to bring formal charges against him, feel free. As he has done nothing illegal, try not to get your feelings hurt when you get laughed out of courtroom in America.

The list goes on and on.

No, mostly you go on and on with wild accusations.

The neocons will now respond by bashing Clinton. It's the only defense they have, because they can't defend their own President's actions.

Defend his actions against what crime? Not doing things the way Mr. Clinton claims he would have done them differently? As I pointed out, Mr. Bush as done nothing illegal. I know you pray every night he *does* do something illegal so you can scream "now I have you!!!!", but don't hold your breath.

As for bashing Mr. Clinton, the main difference I see here, beyond the whole Conservative vs. Liberal argument, is that Republicans spent time praying every night that Mr. Clinton would do something illegal so they could scream "now we have you!!!!" and Mr. Clinton delivered.

--h

P.S. If Mr. Clinton gets large speaker fees these days it's because people like listening to characters. Mr. Clinton doesn't *have* character, Mr. Clinton *is* a character.

-
 
2003-12-19 09:13:41 AM  
farker_diego:

Watch out throwing the term "free thinker" around. That usually is just a code word for "arrogant psuedo-intellectual jerkoff". I'm not saying that those people are, I'm just saying that if someone calls themselves a free thinker, they usually don't know jack.
 
2003-12-19 09:13:58 AM  
Why do you Republicans hate America so much?
 
2003-12-19 09:14:13 AM  
ManCalledFoot:

Do you think only anti-war liberals vote in the primaries? That's a bit insulting. Democrats everywhere get to vote for who they want to run and if they don't think Dean is electable, they won't vote for him. It's that obvious.

I know of many Republicans (i.e., conservatives, not neocons) who will vote for damn near anyone who opposes Bush in this coming election as long as it's not Kucinich who gets the nomination.

Dean is electable and that's just something you'll have to accept next year.
 
2003-12-19 09:15:14 AM  
everyone who made a comment about fark *itself* please go back a couple of days and read the post about how to get a submitted link posted. go!

zappaisfrank i'm nobody, but i'm going to say this once anyway, get a blog. fark is for postings people acutally want to read and respond to.

i think i have to shell out the bucks and join totalfark or give up on the internet altogether at this point.
 
2003-12-19 09:18:14 AM  
ManCalledFoot:

Oh, and as for Vermont being the most liberal New England state, can I have some of what you're smoking? Must be some good shiat.
 
2003-12-19 09:21:33 AM  
The dems are sandbagging for 2008 looking at the group of chumps they have for '04. '08 is when they will bring out the big guns (& calves): Hillary.

The democratic party seems to be deficient in democracy and completely devoid of liberty. Lets have bigger government and more social(ist) programs! Duuuh, Bush is stoopid; vote for us!

If you want to check out some extremists, go to http://www.democraticunderground.com/ . Those people are kind of scary.
 
2003-12-19 09:22:13 AM  
Watch out throwing the term "free thinker" around. That usually is just a code word for "arrogant psuedo-intellectual jerkoff". I'm not saying that those people are, I'm just saying that if someone calls themselves a free thinker, they usually don't know jack.

My definition of free thinker is someone who is not bound by any party affiliation or label. Someone who is open minded enought to change their mind as they get older and perhaps wiser. Someone who hates being labeled and having name calling used instead of actual debate. I know "free thinker" is a label and that's inconsistent with what I said, but I think that it is a non-insulting label and one which many here would prefer. If you want to replace it with more insults and name calling as you did above, that is your choice.
 
2003-12-19 09:22:56 AM  
BurnTime:

If you bother to do some research, you'll find that Bush has expanded the government to the largest size it's ever been. So much for conservatism.
 
2003-12-19 09:26:32 AM  
Dean's trying to the black vote??

What, I ask, is wrong with Mr. Sharpton on this account?
 
2003-12-19 09:27:15 AM  
Osirs
Did I miss the Headline for Sen. Jim McDermott's accusationn that asserted the currnet administration was holding off picking up Saddam until he needed it polically?

That could have been funny stuff.
anyway/
 
2003-12-19 09:28:08 AM  
farker_diego:

So you can say that they examine all the facts and come up with a conclusion they believe is logical. A "free thinker" is what atheists and other college students use as a code word for "I'm smarter than you Jeebus lovers".

And if you would have READ MY STATEMENT, I did not call the people you described names. I was calling the general person who says they are a "free thinker" those names. I wasn't insulting you nor was that my intention.
 
2003-12-19 09:28:35 AM  
Newsmax is just plain scary. Pure unadulterated spew and propoganda. [sarcasm] I get my straight news from democraticunderground.com [\sarcasm]
 
2003-12-19 09:30:07 AM  
CatholicSamurai:

As an atheist, I call a spade a spade. I'm an atheist, that's it. Doesn't make me smarter than Christians (well, not all of them) but it tends to make me more socially tolerant than most.
 
2003-12-19 09:30:37 AM  
Dean may win and he may lose (depending heavily on how Iraq is doing in November) but to call him a far left liberal is highly inaccurate. He's a fiscal and foreign policy conservative who is socially liberal. He also isn't a pussy, which is a good thing for Democrats.
 
2003-12-19 09:33:52 AM  
I also hope they run Dean in 2004. I would love nothing more than the college kids, the internet hacks and the general losers of the population to get their choice for president on the ticket. Then once reality strikes and they realize that the vast majority of Americans don't want a socialist hippy-type for President, maybe they will put down their cartoon drawing pens and their article spouting keyboards and go back to being bitter and marrying up all the ugly women.

Why do these retards keep calling Dean a socialist hippy? Are conservatives really that stupid? Or do they just think that if they keep saying it enough some other gullible asshole will believe them?

/astounded
 
2003-12-19 09:34:49 AM  
I'm not calling all atheists buttholes. I have atheists friend. I, however, do not like atheists that have to prove their intellectual superiority or their political intelligence over everyone all the time (I.E. Michael Newdow, Manyard from Tool, etc)
 
2003-12-19 09:35:02 AM  
matto22

Did I miss the Headline for Sen. Jim McDermott's accusationn that asserted the currnet administration was holding off picking up Saddam until he needed it polically?

Yeah, that would be about as bad as some political types basically accusing the President of being involved in murder ... or spending millions of taxpayer dollars on a bj investigation.
 
2003-12-19 09:36:06 AM  
Lets have bigger government and more social(ist) programs!

It's better than the conservative route, which is "Let's have bigger government and fewer social freedoms!"

Bush has expanded the government like a madman, chump. Look into it and get back to me.
 
2003-12-19 09:39:00 AM  
MyrnaMinkoff:

Don't pat yourself on the back too fast, now. Bush is expanding government faster than Clinton ever did. I hate it greatly.

BUT

Do you think honestly think that we have less social freedoms than we did 10 years ago? Take away the Patriot Act, and what social freedoms have been destroyed? ZERO.

If someone like Dean gets into office, I for one will welcome our new Thought Police, Thought Crime, increase the welfare state warlords.
 
2003-12-19 09:39:10 AM  
BurnTime writes:

The dems are sandbagging for 2008 looking at the group of chumps they have for '04. '08 is when they will bring out the big guns (& calves): Hillary.

Hillary will go down in flames. Her negatives are way too high.

If I were running the Democrat Party, I'd be grooming Harold Ford, Jr. to run in 2008. Too young you say? I've listening to him talk and for the most part I like what I hear so far. Wise beyond his years. Naturally I'd have to pair him with someone older from the Liberal wing of the party, but don't expect it to be Hill or Ted or anyone with a lot of negatives.

--h
 
2003-12-19 09:39:52 AM  
CatholicSamurai:

If someone like Dean gets into office, I for one will welcome our new Thought Police, Thought Crime, increase the welfare state warlords.

Give evidence for those 3 points, please.
 
2003-12-19 09:42:16 AM  
CatholicSamurai

Take away the Patriot Act, and what social freedoms have been destroyed? ZERO.

I'm still trying to figure out the logic behind that statement.
 
2003-12-19 09:42:31 AM  
A list of Logical Fallacies for you all -- Judging from the comments in the first half of the thread, you obviously need it. Particularly Reglar-Roger and OsirisOfTheDead.

That is all.
 
2003-12-19 09:44:32 AM  
Do you think honestly think that we have less social freedoms than we did 10 years ago? Take away the Patriot Act, and what social freedoms have been destroyed? ZERO.

But we DO have the Patriot Act, so what is your point? If your point is that we should get rid of the Patriot Act, then I am in agreement.
 
Displayed 50 of 319 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report