obama's campaign fakes women's feinting spell over and over

Trench · Post by **Trench** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:01 am

EvilHorace wrote:Ron Paul isn't even a contestant anymore, it's over.
Any independant is really a wasted vote as they simply can't win. If a person is going to vote, make it count and it's always a choice between two.

Tell that to Nader LOL :lol

Trench · Post by **Trench** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:03 am

TheSovereign wrote:i weep for the future

Here ya go ...

Trench · Post by **Trench** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:10 am

ZYFER wrote: The cool and calm attitude is nice. Though I think Ron Paul would be a good overall choice compared to the entire lot, Obama would be the more likely to win and second best choice. Let us face it, you can not get elected if you want to make a difference and avoid sucking up to corporate sponsors.

That reminds me of a comment i heard some pundit make on some show .. cant remember who, but he said that we should change the political system into something like NASCAR where all the politicians where logos on their suits, that way we know whos buying them out and what not ... i thought that was hilarious and not a bad idea at the same time.

Trench · Post by **Trench** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:03 am

FlyingPenguin wrote:Hey Trench, I like the guy. I'm waffling between him and McCain. No way I'll vote for Hilary.

However, I think it's naive to believe that anyone in his position doesn't owe some important people some favors. That's the way it works.

And believe me, since it's going to come down to decision by super delegates, there is going to be a LOT of horse trading going on at the convention.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080324/vonhoffman

Politicians, journalists and even admiring skeptics listen to Obama, thrill to the grand phrases, so powerfully delivered, but, after the oratory, whisper that there is no meat on those bones. They wonder if these emotions, born of the urgent hopes Obama raises, hide a lack of substance. His opponents call Obama a rock star and say that the spaghetti-thin senator from Illinois is running a cult, not a political movement.

Nonetheless, Obama has a signal accomplishment to his credit, a substantial one, which may change the shape of politics. If elected he will be the first to enter the office without financial backing from the major business, industrial or professional groups with their PACs, their contribution bundlers and lobbyists. That first day, which Hillary Clinton has made famous, will find Obama not owing a thing to the big money pressure groups. You would have to go back a century and a half to name an incoming president with so few debts to repay.

TheSovereign · Post by **TheSovereign** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 1:20 pm

u know u coulda just made 1 post with all that instead of continually replying adding new posts

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:04 pm

TRENCH: There is MUCH more that goes on than just political contributions. There are many ways an individual or group can grease the path for a politician.

As I said before, since it looks like it will come down to super delegates at the convention to decide the nominee, you can bet your ass that there will be a lot of favors traded with those super delegates. Remember that many of the super delegates are governors.

It's all great that he has fewer strings on him, don't get me wrong, just don't be so naive as to believe that there aren't any strings at all.

I like Obama - he has a refreshing Bobby Kennedy wit. He thinks fast, and he's trying to keep above the ugly side of politics. His inexperience doesn't bother me too much because that can be made up for in a good VP and cabinet.

PLUS, let's be honest, how much more "experienced" is Hilary? She's only been a Senator 6 years and hasn't accomplished much herself. I don't consider being First Lady any more a qualification to be President than being the King's Dentist making him qualified to rule the kingdom.

I must admit that with a lot of troops abroad, I am attracted to a president with some military experience which is one of the reasons I'm looking hard at McCain. I don't think military experience is a mandatory requirement, but the fact is that Presidents without a military background have a hard time trusting the military (and vice-a-versa) and that leads to problems. Not insurmountable in peace time, but with boots in Iraq for the foreseeable future (like it or not) I'd like someone in there with a military background who at least understands the military mindset.

EvilHorace · Post by **EvilHorace** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:01 pm

Tell that to Nader

Nader's been wasting time and peoples votes for decades. He knows he can't win, it's pointless.

Walleye · Post by **Walleye** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:48 am

normalicy wrote:There are so many fakers, it's hard to tell till the deed is done. Shame that the party system is even allowed. I'm waiting for the president that gets elected & then completely does what he actually believes & pisses off both parties.

that would be our current president.