Nick Against the World (47 Viewers)

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Sergio ] ++
Here is what a tried and true democrat wants to happen in this election:

(please note: I am a registered republican, so this isn't me. Although I do not vote exclusively republican)


No one in their right mind who is a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat wants John Kerry to win this election.


no way. no how.

Why you ask??

Here's your answer:

















Ready??

























Oh, You're going to love this.





















Hillary Rodham Clinton.




She is the reason why no Democrat really wants John Kerry to win. Why, you ask? Its simple.


Mrs. clinton wasn't deemed ready enough at this point in her political career to put her hat in the ring for the Democratic presidential nomination, and if she did so, and lost in the primary, then her poitical career would have been in serious jeopardy.

I know, what does this have to do with john Kerry.

Well, most democrat insiders want Hillary clinton to be the candidate in 2008, and the only way that can realistically happen is how?


If John Kerry loses the 2004 election.

there is no way on God's green earth that Mrs. clinton can run for that ticket in 2008. Not that she wouldn't win, but it would be the biggest embarassment in the Democrat party since Jimmy Carter if she were to win the nomination for the Democratic ticket while they had a Democrat in the White House.


See the logic?


Sure, the anti-Bush establishment would take Paris Hilton over Bush right now, but Democrats in general, and I've spoken to a whole bunch lately, including my wife's cousin who happens to be a Democratic member of the House of representatives, have stated that they are hoping for Hillary in 2008.

Thats a great post Sergio, one that makes my understanding of politics rise a bit.

But I wonder what would happen if Mrs. Clinton takes the oath of Office......

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Dragon]

Jimmy Carter is bullshit

 

[flieeeekke]

george w. bush is bullshit.

 

[Kaiser Franco]

I guess the bi-partisan system in America is showing its limits, if all a presidential election comes to is a choice between an illiterate chimpanzee and a dull flip-flopper, both of which are only addressing the interests of the corporate mafia anyway, NOT the everyday's concerns of the American people. It seems Americans will re-elect the chimp after all, and I'd love one of them to genuinely list me the positive aspects of his record that will make them do so (just out of curiosity, not to stir up a fight), even if Kerry's platform seems to be strictly focused on the "anyone but Bush" tenet.

Italy's multi-partyism (I think we must be the only country in the world with 2 Communist Parties, and who else can boast of having a Pensioners' Party sitting in Parliamanent?) has allowed for the fall of 50 odd governments since the end of World War Two. That's a record that would make any South American Banana Republic jealous, yet Italy is not Colombia : it's the 5th/6th economy in the world. Somehow the "gattopardismo" (the more it changes, the more it stays the same) of Italy's political life might be the secret of our relative success. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the longevity of the corporate men of honour currently governing Italy has corresponded with a steady decline of the country. Another advantage of a multi-party system like we have in Europe is that the extremists can be easily spotted. If you want to throw all arab immigrants into the sea, you can make it clear by voting for the Lega, or Le Pen's Front National. But the mainstream parties will basically stay the same, i.e. you won't see France's UMP or Germany's CDU taken over by a neo-conservative faction as was the case in America.

PS : What do you ask John Kerry after he loses the election? "Why the long face?" Ho, ho, ho.

 

[flieeeekke]

++ [ originally posted by Kaiser Franco ] ++
I guess the bi-partisan system in America is showing its limits, if all a presidential election comes to is a choice between an illiterate chimpanzee and a dull flip-flopper, both of which are only addressing the interests of the corporate mafia anyway, NOT the everyday's concerns of the American people. It seems Americans will re-elect the chimp after all, and I'd love one of them to genuinely list me the positive aspects of his record that will make them do so (just out of curiosity, not to stir up a fight), even if Kerry's platform seems to be strictly focused on the "anyone but Bush" tenet.

Italy's multi-partyism (I think we must be the only country in the world with 2 Communist Parties, and who else can boast of having a Pensioners' Party sitting in Parliamanent?) has allowed for the fall of 50 odd governments since the end of World War Two. That's a record that would make any South American Banana Republic jealous, yet Italy is not Colombia : it's the 5th/6th economy in the world. Somehow the "gattopardismo" (the more it changes, the more it stays the same) of Italy's political life might be the secret of our relative success. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the longevity of the corporate men of honour currently governing Italy has corresponded with a steady decline of the country. Another advantage of a multi-party system like we have in Europe is that the extremists can be easily spotted. If you want to throw all arab immigrants into the sea, you can make it clear by voting for the Lega, or Le Pen's Front National. But the mainstream parties will basically stay the same, i.e. you won't see France's UMP or Germany's CDU taken over by a neo-conservative faction as was the case in America.

brilliant post. my thoughts exactly bar the inteligent parts.

PS : What do you ask John Kerry after he loses the election? "Why the long face?" Ho, ho, ho.

 

[Torkel]

++ [ originally posted by Sergio ] ++
there is no way on God's green earth that Mrs. clinton can run for that ticket in 2008. Not that she wouldn't win

She won´t win, McCain and Giuliani are blowing the right people now, and will be too strong in 08. But it will be an interesting election nonetheless.

++ [ originally posted by fabiana ] ++
Jimmy Carter is bullshit

What a bullshit post. Say what you want about his presidency, but he has proved to be a great politician, winning the Nobel Peace Prize. To slag him off is to me stupid, but to do it when the man just turned 80th is tacky.

 

[juventus2]

I think these were the best American presidents:

Bill Clinton, John F. Kennedey, Ronald Regan

I think that Arnold Schwateneger would do a great job as a president, but it's unlikely to happen.


P.S

Torkel, I don't hate Carter or something, but a Nobel Peace prize doesn't mean shit. Arafat also won the Nobel peace prize, and look at how much terrorism is going out down there.

 

[Seven]

++ [ originally posted by juventus2 ] ++


I think that Arnold Schwateneger would do a great job as a president, but it's unlikely to happen.

 

[Vinman]

++ [ originally posted by Sergio ] ++
Here is what a tried and true democrat wants to happen in this election:

(please note: I am a registered republican, so this isn't me. Although I do not vote exclusively republican)


No one in their right mind who is a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat wants John Kerry to win this election.


no way. no how.

Why you ask??

Here's your answer:

















Ready??

























Oh, You're going to love this.





















Hillary Rodham Clinton.




She is the reason why no Democrat really wants John Kerry to win. Why, you ask? Its simple.


Mrs. clinton wasn't deemed ready enough at this point in her political career to put her hat in the ring for the Democratic presidential nomination, and if she did so, and lost in the primary, then her poitical career would have been in serious jeopardy.

I know, what does this have to do with john Kerry.

Well, most democrat insiders want Hillary clinton to be the candidate in 2008, and the only way that can realistically happen is how?


If John Kerry loses the 2004 election.

there is no way on God's green earth that Mrs. clinton can run for that ticket in 2008. Not that she wouldn't win, but it would be the biggest embarassment in the Democrat party since Jimmy Carter if she were to win the nomination for the Democratic ticket while they had a Democrat in the White House.


See the logic?


Sure, the anti-Bush establishment would take Paris Hilton over Bush right now, but Democrats in general, and I've spoken to a whole bunch lately, including my wife's cousin who happens to be a Democratic member of the House of representatives, have stated that they are hoping for Hillary in 2008.

Serge,

You are 100% correct , my friend !!!

I heard that they were even giving him bad advice toward his campaign so he would surely lose.......

Most dems think Kerry is a joke...but they really hate Bush

If Kerry wins (which I doubt) it will throw a wrench into Hillary's plans....

I gotta laugh at the ppl in here, who arent even American, and dont live here, saying who THEY think our best president was.......

How would they even have a clue ????????????????????

 

[juventus2]

a woman president. :LOL:

 

[KB824]

++ [ originally posted by juventus2 ] ++
a woman president. :LOL:

She's more qualified than John Kerry is right now, and will be infinitely more qualified by the time 2008 comes around. So keep laughing. And keep your sexist ideas to yourself. She would be a great president. She has more balls than any male candidate in the last 15 years, and that includes her husband.


The Gov-inator can't run for president even if he wants to. Naturalized citizens are'nt allowed to run for the presidency. He's a great speaker, but he's still a work in progress as a politician

 

[KB824]

++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++


Serge,

You are 100% correct , my friend !!!

I heard that they were even giving him bad advice toward his campaign so he would surely lose.......

Most dems think Kerry is a joke...but they really hate Bush

If Kerry wins (which I doubt) it will throw a wrench into Hillary's plans....

I gotta laugh at the ppl in here, who arent even American, and dont live here, saying who THEY think our best president was.......

How would they even have a clue ????????????????????

This campaign isn't about John Kerry being the president, its more about "Anybody other than Bush".


John McCain is someone I've been begging to get the nomination for the last 5 years, but he's not right wing enough for the Republicans, has pissed off too many Democrats, and doesn't have the financial resources to run as an independent. I was hoping that President Bush would have made a shocking move and asked him to be his VP candidate. We need someone like him in a position more powerful than just being a Senator from Arizona.



I'm already looking ahead to 2008, to be honest with you. A Giuliani-Clinton election race would be majestic, to say the least.




Tthe two presidents that I have the highest regards for are the Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin . They were both highly instrumental in leading this country into the 20th century. And they were both leaders of men, which is extremely important as a president.

 

[KB824]

++ [ originally posted by Torkel ] ++

She won´t win, McCain and Giuliani are blowing the right people now, and will be too strong in 08. But it will be an interesting election nonetheless.

Not saying that she would win the election, but she would run away with the Democratic nomination. I admire that woman a great deal.

What a bullshit post. Say what you want about his presidency, but he has proved to be a great politician, winning the Nobel Peace Prize. To slag him off is to me stupid, but to do it when the man just turned 80th is tacky.

President Carter is a great humanitarian, and that is what he will be remembered for when all the positive tributes come out after his passing. He has done more in recent memory after a President has left office than I can remember.

As a President, he was absolutey abyssmal. Our worst president in the last 30 years, and easily one of the top 5 in the history of my country.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++


Serge,

You are 100% correct , my friend !!!

I heard that they were even giving him bad advice toward his campaign so he would surely lose.......

Most dems think Kerry is a joke...but they really hate Bush

If Kerry wins (which I doubt) it will throw a wrench into Hillary's plans....

I gotta laugh at the ppl in here, who arent even American, and dont live here, saying who THEY think our best president was.......

How would they even have a clue ????????????????????

Thats exactly what ticks me off sometimes Vin. Some people from other countries think they know whats best for America, while that usually coincides with whats "best" for them. It can't always work both ways my friends.

 

[flieeeekke]

andy, its not about "what's the best for america and whats not". i am against bush for the reason that he does whats the best for america on international scene. internal affais, shoot me, i dont care, do whatever you please. but in the world that just dont cut it.

 

[KB824]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Thats exactly what ticks me off sometimes Vin. Some people from other countries think they know whats best for America, while that usually coincides with whats "best" for them. It can't always work both ways my friends.

While your statement is true, Andy, it does work both ways in a sense. America is the country on which the rest of the world is most depndant on, in terms of financial, political, and military assistance. However, that is the monster and the type of situation that America itself has created. And to think that America doesn't need anyone but itself is not only arrogant, but also untrue. (I'm not saying that you share those beliefs, so please don't take it that way.


Pro-American stance on this is that we are only trying to make the world a safer place. Anti-American stance accuses us of globalization, but the world's economy does revolve around the US in a strange way. Case in point:

There is a naval base in Puerto Rico called Roosevelt Roads. Roosevelt Roads employed 6000 civilians to work at the base at a wage that is considered in the upper-middle class range of Puerto Rico's economic structure. There has always been a vocal minority in Puerto Rico to get the base closed, because they see it as a form of Colonialism, regardless of the fact that Puerto Rico is a U.S. owned territory. They also are opposed to one of the other facets of the base, which is used as a training ground for bombing exercises.

Well, they've gotten their wish, and now 6,000 people will be out of a job, nearly 400 million dollars annualy will be removed from the Puerto Rican economy, and countless other businesses around the naval base will be in serious jeopardy as well.

The other, and more serious issue for Puerto Rico, is because of the desire to have the base closed, they are now in serious jeopardy of losing 14 billion dollars annually in federal aid for a territory that pays no U.S. income tax whatsoever.


Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.

 

[KB824]

++ [ originally posted by Kaiser Franco ] ++
I guess the bi-partisan system in America is showing its limits, if all a presidential election comes to is a choice between an illiterate chimpanzee and a dull flip-flopper, both of which are only addressing the interests of the corporate mafia anyway, NOT the everyday's concerns of the American people. It seems Americans will re-elect the chimp after all, and I'd love one of them to genuinely list me the positive aspects of his record that will make them do so (just out of curiosity, not to stir up a fight), even if Kerry's platform seems to be strictly focused on the "anyone but Bush" tenet.

First off, Libero, let me welcome you back. Its good seeing you again.

In regards to President Bush's accomplishments, I think that the two most positive pieces of legislation that he has passed is the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, and the "No child left behind" education act.


How he managed toturn a 200 billion dollar budget surplus into a 500 billion dollar deficit, I have no idea.

I support his views on terrorism, in being pro-active "get them before they get us", but I don't support the war in Iraq, although I wholeheartedly support the men and women who are fighting. ( and no, people, that isn't an oxymoron. Its the same as saying "I don't support what you say, but I wholly support your right to say it.") I also don't support his stance on Israel/Palestine. Israel are the aggressors in this case, not the Palestinians. Peace in the Middle East begins with the resolution of this matter, and everything else will fall into place in that region. And as far as terrorists are concerned, does anyone even know what most of these terrorists beliefs are anymore?

 

[aressandro10]

++ [ originally posted by Sergio ] ++


First off, Libero, let me welcome you back. Its good seeing you again.

In regards to President Bush's accomplishments, I think that the two most positive pieces of legislation that he has passed is the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, and the "No child left behind" education act.


How he managed toturn a 200 billion dollar budget surplus into a 500 billion dollar deficit, I have no idea.

I support his views on terrorism, in being pro-active "get them before they get us", but I don't support the war in Iraq, although I wholeheartedly support the men and women who are fighting. ( and no, people, that isn't an oxymoron. Its the same as saying "I don't support what you say, but I wholly support your right to say it.") I also don't support his stance on Israel/Palestine. Israel are the aggressors in this case, not the Palestinians. Peace in the Middle East begins with the resolution of this matter, and everything else will fall into place in that region . And as far as terrorists are concerned, does anyone even know what most of these terrorists beliefs are anymore?

A US president with that simple mentality in my opnion, would save America hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives lost by doing War On Terrorism

 

[Dragon]

++ [ originally posted by Torkel ] ++

What a bullshit post. Say what you want about his presidency, but he has proved to be a great politician, winning the Nobel Peace Prize. To slag him off is to me stupid, but to do it when the man just turned 80th is tacky.

His Carter Center is complete bullshit, he did whatever he could do for his interests in the current situation in Venezuela. He was said to be useful to us but he was even more useless than the OAE

 

[Seven]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Thats exactly what ticks me off sometimes Vin. Some people from other countries think they know whats best for America, while that usually coincides with whats "best" for them. It can't always work both ways my friends.

Well, from a distance your perspective is better. And yes, it's in our own interest. If America has an idiot like Bush for a president we, Europeans are in trouble as well. Everyone would be in trouble actually. I wouldn't know who's the best president for America, as I don't really follow politics but I have to say Bush looks really.. really stupid most of the time.