caL Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 he would save us money and get us out of the deficet hahaha *pretends to know what that is* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0rdka0s Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 waht the fuck asshole, WHERE THE FUCK IS NADER!!!!! FUCKING NADER IN 04'!!!!!!!! FUCK REST FUCK REST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubbish heap Posted September 5, 2003 Author Share Posted September 5, 2003 Originally posted by robotripp waht the fuck asshole, WHERE THE FUCK IS NADER!!!!! FUCKING NADER IN 04'!!!!!!!! FUCK REST FUCK REST sorry to shit on your parade but he ain't running :idea: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubbish heap Posted September 5, 2003 Author Share Posted September 5, 2003 Welcome to Page 2 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/images/20010913-4-1-m.jpg'> <span style='color:burlywood'>"Hello?"</span> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob Sorry, homey. I just started school again and have been on the computer less. Are you honestly supporting Lieberman, albeit from a different country? well it was a little while ago...say the word and i'll bump it for you, it's a piece written by norman solomon(who's a pretty dope dude all around) and definitely worth a read. as far as your second question.....hahahaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 Originally posted by BROWNer as far as your second question.....hahahaa Thank fucking God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 You see... the way the 'Primary system' is set up... ah fuck it... and Vanity, that wasn't cool to bust Lieberman out on his role as the 'original' Teller... I think he's put that behind him and made great strides since them, WHY MUST YOU CRUCIFY HIM??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weapon X Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 The Democrats have no style; it’s all about the charming smile and winning personality of Dick “my mothafukkin’ man” Cheney. I bet if we could, us foreigners would vote a lot more than you guys, considering the terrible voter turn outs you have. Respect to Grover Norquist and Karl C. Rove, the ex-Young Republicans who took life for what it is – a once in a lifetime thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 I was a young republican... but only because I was political and it was the only thing there was... but after 2 meetings I realized they were trying to hype me on some other members dad's REPUBLICAN bid for state senate... I bailed but not until I asked his dad a couple hard questions at local fundraisers... well, perhaps I was also 'asked to bail'... I forget if that axe actually fell or just loomde over my head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dukeofyork Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 Originally posted by Vanity bushie hands ha ha.... wheres boogie been anyway? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubbish heap Posted September 7, 2003 Author Share Posted September 7, 2003 http://www.cnn.com/interactive/allpolitics/0209/iraq.reax.0912/gal.kucinich.jpg'> Vote for this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mapo returns Posted September 7, 2003 Share Posted September 7, 2003 Ill probably vote for Bush. Simply because I think he'll do the best job fucking it up. But then again Im not registered to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoter Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 anyone els watch the democrat party debate last night?the dude rubbish heap posted had decent answers.dean from vermont is also some favorable motives.i wasn't surprised with lieberman's hesitant answers about sending more troops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rip Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 wheres the bush option? thats who im voting for. unless a better republican comes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarzAbove Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 Arent ARCEL n DHABZ RUNNING? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
23578 Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 dean, it's the only realistic choice (right now), i saw kucinich the other night, he's a smart dude, too bad he doesn't have any back. oooh, howie dean, he's sooo moderate:eek: :dazed: .:) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horse cock Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 anybody else in '04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TEARZ Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 "You can talk about balancing the budget in Vermont, but Vermont doesn't have a military. And if you're not going to cut the military, then what are you going to do about social spending?" -DK dean is not an acceptable option.... 23578, watch kucinich become more realistic by the month.... and i don't even see why "realistic" even needs to come into the picture in a primary. but whatever. i wonder how the dean supporters will feel when dean sprints to the center after (if) he secures the nomination. he's fraudulent. i can't believe that people aren't picking up on it by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadawhat Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 from another thread.... maybe a late addition to the race?..... Originally posted by nomadawhat has anybody heard of gen. wesley clark? he may be yet another democratic nominee, he says he will annouce by sept. 19th.. he seems to have good views on some issues but i have yet to hear or read much. i saw him on tv for a few minutes and he was very personable, plus he is what the republicans are afraid of in a nominee, someone with actual miltary credentials who is a people person. some of those credentials: 4 star retired U.S. general Rhodes scholar first in his 1966 class at West Point White House fellow, head of the U.S. Southern Command NATO commander during the 1999 campaign in Kosovo keep your eye on this guy, it seems as all the other nominee's are. here's a site supporting him and trying to get him to join the race for more info: http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 those credentials don't mean squat to me. look at kucinich up there all rugged and shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 ^^mofuckin HOLLLLA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadawhat Posted September 9, 2003 Share Posted September 9, 2003 Originally posted by BROWNer those credentials don't mean squat to me. look at kucinich up there all rugged and shit. fuck, i just typed this out!!!! ok again... i agree, they don't really mean squat to me but alot of sheepish americans look for shit like this to grab on to in a nominee. i don't know much about this guy and i'm not giving him my support, but that could change, but it seems as he is making waves and could alter the landscape of the whole democratic nomination if he does enter, albeit late.so i'm just throwing his name out there... since there is a lot of 'anybody but bush' feelings going on here. sounds like if he decides not to run that he may be a top choice for vice president... which may be best since he doesn't have any political credentials.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubbish heap Posted September 9, 2003 Author Share Posted September 9, 2003 it'd be nice to see the press give the spotlight to someone other than dean :idea: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
23578 Posted September 10, 2003 Share Posted September 10, 2003 TEARZ-brudda, i feel you on that statement. that's my hot button with dean. kucinich is straight up the right choice. my problem with him stems from his campaign. he didn't seem that confident in the debate last night, and he's not getting coverage doing what he's doing. he needs to rally the youth vote. i don't know, dean has the internet thing going on, why doesn't kucinich go online and make some noise. dean has the graffiti in the background, kucinich should go on mtv, like clinton did, or just get up on the networks and do some stupid shit to get noticed. alot of the candidates talk pretty, (dean, kerry, gephardt, leiberman) but everyone knows they're not 100% right, yet they're too scared to vote for anyone else because their horse has a chance. as far as last nights debate at Morgan State, Al Sharpton got his message across, as far as i'm concerned, the ball is in their court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted September 10, 2003 Share Posted September 10, 2003 Originally posted by TEARZ i wonder how the dean supporters will feel when dean sprints to the center after (if) he secures the nomination. he's fraudulent. i can't believe that people aren't picking up on it by now. I'm going to have to disagree with you here. He is relatively centrist on a lot of issues, so there won't be any "sprint[ing] to the center" - he's already there. He's never portrayed himself as an ultra-liberal candidate. The press, on the other hand, may have done so mostly because of his anti-war stance. All of his views on the issues are available at www.deanforamerica.com, so how has he been fraudulent? Dean has been the frontrunner for almost two months now, so I'm expecting the other candidates to start attacking him negatively. Lieberman did just that, but, to Dean's credit, he was able to rebuff Lieberman's attempts. And, furthermore, I hope you're not being completely honest when you say that Dean is "not an acceptable option." In order to get aWol out of the White House, any Dem (*cough*save Lieberman*cough*) should be an acceptable option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted September 10, 2003 Share Posted September 10, 2003 Originally posted by rip wheres the bush option? thats who im voting for. Yeah, Bush has shown a ton of compassion for those in the military these past few years (and his entire life). /sarcasm. Read up: Bush's 'Bring 'em on' speech rings hollow as he cuts benefits for soldiers, veterans Frustrated veterans accuse Bush of breaking promises http://www.awolbush.com/ http://www.awolbush.com/images/bushbillboard2.jpg'>http://www.awolbush.com/images/CheneyBillboard_sm.jpg'>http://www.awolbush.com/images/bushbillboard1.jpg'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TEARZ Posted September 11, 2003 Share Posted September 11, 2003 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob I hope you're not being completely honest when you say that Dean is "not an acceptable option." In order to get aWol out of the White House, any Dem (*cough*save Lieberman*cough*) should be an acceptable option. haha, word, there certainly was a bit of hyperbole involved in the statement. to me, dean isn't an acceptable progressive option; compared to W, he's the motherfucking man. poop, i would like to see what you would have to say about the articles browner posted a while back. actually, i do think that dean/ his campaign (which i admit has been run brilliantly thus far) HAS portrayed him as something he's not. he's NOT a peace candidate, so why does everyone think that? he's NOT a progressive, but he has widespread progressive support... this isn't just big media spreading the gospel dude, this is opportunism and misrepresentation; big media just noticed the dude a month ago so... a lot of this came/comes from the dean camp, which strategically makes sense for him, i just don't think it's 100% forthright. whatever, he's a politician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Panic Posted September 11, 2003 Share Posted September 11, 2003 Kucinich is definitely the fucking man. I skipped a class to listen to him on the radio this morning. It sucks that he isn't getting much coverage in the media, lots of people I talk to don't even know who he is, or how to pronounce his name. You'd get the impression Dean has already won the nomination with as many places as you see his face. By the way, when are the primaries over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_El Mamerro Posted September 11, 2003 Share Posted September 11, 2003 My problem with Kucinich is that he can add "repeal the law of gravity" to his list of goals without sounding any less realistic than he already does. But what the hell, I moved out of the states so I can't vote anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted September 11, 2003 Share Posted September 11, 2003 Originally posted by TEARZ poop, i would like to see what you would have to say about the articles browner posted a while back. actually, i do think that dean/ his campaign (which i admit has been run brilliantly thus far) HAS portrayed him as something he's not. he's NOT a peace candidate, so why does everyone think that? he's NOT a progressive, but he has widespread progressive support... this isn't just big media spreading the gospel dude, this is opportunism and misrepresentation; big media just noticed the dude a month ago so... a lot of this came/comes from the dean camp, which strategically makes sense for him, i just don't think it's 100% forthright. whatever, he's a politician. I promise I'll do a search on the articles tomorrow .. I just have too much shit to do tonight. And I think your statements re: his campaign are slightly off. You essentially said that he's not X, yet people believe him to be X, therefore it is his campaign's fault. I disagree. The media, latching on to the lowest denominator, has run with the fact that, because he hollers about the war, he's the PEACE CANDIDATE. The media has further extrapolated this into him being progressive. It's incorrect, as you point out, but the media doesn't seem to care. Read this article by Dick Morris in yesterday's NY Post, calling Dean "ultra-liberal." (Ignore the fact that Morris is a fucking idiot based on what he says in the article). Anyway, my basic statement is that his stances have always been available to anyone willing to read them. I believe the press has taken one issue and somehow turned that into his being progressive - thus I don't think one can lay all the blame on his campaign. And, no, I'm not being thick here - I agree with you that his campaign has used these widespread notions to their advantage .. but anyone in their position would have as well (not that that makes it right, I know). FURTHERMORE. ahem. The fact that he has widespread progressive support cannot be solely attributed to the fact that he has "misrepresented" himself. If that were true, you are seriously insulting the intelligence of the progressive community. Afterall, as I've said again and again, his views aren't hidden. People can (and do) look at what he stands for. The true question is, then, why do progressives continue to support him even after they realize he's not a progressive's wet dream (especially when DK is much closer to that perceived wet dream)? I believe much of that answer lies in the grass-roots organizing his campaign has done. There are endless ways that people get involved, empowering people and making them excited about the possibility of a Dean presidency. Progressives understand that Dean doesn't represent all of their views. With that said, they still believe in him. www.deanforamerica.com www.blogforamerica.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.