Condi v. Hillary - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-05-2004, 09:51 PM   #31
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 31
Local Time: 12:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
As soon as conservatives learn to avoid getting baited into these silly abortion litmus tests, GOP candidates could take all offices.
There is nothing silly about the slaughter of 25 million unborn babies. Those just aren't litmus tests, those are moral tests which are indicative about a candidate's logic in all other areas where morals are concerned.
__________________

__________________
GOP_Catholic is offline  
Old 11-05-2004, 10:10 PM   #32
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,153
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Man what is the deal... does every FYM thread normally degenerate into abortion, gay rights, or Christian-baiting/ secularist attacking thread? LOL.

Anyways... IMO Hillary and Pelosi are too polarizing as candidates. Pelosi is insanely liberal, is she not? California liberal if my memory serves me. If Kerry couldn't get elected I doubt Pelosi will. It would be like Newt Gingrich running for President. As for Hillary... the mere mention of her name causes feelings of revulsion in the hearts of the right.

No matter how much the culture of the United States changes, a women President is a little ways away... not to mention Hillary has too much baggage.

Arnold has no way of running. I also agree that Arnold would have probably lost in his California primary if he had to run. He got lucky. I don't even think Arnold will ever have a chance to run for President. There will never be an Ammendment in his lifetime- at least, to allow him to run- no matter how much posturing there is. Do I think it is fair? That is another argument for another time.
__________________

__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-05-2004, 11:08 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: full of sound and fury
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 01:13 PM
I don't understand why Americans seem to love Clinton but hate his wife. Can this be explained?

foray
__________________
foray is offline  
Old 11-05-2004, 11:10 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:13 AM
I think that it had something to do with the penis
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-05-2004, 11:12 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: full of sound and fury
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 01:13 PM
All hail, all hail.

foray
__________________
foray is offline  
Old 11-05-2004, 11:14 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Thanks everybody - i'll be here all week, dont forget to tip your waitress/
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-06-2004, 12:09 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by GOP_Catholic
There is nothing silly about the slaughter of 25 million unborn babies. Those just aren't litmus tests, those are moral tests which are indicative about a candidate's logic in all other areas where morals are concerned.
Two things:

First - we've had how many years of conservative Presidents, and how many abortions did they prevent? Zero.

Second - look at any discussion of abortion. It is a polarizing issue. The object of the game is to define the "center line" for the debate, and watch how both sides spit. For conservatives, use the partial birth abortion as the starting point, and you polarize more people to the right. Use stem cell research as the starting line, and you polarize more people to the left.

Millions die. But that is not even considered collateral damage in this political game.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-06-2004, 04:02 PM   #38
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 144
Local Time: 12:13 AM
I don't think it's realistic that either Hillary or Condi will every become president, although I do think that Hillary will be her party's nominee in 2008 (and go down in flames in the general).

Eventually we will have a female president and I think that that woman is more likely to come out of the republican party than the democratic party. The inherent weakness that any female candidate for president would have is a perception of weakness, particularly on issues of national security. A woman coming from the republican party will have a much easier time countering those perceptions. (Think of Margaret Thatcher, a Tory and 'the iron lady' to boot).
__________________
nicholsfornixon is offline  
Old 11-06-2004, 04:44 PM   #39
War Child
 
Seabird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: with 2 kids in high school they tell her that she's uncool, but she's still preoccupied with 1985
Posts: 906
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Condi!
__________________
Seabird is offline  
Old 11-07-2004, 07:04 AM   #40
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 12:13 AM
"Condi" has an oil tanker named after her, not just any oil tanker, an exxon one. Apparently for services rendered in the name of the exxon oil company.

Knowing how these vultures and scoundels work, this she should be barred from any elected office.

Oh and the fact she let multiple warnings about the threat of an attack on the US by terrorists past through her desk without so much as raising a finger to stop it, isn't exactly a great recommendation either.
__________________
popshopper is offline  
Old 11-07-2004, 07:17 AM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:13 AM
I don't see Hillary as winning the nomination in 2008 if she runs. She's just too controversial. She's like alot of other outspoken people, she's made alot of enemies. The Democrats have other stars now, like John Edwards and Wesley Clark, who will be more viable in 2008 than Hillary. All of this talk about Hillary is alot of hype to me, quite frankly. I'm not even sure I envision her running in 2008. Hillary is high in the visibility department, but not the popularity department.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com