Official Campaign 2008 Hot Stove Thread - Page 38 - 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 08-09-2007, 11:37 AM   #556
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:22 AM


It's ok, April


I really hope I start liking Hillary soon, because it's sure looking difficult to overcome her lead.
__________________

__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:44 AM   #557
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
I personally think the Bonds question was a valid question. It's one of the biggest stories in the entire country right now. Not to mention that tt's a very controversial topic and his answer or how he went about coming to his answer would speak to his thought process/even whether he sticks to the presumption of innocence before guilt. It also normalizes he too. It's a question that more people will discuss than how they feel about Pakistan.
__________________

__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:45 AM   #558
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by unico
obama would've earned some points from me if his response was "i'm sorry, that question belongs in the PEUP forum. this is an FYM topic."


I am finding myself more and more in the Hillary camp each day. And not because she's in the lead at the moment, either. She looks more presidential every time I see her.
__________________
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:48 AM   #559
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
I personally think the Bonds question was a valid question. It's one of the biggest stories in the entire country right now. Not to mention that tt's a very controversial topic and his answer or how he went about coming to his answer would speak to his thought process/even whether he sticks to the presumption of innocence before guilt. It also normalizes he too. It's a question that more people will discuss than how they feel about Pakistan.
yeah but the question was would he invite him to the WH. does it really matter what this guy has been accused of? the question wasn't whether or not he supported him, it is whether or not he would invite him. is that really too hard to answer? it's as simple as inviting someone over to hang out or something.
__________________
unico is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:57 AM   #560
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
I don't think it's that cut and dry. Inviting Bonds to the White House is a means of honoring of him. Most of the pro and college sports teams get a day at the White House to celebrate their accomplishments. Major League Baseball couldn't even figure out a way to honor him with all of the allegations flying around. He is the new home king, the most sacred record in sports, but potentially lied to a grand jury in addition to all of the steroid talk. Do you honor the guy based on what he accomplished regardless of the allegations or do you not honor before his actually guilty of anything?
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:16 PM   #561
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
Not to mention that tt's a very controversial topic and his answer or how he went about coming to his answer would speak to his thought process/even whether he sticks to the presumption of innocence before guilt.
No way is it a valid question.

And the way he answered it, I think in a way does say, "well I don't know all the details yet", which goes along your innocence before guilt issue.

But the point is, anyone who equates this to "and he wants to run our country?" is just biasly reaching and doesn't know what they are talking about.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:22 PM   #562
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
I don't think it's that cut and dry. Inviting Bonds to the White House is a means of honoring of him. Most of the pro and college sports teams get a day at the White House to celebrate their accomplishments. Major League Baseball couldn't even figure out a way to honor him with all of the allegations flying around. He is the new home king, the most sacred record in sports, but potentially lied to a grand jury in addition to all of the steroid talk. Do you honor the guy based on what he accomplished regardless of the allegations or do you not honor before his actually guilty of anything?
i see what you're saying. but i mean really, how many liars get to pass through the white house doors? hell bush and cheney are guilty of nasty lies themselves, and congress is letting them stay there instead of holding them accountable for their lies.
__________________
unico is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:31 PM   #563
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Yes, in the grand scheme of things, Bonds walking through the door would rank low on the list of sleezebags ever to graze the White House. I agree with you all the way on that.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:32 PM   #564
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


No way is it a valid question.

And the way he answered it, I think in a way does say, "well I don't know all the details yet", which goes along your innocence before guilt issue.

But the point is, anyone who equates this to "and he wants to run our country?" is just biasly reaching and doesn't know what they are talking about.
How is it not a valid question?
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:36 PM   #565
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,251
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


How is it not a valid question?
I was just about to ask that.

Again, it was a simple question, and he had to be asked twice. He failed in every aspect of answering that question. He is showing his inexperience and he is afraid to upset potential supporters.

Ultimately though, I dont think it matters. He is done as a serious candidate. It looks like Mrs. Bill Clinton will get the nomination easily.
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:39 PM   #566
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


How is it not a valid question?
One for the pure fact that his "innocence" is still in question. It's like asking, "do you think OJ did it?" How would that be valid to ask a President?

Secondly, how many criminals walk in and out of the WH doors? No one seems to care. If no one cares, why is it a valid question?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-09-2007, 12:52 PM   #567
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


One for the pure fact that his "innocence" is still in question. It's like asking, "do you think OJ did it?" How would that be valid to ask a President?

Secondly, how many criminals walk in and out of the WH doors? No one seems to care. If no one cares, why is it a valid question?


Asking if OJ did it is a terrible analogy because it played out in the courts already. He was proven innocent. Enough said. The fact that his innocence is still in doubt is what makes it a valid question. Bond's broke the most historic record in sports. On those grounds alone, it should result in an open invitation to be honored at the white house, but it's all clouded up because of the allegations. Do you honor the act or do you ignore it based on allegations? It sure is a pretty valid question.


People may not care about liars entering the White House, but they care about the Bonds issue. It's not like this is some minor event. Bonds is one of the most polarizing figures in this country today.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 01:03 PM   #568
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,251
Local Time: 08:22 PM
He's afraid to say something wrong or unpopular. It makes me wonder if the man has any true, earnest beliefs. He did not demonstrate what a good politician looks like, and that might be why he is losing ground daily to Clinton.
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 01:09 PM   #569
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
He's afraid to say something wrong or unpopular. It makes me wonder if the man has any true, earnest beliefs.
At least on this matter he comes across as a spineless wimp. A lot of people love Barry, a lot of people hate Barry, but hardly anyone is in the middle or can't make up their mind. Grow a sack and make a decision. It's pretty simple.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 01:13 PM   #570
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
He's afraid to say something wrong or unpopular. It makes me wonder if the man has any true, earnest beliefs. He did not demonstrate what a good politician looks like, and that might be why he is losing ground daily to Clinton.
You're reacting as though this is the only question that he, or many other candidates (democrat or republican) avoid answering.

sidenote: anybody else agree that if a candidate runs over their alloted speaking time that it should be deducted from their next response time? i think they should have a total number of seconds for the entire debate. that would get them to shut up and focus on directly answering questions instead of avoiding the issue and going off on their usual soundbytes.

im already tired of politics and the election is so far away.
__________________

__________________
unico 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 08:22 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