Daniel To Support Mccain Over Hillary.

[Otodat 0]

Didn't start off wellGot worseEnded badlyHer looks are a symbolic representation of what her presidency would be like

Are you kidding. Have you seen pictures of her recently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hillary...ham_Clinton.jpgIf her presidency is anything like that pic, man we're gonna have one energetic caffeine fueled presidency if you ask me .

[nudist30 0]

Okay all you pathetic excuses for BUSH lovers and jackasses. You all gone too far when it comes to katrina and BUSH. BUSH didnt do a damn thing for the majority of the people in New Orleans. The head of FEMA wasn't to blame as he was begging for help from BUSH in the form of the National Guard and Airlifting of supplies and BUSH turned a deaf ear and then blamed him. I don't blame the head of FEMA for leaving when BUSH couldnt be the stand up guy you are making him out to be and have the supplies and troops in there to restore order to New Orleans right away. No it took him 5 days before the Superdome and the New Orleans Civic Center was evacuated. 5 DAYS, Why? Because bush told the head of FEMA he had no way to get the national guard into new orleans which is a bunch of BS because it don't take but a few damn helicopters to land troops in a war zone and that shouldn't make any damn difference when it came to the aftermath of Katrina. The problem is Bush had his head up his @ss for 5 days because he couldnt figure anyway of helping those people. As far as Ray Nagin is concerned, he never said BUSH did all he could do. He asked on national televison when the federal government and BUSH was going to help New Orleans out of this situation. So why dont you all just shut the hell up and realize that BUSH was, is and always will be a FAILED president. As for Reagan that dumb SOB couldnt be the president of Jack CHIT. If you forget he came up with reaganomics which was a disaster economically for the nation and caused all sorts of problems. He was no where near the best president in the last 100 years. Try FDR and all the hell he went through. THink about that before you start preaching how great republicans are you jackasses.

[NickZepp 0]

Okay all you pathetic excuses for BUSH lovers and jackasses. You all gone too far when it comes to katrina and BUSH. BUSH didnt do a damn thing for the majority of the people in New Orleans. The head of FEMA wasn't to blame as he was begging for help from BUSH in the form of the National Guard and Airlifting of supplies and BUSH turned a deaf ear and then blamed him. I don't blame the head of FEMA for leaving when BUSH couldnt be the stand up guy you are making him out to be and have the supplies and troops in there to restore order to New Orleans right away. No it took him 5 days before the Superdome and the New Orleans Civic Center was evacuated. 5 DAYS, Why? Because bush told the head of FEMA he had no way to get the national guard into new orleans which is a bunch of BS because it don't take but a few damn helicopters to land troops in a war zone and that shouldn't make any damn difference when it came to the aftermath of Katrina. The problem is Bush had his head up his @ss for 5 days because he couldnt figure anyway of helping those people. As far as Ray Nagin is concerned, he never said BUSH did all he could do. He asked on national televison when the federal government and BUSH was going to help New Orleans out of this situation. So why dont you all just shut the hell up and realize that BUSH was, is and always will be a FAILED president. As for Reagan that dumb SOB couldnt be the president of Jack CHIT. If you forget he came up with reaganomics which was a disaster economically for the nation and caused all sorts of problems. He was no where near the best president in the last 100 years. Try FDR and all the hell he went through. THink about that before you start preaching how great republicans are you jackasses.

90% of your post is complete crap. I said the last 50 years. Last I looked FDR kicked the bucket 63 years ago.The federal gvt reacted quicker then it does for most major disasters for Katrina. They started going into Katrina about a day after the disaster got there within 2 days. You can't do much better than that at the national level. The problem was that Louisiana simply wasn't prepared for what happened as a state. They never had a disaster like that happen there before there was no way for them to prepare for it. There was nothing a President or anyone at the national level could do any better. You look at the funding at the state level. They didn't have any money for rescuing people or sending in anything. That's pretty sad. What can a President do in a situation where the state isn't funded? A president isn't going to go into a state half assed and without proper funding. It would have just ended up worse then it actually ended up being. NOLA was doomed from the beginning and that wasn't even a major Hurricane. It was only a mid level hurricane. If a top level Hurricane ever hits New Orleans that city has no shot.

[JustDoIt 10]

Okay all you pathetic excuses for BUSH lovers and jackasses. You all gone too far when it comes to katrina and BUSH. BUSH didnt do a damn thing for the majority of the people in New Orleans. The head of FEMA wasn't to blame as he was begging for help from BUSH in the form of the National Guard and Airlifting of supplies and BUSH turned a deaf ear and then blamed him. I don't blame the head of FEMA for leaving when BUSH couldnt be the stand up guy you are making him out to be and have the supplies and troops in there to restore order to New Orleans right away. No it took him 5 days before the Superdome and the New Orleans Civic Center was evacuated. 5 DAYS, Why? Because bush told the head of FEMA he had no way to get the national guard into new orleans which is a bunch of BS because it don't take but a few damn helicopters to land troops in a war zone and that shouldn't make any damn difference when it came to the aftermath of Katrina. The problem is Bush had his head up his @ss for 5 days because he couldnt figure anyway of helping those people. As far as Ray Nagin is concerned, he never said BUSH did all he could do. He asked on national televison when the federal government and BUSH was going to help New Orleans out of this situation. So why dont you all just shut the hell up and realize that BUSH was, is and always will be a FAILED president. As for Reagan that dumb SOB couldnt be the president of Jack CHIT. If you forget he came up with reaganomics which was a disaster economically for the nation and caused all sorts of problems. He was no where near the best president in the last 100 years. Try FDR and all the hell he went through. THink about that before you start preaching how great republicans are you jackasses.

BABBLE BABBLE BABBLEYour ranting on your posts is really VERY BORING and lack any historical substance. (That means WHERES THE BEEF! Some facts instead of your BABBLE)Maybe you could give us a history lesson why FDR packed the courts?

[El Guapo 8]

BABBLE BABBLE BABBLEYour ranting on your posts is really VERY BORING and lack any historical substance. (That means WHERES THE BEEF! Some facts instead of your BABBLE)Maybe you could give us a history lesson why FDR packed the courts?

He created the New Deal. So how is that one working out for everyone?Talk about a short term fix causing long term problems.

[JustDoIt 10]

He created the New Deal. So how is that one working out for everyone?Talk about a short term fix causing long term problems.

Correct!But without packing court he never could have pulled off the New Deal.One brilliant thing FDR did was keep the press out of the war theaters, to bad we don't do that today knowing that the press has undermined the troops and fed people like nudist.

[El Guapo 8]

Correct!But without packing court he never could have pulled off the New Deal.One brilliant thing FDR did was keep the press out of the war theaters, to bad we don't do that today knowing that the press has undermined the troops and fed people like nudist.

Umm I was not agreeing with you, the new deal has set this country back 50 years. We have a social security program that was based on the thought that life expectancy being 60 years old (they never intended to hand out the money in SS). We have so many wlefare programs that we cannot even keep track of them.I do however agree that the press is a locust that is destroying this country.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

JustDoIt, just check your history books. FDR attempted to pack the courts, but it never happened. His plan was to increase the Supreme Court from nine justices to fifteen, giving him the ability to pick six justices all at once and thus pack the court with his favorites. He made this suggestion after the Court had gutted some of his New Deal legislation. The plan was first proposed in the Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937.As you might notice, we still have just nine justices, and at no time in the past century did we ever have fifteen. That's because the plan was shot down, with both Democrats and Republicans opposing it. He soon realized he'd have a fight on his hands if he persisted in trying to expand the court, and, considering how many other irons he had in the fire, and the situation of world politics, with Hitler having gained power in Germany, he decided he shouldn't waste him time or his political capital on what would be a losing battle, so he backed down. The bill was never passed, and the "court-packing" scheme (and it is this bill to which that phrase ALWAYS refers) never took place. What DID happen, and why some people think the court did get packed, was that the justices realized that they had just barely dodged a major attack on their power. They, too, decided that they were not ready to have a battle royale over the New Deal, and from then on, they mostly approved the legislation whenever it was challenged. They were cowed by FDR's enormous popularity in the country, half persuaded by his argument that desperate times called for desperate measures, and unwilling to risk another frontal attack.There's your history lesson on FDR and the court-packing scheme, courtesy of a girl who majored in 20th Century American history and wrote her thesis on World War II.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

P.S. to El Guapo...Social Security is in dire need of reform. I used to do political work, and one thing I did was write a white paper on Social Security that was distributed to members of Congress. It is a looming disaster for the country. But that's not FDR's fault.He and his team put Social Security in place in 1937, and they set it up so that it served as well as possible the American society of 1937. Most women did not work outside the home, most families had four or more children (meaning the next generaion would always be bigger than the one before it), and most people died around 65, meaning that money didn't have to be handed out for long. The payments were to preserve some level of dignity for the 60-year-old working poor, who were too old and frail to work and without income were falling into desperate poverty during the Depression.So, 1) no two-earner families; 2) lots o' kids; and 3) lifespan of 65. All three things were true in 1937. If they were still true, Social Security would be working great. Unfortunately, none of them are true today. FDR never thought he was designing the system for all time. In fact, right in the legislation that establishes it, there is a provision for it to be revised, from the bottom up if necessary, to keep abreast with changing demographics. The problem is that nobody after FDR ever did that. The baby boom came 60 freaking years ago. If we had done something then, Social Security would not be in trouble today. Now, it may be too late.

[El Guapo 8]

P.S. to El Guapo...Social Security is in dire need of reform. I used to do political work, and one thing I did was write a white paper on Social Security that was distributed to members of Congress. It is a looming disaster for the country. But that's not FDR's fault.He and his team put Social Security in place in 1937, and they set it up so that it served as well as possible the American society of 1937. Most women did not work outside the home, most families had four or more children (meaning the next generaion would always be bigger than the one before it), and most people died around 65, meaning that money didn't have to be handed out for long. The payments were to preserve some level of dignity for the 60-year-old working poor, who were too old and frail to work and without income were falling into desperate poverty during the Depression.So, 1) no two-earner families; 2) lots o' kids; and 3) lifespan of 65. All three things were true in 1937. If they were still true, Social Security would be working great. Unfortunately, none of them are true today. FDR never thought he was designing the system for all time. In fact, right in the legislation that establishes it, there is a provision for it to be revised, from the bottom up if necessary, to keep abreast with changing demographics. The problem is that nobody after FDR ever did that. The baby boom came 60 freaking years ago. If we had done something then, Social Security would not be in trouble today. Now, it may be too late.

I agree with you 1000%. You say 65 I have seen number low as 60, but whatever same difference. Sometime in the last 60 years people decided that SS was a sole retirement account.Regardless of the non-action of all the following administrations, the New Deal was a short term fix that had long term negative implications. I am in no way saying that I have a better idea of what should have happened, or been done, but it is evident that it has created systems that at this point are next to impossible to change or reverse.I do not necissarily agree with what the FEd is doing right now, the media has made long term into a matter of months instead of years. Countries go into recession, its normal. Too much government does not allow financial markets to work themselves out.

[nudist30 0]

90% of your post is complete crap. I said the last 50 years. Last I looked FDR kicked the bucket 63 years ago.The federal gvt reacted quicker then it does for most major disasters for Katrina. They started going into Katrina about a day after the disaster got there within 2 days. You can't do much better than that at the national level. The problem was that Louisiana simply wasn't prepared for what happened as a state. They never had a disaster like that happen there before there was no way for them to prepare for it. There was nothing a President or anyone at the national level could do any better. You look at the funding at the state level. They didn't have any money for rescuing people or sending in anything. That's pretty sad. What can a President do in a situation where the state isn't funded? A president isn't going to go into a state half assed and without proper funding. It would have just ended up worse then it actually ended up being. NOLA was doomed from the beginning and that wasn't even a major Hurricane. It was only a mid level hurricane. If a top level Hurricane ever hits New Orleans that city has no shot.

First of all you jackass BUSH didnt send in support was not there the day after Katrina hit. It took them 5 days to get the full federal complement of national guard and other support services into New Orleans. How do I know this because I went down there to help people try and recover along with a group of friends and other concerned citizens and when we got down there to help people out many of them if not all of the people we talked to said the federal government was no where to be seen until at least 4-5 days after Katrina hit. The state was underfunded because in the previous year BUSHY cut funding to Louisana in precisely those areas that New Orleans needed help in. So think about that before you open your big @ss mouth. As for Katrina being a mid level hurricane thats pure BS. Hurricane Katrina was a Category 4 hurricane per the National Hurricane Center and that is designated as a MAJOR HURRICANE. So you may want to get your facts straight jackass. Of course you will defend BUSH up and down because you are in love with him just like most of the other jackasses in this forum. FDR did alot more for this country than any president. But dont worry come november everything BUSH screwed up will be repaired. MCCAIN is just another BUSH wanting to keep our troops in IRAQ and cause more wars and that is his own words not a bunch of BS. The war will end once Clinton wins the election. So STICK that up your @ss and smoke it dude.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

Another misperception on JustDoIt's part is about FDR keeping the media out of war theatres. The link below is to a story on MSNBC.com this morning. The death photo of WWII photographer Ernie Pyle was finally published. Pyle was a journalist who died in action in the Pacific, and he was probably one of the most famous war correspondents in history. William L. Shirer and Eric Sevareid covered the war in Europe brilliantly as well, right from the middle of the action.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22980127/Sorry, WWII's just totally one of my "things." I might be just about the only person alive whose bookshelf is almost equally split between books on Buddha and books on Hitler (just to be clear, I don't like Hitler, but I do study him).

[Southern Buddhist 1]

Another link this morning: from the New York Times, Nicholas D. Kristof wrote a nice op-ed piece titled "Evangelicals a Liberal Can Love," mentioning that the evangelical vote could be in play this year, especially for Obama. Here it is:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/...&ei=5087%0A

[Nimue1995 1]

Another link this morning: from the New York Times, Nicholas D. Kristof wrote a nice op-ed piece titled "Evangelicals a Liberal Can Love," mentioning that the evangelical vote could be in play this year, especially for Obama. Here it is:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/...&ei=5087%0A

Thanks for the link. It is an article worth reading. For quite a few years now, I've found I have less and less in common idealogically with the so-called Christian right because of the very issues mentioned in the article. I happen to be pro-life but am also pro-sex education in the schools to teach teens how to keep from getting pregnant in the first place. And I'm all for teaching them about condom use and AIDS prevention as well. I find it very naive to believe that once a teen has started having sex that you're going to stop them with an abstinence lecture. Sorry but if a teen is already sexually active then that ship has sailed and we need to teach them how to stay healthy and not pregnant. Anyway sorry if I got off on a tangent here but it's something I feel passionately about and am at odds with the local school districts here about as well.