I Hate Republicans

[hblask 1]

Correct. The truth of the matter is, we don't deserve a man like Ron Paul. We deserve Hussein. We deserve George Bushes. We deserve Hillary Clintons and Nancy Pelosis and Sarah Palins and whatever other vaseline-smiled, glad-handing politico faggots who come slithering down the pike, standing for nothing and unable to accomplish anything beyond soaring rhetoric and analysis-paralyzed 'big ideas' - which themselves are usually rooted in some sort of impractical, partisan, idealistic bullshit that only serves to dig our graves even deeper.We deserve American Idol and Dancing With the Stars, but we absolutely, positively do not deserve a man like Ron Paul.In this regard, Democracy couldn't be more meritocratic. It never, ever elects great candidates when the electorate is undeserving.

It's about time you get here.... and sadly, you are probably correct about this. I'm hoping the awakening of the last six months to a year changes all this, but just when I start getting optimistic, I see Sarah Palin(*) on TV.(*) Not that she's the worst to come along, but if that's the best America has, we're in big trouble.

[slink 1]

Then again....http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=sXzrUztyd1Y

[CaneBrain 95]

It's about time you get here.... and sadly, you are probably correct about this. I'm hoping the awakening of the last six months to a year changes all this, but just when I start getting optimistic, I see Sarah Palin(*) on TV.(*) Not that she's the worst to come along, but if that's the best America has, we're in big trouble.

It's the truth but to say it means you are elitist.Sarah Palin is a big turd. Her views on the nuclear treaty and Iran are borderline insane.

[brvheart 1,752]

I have zero opinion one way or the other, but I guarantee that if every single thing about Sarah Palin was the same, except she was a man, then everyone, including Henry, would view 'her' very differently.I'm really surprised (not really) that groups like NOW aren't pointing this out. It's pretty shocking that they would rather be vicious liberals first, than to protect a woman in another party.

[CaneBrain 95]

I have zero opinion one way or the other, but I guarantee that if every single thing about Sarah Palin was the same, except she was a man, then everyone, including Henry, would view 'her' very differently.I'm really surprised (not really) that groups like NOW aren't pointing this out. It's pretty shocking that they would rather be vicious liberals first, than to protect a woman in another party.

She would just be George Bush as far as I can tell. With more charm.

[85suited 0]

It's the truth but to say it means you are elitist.Barack Obama is a big turd. His views on almost any topic are borderline insane.

[CaneBrain 95]

first of all you have to put fyp.second of all, no.

[brvheart 1,752]

She would just be George Bush as far as I can tell. With more charm.

...so a two-term president that was re-elected in the middle of an unpopular war. I agree.

[CaneBrain 95]

...so a two-term president that was re-elected in the middle of an unpopular war. I agree.

Well, no, because everyone started disliking her before she got the chance (see polls on her presidential chances). I meant more like an idiot who says they like Ronald Reagan but clearly never heard him speak or read about stuff he championed......and will have a 29% approval rating once people really get to know her.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

Correct. The truth of the matter is, we don't deserve a man like Ron Paul. We deserve Hussein. We deserve George Bushes. We deserve Hillary Clintons and Nancy Pelosis and Sarah Palins and whatever other vaseline-smiled, glad-handing politico faggots who come slithering down the pike, standing for nothing and unable to accomplish anything beyond soaring rhetoric and analysis-paralyzed 'big ideas' - which themselves are usually rooted in some sort of impractical, partisan, idealistic bullshit that only serves to dig our graves even deeper.We deserve American Idol and Dancing With the Stars, but we absolutely, positively do not deserve a man like Ron Paul.In this regard, Democracy couldn't be more meritocratic. It never, ever elects great candidates when the electorate is undeserving.

Welcome back, Mr. Awesome. Quoted for the painful truth.

I have zero opinion one way or the other, but I guarantee that if every single thing about Sarah Palin was the same, except she was a man, then everyone, including Henry, would view 'her' very differently.I'm really surprised (not really) that groups like NOW aren't pointing this out. It's pretty shocking that they would rather be vicious liberals first, than to protect a woman in another party.

I was on the board of NOW New Jersey when we endorsed Republican Christine Todd Whitman for governor. In fact, I could even say I was one of the pivotal votes, because it was an evenly split board, and I made a pretty impassioned speech in favor of Whitman.It was a huge deal for us. We had never endorsed a Republican for the governorship, and in New Jersey NOW actually had a decent amout of sway with women voters. Our endorsements usually made the front page. We lost a lot of members over it, members whose perception of NOW was that we existed to support a liberal, hence Democratic, platform. But we gained the respect of a lot of other people, for proving that we do put women's interests above party affiliation. After that endorsement, both parties in Trenton respected our power.BUT... NOW has non-negotiables. And the number one non-negotiable is reproductive choice.[i love that Palin said Bristol was "choosing life" by being a knocked-up teenager. "Choosing life" is fine. We're not one bit opposed to choosing life -- so long as it's a choice, and not a matter of government force. What she probably should have said was "Bristol's choices don't matter one bit to me. I'm forcing her to have this baby, and I'll jail her if she doesn't."]We endorsed Christie Todd Whitman because she was strongly pro-choice, and because she would be the first female governor in New Jersey history. She proved to be a very good governor, and pretty uncorruptible even in Trenton's extremely corrupt environment. Because she understood the value of a woman's viewpoint, she also appointed New Jersey's first female Chief Justice and filled a lot of other cabinet positions with women. Republican or independent women, mostly, and NOW was absolutely thrilled with it. In fact, as I recall, we didn't disagree with a single one of her female Republican nominees, because she supported pro-choice Rebublican women.But there is no way that NOW would compromise the reproductive rights of 150 million women in order to further the political ambitions of one.[P.S. It's not really NOW's position that women need "protecting."]

[vbnautilus 48]

I have zero opinion one way or the other, but I guarantee that if every single thing about Sarah Palin was the same, except she was a man, then everyone, including Henry, would view 'her' very differently.I'm really surprised (not really) that groups like NOW aren't pointing this out. It's pretty shocking that they would rather be vicious liberals first, than to protect a woman in another party.

Sure, being woman is one of her weaknesses, but it's far from her biggest one.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

Sure, being woman is one of her weaknesses, but it's far from her biggest one.

Pbbbbthththpppt.

[hblask 1]

I have zero opinion one way or the other, but I guarantee that if every single thing about Sarah Palin was the same, except she was a man, then everyone, including Henry, would view 'her' very differently.

Totally disagree. I actually had some respect and a wait-and-see attitude toward her at first, but when she started saying we should bomb Iran, I gave up on her. She's just another big-talking Bush neocon. Some of her early speeches were pretty impressive, and I really didn't care about a lot of the things she got criticized for. But wanting to get us into another unwinnable war in the middle east is just nuts.Plus, if you look at actual data, she is in the top ten for governors who increased spending per capita per year, hardly the position she is trying to sell now.

[brvheart's I Phone 0]

Liar

[akoff 0]

I don't like her...but I like nancy a whole lot less! Still a caveman i guess but I don't even like women on the golf course and certainly not in the white house.

[jmkiser 0]

We're wondering if Sarah Palin wasn't a woman....?The majority would dislike her even more?I'm pretty sure all she's got going for her is the fact that she is a beautiful woman. And maybe that "charm", which is probably the most fake thing about her...Copy pasting other people's political points of views so you can fly around and preach to the choir... well, that's not the toughest thing in the world to do. Add in a heart-warming story about your family and you get to play the victim, too.Republicans don't understand, we don't hate her because she's "threatening". We hate her because we can see right through her to the soulless dark core that runs the machine."AMG, someone made a joke regarding Down's Syndrome (sp?)!!!! Score another political point for me!"

[strategy 4]

she's also pretty awesome at taking down bullet points.

[Don Giovanni 0]

Totally disagree. I actually had some respect and a wait-and-see attitude toward her at first, but when she started saying we should bomb Iran, I gave up on her. She's just another big-talking Bush neocon. Some of her early speeches were pretty impressive, and I really didn't care about a lot of the things she got criticized for. But wanting to get us into another unwinnable war in the middle east is just nuts.Plus, if you look at actual data, she is in the top ten for governors who increased spending per capita per year, hardly the position she is trying to sell now.

lol @ a war with iran being unwinnable. in reality, we could crush them in an instant, if we were willing to actually fight a war, which we havent been in a long time, obviously. the key would be to take over and establish a constitutional republic, and remain there indefinitely like japan and germany (who are not doing so bad).not that sarah palin knows any of this of course.

[strategy 4]

lol @ a war with iran being unwinnable. in reality, we could crush them in an instant, if we could overcome this obstacle that we are incapable of overcoming.

[AmScray 355]

lol @ a war with iran being unwinnable. in reality, we could crush them in an instant, if we were willing to actually fight a war, which we havent been in a long time,

You're an enormous faggot, but what you said here is 100% accurate.

obviously. the key would be to take over and establish a constitutional republic, and remain there indefinitely like japan and germany (who are not doing so bad).

This part is 100% inaccurate, and you're still a faggot.

[Don Giovanni 0]

You're an enormous faggot, but what you said here is 100% accurate.This part is 100% inaccurate, and you're still a faggot.

saying "100% accurate" is redundant.

[strategy 4]

saying "Don Giovanni [...] faggot" is redundant.

[Balloon guy 158]

You know what I hate?That this president is giving money to Google to make sure his political message is top of the list with regards to Goldman SachsI wonder if it had anything to do with Google giving him less than Goldman Sachs during the campaign?

At OpenSecrets.org, you find the list of top contributors to the Obama campaign. Google Inc is 6th in the list with $373,212 , behind Goldman Sachs, $627,730;University of California, $523,120; JPMorgan Chase & Co,$398,021; Citigroup Inc,$393,899; UBS AG, $378,400; and just slightly ahead of Harvard University, $369,802. Microsoft Corp donated $276,925 and ranked 15th among the top contributors.

[Southern Buddhist 1]

I wonder if it had anything to do with Google giving him less than Goldman Sachs during the campaign?

I wonder if Enron being one of Bush's top donors had anything to do with the lack of federal oversight while they robbed employees and investors blind?

[Balloon guy 158]

I wonder if Enron being one of Bush's top donors had anything to do with the lack of federal oversight while they robbed employees and investors blind?

There's a good book called a Conspiracy of Fools.You should read it so you can know what you are talking about with regards to Enron.Or you can just go on pretending that Obama paying off Hillary's campaign debt with 'stimulus money' doesn't make him a real crook, not like the pretend one you guys try so hard to convince yourselves that Bush was...