The Next President?

Highhorse. Dude, you really must learn not to repress like that.

It bugs you that people make their own choices while in the voting booth? That is too bad. Thanks just the same I will vote for whom I choose, not who you think, or rather scream that I should. If I want to vote for a democrat I will, a republican I will, a third party candidate I will. So apparently, will a multitude of others here.

You, and others like you, need to get over yourselves. The font of all political wisdom you ain't.

Bye the by, I voted for Bush the first time 'round, and Nader the second. I voted for Mr. Bushes father both times, too, and against Clinton twice. I even voted for Reagan both times. I also happen to be a lifelong concervative democrat. As I stated before, my choices are my own, no one else's. You don't like 'em? 'Tis sorry I am!

As a concervative democrat...oh wait...maybe tommorrow I'll be a concervative Green...or heaven forbid, a concervative evengelical rightwing concervative republican. That'd get your gourd wouldn't it.

Nah, I'll remain a concervative democrat.

[edit on 31-3-2006 by seagull]

[edit on 31-3-2006 by seagull]

You need a 3rd option, it is supposed to be a democracy, 2 valid choices is not democratic. Similar in the UK but not at the US level

The world shouldn't view America based on george bush. More than half of the voters voted against bush. That is not a mandate. The reason the democrats lost is because of the religious vote. Many Christians were told to vote for bush because "he is a religious man". You cannot overcome a block of voters who believe that one man is "ordained by God". I don't believe george bush is a religious man but he says he is and most Christians take him at his word. The democrats should point out that you don't have to be a republican to be a Christian.

Actually I think it had more to do with abortion. Many Christians (especially Catholics) have a "moral obligation" to not vote for someone pro-abortion.

1) Who do you think employs the population goofie? You people crack me up. Socialists! Everything will be alright if no one is rich, riiiiiiiiight.

2) You said above in your post that Reagan was a good preident. Can't have it both ways goof.

OneGodJesus...these statements show your level of intelligence. For you to stoop to name calling shows your immaturity and lack of any substance to your statements. At least, no one wants to listen to a whiny little name caller. Also I'm not your "pal."

I said Reagan was a good president..yes. How is that having it both ways? Who is not making any sense here? I'm a democrat, but certainly can admit when someone from another party does a good job.

And...thank you to the poster who reminded me that I forgot Johnson. So that makes it 6 dems to 6 reps since FDR with 5 solid democratic presidents and 1 solid republican. Who are the "goofs" here OGJ?? Looks like most of the republicans to me!!

Lastly, OGJ...for a Christian, and probably a born again based on the name you chose, you have a lot to learn about what it means to be a good Christian. But of course all of you can simply say your sorry for your bad behavior and that makes everything okay!

I'm a goof?

Actually the President has nothing to do with whether or not abortion is legal. That I think was decided by the Supreme Court and congress. Granted he will probably pack the supreme court with people who share his views but how can one supreme court decision say that abortion is constitutional and another say it is not. Issues are either constitutional or they are not. The supreme court should not be used to further a political agenda it should be used to protect the freedoms of all americans. Granted unborn americans are still americans and should be given the same protections of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I just don't see voting for someone who says "I don't support abortion" versus another who says he will uphold the laws of the United States whether he agrees with them or not. The president should uphold the laws not press a personal agenda.

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
1) OneGodJesus...these statements show your level of intelligence. For you to stoop to name calling shows your immaturity and lack of any substance to your statements. At least, no one wants to listen to a whiny little name caller. Also I'm not your "pal."

2) I said Reagan was a good president..yes. How is that having it both ways? Who is not making any sense here? I'm a democrat, but certainly can admit when someone from another party does a good job.

3) And...thank you to the poster who reminded me that I forgot Johnson. So that makes it 6 dems to 6 reps since FDR with 5 solid democratic presidents and 1 solid republican. Who are the "goofs" here OGJ?? Looks like most of the republicans to me!!

4) Lastly, OGJ...for a Christian, and probably a born again based on the name you chose, you have a lot to learn about what it means to be a good Christian. But of course all of you can simply say your sorry for your bad behavior and that makes everything okay!

1) Originally I meant it in a punch you in the arm good natured remark. Guess we can't be civil here.

2) YOU said that there were no good republican president. reread your statement

3) evidently you didn't read the history lesson, where is the disconnect here?

4) you people always gotta bring my religion into things to muddy the waters of your false account of things as a defense. guess that is the way of the simple. post on mr marx without regarding history.

[edit on 1/4/06 by OneGodJesus]

guess that is the way of the simple.

Again, sadly...you must resort to name calling. This truly shows the level of your character....You have no argument so you resort to name calling...that is what is known as a character flaw.

Lastly....I never said ALL republicans were bad. Why don't you re-read this whole thread and find where I said that....which of course, you won't be able to do!!

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Wow...this is a first....a QUADRUPLE post. I have no idea how I did it...but sorry about that everyone!

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Sorry again...as I said...no idea how I QUADRUPLE posted??

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Instead of just saying sorry again about this QUAD post of mine.....I'd like to know what happened to peruvianmonk? He doesn't seem to have anything to say in response to what people have had to say about his original post.

I'd really like an answer monk as to what an average muslim is!! Thanks!

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Just who in the world told you young Einsteins that voting Independent for Ross Perot or Ralph Nader would be efficacious? That's why the Democrats lost the last election because you morons wanted to go on a "shopping trip" for a president. Election time, you have to take what is offered on your plate and make a choice that means something. Don't just make some sort of "statement" trying to reflect your brilliant political mind and stand. We all knew the choices were limited, but by God, next time make your vote count, or don't bother to vote at all! Voting for Perot or Ralph Nader! Ha! Just thinking that some idiot would do that makes my blood boil. Why??, because it meant we have that bloodthirsty, oil-thirsty, moron idiot Bush in the White House who will probably get us all killed. My God, no wonder our country is in the ditch!

AMEN!! Every vote for an independent or third party member like a Perot or a Nader might as well be a vote for a republican. You're right.....these kind of votes are senseless. Pick a candidate that can win and vote for the one you think will do the best job.

But it is pretty much futile because the powers that be will make sure the person they want will be in the white house anyway. Voting really doesn't matter in this country anymore. The last election was an obvious fudge job and so was the one before it....GWB has no right to be in that office, but he is the perfect puppet for the people that really run this country!

Kennedy managed to get elected even though the people that truly run this country wanted Nixon in there. And what happened to Kennedy?

Democracy? What democray?

Seagull,

A good indication of whether one is intelligent enough to make a sound decision politically is whether you can SPELL. It is obvious your lack of education and intellect has left you unable to spell. I question whether you have sense enough to choose a letter much less a President. Take that you crazy Republican.

Democrat /Republican is there really that much difference? If you drew a line from the east coast to the west they would both end up somewhere in Kansas. Killing innocent women and children like we did in both Vietnam and in Iraq is not christian. It's sick, actually if we thought of our selves as human beings and not nationalistic snots we may be able to preserve the earth we're riding on. We will get exactly what we deserve won't we? It just seems that some people are deluding themselves to think they are the "chosen ones" Actually Americans are no better than anyone else probably all things considered we have been much more destructive. We will all be paying for Mai lai, Iran, El Salvadore, Vietnam, Nicauraugua etc. you know the sins of our fathers.

My, my, such a temper you have there, little horse.

Creative spelling aside, tell me what you really think. Since when does correct spelling indicate a lack of intelligence? It would seem to indicate a lack of a spellchecker nothing more.

Try and have a civil conversation without the personal attacks, and maybe, just maybe, you might sway someone to your way of thinking. Are you even capable of having a conversation with someone who disagrees with you? Your past few posts would indicate not. Your loss, sonny boy.

Oh, by the by... back at 'cha.

Originally posted by Carseller4
Democrats are weak and raise taxes, Republicans are strong and lower taxes.

Wow... are Republicans God, too?

You just keep voting for the candidate with the (R) next to his name. Better yet, why don't you just mix it up a bit and vote for a candidate with a (D) at the same time - I mean, they aren't much different when you get down to brass tacks.

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
1) Again, sadly...you must resort to name calling. This truly shows the level of your character....You have no argument so you resort to name calling...that is what is known as a character flaw.

2) Lastly....I never said ALL republicans were bad. Why don't you re-read this whole thread and find where I said that....which of course, you won't be able to do!!

[edit on 1-4-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

1) Not name calling on that last post. Just an observation. With a statement like " GWB probably wanted the 9/11 attack to happen so he could come in and play savior." you really show your political savvy. It is a simplistic view that generates thoughts like this. I have some questions. What would you have done in the face of a 911 attack? What would you do with intelligence that may or may not be complete or is too vague to do anything about? What would you do with a economy like ours (details please). What would your foreign policy be to say the Palistinians or the Iraqi's be, should you be voted president. I wager that the answers will be less than enlighting.
2) and I qoute "Other than that, what other republican has done anything for this country in the last 100 years? I'll tell you...NONE!! " nuff said.

1) Not name calling on that last post. Just an observation. With a statement like " GWB probably wanted the 9/11 attack to happen so he could come in and play savior." you really show your political savvy. It is a simplistic view that generates thoughts like this. I have some questions. What would you have done in the face of a 911 attack? What would you do with intelligence that may or may not be complete or is too vague to do anything about? What would you do with a economy like ours (details please). What would your foreign policy be to say the Palistinians or the Iraqi's be, should you be voted president. I wager that the answers will be less than enlighting.
2) and I qoute "Other than that, what other republican has done anything for this country in the last 100 years? I'll tell you...NONE!! " nuff said.

1. I'm not a politician. I have been discussing politicians and their choices...not mine. I personally had no information or intelligence regarding the planned 9/11 attack, but Bush did and did nothing about it. Again, he was probably involved in the attack with Bin laden. You ask what would I do with an economy like ours or with Iraq and Palestine should I be voted president. Kind of a dumb question as I will not be voted president and I am not a politician. I would like for our president to be able to handle these things...but GWB is too busy trying to figure out where he can make money and less concerned about how many Americans die in the process.

2. Not sure what your point is here. I stated that Reagan was the only good republican president out of the last 6. You said that I said all republicans are bad. So you were wrong...........What is your point?

I will tell you what I would do with Iran right now though. I would nuke the whole country!

If that is "less than enlightening" OGJ..oh well. I'm not here to enlighten you. Obviously you are already enlightened by your OGJ...or at least you pretend to be.

I just love Born Again Cultians!!

Whatever, dude...a doubleminded man is unstable in all his ways.

In other news, martians have landed on the whitehouse lawn and they now control Bush's mind....He is said to be in fair to middle health and intends to resurrect Reagan to consult with him on topics like Iran-Contra and other "great president" stuff. He is also said to be wanting to mirror with his new brother Bill Clinton on financial matters, dragging the economy into a welfare state instead of a bully state. He recently said he was considering taking christianity to new heights by incorporating rastafarians, hindus and satanists for consultative matters and just good weed, sex and power tripping....um, how many fingers am I holding up?

You are all over the map in your views man.

[edit on 3/4/06 by OneGodJesus]

Whatever, dude...a doubleminded man is unstable in all his ways.

Well OGJ, at least you are able to admit your shortcomings. That is the first step!

I'm all over the place in my views? NO....once again, why don't you re-read what I've posted. I have one quite clear view. It must be your double-mindedness that causes you to see more than one view!