Clinton? Obama? or Edwards? Who Will It Be?

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Let's have a look at this immigration thing again. Bush43 wanted the Kennedy-McCain bill, which would seem tos atisfy Don's requirements . The rest of us appear to have disliked it because it was toothless in its enforcement. Have we 'lost' the immigration debate? Are we doomed to be over-run?

From where I sit ,teh politicos benefit just a little too much from the chaos. They have no real incentive to give us the reforms we want. After they get tarred and feathered in '08, we may see a chastened Republican Party come back to this issue with new eyes. I don't like having to wait for so long to get reform, but this might be the only way.

Or is it? We all know the economy is on shaky ground. If the stock market tanks, will we see more agressive border enforcment? Last night, as I listened to the radio, I heard a talk show host yackingabout Steinbeck's "grapes of wrath." Has anyone here read that book?




posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
I do expect they would ignore the underlying issues.

Ignorning the billions that illegals cost this country... that is ignoring the issues. It's not worth being able to buy corn 5 cents cheaper just to have illegals suck the life out of this country.

As far as freedom goes .... no one should be 'free' to commit crimes.
That's what illegals do .. commit a crime.

Neither party is dealing with this very serious issue.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Let's have a look at this immigration thing again. Bush43 wanted the Kennedy-McCain bill, which would seem tos atisfy Don's requirements . The rest of us appear to have disliked it because it was toothless in its enforcement. Have we 'lost' the immigration debate? Are we doomed to be over-run?

Steinbeck's "grapes of wrath." Has anyone here read that book?


The problem is that the American people want teeth in the border issue and both parties can not, or will not see it. That is why who ever goes this direction will get a larger number of votes.

Giuliani wants to finish the wall with excellent surveillance and rapid response forces to secure the border. He also wants a team that analyzes all the patterns that are used to penetrate to continue to increase the efficiency of border control.

Once the borders are secure he wants to combine all state and governments agencies in tracking down and deport the majority of illegals, but give them the ability to come back with working visas if they have a clean record.

He also wants to incorporate a biometric ID system for all non-citizens to track them anywhere anytime in our country. Basically the foreigner lets say comes through customs at the airport. They get their hand scanned and then they are checked against an international data base, they are then given an ID card with their finger prints/info on it, and they must present it anytime to a person of authority. I know many on this site would scream “1984” with this though.

I read the book, and I really feel our economics is a monster of its own that cares little of one administration or the next. Case in point, the current administration has had little effect on it even though they been very economically unfriendly. Plus vast majority of the voters are really only effected by some of the more fundamentals like job growth and the value of the dollar to buy.

The housing market was coming to an end of a cycle no matter what anyone did. The fact that many invested poorly into it is just a bump in the road.







[edit on 23-8-2007 by Xtrozero]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

posted by Xtrozero

posted by Justin Oldham
Let's have a look at this immigration thing again. Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath." Has anyone here read that book?


No, not the book. But I’ve seen the movie a dozen times. Every drive-in theater around where I lived always coupled it with Tobacco Road in the all-night Saturday love-fests. Share croppers in Oklahoma - Oakies - piled their possessions onto a broken down truck and headed WEST, as NY’s Horace Greeley recommended. It was America’s closest thing to South Africa’s Great Trek and it showed poverty everywhere in America in the early 1930s - BEFORE FDR (1933).


The problem is that the American people want teeth in the border issue and both parties can not, or will not see it. That is why who ever goes this direction will get a larger number of votes.


CFR. Campaign Finance Reform. How much money did you send your Congressperson last year? Or this year? Who do you think “gives” them $300 million every 2 years to befuddle you voters? For example, the Swift & Co meat packers were raided 4 months ago by ICE. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Out of 5,000 workers in 5 plants, 1,500 were undocumented. 75 had stolen IDs. That was the publicly stated reason for the raids. More likely the raids were orchestrated by Swift itself to stop workers pro-union talk. To intimidate the illegals. (The illegals had bought the IDs from local regular white American crooks and were themselves victims of crime).

So wanna bet Swift & Company sends millions to Congress and to the White House every year? CFR. Without CFR, your government is sold to the highest bidder. Huh?


Giuliani wants to finish the wall with excellent surveillance and rapid response forces to secure the border. Once the borders are secure he wants to combine all state and governments agencies in tracking down and deport the majority of illegals, but give them the ability to come back with working visas if they have a clean record.


The Wall is a SHAME on America. If you really wanted to stop the illegals you’d raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour. That would end the open jobs they come here to fill. At $10 an hour, we’d do our own dirty work.


He also wants to incorporate a biometric ID system for all non-citizens to track them anywhere anytime in our country. They are then given an ID card with their finger prints/info on it, and they must present it anytime to a person of authority.


A national ID card for all us chickens would be a good thing. Get you into a hospital quickly and avoid allergic drug reactions, have your blood type and so on. It would save 5,000-10,000 lives a year. One picture ID with your thumb print on the back. For super-security freaks, a number coded to a similar number tattooed onto your left inside forearm would take it one level higher!


The housing market was coming to an end of a cycle no matter what anyone did. The fact that many invested poorly into it is just a bump in the road.


We used to have rules about loans. After Ronnie Reagan launched is drive to destroy the American government, it has come to this, we have no rules, no enforcement capability. We jeopardize ours own economic future by letting unrestrained unregulated money grubbers run the home loan show. Now the money grubbers are trying to get the US Taxpayers to INFUSE money into the market.

[edit on 8/23/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Assume you are a small house builder who wants to be a big house builder. You hook up with a real estate broker and a guy who knows the mortgage lending business. You find a guy who owns 5 or 6 acres of properly zoned land near a thriving part of a city. You build 10 house on the property, which would have sold for $295,000 last year. Instead you list them with your real estate “partner” at $375,000. Where normally you want 10% down, based on a genuine appraisal, in this case you offer the houses at 5% down and sometimes agree to “hold” a note in that amount on the side for the buyers. The appraisals are made by a “pliable” appraiser.

The buyers get an initially low adjustable rate mortgage. Because the FED is at a near record low in its rates, there only way the price of money to go is up. The builder/seller has received a $370,000 payout from the mortgage company. Based on superficial “facts” the lender re-sells the mortgages at a small discount, 3-4%. These in turn are bundled and a large foreign investor buys a billion dollars worth of paper BECAUSE American paper has always been good. For unrelated reasons, the FED raises it overnight rate, the basic rate for determining the cost of borrowing.

Now 2 problems. 1) The adjustable rate goes up. A 1% rise on a $300K loan is $3K a year, or $250 a month.
2) When the amount of the loan exceeds the value of the collateral the mortgage will allow the mortgage holder to ACCELERATE the loan. That is, the buyer borrower must immediately come up with a lot of cash. 10s of 1000 of $ to pay the lender or holder of his paper.

As you can see, the wrong-doers are taking advantage of a system gone sour, thanks to Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich. Good lending practices are no longer in effect and there is no outsider able to challenge this PONZI scheme. It’s the S&L of 1970s revisited, which cost the US Taxpayers about $75 b. and Neil Bush escaped prison by his fathers intervention. Neil and his partners had skimmed about $60 million of the Silverado S&L.

[edit on 8/23/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   
The simple fact of the matter is that thre are too many peole in office today who have dirty hands. I count my own State's senior Senator inthat mix. Ted Stevens is a very nice man, but he's been in D.C. too long. I fault no man for eventually giving in to the dark forces that tempt so many in D.C. After a point, it becomes utterly impossible to avoid the taint. The current economic ledge that we're sitting in is indicative of what's in our future.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
The simple fact of the matter is that thre are too many peole in office today who have dirty hands. I count my own State's senior Senator inthat mix. Ted Stevens is a very nice man, but he's been in D.C. too long. I fault no man for eventually giving in to the dark forces that tempt so many in D.C. After a point, it becomes utterly impossible to avoid the taint. The current economic ledge that we're sitting in is indicative of what's in our future.



I agree that life long career politicians are not good for America and do not hold their constituents best interest at hand.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   
This is a long shot but I believe it will be Biden or Dodd. As the primaries draw near, dem primary voters will conclude they need a grown up, experienced candidate. This excludes Obama and Edwards. Unless someone in the Dem party can prevent Obama and Edwards from slinging mud, the negatives on Hillary, that no one is talking about now, will come back to the front.

about 35:1 but I'd put a C on it.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 12:22 AM
link   
I believe 'they' will chose Clinton, as she's already stated her hard stance on Iran.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Hello darkblue and Chop, it's good t osee you again. Chris Dodd and Joe Biden are in this race for a shot at the Cabinet. they never have been crecdible Presidential contenders. I think even Don would have to back me on that one.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Hello darkblue and Chop, it's good t osee you again. Chris Dodd and Joe Biden are in this race for a shot at the Cabinet. they never have been crecdible Presidential contenders. I think even Don would have to back me on that one.


The Dems really need a new line of front runners. They do much better to have someone come out of the blue than to rehash old contenders. Honestly I hope Clinton is picked for that would be great news to the Republicans.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   
You're making an assumption that her past will be enough to sink her Presidential ambitions. I don't thnk her past activitieis will slow her down at all. It's worth noting that there is some reverse psychology going on here. She's the wounded WIFE of a skirt-chaser. She can pontificate all day long about her reasons for forgiveness, and it'll play well with the press and a large segment of the population.

She's bee naccused of a lot, bot convincted of nothing. Like Martha Stuart, she is known to be hard-nosed and more than a little bit frosty. These are traits that actually serve these women in their leadership roles. Why? We all prefer strong leaders. Her male counterparts will be wishy-washy on any number of topics, especially those related to home life and fidelity. She, on the other hand, will be straight-forward and to the point.

I've heard on the news that former Panamanian President Manuel Noriega is due to get out of Federal prison next month . By all accounts, Manuel is a nice guy. He's just got a very large PR deficit deficit. Like Hillary, he wil be relying on the public's notoriously short memory.

It was never hard to see that the Clintons planned to have two stays in the White House. Anyone who bothered to do their homework would have realized that by the time Bill took his first term Oak of Office. I dislike this very much because it smacks of dynasty building. I'm not wild about this particular candidate because of what I think she'll do in office. My published work speaks for itself in this regard.

A lot of Republicans are under the misguided assumption that Mrs. Clinton will be easy to take down during the general election. Nothing could be further from the truth. In their own ways, each of the GOP contenders is actually just as...flawed...as she is. If people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, these 2008 candidates need to hope for very large rock-free lawns.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   
This is akin to predicting the winter snow by how high the bees build their hives but....

The Dems problem is they are all senators. No candidate has won the presidency coming directly out of the senate since JFK I believe...

It's governors, governors, governors.

IMO this is good, since as Governors, they have a track record of administrative skills and experience in decision making. Legislators are by definition negotiators and compromisers. They also have the excess baggage of a clear voting record which is used against them.

From this perspective, the R's are in the cat bird seat with Romney and Gulliani (I know...mayor not governor, however he administrated a city government bigger than most states and many countries).

I realize this is off topic but I'll offer my opinion on the R nominee...Romney...or maybe Thompson...which I realize totally contradicts my whole senator vs. governor schpiel.

[edit on 8/25/2007 by darkbluesky]



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   
The entire point of this thread is to encourage speculation. Go right ahead. I myself am expecting that the 2008 Presidential elections will be another referendum on the Iraq war. If the economy slides enough in 2008, we could see people going to the polls in November with another reason to 'punish' the Republicans. when you get right down to it, that's what I predict for '08. Republican punishment. Noth appy to see it, but there it is. The GOP has made a short list of mistakes that they seem to be utterly incapable of answering for.

In spite of my pessimistic outlook for the GOP, I am confident that the American voters who do go to the polls will not hesitate to elect a woman and a black man on the same ticket...if...they think those of the people who will best serve their needs. A lot of people are still saying that its too much too fast to elect both, but I disagree. In spite of our current trouboles, we are an evolving nation. the only way to put the issues of race and sex behind is to...put them behind us.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   
I pray this nation does not elect a woman and black man only so that it can be said we elected a woman and a black man. I agree that the barriers have been removed and gender/race will no longer prevent a qualified candidate from being elected. My only problem is who the current candidates are, their competence, and motivations.

Would you agree that Obama was "choosen" by the MSM? Why else would a one term senator, who is obviously a political novice garner so much "apparent" support so quickly?

Now Hillary...I realize its not your responsibility to defend her JO, but can you or anyone else list for me, three bullet items from her resume that qualify her to become CinC?



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Don is our resident expert on Dems, so I'll let him talk about Hillary. I do think that Barack Obama is an opportunist, but I would defy anyone to resist the lure of the mainstream media once they've "chosen" somebody. Obama is gettingw hat he can't buy from the MSM, and he'll be a contender for the Vice Presidency to be sure. So long as he does not break faith with the people who made him.

I have said all along that I don't mind a female President. I do take issue with this specific female. Her agenda scared me enough to end up in my present professional niche, which includes my involvement on ATS. For the moment, I am in a position to speak out against the election of Hillary, and I will do so with all the civility I can muster.

Obama will be a different man by the time he reaches the Presidency. He will have been schooled the hard way, and he won't be nearly so idealistic. If he survives the process, he'll be more of a contender than he is now.

You and I are in the same boat for many of the same reasons. A lot ofwhat yous ee in this CM forum is my attempt to sound the alarm, and to build a case for reform. In that respect, I am not a traditional conspiracy theorist. I'm just a concerned citizen. I take heart in the knowledge that I'm not the only one who has these worries.



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 



posted by Justin Oldham: The simple fact of the matter is that there are too many people in office today who have dirty hands. I count my own State's senior Senator in that mix. Ted Stevens is a very nice man, but he's been in D.C. too long.


The problem we face is much more significant than replacing a few crusty old timers who believe if you can’t help your friends, who can you help? However sacred we hold the 1787 Constitution, and despite its 27 amendments, half of which we ignore and the other half are ineffectual, we are still applying the basic principles we adopted then (1789) to run a world entirely different today (2007). Jefferson may have perceived this limitation as being inherent, when he said something like “every generation needs a new look at governance.”

You know the numbers. 3 million then, 300 million now. Less than 500,000 square miles then, 3.6 million square miles now. Washington’s travel time from Mt Vernon to the first inauguration in New York, 10-12 days if you are lucky! The speed of a walking horse. And you have to rest a horse every hour, 5 or10 minutes. And horses only “work” in daylight. And etc.

Today we have x-rays made in small town hospitals read by radiologists in Bombay! All via the internet. All the toys sold in the US are made in China. Lead paint or no. Even cars assembled here frequently contain less than 20% domestic content.

So how much longer are we going to struggle along in the twenty-first century using 18th century rules? I watch CSpan and other public access channels. I see Congress in action, when it’s in session, I see the state legislature in action and I watch the local City Council in action but it is ll too gloomy to watch with pleasure. The size of government has overwhelmed our individual capacity to either comprehend or to operate or to manage it.

Two months ago, I obtained a copy of the $870 million budge for FY 2007. Actually the FY runs from September 1, ‘07, to August 31, ‘08. It’s really called FY ‘07-‘08. Why we can’t have our fiscal years coincidental with our calendar years is another thing I don’t like. You can’t discuss budgets in ordinary language. You have to say, “the ‘07-‘08 budge.” a lot of citizens think this is a TWO years budget which may keep some heat off the elected officials. It looks purpose made to confuse and keep taxpayers at bay. It looks purpose made to confuse and keep taxpayers at bay. 800 pages, 15-20 lines per page, each line for an item in the budget.

Between 12,000 and 15,000 separate lines or entries. Some as small as a few hundred dollars others as large a $138,000,000 for salaries for the 2,700 unformed police officers. Another line set $7,500,000 for overtime. Another line had $31,800,000 for health care insurance. And on and on.

We discovered the other day that one agency budgeted at $250,000 a year had spent $1,750,000 last year, making over the past 5 years a total overdraft of $4,000,000. How can this happen? Does the bank honor any check regardless of the amount on deposit? Is there any auditing? Who countersigns the drafts exceeding the budgeted amount? What is the point of having a budget at all, in this case? This bit of info was discovered by the local newspaper searching another issue. But for that, it appears this particular agency was unconcerned about budgets. What the heck good as the City Council done about this over the past 5 years? Is this the only agency doing its own thing? Well, I have to stop now.

But I’ll have more later.

[edit on 8/25/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
The entire point of this thread is to encourage speculation. Go right ahead. I myself am expecting that the 2008 Presidential elections will be another referendum on the Iraq war. If the economy slides enough in 2008, we could see people going to the polls in November with another reason to 'punish' the Republicans. when you get right down to it, that's what I predict for '08. Republican punishment. Noth appy to see it, but there it is. The GOP has made a short list of mistakes that they seem to be utterly incapable of answering for.


I agree about the Republican punishment, but I think it has stopped at the senate and since the senate has now what a 17% favor rating they are not helping their party very much to show all Americans the swap of power was a good one.

The problem with Hilary is not so much her hubby’s past but her directly. She has shown she can be very far left liberal, but continues to show a side of middle of the road, and so she just scares the crap out of people for they really do not know what she will do. There was a rather interesting poll awhile back where she was polled as the front runner, but was also was polled that over 30% of the democratic base would not vote for her.

She is very cold and calculating with the ability to rip your heart out with a single glance...well maybe not, but that is how she comes across. She cannot win the hearts of America.

The only thing that I can think of that she has tried to do was that socialist Medicare bill that failed miserably. Honestly, I think she would be strong on the War and maybe the border, but I see a huge government forming under her unlike anything since Roosevelt, and so does many others.

And so because of all this with the country split about 55% conservative and 45% liberal there would be at best average showing at the polls for her where on the conservative side it would bring everyone out of the woodwork to vote against her.




[edit on 25-8-2007 by Xtrozero]



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   
As a writer, I've had the chance to do a very close-up character study of what it might take for a woman to be President of the United States. The simple fact of the matter is that no woman, regardless of race or ethnicity, could show a soft and feminie side while being the Chief Executive. Her enemies...no matter who she was...would interpret such warm qualities as weakness. Even if she had the fashion sense of Jackie O, Hillary would still have to prove that she had more than enough brass to hang with da big boyz. Like it or not, she is sending those signals now.

[edit on 25-8-2007 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky
I pray this nation does not elect a woman and black man only so that it can be said we elected a woman and a black man.


Pretty darn sad ... but you are soooooooo on target with this statement.

People are ga-ga over Obama, and yet he has no qualifications and has shown himself to be inept politically. His attendence and strong agreement with that anti-white black-power 'church' that he attends is VERY troubling! The ONLY reason that anyone would vote for him is because he's half black. Pretty freak'n pathetic.

Hillary has experience. She has a lot of baggage as well. But she does have experience. Seriously - she's a two term senator and she really was co-president. She isn't nearly as qualified as Bill Richardson or Joe Biden, but she is a better politician then either of them. (not a compliment).

Bill Richardson is the best bet the dems have ... and yet they are ignoring him and are going for the flavor of the month - Obama. :shk:





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join