Predicto Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 It'll never happen though, because the Dems dont want change, they only want change that allows them to keep power in CA Electoral votes.I personally wouldnt mind seeing this enacted nationwide. I dont think the EC needs to be changed, but if we had to, this is the way. I would not mind it being enacted nationwide also. But that is the point. The change is NOT being suggested nationwide. Texas and Virginia and Georgia and so on are not giving the Democrats a chance at some of their electoral votes. Only in California, the majority Democrat state, is this being proposed. Proposed by the California Republican party. Of course the Democrats oppose a change that only affects them. They should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I have to think that Edwards is the one that the GOP really fears. Maybe that's why Rove jumped on Hillary so publicly... The scuttlebutt said that's why the Republicans attacked Kerry so much and so early: because they were scared of Edwards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I would not mind it being enacted nationwide also.But that is the point. The change is NOT being suggested nationwide. Texas and Virginia and Georgia and so on are not giving the Democrats a chance at some of their electoral votes. Only in California, the majority Democrat state, is this being proposed. Proposed by the California Republican party. Of course the Democrats oppose a change that only affects them. They should. I agree they should. They should also stop saying they want it changed, when they dont. It's a state by state choice. Maine and Nebraska (maybe Utah?) also do it that way. It's not a national attempt to subvert Democratic stregth, it's a local attempt by local officials to limit stregth. I think that's EXACTLY what our system of Govt is set up to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I agree they should. They should also stop saying they want it changed, when they dont.It's a state by state choice. Maine and Nebraska (maybe Utah?) also do it that way. It's not a national attempt to subvert Democratic stregth, it's a local attempt by local officials to limit stregth. I think that's EXACTLY what our system of Govt is set up to do. I don't know if it is necessarily a state by state choice. Even if it is, then it is understandable why Democrats would prefer to have the change happen elsewhere than in their only guaranteed large state stronghold, especially when the last two elections have been so damn close. It is not an unreasonable point of view, I think. Maybe if Texas agrees to undo the DeLay gerrymandering we could make a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't know if it is necessarily a state by state choice. Even if it is, then it is understandable why Democrats would prefer to have the change happen elsewhere than in their only guaranteed large state stronghold, especially when the last two elections have been so damn close. It is not an unreasonable point of view, I think. Maybe if Texas agrees to undo the DeLay gerrymandering we could make a deal. I promise, that decision is made by each states legislature. So it's not realistic to think CA should do it only if TX does it. And I agree, it makes TOTAL sense for the Dems to oppose it. Without CA, they have no chance at the white house most years (including the next one). Im just taking the opportunity to needle them about the hypcrisy of calling for change and then opposing it. Yes, I know it's a stretch, but nothing else is worth debating on the board today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 I'm just curious how you can say you are for the poor and little guy when you have the money he has?? It just doesn't sit right. He may be sincere, but when you pay $1200 for a haircut, and than say you are fighting for the poor, it isn't right According to you, you can't run as a democrat. Here follow my logic. . . You need money to be in politics and run for president right? OK, well show me a person running for president who is not worth over $50 million dollars. . . OK, so we have decided that you need to me a multi-millionaire to play ball. Well, if you have that much money, than you can not. . .according to you. . . Own a big house Own a SUV Ride in an Airplane spend money According to you, if you are rich and a democrat you are a hypocrite. do you not see why this is a hollow argument? Here, lets play a game. Lets look at his VOTING record for the poor people and see if he is what he says he is. You can go and look it up, show me where he has voted against things for poor people. Just because you have money does not mean you are a hypocrite for being a democrat, it means you want to use your money to better the country. . .unlike the GOP in power who wants to use their money to give all of their friends more money, and thus insure two more generations of cocaine addicted spoiled rich kids running the country. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 unlike the GOP in power who wants to use their money to give all of their friends more money, and thus insure two more generations of cocaine addicted spoiled rich kids running the country. :doh: Lol, Chommie I love it when you go to extremes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Lol, Chommie I love it when you go to extremes. This is Extremeskins, after all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 This is Extremeskins, after all... Dynamite drop in, Predicto! Now I get to use one of my favorite emoticons: :obvious: Seriously though, I'm aware that you've gotta be loaded to run for president, Republican or Democrat. But when it comes down to championing the poor, getting 1,200 dollar haircuts isn't exactly practicing what you preach. If you're championing the use of electrical cars or more fuel efficient cars, you shouldn't be riding around town in an escalade. I know they have to fly around and I know they have to have a lot of money to run...but when it comes to simple things like that, they should be doing their best job possible to practice what they preach. Politicians ****ing blow, the whole lot of them. It'd be nice to see one walk the talk as best as they possibly could...but in this day and age when the American public is put on the backburner as the two douchebag parties battle it out for power no matter the cost, that'll probably never happen. It's kinda like that saved by the bell episode where the rock star comes to the school to shoot the anti drug campaign and then tries to get Kelly Kapowski to smoke weed at the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 31, 2007 Share Posted August 31, 2007 Dynamite drop in, Predicto! Now I get to use one of my favorite emoticons::obvious: Ouch :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Rumor: Edwards Affair What if the National Enquirer threw a campaign sex scandal and no one came? Usually, the mainstream press is happy to let tabloids do the dirty work so it can swoop in and fill in the blanks with on-the-record non-denial denials and explanations with just enough wiggle room for back-peddling down the road. That appeared to be how it would go down when the National Enquirer claimed John Edwards had an affair with campaign worker (and former Jay McInerney squeeze) Rielle Hunter. The notion of the candidate with the cancer-stricken wife getting his $400 haircuts mussed up by a woman who describes herself as "addicted to higher consciousness" has the makings of a dynamic and devastating primary season scandal. What's more, the Enquirer says it has enough evidence to sink the campaign. Sources close to AMI tell Radar the tab is in possession of e-mails and phone records from Hunter to various acquaintances in which she details the affair and says she and John are in love with one another. There's just one problem: nobody wants to believe the story. Call it a swift boat backlash. The mainstream media hasn't seen fit to dignify the item with much coverage (Ann Coulter doesn't count). When writer Sam Stein dared deface liberal oasis Huffington Post last week with questions about payments from the Edwards camp to Hunter's video production company, the rest of the prog-bloggers piled on him. Edwards himself calls the story "just false" and Hunter says, "When working for the Edwards camp, my conduct as well as the conduct of my entire team was completely professional" (Mickey Kaus notes that the odd preface leaves flexibility for both parties regarding their conduct before and after she was on staff). Privately, however, at least one former Edwards staffer labels Hunter a "crazy lady," and admits being unsure what her role was with the campaign. The refusal to push the affair story is the latest example of what one rival strategist dubbed "the Teflon campaign" of the former North Carolina senator. Remember last fall when an intern called a North Carolina Wal-Mart and asked a clerk to set aside a Playstation 3 for Edwards, even though Edwards is critical of the company's labor practices? Remember the revelation that two Edwards campaign bloggers authored anti-Catholic posts on their personal blogs? No, right? Click on the link for the full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Rumor: Edwards Affair What if the National Enquirer threw a campaign sex scandal and no one came? Usually, the mainstream press is happy to let tabloids do the dirty work so it can swoop in and fill in the blanks with on-the-record non-denial denials and explanations with just enough wiggle room for back-peddling down the road. That appeared to be how it would go down when the National Enquirer claimed John Edwards had an affair with campaign worker (and former Jay McInerney squeeze) Rielle Hunter. The notion of the candidate with the cancer-stricken wife getting his $400 haircuts mussed up by a woman who describes herself as "addicted to higher consciousness" has the makings of a dynamic and devastating primary season scandal. What's more, the Enquirer says it has enough evidence to sink the campaign. Sources close to AMI tell Radar the tab is in possession of e-mails and phone records from Hunter to various acquaintances in which she details the affair and says she and John are in love with one another. There's just one problem: nobody wants to believe the story. Call it a swift boat backlash. The mainstream media hasn't seen fit to dignify the item with much coverage (Ann Coulter doesn't count). When writer Sam Stein dared deface liberal oasis Huffington Post last week with questions about payments from the Edwards camp to Hunter's video production company, the rest of the prog-bloggers piled on him. Edwards himself calls the story "just false" and Hunter says, "When working for the Edwards camp, my conduct as well as the conduct of my entire team was completely professional" (Mickey Kaus notes that the odd preface leaves flexibility for both parties regarding their conduct before and after she was on staff). Privately, however, at least one former Edwards staffer labels Hunter a "crazy lady," and admits being unsure what her role was with the campaign. The refusal to push the affair story is the latest example of what one rival strategist dubbed "the Teflon campaign" of the former North Carolina senator. Remember last fall when an intern called a North Carolina Wal-Mart and asked a clerk to set aside a Playstation 3 for Edwards, even though Edwards is critical of the company's labor practices? Remember the revelation that two Edwards campaign bloggers authored anti-Catholic posts on their personal blogs? No, right? Click on the link for the full article Does not surprise me. The press has it's favorites. It's not a secret democratic conspiracy, it's just a bunch of individuals with individual bias that happens to agree and refuses to question anything that goes against their own beliefs. And that swiftboat thing? Who the hell goes to vietnam for four months gets three purple hearts for injuries the size of paper cuts and returns as a "hero" ? I don't know about you but Kerry's version of events sets off every BS alarm in my head. Common sense tells me something is wrong with his story. The press let that one slide big time. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOKU Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Yea I can give a rats ass about any of them. All political parties are scums of the Earth. As are all politicians at this point. I know this has been discussed but it irks me everytime I read about someone rich or famous telling us that we all must sacrifice - All meaning everyone but themselves b/c they are rich. F them! I have an SUV b/c we have 2 kids and I am 6 foot 5 and cant really ride in anything else. If I were single and shorter I would buy a hybrid. Edwards, Gore, Clooney, that hot rock chick, DiCaprio - all of them are so concerned about saving the planet that they ride in giant gas guzzling limo's, private planes, live in huge mansions and run up monthly utility bills that would equal some peoples yearly pay. But they pay Carbon offsets..... Carbon offsets?? Carbon Offsets?? Bull s*** - that is basically paying a penalty to pollute! Freaking feel good, politically correct bs! Screw them! They are not sacrificing a thing - they just pay to live exactly like they were before and it's up to everyone else to do the hard work and sacrifice. The people who cant really afford it. I def. think its great if you can conserve and help the environment. I had to rant b/c I hate this kind of crap and yes, Both Democrats and Republicans do this crap all the time and they are all A-holes! Here is the story that got me fired up. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294974,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 A thread about a politician? Allow me to serve up my usual bitter rant. All politicians are liars, hypocrites, and embezzlers. There is only one party. It's called the "Polarity" party and it inspires us to vote by making us hate each other. The desire to beat the people we don't agree with makes us support certain liars, hypocrites, and embezzlers. The system works only to perpetuate itself and ensure we are always kept in the dark. In my entire life, I have trusted only one candidate enough to actually vote. That person won the popular vote because America trusted him too, but the system had a built-in loophole and installed it's own choice anyway. Enjoy your illusion of a government run by and for the people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Additionally, when the ****roach politicians in Washington decide... via legislation, what kind of car I can drive... that's when I know it's time to pack up and move somewhere else. Because... if they're telling me what kind of automobile I must buy then they must be telling me other things I must do that goes beyond the powers authorized to them by the Constitution. The right to drive whatever you want on public roads is in the Constitution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 The right to drive whatever you want on public roads is in the Constitution? Henry: the enemy within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Henry: the enemy within. Not if we perfect him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Not if we perfect him. You guys suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 The right to drive whatever you want on public roads is in the Constitution? Actually the Right to Travel has been deemed a fundamental right granted by the Constitution. So says the Supreme Court. So, in a way, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Actually the Right to Travel has been deemed a fundamental right granted by the Constitution. So says the Supreme Court.So, in a way, yes. I'll remember that the next time I see a road closed due to construction. I'll roll down my window, chuck my empty beer can at the guy with the flag, shout "Don't oppress me!" and plow through. Freakin liberals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 I heart Henry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 And I have heard a lot of Koreans say that Henry loves Chachi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 And I have heard a lot of Koreans say that Henry loves Chachi. I swear, I'm never posting in Tailgate ever again. Oh, and TEG, Schlomo and the boys in the back want to have a word with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 I swear, I'm never posting in Tailgate ever again.Oh, and TEG, Schlomo and the boys in the back want to have a word with you. Atleast you got the joke - I think it might have been cruising at 30000 feet for some people here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Atleast you got the joke - I think it might have been cruising at 30000 feet for some people here. All I could think of was "Joanie Loves Chachi" - so I guess I didn't get it. Or maybe kimchi? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.