Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: United States President: 2008
Thread: United States President: 2008 This thread is 90 pages long: 1 10 ... 18 19 20 21 22 ... 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 · «PREV / NEXT»
Wolfman
Wolfman


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
posted December 12, 2007 03:41 PM

Quote:
Thanks Wolfman! My mistake


Not a problem.

I'm supporting McCain now mostly because of his performance in the debates that I've seen.  He just seems like he's being himself more this time around than he did 8 years ago.  I especially liked his comment "I was tied up at the time" in reference to Woodstock.  He seems to stop putting up with nonsense and I think that's what we need.

Romney is playing politics.  He's also starting to play with religion, I had hoped it would stay in the background and not be an issue, but that's no longer the case.  Huckabee is so much worse when it comes to religion, it's ridiculous.  I can't believe he's one of the front runners now.

McCain just seems like a down to earth guy and I think he has the bast chance against Clinton, who will probably be the Democratic nominee.  He could probably beat Obama also.

I actually hope Clinton does get the nomination simply because she is so polarizing and has been involved in politics for many years.  Obama doesn't have as much dirt and hasn't made as many people angry as she has.
____________
Don't assume you know anything
about my position on any issue.  
Best idea would be to ask.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted December 12, 2007 05:35 PM
Edited by Consis at 17:42, 12 Dec 2007.

Rofl

I Gizoogled your Heroes Community Personal Page Wolfman.

Here's an excerpt from my Personal Page:

Quote:
Comments/Observizzles:

I suppose I'm simply dippin' ta makes ends mizzle here at mah home in Oregon. I care fo` fizzle S-M-to-tha-izzall children while mah wizzle works. It's hard wizzy fo` biznoth of us n we S-T-to-tha-izzill in love wit each brotha . Aint no killin' everybodys chillin'. Life is monotizzles n difficult n I dizzay hizzy anyone else ta rap ta dur'n tha day so I come ta Heroes Community . Snoop dogg is in this snow. I enjoy tha atmosphere n all tha rap of Hizzle related subjects , betta check yo self. I'm not exactly tha biggest fan of Hizzy . It's your homie snoop dogg from the dpg. I am actually a die-hard fan of Baldur's Gizzle n WarcraftIII Tizzle but they C-H-to-tha-izzat forum pales in comparizzles ta this one cuz its a pimp thang. I hizzy ta say tha mizzle reason fo` mah membership n attendance is fo` tha thugz tizzy come here. They aren't so mizzay of a 'blogga' (that which I tire of) like mizzay internet Americans are. I like how genuine tha thugz is hizzle where the sun be shinin and I be rhymin'. I also feel this is a bootylicious place ta learn more `bout/from thugz outside tha United States n we out. I also really enjoy tha rules here . Keep'n it gangsta dogg. Not only is tha rules acceptable ta me but tha forum moderizzles actually do a bootylicious job of hatin' tizzy fo all my homies in the pen! I'm afraid I can't say tha same fo` any otha message board I've ever visited.


____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted December 13, 2007 05:33 PM

Watched The Republican's Debate

Saw it yesterday. I recorded it while I was at the gym. I came home, turned it on, and began to watch it with my three year old. The very first thing the moderator (a very stiff-looking woman who's makeup was frighteningly awful) said was, "We will not discuss Iraq or immigration". So I sat there..... for another few minutes trying my best not to pay attention to the 400 pound gorilla standing in the room.....fifteen minutes.....and *click* I stopped the recording and switched over to "SpongeBob Squarepants". For the next hour or so I enjoyed watching cartoons with my daughter. We both sat and laughed at all the zainy antics and terribly telegraphed jokes. It was a very pleasant experience. She fell asleep and I went to the kitchen to resume some chores I didn't have time to finish that morning. I can't say wednesday was terribly remarkable. However I did do a smashing job in purchasing two new pairs of pants and a new belt for my son. He was very happy with the comfortable fit of his new light and dark bluejeans.

I wonder if there's a chance the democratic debate will pay attention to the obvious issues today. Should the ice queen return with her pet gorilla I expect another warm and cuddly afternoon of cartoons and chores with my adorable little daughter who wishes she could go to school just like her big brother and sister.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted December 13, 2007 09:58 PM

Lol. That's all I can say. But it had a great moment:

Moderator: CONGRESSMAN PAUL, WHAT'S THE BIGGEST OBSTACLE –

Keyes: EXCUSE ME, DO I HAVE TO RAISE MY HAND?

Moderator: I'M GETTING TO YOU.

Keyes: NO, YOU'RE NOT. YOU HAVEN'T IN SEVERAL GO ROUNDS, SO I HAVE TO MAKE AN ISSUE OUT OF IT. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF EDUCATION.

Moderator: GO AHEAD YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.

Keyes: YOUR UNFAIRNESS IS NOW BECOMING SO APPARENT THAT THE VOTERS IN IOWA MUST UNDERSTAND THERE'S A REASON FOR IT, AND THE REASON IS WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY. GOVERNOR HUCKABEE JUST ADDRESSED THE QUESTION OF EDUCATION CLAIMING THAT HE IS THE SPOKESMAN, DO YOU KNOW THE MAJOR PROBLEM? WE ALLOWED THE JUDGES TO DRIVE GOD OUT OF OUR SCHOOLS. WE ALLOWED THE MORAL FOUNDATION OF THIS REPUBLIC WHICH IS THAT WE ARE CREATED EQUAL AND ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR, NOT BY OUR CONSTITUTION OR OUR LEADERS WITH OUR RIGHTS. IF WE DON'T TEACH OUR CHILDREN THAT HERITAGE AND THE MORAL CULTURE THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT, WE CANNOT REMAIN FREE, THEY WILL NOT BE DISCIPLINED TO LEARN SCIENCE, TO LEARN MATH, TO LEARN HISTORY, TO LEARN ANYTHING. AND THEY DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS EXCEPT WHEN THEY'RE SQUABBLING ABOUT THEIR OWN PERSONAL FAITH AND FORGETTING THAT WE HAVE A NATIONAL CREED. AND THAT NATIONAL CREED NEEDS TO BE TAUGHT TO OUR CHILDREN SO THAT WHETHER THEY WERE SCIENTISTS OR BUSINESSMEN OR LAWYERS THEY WILL STAND ON THE SOLID GROUND OF A MORAL EDUCATION THAT GIVES THEM THE DISCIPLINE THEY NEED TO SERVE THE RIGHT, TO EXERCISE THEIR FREEDOM WITH DIGNITY, AND TO DEFEND JUSTICE BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND IT IS OUR HERITAGE.

____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wolfman
Wolfman


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
posted December 13, 2007 10:37 PM

I watched the first hour of it, then had to go out and chip all the ice off the driveway.  That part was great, Mvass.  I kept hoping he was going to throw in a hallelujah or amen somewhere while he was speaking.  He sounded more like a preacher than Huckabee, and that's not good.

I liked the graph they had for what their audience liked and didn't like.  Paul and Keys don't stand a chance in hell judging by the graph playing as they spoke.  McCain would talk and it would shoot up, then they'd switch to Paul and it would shoot through the floor.  It was awesome.

If Huckabee wins the nomination I'm voting for myself.
____________
Don't assume you know anything
about my position on any issue.  
Best idea would be to ask.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
The_Gootch
The_Gootch


Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
posted December 14, 2007 08:28 PM

McCain is too old and therefore unelectable. If he was an incumbent he would've had a better shot.  As it is, his time is past.

Paul is the one of the smartest candidates.  The GOP doesn't put up smart candidates.  That's why neither he nor Romney will be picked.  Romney gets the double whammy because he's a pandering mormon.

And that leaves us with Giuliani and Huckabee.  Giuliani is a great asset except he stands for all the things the GOP has stood against for an entire generation.  He's pro-choice and pro-divorce.  Lol, I'm ecstatic that the awful and nonsensical family values platform that has been a GOP given for I can't remember how long now has finally played its last song.  How many more sex scandals can you dumb*sses suffer?  Let's see, you have more extramarital affairs among you then the man you tried to impeach.  My favorite of course is Gingrich sending divorce papers to his cancer stricken wife while she was laid up in a hospital.  You're against gay equality when you've got congressmen sending mash e-mails to young boys and even better, you've got senators getting busted in airports for soliciting blowjobs.  

Choose your poison Republicans.  Since you have decided to pin so much of your hopes on wedge issues like abortion and gay rights, what're you going to do?  Will you go with Giuliani and declare a surrender to the better and more qualified democrat?  Or will you go with the tired chorus of conservative evangelism in Huckabee and still lose because of how awful George W. has been?  

2008 is the year of the dems.  Bank on it.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted December 14, 2007 11:31 PM

Hmm

I think The_Gootch is right. We know we're going to elect a democrat this go around but the question is who? The only problem with this is we democrats should be careful what we wish for. We might get it. I am afraid of making the wrong decision. I don't want to do that. My gut tells me Joe Biden but my mind is telling me to stick it to all the fathers who abandon their wives and leave it to the women to care for the children. A vote for Hillary tells men they need to reconsider leaving a pregnant woman. A vote for Biden is a vote for all americans, man or woman.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Peacemaker
Peacemaker


Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
posted December 18, 2007 05:01 PM
Edited by Peacemaker at 17:46, 18 Dec 2007.

Holy Cow...

I go off to campaign for a few weeks and all hell breaks loose around here...

You guys just make me laugh.  What a slingfest.  

Consis:  Apparently you've gone off your meds, man.  You honestly have no clue.  Everything you say is through the looking glass.  Black is white.  Wrong is right.  Everybody's racially motivated despite Obama's enormous intellect and political skill.  It's absolutely impossible that the vast majority of his following just doesn't give a **** about your topic of obsession.  I mean, do you actually know anyone -- besides yours truly -- who is actually working on the campain?  My guess is not, since race is simply a non-issue as a matter of fact.

And for all the time you're spending mudslinging at Obama and Winfrey and all, you could be out campaigning for your chosen candidate instead of sitting around bellyaching.  

I will reserve the remainder of my comments; those were the nicer ones.

Is anybody around here paying attention to the numbers?  All these wild predictions being flung around suggest to me that most of you have not...

Obama is ahead in Iowa and South Carolina, and is in a statistical dead-heat with Clinton in NH.  Those numbers increased after the Oprah Winfrey stump appearances.  As much as some of you might just hate that.  

195 days ago: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-06-04-poll_N.htm

Posted December 12: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/obama.newhampshire/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

December 14: http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/12/new-iowa-polls.html

December 17: http://washingtontimes.com/article/20071217/COMMENTARY05/697464491/1012/commentary

...But we'll see.  It remains to be seen what people actually do when they draw that curtain (or walk into the caucus).

Gootch, I need your address so I can send some Christmas stuff.  Miss you baby.

Obama's most likely choice for VP (or maybe this is just my wishful thinking): John Edwards.  Put those two together and they would be numerically unstoppable.  Biden or Richardson for Secretary of State.
____________
I have menopause and a handgun.  Any questions?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Wolfman
Wolfman


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
posted December 18, 2007 06:43 PM

An Obama/Edwards ticket would be a pretty powerful one.  It seems like Clinton is on the downturn, but she won't go out without a fight.

That ticket will win too, because all the Republican candidates suck, except McCain but he probably won't win the nomination.  And this coming from a Republican...sigh...
____________
Don't assume you know anything
about my position on any issue.  
Best idea would be to ask.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted December 18, 2007 10:07 PM

Yeah, if Obama gets the nomination, Edwards will be his running mate, and vice-versa. Really, most of the candidates seem to kind of be in pairs.

Hillary-Richardson
Obama-Edwards
Biden-Dodd
Kucinich-Gravel
Tancredo-Hunter

Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Giuliani, Thompson, and Paul don't fit in, though. But I bet that McCain will be the Republican VP nominee.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted December 18, 2007 11:50 PM
Edited by Consis at 23:51, 18 Dec 2007.

Is That So Peacemaker?

Through the looking glass eh? We'll see when the votes are in. We shall see. All these people who want to predict what states will vote for whom....you're all wrong, all of you. The only state in which we know for certain which way they are going to vote is Utah. Every single one of you has no idea what's brewing in our own home-grown theocracy state. What does it mean for the rest of nation? I have no idea. The only thing I know for certain is that their vote against Hillary is for all the wrong reasons:

1. Because she's a woman
2. Because she isn't christian enough
3. Because both she and her husband are looked at as an unclean marriage
4. And because the leader of their church, the Mormon prophet told them to do it

Hillary will do just fine no matter what those polls say. You'll see. And the Mormons will only use her nomination to further embolden their own position as they continue to preach their very specific view of what's wrong with the world. You wait and see. You wait. They'll say her nomination is proof of what they've been saying all along. They'll say it's the beginning of the end and soon homosexuality will run rampant before the second coming of Jesus Christ. You think I've lost my mind, but just you wait. You don't know what that religion is capable of. Everyone's head is turned the other way in complete ignorance of the real home-grown threat.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted December 19, 2007 01:57 PM

Consis, I'm sorry to tell you this, but:
1. You might offend some Mormon reading this.
2. Your anti-Mormonism is really clouding your perception of everything.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Peacemaker
Peacemaker


Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
posted December 19, 2007 04:39 PM
Edited by Peacemaker at 16:46, 19 Dec 2007.

Well well well....

Any of this sound familiar, guys???

Quote:

By DAVID BROOKS
NYT Op-Ed Columnist


Published: December 18, 2007
The Denver Post

Hillary Clinton has been a much better senator than Barack Obama. She has been a serious, substantive lawmaker who has worked effectively across party lines. Obama has some accomplishments under his belt, but many of his colleagues believe that he has not bothered to master the intricacies of legislation or the maze of Senate rules. He talks about independence, but he has never quite bucked liberal orthodoxy or party discipline.

If Clinton were running against Obama for Senate, it would be easy to choose between them.

But they are running for president, and the presidency requires a different set of qualities. Presidents are buffeted by sycophancy, criticism and betrayal. They must improvise amid a thousand fluid crises. They’re isolated and also exposed, puffed up on the outside and hollowed out within. With the presidency, character and self-knowledge matter more than even experience. There are reasons to think that, among Democrats, Obama is better prepared for this madness.

Many of the best presidents in U.S. history had their character forged before they entered politics and carried to it a degree of self-possession and tranquillity that was impervious to the Sturm und Drang of White House life.

Obama is an inner-directed man in a profession filled with insecure outer-directed ones. He was forged by the process of discovering his own identity from the scattered facts of his childhood, a process that is described in finely observed detail in “Dreams From My Father.” Once he completed that process, he has been astonishingly constant.

Like most of the rival campaigns, I’ve been poring over press clippings from Obama’s past, looking for inconsistencies and flip-flops. There are virtually none. The unity speech he gives on the stump today is essentially the same speech that he gave at the Democratic convention in 2004, and it’s the same sort of speech he gave to Illinois legislators and Harvard Law students in the decades before that. He has a core, and was able to maintain his equipoise, for example, even as his campaign stagnated through the summer and fall.

Moreover, he has a worldview that precedes political positions. Some Americans (Republican or Democrat) believe that the country’s future can only be shaped through a remorseless civil war between the children of light and the children of darkness. Though Tom DeLay couldn’t deliver much for Republicans and Nancy Pelosi, so far, hasn’t been able to deliver much for Democrats, these warriors believe that what’s needed is more partisanship, more toughness and eventual conquest for their side.

But Obama does not ratchet up hostilities; he restrains them. He does not lash out at perceived enemies, but is aloof from them. In the course of this struggle to discover who he is, Obama clearly learned from the strain of pessimistic optimism that stretches back from Martin Luther King Jr. to Abraham Lincoln. This is a worldview that detests anger as a motivating force, that distrusts easy dichotomies between the parties of good and evil, believing instead that the crucial dichotomy runs between the good and bad within each individual.

Obama did not respond to his fatherlessness or his racial predicament with anger and rage, but as questions for investigation, conversation and synthesis. He approaches politics the same way. In her outstanding New Yorker profile, Larissa MacFarquhar notes that Obama does not perceive politics as a series of battles but as a series of systemic problems to be addressed. He pursues liberal ends in gradualist, temperamentally conservative ways.

Obama also has powers of observation that may mitigate his own inexperience and the isolating pressures of the White House. In his famous essay, “Political Judgment,” Isaiah Berlin writes that wise leaders don’t think abstractly. They use powers of close observation to integrate the vast shifting amalgam of data that constitute their own particular situation — their own and no other.

Obama demonstrated those powers in “Dreams From My Father” and still reveals glimpses of the ability to step outside his own ego and look at reality in uninhibited and honest ways. He still retains the capacity, also rare in presidents, of being able to sympathize with and grasp the motivations of his rivals. Even in his political memoir, “The Audacity of Hope,” he astutely observes that candidates are driven less by the desire for victory than by the raw fear of loss and humiliation.

What Bill Clinton said on “The Charlie Rose Show” is right: picking Obama is a roll of the dice. Sometimes he seems more concerned with process than results. But for Democrats, there’s a roll of the dice either way. The presidency is a bacterium. It finds the open wounds in the people who hold it. It infects them, and the resulting scandals infect the presidency and the country. The person with the fewest wounds usually does best in the White House, and is best for the country.



____________
I have menopause and a handgun.  Any questions?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Peacemaker
Peacemaker


Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
posted December 19, 2007 04:45 PM
Edited by Peacemaker at 17:12, 19 Dec 2007.

...And here's another

If any of you knows who either David Brooks or Fareed Zakaria is, you know this is pretty powerful stuff....

Quote:

Newsweek
December 24, 2007 Issue
The Power of Personality
by Fareed Zakaria



When I talk to people in a foreign country, no matter how strange, they are always familiar to me.

I never thought I'd be in this position. There's a debate taking place about what matters most when making judgments about foreign policy—experience and expertise on the one hand, or personal identity on the other. And I find myself coming down on the side of identity.

Throughout the campaign, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been squabbling over who has the better qualifications to lead the world's only superpower.

Hillary's case is obvious and perfectly defensible. She's been involved in foreign policy for eight years in the White House (though in a sideways fashion as First Lady) and then seven years as a senator. Most of the Democratic Party's blue-chip foreign-policy advisers support her. Plus, she has Bill.

Obama's argument is about more than identity. He was intelligent and prescient about the costs of the Iraq War. But he says that his judgment was formed by his experience as a boy with a Kenyan father—and later an Indonesian stepfather—who spent four years growing up in Indonesia, and who lived in the multicultural swirl of Hawaii.

I never thought I'd agree with Obama. I've spent my life acquiring formal expertise on foreign policy. I've got fancy degrees, have run research projects, taught in colleges and graduate schools, edited a foreign-affairs journal, advised politicians and businessmen, written columns and cover stories, and traveled hundreds of thousands of miles all over the world. I've never thought of my identity as any kind of qualification. I've never written an article that contains the phrase "As an Indian-American ..." or "As a person of color ..."

But when I think about what is truly distinctive about the way I look at the world, about the advantage that I may have over others in understanding foreign affairs, it is that I know what it means not to be an American. I know intimately the attraction, the repulsion, the hopes, the disappointments that the other 95 percent of humanity feels when thinking about this country. I know it because for a good part of my life, I wasn't an American. I was the outsider, growing up 8,000 miles away from the centers of power, being shaped by forces over which my country had no control.

When I hear confident claims about liberty and democracy in the Third World, I always think about rural India, where I spent a great deal of time when I was young, and wonder what those peasants struggling to survive would make of the abstractions of the American Enterprise Institute. When I read commentators fulminating about women wearing the burqa—which I don't much like either—I think about one of my aunts, who has always worn one, and of the many complex reasons she keeps it on, none of which involves approval of misogyny or support for suicide bombers. When I talk to people in a foreign country, no matter how strange, they are always, at some level, familiar to me.

I couldn't do my job well without the expertise. But any insights I have are thoroughly informed by the perspective and judgment that I've gained from being first a foreigner, then a foreign student, then an aspiring immigrant and now an American. My biography has helped me put my book learning in context, made for a richer interaction with foreigners and helped me see the world from many angles. So I understand what Obama means when he talks about his life and its lessons.

Look at the experiences of so many distinguished Americans in foreign policy. Zalmay Khalilzad was, by common consent, a superb ambassador in Afghanistan and Iraq. Could that be in part because of his feel for those cultures? Most everyone regards Henry Kissinger as an enormously skilled negotiator. Could that be partly because as a Jew who grew up in Germany and then an immigrant in America, he has the ability to see things through several different prisms at once?

This might sound like an argument about intangibles, but it's been embraced by hard-nosed businessmen. Fourteen CEOs of Fortune 100 companies are foreign-born, a number that has grown by leaps in the past decade. Some of these companies have explicitly said that they chose CEOs who could penetrate foreign cultures and markets. This understanding, mind you, comes not from extensive work experience in these countries. Executives like Vikram Pandit of Citigroup and Indra Nooyi of PepsiCo have spent most of their professional lives in the United States. But they have a powerful feel for the world beyond America.

We're moving into a very new world, one in which countries from Brazil to South Africa to India and China are getting richer, stronger and prouder. For America to thrive, we will have to develop a much deeper, richer, more intuitive understanding of them and their peoples. There are many ways to attain this, but certainly being able to feel it in your bones is one powerful way. Trust me on this. As a Ph.D. in international relations, I know what I'm talking about.


____________
I have menopause and a handgun.  Any questions?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Peacemaker
Peacemaker


Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
posted December 19, 2007 05:10 PM
Edited by Peacemaker at 17:24, 19 Dec 2007.

...OMG!!!

It just keeps getting better...

How 'bout Ken Burns,folks?!?!?
Quote:
Once neutral, filmmaker Ken Burns picks Obama
by Jill Zuckman
Chicago Tribune


Manchester, N.H. – New Hampshire resident and famed filmmaker Ken Burns said today that he is throwing his support behind Sen. Barack Obama for president, complaining that "recent events" and the negative tone of the campaign compelled him to come forward.

Burns, who lives in Walpole, said he had originally planned to stay neutral because there were things he liked about all the Democratic candidates for president.

When asked what specifically prompted him to come forward, Burns said, "Those recent events are pretty obvious."

Last week, Sen. Hillary Clinton's state co-chairman resigned his position after saying that Obama's acknowledged use of drugs as a young man would prevent him from getting elected president because of likely Republican attacks.

"I'm really just disappointed in the tone this campaign has taken on their part," Burns said, referring to Clinton. "I think she's getting some bad advice."


Burns recently produced "The War," an examination of World War II that took him seven years to make. He's also well known for his documentary about baseball, as well as historical sagas about the West, Thomas Jefferson, Frank Lloyd Wright, and suffragists Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony.

Burns said he liked Obama right off the bat and felt he could stamp out society's "creeping cynicism" with his "unironic posture."

"I have been attracted from the beginning to his authenticity," he said. With the country facing difficult times, he said, the nation needs "someone able to dream and suggest a future without being tied to the past."

He also said he appreciated Obama's stand against the war when other candidates supported it.

"I think this is a human being who knew in advance how unnecessary and foolish this war was," Burns said, adding that Obama knows how to distinguish between "fraudulent wars," and "those that really need to be fought."

As a state senator, Obama spoke out against the invasion of Iraq, while Clinton voted for the use of force resolution.

"His record is utterly clear and unassailable on this point," said Burns.


Quote:
Ken Burns endorses Obama
Submitted by Monitor Staff on Tue, 2007-12-18 16:28
Primary Monitor Blog


Renowned filmmaker Ken Burns today announced his endorsement of Barack Obama. In a conference call with reporters, Burns, of Walpole, said that what he characterized as recent negative campaigning by Hillary Clinton influenced his decision to make an endorsement.

“I’ve been disappointed by the tone the campaigning has taken, and I felt it was important to end my neutrality,” Burns said. He added that he respects Clinton and said, “She’s getting bad advice, and I’m sure she’ll clean up her act.”

Burns praised Obama’s character and said he respected his stance on the Iraq war. “At a time when political winds were pushing this country into an unnecessary and unwise war, Barack Obama had the judgment, the political and moral courage to oppose it,” he said. “At a time when politics descended to cynical slash-and-burn character attacks, Barack Obama steadfastly presented a positive un-ironical agenda for the country. While others are mired in the consequences of past actions . . . he presents a vision of the future that’s not only possible, it’s essential to our survival as a great nation.”

Burns called Obama authentic and said he would be a leader “who calls on each of us to heed the better angels of our nature and not our basest fears.”

Quoting a line from his recent film about World War II, “There is no such thing as a good war, only necessary wars,” Burns said of Obama, “I trust him to distinguish the difference between necessary and unnecessary wars.”

Burns also cited U.S. history. “If you were a pundit in the 1850s, you would be certain the country needed an experienced professional like Clay, Calhoun, Chase or Stanton, but what the country actually needed was a relatively inexperienced young wiry figure from Illinois,” he said, referring to Abraham Lincoln. “I’m willing to bet that in this case history does repeat itself...”


(Emphasis added)

The country's finally starting to catch on...




 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted December 19, 2007 05:29 PM
Edited by Consis at 08:06, 30 Dec 2007.

Yes

You're right on both accounts Mvassilev. It may be one of my biggest flaws. I just feel like people don't see what I see.

Edit

Forgive Me Hillary....

I am changing my vote to Joe Biden. He's the one. I think he should be our next President of the United States.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Wolfman
Wolfman


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
posted December 31, 2007 06:41 AM

One word...

Why?
____________
Don't assume you know anything
about my position on any issue.  
Best idea would be to ask.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted December 31, 2007 03:31 PM
Edited by mvassilev at 15:31, 31 Dec 2007.

Quote:
I am changing my vote to Joe Biden. He's the one. I think he should be our next President of the United States.
Good choice, Consis. But why not Paul?
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted January 02, 2008 09:23 PM
Edited by Consis at 21:26, 02 Jan 2008.

Why Biden?

I feel like he is the least evil candidate. I feel like he wears his emotions on his sleeve. I feel like he is honest enough. After that first debate I was left feeling amazingly compelled to continue thinking about him from his demeanor and answers to some of the questions. For example when that frightening person from YouTube came out to say and show his "baby" was a large rifle of some kind Biden's repsonse was, "If that's his baby then he shouldn't own a gun". I recall the audience erupting with laughter but then as I looked at him his face hadn't changed. He told everyone, "I'm not joking. I'm serious." And I felt very much in agreement with him as he went on to describe his views on specific gun laws and restrictions that should be strongly enforced. I also recall his answer to the question asked about which candidate's children were put in private schools as opposed to public. I recall that he almost began to cry while barely holding on to his emotions as he attempted to take a trip down memory lane about the childrens' mother. I myself did in fact feel the tears welling up inside. I could tell he was trying his best to remain cordial and present a presidential response but his human side slowly crept through. I saw not simply a candidate or a senator but a man, not unlike any other. Since that time I have watched and listened to how people seem to be responding to him. Many like him. Some think he's washed up. And some immeasurably wealthy people seem to ignore him for his continuous rhetoric and strong standing against abuse of power. I also discovered he is constantly worrying in the biggest of terms for the next terrorist attack. I feel he is the most concerned with this regard of all the other candidates from both parties.

Why not Hillary any longer? Why have I changed my vote? First let me explain my very top reason for wanting to elect her as president. She is the only candidate of all the others who is by far and above our greatest hope to socialize our healthcare system. I have personally worked in the healthcare system both public and military. It is the one thing in all our greatness where the rest of the civilized world is laughing at us. How much will it cost you to have a baby? How much will it cost you to break your arm? How much for a tooth cavity? My vote for Hillary was a vote to change healthcare toward socializing it. But I also understand much more than some might think. Our current healthcare system is so deeply entrenched that only a revolution could possibly hope to change it. I know this. I've seen how much people are getting paid to be quiet. So does Hillary unfortunately. She's been paid off herself. But she is still the only candidate that without question would implement programs and influence to take us one step closer to it. My greatest reason for deciding against her is not because so many people hate her. It is because of how she has come to power. It is something that sets a most terrible example for the rest of the country. She came to power by being the President's wife. If she became president what would that say to the rest of the women in the country? Marry well and you too could be successful? That is not a message I intend to support.

Why not Ron Paul Mvassilev? This is a rather simple answer. It is because we are not founding a nation. There is a great big difference in birthing a nation and raising it to adulthood. Not but a few days ago Ron Paul was on television promoting that people shouldn't pay their taxes as a form of nonviolent protest as Ghandi or Martin Luther King might have done. And then he was talking about moving closer toward using a gold standard. Ron Paul is an idea-man. What he lacks in results and cooperation he makes up for with brilliant ideas. His ideas are sound. But they are so ahead of his time that he too, much like Hillary and changing healthcare, would need a revolution to bring them about with any sort of brevity. In fact I'll go out of my way to make a prediction about him. His ideas are so deeply brilliant and sound that I predict we will return to his genius when we start to colonize Mars. He will be required reading material in those days of the future. Once people start to see that the value of gold is indeed literally interplanetary many will begin to look for solutions in enacting laws to handle such a thing. And that's not the only reason why not Ron Paul. Ron Paul is also very much a man of the times, more so than any other candidate. He is the only candidate whom is clearly paying attention to the internet. here is what you need to understand about the internet Mvassilev. Look at us, you, and I, and Wolfman, and the others. Just look at us. How many people come to Heroes Community and other chat forums like it? How many in those of us who visit such an internet place actually talk about politics and things of that nature? Then ask yourself how many of that unbelievably small percentage actually go to vote in an election or any other local ballot? The actual number of people who are regular internet users like us and whom transport themselves to vote at appropriate times is so miniscule and inconsequencial that we are almost invisible to the naked eye. Here is the reality: Many people own computers and use the internet but most who do either don't vote or don't let the computer/internet affect their vote. In fact most of those people who are regular internet goers would rather send money than get out to vote. So what you'll see is a large financial turnout for candidates who are popular online but then when it comes time to vote they apathetically laugh and make up the laziest of excuses why they either couldn't mail it in or make it to the ballot boxes in person. That's right Mvassilev...you and I and Wolfman (and the others like us who care enough about voting) aren't like most internet people. They aren't like us. They won't vote and we will. And so it doesn't matter how popular a candidate seems on the internet. It isn't an accurate reflection of their true voter support.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted January 02, 2008 09:42 PM
Edited by mvassilev at 21:46, 02 Jan 2008.

Again you touch on one of our core disagreements: candidate support and other extraneous candidate features. I only care about one part of a candidate: their views. If I agree with them (and they don't change their positions all of the time) then I support them. If not, I oppose them. It's foolish to look at anything else.

TANCREDO DROPPED OUT!!!!! PARTY!!!!!!

The Iowa caucasses are tomorrow. Here is my prediction.
Democrats:
1. Obama
2. Edwards
3. Clinton
4. Richardson
5. Biden
6. Dodd
7. Kucinich
8. Gravel

Republicans:
1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain
4. Paul
5. Thompson
6. Giuliani
7. Hunter

I predict that Romney will be so bitter for not winning 1st place that he will have a Howard Dean moment (perhaps not yell, but something that really hurts his popularity). He'll say some really nasty anti-Baptist comment and his support will drop drastically, and he'll drop out.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 90 pages long: 1 10 ... 18 19 20 21 22 ... 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.1270 seconds