Cliton For President, Hillary That Is

[dirtydan]

Sure African-American means a person who is an American citizen and whose ancestors came from Africa. There are whites born in Africa and so by definition an African American could be white.

Is it Afro-American or African-American you are referring to?

The more common use of the term was to describe Americans who were sold into slavery in the 18th and 19th centuries. I think all of these slaves were black so African American is real used to describe descendence of slaves.

According to who? Why do you want to exclude Afro-Americans whose ancestors weren't slaves? Are any less or any more black than the narrow definition you have created?

Obama is not from Africa.

That's true in the sense he was born in the US. If he wasn't born in the US then he couldn't be running for President.

However Obama's father was very much from Africa.

Obama's descendeces were not slaves. Therefore he is not African-American, either by the real definition or the common use definition.

That reads like Republican style knit-picking.

 

[Mr.O]

Hogwash!!!

Powell might be too divisive. Not because of being an Afro-American but beause he was literially hung out to dry by the trioka of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld. Powell was made the scape goat of the debacle of no WMD's being found in Iraq. His return to public politics, as through a presidential run, could open huge casims within the Republicans.

McCain: the Al Gore of the Republicans. 'Nuf said.

Giuliani: Up until Bloomberg, the most UNPOPULAR mayor of NYC. A very slick public relations machine after 9/11 created the Giuliani most people think of, and he's a phoney.

With Uncurious Geroge having to step down in Jan/09 the primary battles in the Republicans and the Democrats may very well prove to be titanic struggles. IMHO it's already a 3-way race in the Democrats with Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. The Republicans could have Jeb Bush, McCain, and Giulaini.

Mark my words, whoever wins the presidency in 2008 I think will be the Democrat ot Republican who is the best and quickest to soothe over internal party divisions. Without a unified party behind a candidate any popularity means fuck-all because the political machine won't be there to capitalize on it.

You ain't too knowledgeable about Powell obviously nor do you have your finger on the pulse of the Republican party.
THEY know that they're in trouble this year & need a very middle of the roader to even get consideration for the Presidency.

Powell, IF he was willing to run, which I highly doubt it, is the most moderate of all the rep. canidates thus far on the board.

The American people are wanting CHANGE just like Canada did in the last PM election.

Unless the GOP can serve up a moderate they're sunk!

By the way Powell was duped by false intel as well cuz of Cheney & his crips.
I think you're correct about the division in the GOP camp but that will subside the closer it gets to election.

My prediction!
A "Kinder - Gentler" Republican candidate or a Democrat landslide!

 

[Irresistible Isabelle]

I'm with Randy & GBM & a few others whose handles I can't recall at this moment.

(btw... preemptive apologies for any nyquil induced rambling... be kind boys... ib bery sick)

I think it's critical that the US have a leader with real military experience, who is able to plan and act, who is able to negotiate with other foreign leaders about what needs to happen on a global scale and who frankly just has a bloody clue about what's really going on.

I think Wesley Clark, while he may lack charisma, is ideal. If he isn't up for prez, I seriously hope he manages a VP or major advisory role.

I don't trust Hillary. I don't think Obama has the experience (also I don't know what to think about a politician whose wife introduces him as "ma baby daddy" at a Kerry event).

The media keeps saying it'll be a democratic landslide BUT I think the democrats still need to focus on taking the whitehouse back and making this election about diversity might not be the best bet. I'm all for diversity, if there was a black-hispanic-lesbian with mobility issues who was the best person for the job, she's have my vote. But I don't think that being black or female should be anymore of reason to vote for someone than it is to NOT vote for someone. I just hope that if either Clinton or Obama or any combination of the two is on the ballot that the don't provide an excuse for the GOP to stay in power.

 

[OTBn]

I think it's critical that the US have a leader with real military experience, who is able to plan and act, who is able to negotiate with other foreign leaders about what needs to happen on a global scale and who frankly just has a bloody clue about what's really going on.

I think Wesley Clark, while he may lack charisma, is ideal. If he isn't up for prez, I seriously hope he manages a VP or major advisory role.

what? no chickenhawks for you?

Clark has growing support but probably not as the lead - I've stated before that I think it will become a Gore/Clark ticket... lot's of exploratory talk about Gore taking another run at it. I'm taken with Jim Webb (strong military background) particularly since his rebuttal to the Shrub's SOTU put him front-and-center, but it's too soon for Webb to be considered seriously.

On the repub side Chuck Hagel (strong military background) is gaining a lot of momentum with his anti-Iraq positions/anti-Bush sentiments... notwithstanding his strong conservative voting record

 

[dirtydan]

Kim Campbell should not even be listed as she was not elected, she in fact was a sacrifical lamb, they needed someone to lose the election, which they all knew they would.

Actually no mick. The Tories were doing quite well going into the 1993 election and with a good shot at winning. Campbell's incompetance is what really cost them and reduced the Tories to only 2 seats. If she had been a better campaigner and been more organized the PC's just might have been around today. Even if they had lost and ended up as the official opposition that likely would have spelled the end of the Reform Party. The ineffectiveness of Campbell opened the door for people to think of Brian Mulroney.

 

[dirtydan]

You ain't too knowledgeable about Powell obviously nor do you have your finger on the pulse of the Republican party.
THEY know that they're in trouble this year & need a very middle of the roader to even get consideration for the Presidency.

My guess is my knowledge of the Republicans and my finger on their pulse is likely about the same as your's.

Keep in mind there is a large voting block within the Republicans that is hard to divide. And that is the born-again Christains who make up 30-35% of Republican members. For the Republicans to put forth a moderate then the bulk of the rest of the party must unify behind the moderate to stop the religious zealots. Think back to when Bush 1 was trying to become president in 1988 and the loads of grief those zealots gave him.

Powell, IF he was willing to run, which I highly doubt it, is the most moderate of all the rep. canidates thus far on the board.

I can't see Powell running either. He's has his share of shit to deal with, especially thanks to the bullshit fed to him by Cheney and Rumsfeld. Powell going to the UN and speaking about all this evidence of Iraqi WMD's when it turned out it was all bullshit was a political lynching if there ever was one.

The American people are wanting CHANGE just like Canada did in the last PM election.

Unless the GOP can serve up a moderate they're sunk!

Which to is a good reason they should stay away from Jeb Bush. He's more to the right and more of a religious fanatic than what his older brother can ever pretend to be. That is scary.

By the way Powell was duped by false intel as well cuz of Cheney & his crips.
I think you're correct about the division in the GOP camp but that will subside the closer it gets to election.

One thing that could unify the Republicans very quickly is if the Democrats choose Hillary Clinton as their presidential candidate. The Republicans have a strange but strong hatred of anything smacking of a Clinton.

My prediction!
A "Kinder - Gentler" Republican candidate or a Democrat landslide!

A lot can happened between now and voting day in November 2008. The Republicans may be down, but don't count them out yet. There is always the Democrats ability to shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[Randy Whorewald]

Hilary's gonna be pissed if she doesn't get nominated!!!

 

[dirtydan]

Hillary: best to win & best to lose

Hilary's gonna be pissed if she doesn't get nominated!!!

She may be a good candidate the Dems can win the White House, but she's also a good candidate for them to lose a 3rd straight election to the Republicans. If you ask me, Hillary Clinton is the Democrats #1 choice for losing the 2008 presidential election.

 

[Randy Whorewald]

She may be a good candidate the Dems can win the White House, but she's also a good candidate for them to lose a 3rd straight election to the Republicans. If you ask me, Hillary Clinton is the Democrats #1 choice for losing the 2008 presidential election.

As I said near the top of this thread, if she gets the nomination, she'll cost the Dems the Whitehouse.

 

[jjinvan]

Oddly enough places that you would normally think of as more conservative than the U.S. have all had women leaders. India, Great Britain, Canada, South Africa etc.

Uhh...

1) Do you REALLY classify Canada as being 'more conservative' than the USA???? What rock have you been under for the past 100 years? Seriously...

2) Canada never elected a female leader.

 

[Randy Whorewald]

Who the FUCK is Cliton?

These days it appears you can have females with a clit or without a clit. Check it out for yourself:

Clitoral circumcision: Refers to the surgical procedure in which the hood of the females clitoris (called the clitoral prepuce) is removed. However, the term is often confused in modern day writings with ritual procedures performed in Egypt and in other countries as noted below. On the CIRCLIST website, we refer to female circumcision as only the removal of the hood of the clitoris unless otherwise noted.

Sunna circumcision: Consists of the removal of the tip of the clitoris, sometimes performed by cutting a hole in a piece of cloth and placing it over the area to be cut, limiting the size of the area. In certain cases the clitoris is just nicked with a knife or razor, in parts of Mexico and South America, the sign of the cross is cut into it. Sunna, in Arabic, means "tradition". The clitoral hood is also sometimes removed.

Clitoridectomy: sometimes referred to as excision, which involves the removal of the entire clitoris, rather than just the tip. The labia minora; the inside lips of the vagina are also sometimes removed, but the outer labia are left intact. The vaginal opening is left open and unchanged, rather than sewn together, as in the case of Pharaonic Circumcision.

http://www.circlist.com/femalecirc/anatfemale.html

 

[Mr.O]

Another one who's a real sleuth

Who the FUCK is Cliton?

Your`e a little late but at least you noticed!

RW - did`nt I mention something about comprehension level on another thread?
Maybe I should post some stats on observation as well.

Here read this Sonny:
https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=567987#post567987

 

[dirtydan]

Uhh...

2) Canada never elected a female leader.

Can you name a prime minister or premier who was elected to either position?

 

[sdw]

Can you name a prime minister or premier who was elected to either position?

When Kim Campbell was elected to be the leader of the Conservatives, she lost the election. With only 2 Conservatives elected in following election, she destroyed the party and opened it up for the current alliance of right-wing nut cakes.

When Rita Johnson was elected to be the leader of the Social Credit in BC, she lost the election. With only 2 Socreds elected in the following election, she destroyed the party.

It would seem that the electorate does not want female leaders.

The NDP keeps choosing female leaders and has yet to come close to even providing a strong opposition when lead by a female. When they decide that they would really like to win, they have success with male leaders. Of course, the NDP is always undone by it's internal politics and rarely goes to the next election with the leader they won with.

I think the same situation exists in the States. Hillary may indeed win the Democratic nomination. The Democrats with Hillary in the lead will not win the election.

I think part of the problem with woman leaders is this feeling by women that they can negotiate, network and concensus build for every decision. It's one of the things that drive men crazy and I think it also is behind the reason that women don't seem to support women leaders. It may be that negotiation, networking and concensus building work in women's personal lives, but they want a much clearer vision when they are electing a leader.

The women who are good at negotiation, networking and concensus building are successful at getting the leadership of their organization, however the skills that accomplished that make them look directionless and visionless to the larger set of people who they need to win an election.

 

[therealrex]

To say Kim Campbell ruined the Conservative Party is pretty far fetched Brian managed to do that one all by himself. Campbell didn't have time to do much of anything.

 

[sdw]

To say Kim Campbell ruined the Conservative Party is pretty far fetched Brian managed to do that one all by himself. Campbell didn't have time to do much of anything.

I think if Brian had run again he would have delivered a victory. Kim Campbell subscribed to the theory that you can win an election by attacking your former leader and the party he lead. What some people don't get is that if you run your election on the principle that your former leader and the party he lead are unprincipled thieves, people won't vote for the unprincipled thieves that are running for re-election.

Paul Martin did the same thing. He lost the election convincingly enough that the Liberals didn't retain him as leader. The Liberals only fortune was that the choice was Steven Harper and his unholy alliance of nut cakes or the NDP. If there had been a valid supportable choice there wouldn't be any Liberal MPs in Ottawa today.

 

[Randy Whorewald]

RW - did'nt I mention something about comprehension level on another thread?
Maybe I should post some stats on observation as well.

Right on - You should do that Big O!!