molson_golden2002 Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Hagel is a good man. The GOP base which desperately hangs onto this war out of pride, gross and disgusting ignorance and hate would never support him for the nomination. Besides, he is too smart to be nominated by the Republicans. They like appallingly stupid candidates like Bush. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2401104_pf.html
Alaska Darin Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Hagel is a good man. The GOP base which desperately hangs onto this war out of pride, gross and disgusting ignorance and hate would never support him for the nomination. Besides, he is too smart to be nominated by the Republicans. They like appallingly stupid candidates like Bush. Says the guy whose party of choice nominated TWO men who weren't smart enough to beat him. THINK.
molson_golden2002 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Posted November 28, 2006 Says the guy whose party of choice nominated TWO men who weren't smart enough to beat him. THINK. 850400[/snapback] Winning elections and actually governing are two very different things. I guess I would be expecting too much of you to know that
Bungee Jumper Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Winning elections and actually governing are two very different things. I guess I would be expecting too much of you to know that 850437[/snapback] Too bad those who would govern the country instead choose to focus on the former to the exclusion of the latter. I guess it would be expecting too much of you to know that.
Chilly Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Too bad those who would govern the country instead choose to focus on the former to the exclusion of the latter. I guess it would be expecting too much of you to know that. 850452[/snapback] I'd also argue that focusing on the former, at least in the present environment, leads to the exclusion of the latter.
Alaska Darin Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 I'd also argue that focusing on the former, at least in the present environment, leads to the exclusion of the latter. 850469[/snapback] Ah, fundamentals. I guess understanding that it takes leadership to both win a campaign AND govern effectively is too much to ask.
Chilly Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Ah, fundamentals. I guess understanding that it takes leadership to both win a campaign AND govern effectively is too much to ask. 850510[/snapback] Heh, yeah. Well, right now, whatever they do will only fk stuff up, besides undoing what the other party did. So if you want to win elections, you focus on undoing what the other party did rather then actually getting something done.
pdh1 Posted November 28, 2006 Posted November 28, 2006 Hagel is a good man. The GOP base which desperately hangs onto this war out of pride, gross and disgusting ignorance and hate...http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2401104_pf.html 850288[/snapback] Hate? All those "Death To..." rallies happen in the Middle East. That's your hate right there. Here is a good example of "hate crime": http://www.wral.com/news/10370111/detail.html
molson_golden2002 Posted November 29, 2006 Author Posted November 29, 2006 Too bad those who would govern the country instead choose to focus on the former to the exclusion of the latter. I guess it would be expecting too much of you to know that. 850452[/snapback] Doesn't change the fact that Bush was good at looking intelligent reading speeches in front of the troops but is as dumb as they come. He is President because of his name and family and his handlers. At least guys like Nixon or Reagan or Clinton actually rose their way to the top instead of having everything handed to them. Bush is a total screw up and many of us saw that from the beginning. Those who are easily impressed with shinny things, bright colors and a lot of flags couldn't. One term was excusable, the second one was pathetic.
Bungee Jumper Posted November 29, 2006 Posted November 29, 2006 Doesn't change the fact that Bush was good at looking intelligent reading speeches in front of the troops but is as dumb as they come. He is President because of his name and family and his handlers. At least guys like Nixon or Reagan or Clinton actually rose their way to the top instead of having everything handed to them. Bush is a total screw up and many of us saw that from the beginning. Those who are easily impressed with shinny things, bright colors and a lot of flags couldn't. Tell me something I don't know. One term was excusable, the second one was pathetic. 851244[/snapback] And as I've said over and over and over and over...the Democratic Party couldn't manage to beat the single most beatable incumbent president in seventy years. If Bush's second term is "pathetic", the fault for that lies nowhere other than your party's doorstep.
Alaska Darin Posted November 29, 2006 Posted November 29, 2006 Those who are easily impressed with shinny things, bright colors and a lot of flags couldn't. 851244[/snapback] Says a partisan Democrat. Too funny.
molson_golden2002 Posted November 29, 2006 Author Posted November 29, 2006 Says a partisan Democrat. Too funny. 851376[/snapback] Chuck Hagel is a Republican
Bungee Jumper Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 Chuck Hagel is a Republican 852113[/snapback] He was talking about you, Einstein.
molson_golden2002 Posted November 30, 2006 Author Posted November 30, 2006 He was talking about you, Einstein. 852159[/snapback] And I wrote something about a person I like, Republican Chuck Hagel!
Chilly Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 And I wrote something about a person I like, Republican Chuck Hagel! 852182[/snapback] Which does NOT mean that you are anything other then a partisan Democrat.
molson_golden2002 Posted November 30, 2006 Author Posted November 30, 2006 Which does NOT mean that you are anything other then a partisan Democrat. 852186[/snapback] Right, it means I'm a far left wing extremist who votes for Republicans sometimes
Chilly Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 Right, it means I'm a far left wing extremist who votes for Republicans sometimes 852195[/snapback] Actually, given the high defection rates of self-identified Democrats versus the defection rates of self-identified Republicans, its not a surprise that this is true.
molson_golden2002 Posted November 30, 2006 Author Posted November 30, 2006 Actually, given the high defection rates of self-identified Democrats versus the defection rates of self-identified Republicans, its not a surprise that this is true. 852203[/snapback] Yes, Democrats are generally more open minded, IMO.
Chilly Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 Yes, Democrats are generally more open minded, IMO. 852223[/snapback] troll
molson_golden2002 Posted November 30, 2006 Author Posted November 30, 2006 troll 852227[/snapback] Ok, how about this? Those registered Democrats who have crossed over are mostly older Southern Democrats and they are not rreally Democrats are they? And they sure as hell were never liberals. And another thing, who do you think crossed over more in the last election, Dems or Reps? The Troll has spoken
Recommended Posts