Where can I go to get a high-level run-down on what the candidates stand for, their positions, etc? Oh, and please no conservative reactionary bull$hit from you Maranello Man. Please. Dean annoys me. Lieberman really annoys me. Sharpton annoys the ever-living piss out of me. Other than that I have no opinion, but I need to form one. Thanks for any help. Luke.
OK, you don't like doctors, Jews, or blacks... Hillary all the way!!!! ROFLMAO Seriously, there is a vacuum.
Phuque you, Luke. Really. Your lack of appreciation for other points of view says all we need to know about you. I love Sharpton, actually. He knows he can't win, so he says what he REALLY thinks. And he is genuinely funny, and self-deprecating, without seeming like he's trying too hard. Lieberman is a truly honorable man. I like him on most things. Dean is a mean-spirited Medusa---ask a question & get 8 different answers, depending on the audience. He is totally untrustworthy. Edwards is a scumbag, and walks like a girl. 'Nuff said. Kerry is trying too hard to please, and seems to be wavering all over the place. He is a good guy, but he needs to ignore his "advisors".
Not quite high level, but quick, and easy... http://www.naswdc.org/pace/2004candidates/default.asp Even though I think Dean is going to be the democratic nominee for sure, I still like Clark a bit better. He seems much more realistic in his goals and I would trust his decisions on how to deal with Iraq.
Oops--forgot Clark: Interesting fellow. Fired FOR CAUSE as commander of NATO. That tells me a lot. Also is the Clintons' perferred candidate at this time. That tells me more. Has vacillated 100%, twice or thrice, or the war & WMD issue. That completes the picture.
Maranelloman - I'm not going to argue with you or let you bait me, but suffice it to say your MANY hateful, bigoted, short-sighted, elitist posts have told me all I need to know about you. Jordan - THANKS!
>Where can I go to get a high-level run-down on what the candidates >stand for, their positions, etc? The Enquirer, perhaps?
Show me one that is bigoted, hateful or short-sighted. Occasionally elitist, I won't argue with, but I challenge you to back up your rather rude accusation with anything resembling a FACT. If you have the stones. Methinks you may have me confused with Art...
He was fired not just for his views, but to find a post for Gen. Ralston. You are aware that after you hit O-7, your career and your life turns into a political melodrama. Good for Clark and shame on any of you who believe that because he was retired 3 months early makes him any less of candidate. You know what happens when your assignment is up? You take a post with an equal rank somewhere else, you go up in rank with responsibilities, or you retire. Thats it. There's not many positions for O-8 and above. I was proud to meet Clark and talk with him for at least fifteen minutes while he waited for his staff car without bull****. It goes to show you no matter how good you are in the military, if you aren't liked, you will never succeed as well as you could. Vacillated while in uniform or without? I'm sure none of his statements were released under the guidance of Public Affairs. None at all. Yeah, right. So besides these things, what else can we disqualify him for? He's still the best candidate up there on either "side". Sunny
I hate to side with anyone, but things said about politicians don't count. They're not like real people....
The important thing to know is that they all want to raise the dividend tax & increase the capital gains tax & increase income taxes on people making over $200k. They are all anti business & they all want to blow your $ on hair brained schemes that ultimately dont help much if at all. Thats all I need to know. I think I will send GWB a nice donation & my vote
Well, here is an opinion that matters to me: http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=35&rnd=513.1828526366711
Hm, I wouldnt say they are anti business really. They just have different views on business restrictions and place those views on different priorities than republicans. Taxes are a tough issue though. Nobody wants them, but how else can the government pay for programs we all want and need. Money cant just materialize so they turn to taxes. The rich hate to be taxed, but some of the lower classes just simply cant afford it at all. So who should take the hit? The rich, the poor who cant afford it, or the business? Any combination of those will piss somebody off...I will give it to you, though, that a lot of the democrats plans are just a bit too optimistic and naive --primarily their plans with health care, education, and foreign policies. We are never going to have a completely peaceful earth where everyone has a nearly free college education and health care.
Mr. Edwards DOES walk like a girl. Have you ever seen him walk? I have, in person & on TV...and he sashays much more than my wife does. So what I posted was a FACT. As for the other part of my comment: I view most lawyers of his ilk as scumbags, and have posted this before. This opinion is not limited to Mr. Edwards, but is felt additionally for (for instance) the 3 or 4 lawyers here in Texas who "earned" $3,300,000,000 (that's $3.3 BILLION) in fees for their part of tobacco litigation. None of these folks create jobs or economic growth. All they do is keep perpetuating the "I'm entitled to a lottery payout" mentality. And this is neither bigoted, hateful, nor short sighted. Next?
CNN had a good site that compared all the candidates on each issue. Try cruising around there and finding it. I'll try too.
Suit yourself. That's the beauty of our country--multiple sources of info, and the right to believe what you want. The opinions that matter to me on this come from Clark's former commanding officer, Hugh Shelton, as well as Norman Schwartzkopf, both of who say that Clark was relieved of duty for serious character & moral issues. They worked directly with Clark--I choose to believe them. Sunny, you may be right, and yes, politics play a HUGE role in the commanding ranks. However, look back in history: how often has a 4 star been relieved of duty so close to his rotation home/retirement, and out of such a key command? Not bloody often. Was the last one the MacArthur incident in WWII? I think it may have been, but might be wrong. My point is that Clark's firing was NOT to make room for Ralston, who would have gotten that post anyway in 3 short months. It was for cause. Sorry, but that's what happened, politics notwithstanding.
Got it: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/issues/index.dean.html Click on a candidate. See their positions.
Still waiting for you to have the stones to back up your rude, mean-spirited accusations, Lucas. Your silence speaks volumes. Listen, my young friend: you probably do not like my political views. That is fine, and is the beauty of our system, where we can BOTH express differing views. I have no problem with disagreement, and will defend to the death your right to publicly disagree with me. But have some maturity and either STFU or back up your absurd allegations of "bigotry, hatred, and short-sightedness", OK? That's what grown-ups do as part of discourse. Children having temper tantrums just spew ***** and then run away. 'Nuff said.
As I said, "Children having temper tantrums just spew ***** and then run away." I think we all learned what we needed here, Lucas.
Absolutely. Basically, all the tripe being spouted by the dems has stirred me out of my voter apathy. GWB will have my vote, as well as that of anyone else around me that I can influence. The louder the nonsense level goes up, the louder will be the thunder of collapse for the dems come November. Now, where's my checkbook.....