PDA

View Full Version : Clinton celebrates impending victory



Deeman3
02-20-2008, 09:56 AM
Contest margin of victory
Louisiana 21%
Nebraska 36%
Washington 37%
US Virgin Islands 81%
Maine 19%
Virginia 29%
Washington DC 51%
Maryland 23%
Wisconsin 17%
Hawaii 52%

<font color="blue"> Wow, as Hillary continues to show her strong support among "women over 60 who hate men" and "people who have never paid a dime in taxes", Obama, the empty, inexperienced, opportunist seems to have not fully gotten the message of her impending victory.

Now, it seems, she will be able to claim victory with less than 5 states to her eventual credit, if she can change the delegate rules she signed for Florida and Michigan. What a strategy, keep your opponent off the ballot and then claim the win, what a strategist? I'm glad she is not the plotting type.

</font color>

SpiderMan
02-20-2008, 11:38 AM
I listened to Obama on the radio a few times - he's been running some ads in the Dallas area. He can sure say a lot about nothing. "Yes, we can! We can get out in front of everything that's behind us! Yes, we can!". /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

At least he's not Billary. I think I'll vote for him in the primary, then sit out the main election if he's nominated. If Obama beats McCain, then maybe we'll get the shock treatment needed to elect a true conservative next time, sort of like the mid-term congressional elections during the first Clintonista debacle.

Once back in the White House, I'm afraid the Clinton machine would find a way to rob and rape us without suffering any fallout.

SpiderMan

Deeman3
02-20-2008, 01:30 PM
I agree. I was holding my breath hoping they didn't select a real candidate, I think Biden would have been formitable but not enough "flash" for the Democratic base.

Funny, I really was fearlful that the Republicans would have to take Hillary apart but the Democrats and the liberal media did their work for them. We may see a full scale internal race war in the party as a beenfit to boot.

I agree as well about Obama. If we have to go down the road to ruin, let it be obvious. I am hoping for a Carter like situation where he can lay on the rethoric, do nothing with the "do nothing" Democratic (first 100 hours congress, what a laugh) and get him and the "pretend conservatives" (Bush, et al.) out of there and have a real race next time.

It is simply unbelievable what the Democratic Party will do to itself, election after election. I hate to agree with Gayle, but she saw this coming. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Can we still sign up for the Obama campaign? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Spiderman! Why do you hate women so? /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

pooltchr
02-20-2008, 01:34 PM
I find it somewhat telling that one of the demographics that is supposed to be for Hillary is the "lower income/less educated" group. I guess any group is better than no support at all.
Steve

Deeman3
02-20-2008, 01:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> I find it somewhat telling that one of the demographics that is supposed to be for Hillary is the "lower income/less educated" group. I guess any group is better than no support at all.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> I can understand that support. Look what she did for them with NAFDA, when she was President the first time! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif</font color>

Gayle in MD
02-20-2008, 01:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
At least he's not Billary. I think I'll vote for him in the primary, then sit out the main election if he's nominated. <hr /></blockquote>

As I understand it, that is the Republican strategy. They finally figured out a legal way to throw elections. it's being written about in many papers. Of course, the RNC e-mails are all missing. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Deeman3
02-20-2008, 02:00 PM
My joking above aside, where did Hillary go wrong? I believe, like you I think, that I would have bet the barn a year ago that she was unstoppable, at the very least in the Democratic Primaries. Is the party too far left, was her war vote the thing that got her untracked or is the party really thinking that Obama is the better candidate?

Will, in your opinion, the Democrats regret this decision?

Aside from the old history or her ememies from the right (old news) why would she not be better able to bridge the trust and likeability issues in all this time and with all the money and support she had early on?

Do you think she will be offered or accept the VP nod?

Will she now turn up the negatives and risk harmony in the party?

SpiderMan
02-20-2008, 02:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> I agree. I was holding my breath hoping they didn't select a real candidate, I think Biden would have been formitable but not enough "flash" for the Democratic base.

Funny, I really was fearlful that the Republicans would have to take Hillary apart but the Democrats and the liberal media did their work for them. We may see a full scale internal race war in the party as a beenfit to boot.

I agree as well about Obama. If we have to go down the road to ruin, let it be obvious. I am hoping for a Carter like situation where he can lay on the rethoric, do nothing with the "do nothing" Democratic (first 100 hours congress, what a laugh) and get him and the "pretend conservatives" (Bush, et al.) out of there and have a real race next time.

It is simply unbelievable what the Democratic Party will do to itself, election after election. I hate to agree with Gayle, but she saw this coming. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Can we still sign up for the Obama campaign? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Spiderman! Why do you hate women so? /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif <hr /></blockquote>

Damn! If I'd said I'd vote for Hillary, you'd probably call me a racist /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan

LWW
02-20-2008, 03:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
At least he's not Billary. I think I'll vote for him in the primary, then sit out the main election if he's nominated. <hr /></blockquote>

As I understand it, that is the Republican strategy. They finally figured out a legal way to throw elections. it's being written about in many papers. Of course, the RNC e-mails are all missing. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif <hr /></blockquote>
Oh please.

The truth of the matter is that the DNC had a movement going to have D's switch and vote McCain.

That strategy may have sapped HillBillary's base.

Gayle, you will stoop at nothing to empower the Clintonista will you.

Don't worry, if Obama gets the nod you will faithfully carry his water as well ... but I think he will lose yet. The Clintonista have a way of dealing with people who get too uppity.

LWW

Deeman3
02-20-2008, 04:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr>Damn! If I'd said I'd vote for Hillary, you'd probably call me a racist /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> You Texas guys just can't win. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif I'll give you odds, Hillary reveals she was really born in Houston and named after Clinton, Texas before the week is out. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif all with a Texas drawl, ya'll...</font color>

Gayle in MD
02-20-2008, 04:07 PM
[ QUOTE ]

My joking above aside, where did Hillary go wrong? I believe, like you I think, that I would have bet the barn a year ago that she was unstoppable, at the very least in the Democratic Primaries. <font color="red">Yes, I thought she would win easily. </font color> Is the party too far left, <font color="red">Must not be that, because Obama is farther left, than Hillary, unless you're referring to the insiders in the party, and not the voters. She's really much more of a centrist, than he is, I believe, and I think all the hoopla about Bill, really hurt her campaign. </font color> was her war vote the thing that got her untracked <font color="red">I think that hurt her, yes, with so many in our country believing that the war was a mistake, it couldn't have helped. </font color> or is the party really thinking that Obama is the better candidate?

<font color="red">I think there are a combination of things which have not been good. I do think the Kennedy's got their noses out of joint when she didn't acknowledge Bobby and John, referring instead to President Johnson, as the president who put Dr. King's dreams to paper.

Also, I think Bill Clinton was railroaded by the press for every statement he made, and as you know, I didn't view his statements in the same way, but the press harped on them non stop, while providing Obama with a halo, and never even pressing him for deails, or spot lighting his mis-steps, and he did have a few. The Washington press corps doesn't like the Clinton's, and that includes Hillary. They've had a field day throughout this campaign, and I really think that's a shame. I think some in the party have been disloyal, both men, and women, and I hope it comes back and bites them you know where. Although, If Hillary had been more successful, or manages to win the big three, I think some of them, those who fell off, would rally round her again.

Whatever else can be said about Hillary, I do believe that she thrives on work, and that her goal is always to be the best. I think many in Congress were surprised to find that they liked Hillary when they got to know her, and were surprised that she was easy to work with, and was a very hard working Senator, who became known for reaching across the isle. </font color>

Will, in your opinion, the Democrats regret this decision?

<font color="red">Well, I'm not sure which Democrats you mean, but if you mean the voters, yes, Because I do not think Obama is the best person at this time. I had hoped that he would end up the Vice President, if anything. I think that the constant bashing from the press, and the idea of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton, at a time when people are so disgusted with their government, and want change, also played a role. Obama's message came at the right time, and while he is a great orator, I don't think he can light a candle to Hillary in smarts, or in the kind of experience one must have to get things done in Washington, so you guys from the right can relax, I guess. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I think, also, that many men are not comfortable with the idea of a woman president, and also many women. That is very unfortunate, IMO, because I do believe that no one would have worked as hard for this country, as Hillary. I think she's a person who loves problem solving, and never gives up. I think she would have done a great job, and I am still holding out some hope. </font color>

Aside from the old history or her ememies from the right (old news) why would she not be better able to bridge the trust and likeability issues in all this time and with all the money and support she had early on?

<font color="red">Well, I'm sorry, but I do believe that the press played a huge role in it, sexism played a huge role, the mood of the country, played a huge role, our youth, and their worship of the exciting young Obama, and I do believe that it is the Republican strategy to send their troops out to vote for Obama in the primary, so that Hillary couldn't win the nomination, in all the states where the law allowed. Now, I realize that Rove, and the RNC has bent over backwards trying to portray Hillary as their preferred opponent, but I never bought that. Does Macy's tell Gimbles? Also, I don't think Hillary's personality comes across in public as well as some others, but I don't think that necessarily means that she wouldn't be a great president. She is definately a woman who loves problem solving, and would have done her very best, not only to be a good president, but to be a great president. That is just her nature, IMO.</font color>

Do you think she will be offered or accept the VP nod?

<font color="red">I doubt that Obama would offer it, and I don't think she would accept. I think that if he wins the nomination, she would more likely have her eye on 2012, because I do not think she is wrong about his lack of experience, and in fact, McCain may win, running against Obama. Obama has a lot going against him, which as yet has not been spotlighted, or exploited by the Republicans. He hasn't even given particulars about his policy promises, and the press, is just beginning to press for answers. He's basically been given a bye, throughout this campaign. </font color>

Will she now turn up the negatives and risk harmony in the party?

<font color="red">Well, she seems to be behind, so I don't know what other tactic could be used, at this point, unless the press begins to bash the Obamas' the way they have bashed the Clinton's for the last eight months,... do you? Of course, that, too is a risk, since Hillary is a woman. When men do it, it's politics as usual, but when a woman does it, she's a bitch.

I'm very disappointed about the campaign, but I'm even more disappointed to see how little progress has really been made in this country regarding sexism. I know many would not agree with me, but that is what I have seen throughout this campaign. Of course, I don't know how wide spread this Republican effort has been, but I have heard about it from Republican friends of mine, in Virginia and in a few other states, and it has been spoken about in the news, so that, too, has played a role, I'm sure. I feel bad for Hillary, because I think she has worked very hard throughout her life, to reach this point, and it seems to me that bad press from the past, is what most damaged her campaign, if the attitude of the press, is a result of that past. whatever the causes, I do believe that she would have made a geat president, and even Bill may have thought that... /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif if you get my drift. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif</font color>


<hr /></blockquote>

Deeman3
02-20-2008, 04:41 PM
Gayle,

Thank-you for a very thoughtful and reasonable response. I agree with you on many points and think you are right on the unfair treatment of her by most in the press. I also agree that she would be better off waiting until 2012 than tieing in with Obama.

I also believe there is more to the women than many of us would dare admit. It may just be that she had the misfortune to be the lightning rod for so many on both sides.

I also agree she would have had much more impact on us thatn Obama ever could. I may not agree with her on policy but she could do more than talk. Unfortuantly, we (our culture) values rock start status more than we should.

I beleive that it is possible that Obama may beome unstoppable for all the wrong reasons.

I give you two important points as well. The press will not bash Obama, they won't get by with it like they did against Hillary. As well, I had feelings that I'd like to have Hillary as the candidate but am relieved now that I saw how cool she was under pressure. Obama has smoother words but not the knowledge that she has.

I really don't think my personal dislike or Hillary has anything to do with sexism, but I may be wrong. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif I think I would support a women I believed in but, you know, I really don't know. Just being honest. I think my dislike goes back to Arkansas where she came off as seeming to dismiss the Arkansas people but, of course, that may have been more press portrayal than fact. She was nice to me but very quiet when I saw her.

Again, thanks for your answers.

Gayle in MD
02-21-2008, 02:23 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Again, thanks for your answers.
<hr /></blockquote>

And thank you for yours, and for your honesty.

Gayle in Md.

SKennedy
02-21-2008, 10:08 PM
So, there are those who state that as a Republican in Texas, should I decide to vote for a democrat in the primary, then I'm throwing an election? Would that sentiment also apply in a general election?
Decisions, decisions? Obama or Hillary? Guess this Republican will vote Obama. Why? Sexism over racism! Priorities must be kept straight! Keeping the little lady in her place is top priority, after that we'll work on keeping the black man down! If only Rice was running...I could vote against her and kill 2 birds with one stone....
I just can't wait until our primary....sure hope my wife lets me go vote!

Deeman3
02-22-2008, 10:21 AM
The debate last night was interesting but, as I see it, did not let either candidate make inroads or have a defining mistake by one or the other.

I did notice Hillary continually referring to Texas and Ohio, much like the other states don't count much and, of course, if she doesn't win both, its probaly over.

Is it possible to do much of the spending they are planning? I know all candidates promise the moon but it seems they are already defining their presidency with pretty high goals of accomplishment all based on new spending.

I know American is ready for change but even as this normal monetary cycle gets better, will we have the money to do even a small precentage of health care, infrastructure, environmental, education and other spending packages?

Will our health care system, which I know is flawed, ever recover if we break it completely? It is now, what, 15% of our GNP.

Who had the best solutions, in your opinion?

eg8r
02-22-2008, 10:58 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I know American is ready for change but even as this normal monetary cycle gets better, will we have the money to do even a small precentage of health care, infrastructure, environmental, education and other spending packages?
<hr /></blockquote> We don't have any money right now. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

eg8r

LWW
02-22-2008, 01:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>I know American is ready for change but even as this normal monetary cycle gets better, will we have the money to do even a small precentage of health care, infrastructure, environmental, education and other spending packages?<hr /></blockquote>
None of that makes any difference.

When they don't deliver, which they can't and know they can't, they will blame the other party.

Once that happens all of the usual partisans here will go "YEAH!" and that will be the end of it.

LWW

SKennedy
02-22-2008, 01:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>
Who had the best solutions, in your opinion? <hr /></blockquote>

Had trouble responding and thought the admin took me seriously on my last post and cut me off....just had to log in....
As for your question....
Not sure who has the best solutions. I think they pander to certain groups and what they say sounds good, but both promise things they can't deliver. I think he appears to be less moderate than Hillary, but she's not as moderate as she lets on...and I think the office has a way of moderating someone anyway. Both have solutions we can't afford. However, if we were to really cut waste we could likely afford more than we think.
To me, Hillary is a known entity and Obama is not. While that concerns me about Obama, it does not concern me as much as Hillary. It's time for the Clinton/Bush dynasties to be over. If (and that's a big "if") Obama is as sincere as he indicates, and he ends up more moderate in the position of President, he could do some good things. If he served and served well, it would certainly help with the race issues still remaining in our country. On the other hand, if he does poorly and splits this country further, it will set us back even more.
The last time I actually voted for someone and not against someone else was in 1980 and 1984. I hope to be able to vote for someone again one day.....
Regardless, I'm always optimistic. We will survive. Thank goodness for checks and balances.

bamadog
02-22-2008, 01:26 PM
Obama is a BIG entitlement, BIG taxes liberal. Go to youtube and look at some of the speeches by his wife Michelle.
Is that what we need in this country, a return to a cycle of victimhood and dependancy?
What race issues still remain in this country that are not the product of divisive liberal politics?

Gayle in MD
02-22-2008, 01:31 PM
[ QUOTE ]
know American is ready for change but even as this normal monetary cycle gets better, will we have the money to do even a small precentage of health care, infrastructure, environmental, education and other spending packages?

<font color="blue">Oh my, if only I could believe that this cycle was normal. I don't think it is, this time. I think that as far as our country's economic situation goes, things are far worse than we realize. While some single out earmarks as being a huge problem, I tend to believe that waste, corruption, greed and lack of oversight of where and how our money is spent, all play a much larger role than the bugetary 1% spent on earmarks.</font color>

Will our health care system, which I know is flawed, ever recover if we break it completely? It is now, what, 15% of our GNP.

<font color="blue">Again, corruption and greed. There was a time when insurance counted for something. Now days, the health insurance industry just drops people, same thing with homeowners insurance, and they know that people don't have the resources to fight them in court. I still think we've gone too far on deregulation, and not far enough to protect consumers.

when we can't even eat the food in our grocery stores, without worry if we're going to be poisoned, something is drastically wrong in government, and in the corporate world. Spending money we don't have to fight wars that represent less progress economically than becomming independent of foreign energy sources, makes no sense whatever to me. Federal budgets to the tune of over three trillion dollars, at a time when we owe trillions already, is sheer lunacy. If I had ran my home and businesses that way I'd have been in the poor house long ago. I'm afraid, as that actor in Middle Age Crazy said some time ago, the future sucks, and I don't think this is just a quickly passing economic slowdown, much as I would prefer to believe.</font color>

Who had the best solutions, in your opinion?

<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">I think solutions present themselves as one tackles issues and problems. Again, I truly believe that Hillary is far more capable than either McCain, or Obama, to tackle our coming problems. While you never seem to hear about it in the press, She's also the preferred candidate of the retired military Generals in dealing with our foreing affairs, and these wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan. We're spending trillions, on corrupt governments, in both countries. I can't for the life of me see what advantages we will ever realize by having spent ourselves into a hole, to benefit people who will never be loyal to any from the west. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Obama, though eloquent, does not posess Hillary's quick mind. He does not have the expereince, or the intellect, IMO, that she has. As she says, she has been vetted, and amyone who had watched her biography, or read her books, would realize that if we wanted a president who would go to the ends of the earth, tirelessly, to solve our problems, and cull out the best answers to our circumstances, it was Hillary. It's really a shame that Americans are so easily distracted from substance, by all the glitters. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif </font color>

Deeman3
02-22-2008, 01:33 PM
Steve,

We pretty much agree. One point I might make is, What on earth does Obama have in common with 90% of the blacks in this coountry? Aside from a similar skin color, he, unlike Jackson, Sharpton, etc. was raised very differently than most, had different opportunities. Of course, just the same race might as you said, heal some perceived wounds but there won't be the hand slapping group in the White House saying, "Now it's our turn." you would have with a more mainstream guy or color.

I just don't know if he has the chops. I think he's more like a Carter but more charasmatic.

pooltchr
02-22-2008, 04:51 PM
All 3 candidates have said things that, if were actually put in place, would do nothing but increase our national debt. As bad as it sounds, I guess we are stuck with deciding which candidate stinks the least. Hopefully, we can keep enough of a balance in congress to keep the wheels of government turning very slowly for the next few years. If any of these three has their way, I think our country will change in ways none of us would want to see.
Steve

SKennedy
02-22-2008, 05:18 PM
You're not debating with me on these issues. I agree with you. But, I don't think he would be as bad as you portray. President doesn't wield that much power.
And are you saying you would prefer Hillary?

SKennedy
02-22-2008, 05:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Steve,

We pretty much agree. One point I might make is, What on earth does Obama have in common with 90% of the blacks in this coountry? Aside from a similar skin color, he, unlike Jackson, Sharpton, etc. was raised very differently than most, had different opportunities. Of course, just the same race might as you said, heal some perceived wounds but there won't be the hand slapping group in the White House saying, "Now it's our turn." you would have with a more mainstream guy or color.

I just don't know if he has the chops. I think he's more like a Carter but more charasmatic.
<hr /></blockquote>

Someone had previously stated that he was likely more similar to Carter in that he would be a "do nothing President." That may be an accurate assessment....although Carter did manage to leave behind some pretty good damage....
You are right about Obama having little in common with many blacks. However, I don't think that will really matter in the end. He's still black. You just watch...if elected, the majority of blacks will definitely claim him as their own! Like you said, it's about perception, and that is why I think having a black President, no matter how "black" he or she is, would have a big impact on lessening future racial issues...real or otherwise. We'll always have the extreme groups on the fringes, but I'm talking about your average rank &amp; file folks.

SKennedy
02-22-2008, 05:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> All 3 candidates have said things that, if were actually put in place, would do nothing but increase our national debt. As bad as it sounds, I guess we are stuck with deciding which candidate stinks the least. Hopefully, we can keep enough of a balance in congress to keep the wheels of government turning very slowly for the next few years. If any of these three has their way, I think our country will change in ways none of us would want to see.
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

You may be right...and hope you aren't. But if so, just hope we have the freedom left to go and live some place else. Except that I can't think of any that will likely be better.

eg8r
02-22-2008, 05:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
While some single out earmarks as being a huge problem, I tend to believe that waste, corruption, greed and lack of oversight of where and how our money is spent, all play a much larger role than the bugetary 1% spent on earmarks. <hr /></blockquote> All of you lefties said earmarks were a big problem until we find out that amongst those running for President it is the lefties that are the worst. You are now acting like those earmarks are not a big issue but your sure have had a problem with them here in our recent past.

[ QUOTE ]
While you never seem to hear about it in the press, She's also the preferred candidate of the retired military Generals in dealing with our foreing affairs <hr /></blockquote> LOL, they are no different than what you claim happens between Petraeus and Bush. When talking to active duty soldiers, who were around when the Clintons were in office, they have a much different opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
He does not have the expereince, or the intellect, IMO, that she has. <hr /></blockquote> Is anyone going to ever list any of these mystical "experiences" of hillary's? I have heard about her "experience" in predatory lending but then again she was the one enforcing it so I don't see how that will help anything. I remember her failed healthcare policy, given that history how does that mean she has any experience in getting that pushed across?

I think Hillary will be the worse thing for our country at this point in time. We certainly cannot allow the Clinton's back in office. I am glad lefty voting Americans see through the Clinton lies and are not voting for her. I just hope Hillary does not try to steal the nomination with super delegates when the majority of the country did not want her.

eg8r

eg8r
02-22-2008, 05:59 PM
[ QUOTE ]
You may be right...and hope you aren't. But if so, just hope we have the freedom left to go and live some place else. Except that I can't think of any that will likely be better. <hr /></blockquote> It would have been a lot better around here (the US) if all the lying lefties actually moved when they promised. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

eg8r

Qtec
02-22-2008, 09:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bamadog:</font><hr> Obama is a BIG entitlement, BIG taxes liberal. Go to youtube and look at some of the speeches by his wife Michelle.
<hr /></blockquote>

LOL /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Q

Qtec
02-22-2008, 10:05 PM
[ QUOTE ]
All of you lefties said earmarks were a big problem until we find out that amongst those running for President it is the lefties that are the worst. You are now acting like those earmarks are not a big issue but your sure have had a problem with them here in our recent past. <hr /></blockquote>

All depends on what the earmarks are for. The majority , I hope, are destined for special projects and not personal profit. I agree, some in both parties have been known to abuse the earmark privilege and thats why the earmark system has gotten a bad name.
In the last 7 years its easily the GOP who takes first prize for bold faced corruption.
There are loads of examples but this one is just so outrageous it beats them all.

[ QUOTE ]
The Strange Case Of Coconut Road
NEW YORK, June 7, 2007(CBS) The Skinny is Joel Roberts' take on the top news of the day and the best of the Internet.
Why would an Alaska congressman care about a road-building project in Florida?

Well, he might if a Florida real-estate developer helped him raise $40,000 just days before the congressman introduced a measure that includes a $10 million "earmark" for the project.

According to The New York Times, the funding for a program to upgrade a stretch of pavement "that touches five golf clubs" along Coconut Road near Fort Myers, Fla., "appeared mysteriously in a 2006 transportation bill written by Representative Don Young, Republican of Alaska."

Days earlier, a real estate developer who owns "as much as 40,000 acres" along the road helped organize a fund-raiser for Young at a Florida hotel.
While it's "no secret that campaign contributions sometimes lead to lucrative official favors," the Times says, rarely are the tradeoffs "quite as obvious as in the twisted case of Coconut Road."

It's not the first controversy for Young, who drew attention last year for steering "more than $200 million to a so-called bridge to nowhere reaching 80 people on Gravina Island, Alaska."

He's also among the biggest recipients of campaign donations from an Alaskan oil company at the center of a corruption scandal that has rattled the state's Republican Party. And one of his top aides has pleaded guilty to bribery charges involving convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports that veteran Alaska GOP Sen. Ted Stevens, who was famous for bringing home earmarks during his tenure as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, disclosed that the FBI has "asked him to preserve records as part of a widening investigation into Alaskan political corruption." <hr /></blockquote>


Bahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. LMAO That is funny coming from Stevens. Isn't he also under investigation?

Q

bamadog
02-22-2008, 11:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> You're not debating with me on these issues. I agree with you. But, I don't think he would be as bad as you portray. President doesn't wield that much power.
And are you saying you would prefer Hillary? <hr /></blockquote>

No, I would NEVER vote for Hillary. Although I disagree with some of his actions, I will be voting for McCain. There is too much at stake with the war, and possible Supreme Court nominations, to give the reins to a Dem.

Qtec
02-25-2008, 08:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> There is too much at stake with the war</div></div>

Oh yeah and the US is a battleground? yeah right. The most hostile area in the US is 10 times safer than in the Sudan.

If GW is intent on fighting terrorism how can ghe ignore the genocide in the Sudan? Wasn't HE was the one dared to call the happenings there as Genocide ?
The question that is never asked is WHY?

Why did 19 people attack the USA?
Do you really think they just woke up one day and decided to carry out an attack on the US and kill 3,000 people for NO reason?

Are you aware that tghe USA has interferred in the political process of 70+ countries since the last world war?

Q.......shall we examine GW's fraud when selling his shares when the Co was going to the dogs??

bamadog
02-25-2008, 10:43 PM
Take a deep breath Q.
Try to remember that you are not a US citizen. So don't get your panties in a bunch over issues that are not your concern. You've got much bigger issues in your own country. Have you picked out a nice prayer rug yet?