Marijuana.com

dedbr

Uh, should Hillary drop out?

Democrat or republican, I vote for the one that I think is going to do the best job. My choice would of been John Edwards because of this; He said recently that he would not accept the nimination for vice-president. I just think he was the better choice, and he might start looking a lot better in 4 years.....

But anyway, Hilly right.....Get rid of the hag, or let her drag the Dems down with shit and infighting?


Some Where In Ded Land...........

__________________
Sometimes you can cut your own throat with your tongue.....
So remember to check out our most wonderful Posting Guidelines!

 

drakester

John Edwards looked good to me too. The main doubt I had is that North Carolina went Republican in both 2000 and 2004... against Bush, at that. So I'm not sure what Edwards could bring to the table in terms of political capital. He was not able to rally N.C. behind the Democrats. In theory though, a Southern governor would be an ideal choice; but he has to be able to at least carry his own state with him and preferably other Southern states as well.

drakester

I like Ann Coulter quite a bit. Every time she appears on television, she's like the perfect negative ad against the Republican party. But the reality is that she's wildly popular among plenty of conservatives I know. Maybe I'm better acquainted with the "religious right" faction of the party. I didn't see you make any references to religion in your message, just "personal responsibility." You rephrased my words to make them sound more appealing, but the concept remains the same does it not?

In Georgia right now, for instance, the Republicans are gutting the public defender program because "its too expensive," so that the poor will have less legal representation. Therefore those without funds will be likely to receive much longer prison sentences for crimes such as marijuana possession, trafficking and cultivation. I think policies like this can be fairly described as social darwinism. The poor are judged less fit, and thus can be left to rot in prison, or die of disease or injury. We may be the richest country in the world, but so what? Better to spend money on bombing brown-skinned people, another form of social darwinism.

drakester

>>>The fact that you did not already know the difference only finalizes my prior hypothesis.

I often discuss things I "think" I already know, because there is always doubt, and I think there SHOULD be doubt. How do we know that we really know something? Maybe we're wrong! Constantly my evaluations about things are being modified. Before I worked at my last company, I thought I could never get along with religious-right conservatives. But the reality was quite different. Not only did I get along with them, I had very cordial relations. I think the fact that both they and I are Southern and believe in good manners first, was key, but also there is the fact that they were curious about the other side, and I was curious about their side. So there was a cultural exchange going on.

I think its important to constantly define and redefine the terms that we use, such as "liberal" and "conservative," because the conservative of today would be considered a "flaming liberal" in the 1950s. Imagine: selecting a Negro as Secretary of State! Unheard of! I do give Bush credit for being color-blind at least. Unfortunately he was blind in so many other ways as well. I'd like to go back to the Clinton years, when the U.S. dollar was worth about 1.5 Canadian... wouldn't you? Extramarital affair and all.... heck, give the man a harem, if he can get the economy humming again. But since he's barred from holding office again, I'll accept his wife as Prez.

Andrew87

Hey, I never claimed that there aren't also conservatives who are politically shallow.


Personal responsibility is one of the few reasons I still consider myself a conservative - I am actually quite opposed to the ideas of the overtly religious faction of the GOP. I consider myself a libertarian-leaning conservative: personal responsibility, maintaing a strong military and free market economy, as well as small government and as much personal freedom as possible. Those are the ideals which I subscribe to - hence why my vote tends to sway between Republican and Libertarian, and rarely any leftist or statist party.

I agree with you in this regard. While I strongly believe the frivolous spending of public funds needs to be addressed in some fashion, this is not the way to do it - I daresay even unconstitutional.

__________________
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." -- Ron Paul

"One person's 'schizophrenia' is another's revelation." -- Peter Breggin, M.D.

 

MasterCylinder

The south is a conservative stronghold. Nearly the entire south voted for a Republican in the last few elections. The Dems need to consider that fact before they pick a polarizing candidate.

Andrew87

[quote]I often discuss things I "think" I already know, because there is always doubt, and I think there SHOULD be doubt. How do we know that we really know something? Maybe we're wrong!quote]

Uhh, that 'free spirit' attitude really doesn't apply to everything - the laws of physics come to mind.
Yes, the political parties do sometimes "evolve," but generally speaking - there are clearly defined conservative and liberal ideals.


Ok, this is exactly the type of thing I was referring to in my original post.

How are you so sure that the Clintons will be as good as you say? Things have changed quite a bit in the past eight years, much of it beyond even Bush's control. I agree that he is reasonably responsible for the poor economy, but to insinuate that some Democrat can wave a magic wand and instantly make it all better is absurd. Yes, Clinton is a smart guy, and the economy was quite good during his presidency, I'll give you that - but by no means does that mean he or his wife is going to be the cure. I don't believe for a second that McCain couldn't do just as good of a job.



But to answer dedbr's question, because we have drifted considerably off-topic: Yes, I believe she should call it quits. I think Obama has a much better shot at winning the general election, and she is just wasting her breath at this point.

Freedom_User

This is just something that I heard on CNN/FOX news.They quoted that McCain said he knows little about the Economy. Is this true? And if so, does that bring up any red flags?

Andrew87

I am truly perplexed as to why you would bother to post a completely unauthenticated rumor. I mean, aside from your obvious animosity toward McCain, of course.

Freedom_User

Hey, first of all. You don't know me, I think of the economy first. As I said earlier in the post, CNN AND FOX news said this. I was simply relaying it to you guys.

Viewing McCains History on the Issue of turning us around... I am simply not to sure.. I am trying to keep an open mind about this issue, and is doing as much research as I can.

“The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” he says........ “I’ve got Greenspan’s book.”

Think Progress » Blog Archive » McCain: ‘The Issue Of Economics Is Not Something I’ve Understood As Well As I Should’
__________________________________________________ ___________________________
He even said " I wish Interest rates are zero" Anyone knowing anything about the economy... Do you understand what would happen if they are at zero?

Now... I feel as though.. Me posting all this, I am going to get major boo's and hisses from the McCain supporters. But, this is all on what McCain has said during debates.