2008 Presidential Candidate

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

Nerd85 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

I agree that we can't leave Iraq now, but McCain plans to stay there for more than 5 more years which we cannot do.

SoxNats08 wrote:

Nerd85 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

I agree that we can't leave Iraq now, but McCain plans to stay there for more than 5 more years which we cannot do.

exactly, and that narrows it down to Clinton or Obama. Clinton has observed a president for 8 years, she will do a better job.

superskin6 wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Nerd85 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

I agree that we can't leave Iraq now, but McCain plans to stay there for more than 5 more years which we cannot do.

exactly, and that narrows it down to Clinton or Obama. Clinton has observed a president for 8 years, she will do a better job.

It's a moot point anyway. Our civics teacher was telling us that Hillary Clinton needs 94% of the remaining superdelegates to side with her to win the nomination, whereas Obama needs only 7%.

SoxNats08 wrote:

superskin6 wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Nerd85 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

I agree that we can't leave Iraq now, but McCain plans to stay there for more than 5 more years which we cannot do.

exactly, and that narrows it down to Clinton or Obama. Clinton has observed a president for 8 years, she will do a better job.

It's a moot point anyway. Our civics teacher was telling us that Hillary Clinton needs 94% of the remaining superdelegates to side with her to win the nomination, whereas Obama needs only 7%.

True, and Obama will prolly win, and at that time, I will side with him. But right now, I'm praying that Clinton can pull off a miracle.

Obama is a better candidate anyway...

Nerd85 wrote:

Obama is a better candidate anyway...

I think that congress should change the 22nd ammendment in the constitution that says you can only have 2 terms as president so that George W. Bush can run and win again!!!

lets all just face the facts...he was the best president ever!!!

right up there with Andrew Johnson!!


G-Dub all the way in 08 WHOOOOOOOOOOO

Big_Z wrote:

I think that congress should change the 22nd ammendment in the constitution that says you can only have 2 terms as president so that George W. Bush can run and win again!!!

lets all just face the facts...he was the president ever!!!

right up there with Andrew Johnson!!


G-Dub all the way in 08 WHOOOOOOOOOOO

Oh yeah !

Big_Z wrote:

I think that congress should change the 22nd ammendment in the constitution that says you can only have 2 terms as president so that George W. Bush can run and win again!!!

lets all just face the facts...he was the best president ever!!!

right up there with Andrew Johnson!!


G-Dub all the way in 08 WHOOOOOOOOOOO

Please, PLEASE tell me your were joking.

superskin6 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

I think that congress should change the 22nd ammendment in the constitution that says you can only have 2 terms as president so that George W. Bush can run and win again!!!

lets all just face the facts...he was the best president ever!!!

right up there with Andrew Johnson!!


G-Dub all the way in 08 WHOOOOOOOOOOO

Please, PLEASE tell me your were joking.

no i love G-Dub....i think we should just switch to a monarchy so that the bush family legacy can live on FOREVER!!!

Allow me to thoroughly and fully explain all that Obama can do for our nation, and the entire premise of his campaign.

Are you ready?

Here it is:


Hope.

Desert Demon wrote:

Allow me to thoroughly and fully explain all that Obama can do for our nation, and the entire premise of his campaign.

Are you ready?

Here it is:


Hope.

yep.

Go Clinton!!!

superskin6 wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Allow me to thoroughly and fully explain all that Obama can do for our nation, and the entire premise of his campaign.

Are you ready?

Here it is:


Hope.

yep.

Go Clinton!!!

isnt it mathematically impossible for clinton to get the nomination?

PatsDynasty wrote:

superskin6 wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Allow me to thoroughly and fully explain all that Obama can do for our nation, and the entire premise of his campaign.

Are you ready?

Here it is:


Hope.

yep.

Go Clinton!!!

isnt it mathematically impossible for clinton to get the nomination?

As it is for Obama. It's all going to come down to the super delegates, and noone knows for sure how they will vote, but it most likely will be Obama

Nerd85 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I agree with your 1st paragraph and part of your second...

But you seem like the kind of person you thought that Iraq wanted and needed our help... The United States went into Iraq because they wanted to elminate the dictator and take advantage of the oil reserves and refineries. They used the excuse that "They had nuclear weapons" and ignored the United Nations.

We wasted money and American lives on a War that did not have a reason. We aborted our mission to find Osama and instead invaded a country which we had no business in.

Iraq is a total mess right now, and by staying there any longer nothing will be truly improved. We will just be wasting money that could have been better spent somewhere else.

If you seriously think the Bush Administration has been making all the right moves in Iraq, maybe you should check out the statistics.

4,081 Troops killed.
The Purpose? That remains to be seen.

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but here is the fact that most people do not realize:

Right before we went into Iraq, what did Saddam do? He changed his currency from dollars to euros, which hurt the American Dollar. Don't you think if the US invaded, kicked his ass out of power, and reestablished the country, would send a message to other countries to not fuck with the US economically?

yayanjl wrote:

Well, this is my look at it (for Desert Demon for calling my post "ignorant")

I do not want a democrat in because they promote pulling troops out of Iraq which is a horrible mistake because Iraq still needs our help. If we left them in the dust, I believe fightings would occur in Iraq soon causing a mess like what just happened with Uganda, a genocide. We need to stay in Iraq until we can get them set up with a democracy. (And for the record, I'd rather have Clinton as president rather than Obama, she has more experience as a politician.)

I do not want Ron Paul because he promotes smaller, state governments which allows states to have more power. I do not believe that will work, as the Articles of Confederation showed was not possible. The states did not understand how to use the power shown in history which is why the Constitutional Convention happened. We put in place a stable government which works, why change it? He also promotes pulling troops out of Iraq which is another downside.

I believe John McCain is a great candidate because he is a true Republican but goes with what he believes the right thing is to do. He wants to keep troops in Iraq just like Bush does. The Republican party has shown true leadership with making all the right moves in several topics such as Iraq.

There ya go This took me 45 minutes because I did a LOT of research.

I wasn't calling your post ignorant, I was calling PD's post ignorant (Go check out the quote).

Quote :

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but here is the fact that most people do not realize:

Right before we went into Iraq, what did Saddam do? He changed his currency from dollars to euros, which hurt the American Dollar. Don't you think if the US invaded, kicked his ass out of power, and reestablished the country, would send a message to other countries to not fuck with the US economically?

I havent read the previous conversation which leads to this but please tell me that you arent trying to say america went to war over a currency change

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Quote :

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but here is the fact that most people do not realize:

Right before we went into Iraq, what did Saddam do? He changed his currency from dollars to euros, which hurt the American Dollar. Don't you think if the US invaded, kicked his ass out of power, and reestablished the country, would send a message to other countries to not fuck with the US economically?

I havent read the previous conversation which leads to this but please tell me that you arent trying to say america went to war over a currency change

I do believe that is what he was trying to tell us.

Nerd85 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Quote :

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but here is the fact that most people do not realize:

Right before we went into Iraq, what did Saddam do? He changed his currency from dollars to euros, which hurt the American Dollar. Don't you think if the US invaded, kicked his ass out of power, and reestablished the country, would send a message to other countries to not fuck with the US economically?

I havent read the previous conversation which leads to this but please tell me that you arent trying to say america went to war over a currency change

I do believe that is what he was trying to tell us.

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

Desert Demon wrote:

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

war is not the way to deal with that sort of thing

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

war is not the way to deal with that sort of thing

agreed. The way to deal with that is simply trade sanctions and embargos.

Nerd85 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

war is not the way to deal with that sort of thing

agreed. The way to deal with that is simply trade sanctions and embargos.

I agree too!

But whoever said Bush didn't wanna finish what his daddy started?

Desert Demon wrote:

Nerd85 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

war is not the way to deal with that sort of thing

agreed. The way to deal with that is simply trade sanctions and embargos.

I agree too!

But whoever said Bush didn't wanna finish what his daddy started?

good point, sir

Nerd85 wrote:

Touchdown Jesus! wrote:

Desert Demon wrote:

Not saying that's the only factor, only saying that's a big factor many people aren't aware of.

war is not the way to deal with that sort of thing

agreed. The way to deal with that is simply trade sanctions and embargos.

and then bomb the shiiit outa them