Survey: Who Would Be Best Suited to Lead Us Now?

[Brassmask]

Clark did run a pretty poor campaign.

Clark ran a poor campaign because his only real reason for being in the race was to break down Dean's support.  The Clintons actively co-erced him into the race knowing full well the effect it would have.

The Clintons (who I could easily be convinced are part of a larger power control group) needed to have a candidate that would attract votes but not be a movement or a phenomenon.  Kerry or Gephardt would have sufficed nicely.  Nothing exciting or new.  Wonky and boring.  White bread to carry votes; definitely not cinnamon toast or, god forbid, French toast or bread pudding to delight the taste buds of voters seeking change.

My hope is that they will die by the sword they have lived by.

[Plane]

Just when you thought we were out of Bushes,

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/first-president-bush-sobs-while-talking/20061204194509990018

He also talked about his recent closeness to former President Clinton and some of the work they've done to help Hurricane Katrina and tsunami victims.

"I apologized to him in Philadelphia the other day. I said, 'Bill, I take it back. My dog Millie did not know more about foreign policy than you do.' And he was very understanding," Bush said before turning serious. "It isn't about politics, it's about trying to do something bigger than ourselves, trying to help people who are devastated and need our support."

He then recalled a political cartoon showing his son the president opposing gay marriage and then walking into a room and finding his father on a sofa with Clinton's arm around him, prompting him to shout, "Dad! What are you doing?"

"(Clinton) cut it out of the paper and said, 'Don't you think we ought to cool it George?"' Bush said.

[Plane]

"He never NEVER has had even a mote of support from me. When he was elected, he seemed to be an ignorant corporate dweeb, but after he began trying to destroy social security, mongered a useless war based on lies, and allowed the worst civilian attack in history to occur, he evolved into  the ignorant, destructive, dangerous incompetent dweeb and the worst president since Jefferson Davis. "

Is this you admitting that you were determined to never be uninted , reguardless of whatever Bush said or did?


This is not Bush being a divider but your perspective being stuck.

[sirs]

"He never NEVER has had even a mote of support from me. When he was elected, he seemed to be an ignorant corporate dweeb, but after he began trying to destroy social security, mongered a useless war based on lies, and allowed the worst civilian attack in history to occur, he evolved into  the ignorant, destructive, dangerous incompetent dweeb and the worst president since Jefferson Davis. "

Is this you admitting that you were determined to never be uninted , reguardless of whatever Bush said or did?  This is not Bush being a divider but your perspective being stuck.

I think it was determined when Bush ran for office and egregiously "stole the election".     

[Brassmask]

I think it was determined when Bush ran for office and egregiously "stole the election".     

Your "wink" belies the truth of your statement.

You might consider not using it anymore.

[sirs]

I think it was determined when Bush ran for office and egregiously "stole the election".     

Your "wink" belies the truth of your statement.  You might consider not using it anymore.

Naaa, it's hides the hysterical laughter towards those who still believe the lie that he did.  But let's make a deal.  You cease the pathetic efforts at trying to convert Christians into non-Christians, and drop the lie about neo-cons were behind 911, and I'll not use a sarcastic wink with "stole the election" any longer.  Deal?

[Brassmask]

  Deal?

I'll pass.  Thanks just the same.

By the by, did you see the new video of the Pentagon that was released yesterday?  Yet another video that has no plane hitting the Pentagon.

I'll let it go when I see a pic of that plane hitting the building.

[sirs]

I'll pass.  Thanks just the same.

Well then, don't expect me to quit laughing every time you folks start ranting about a "stolen election", and continue to reassert the facts of the matter.

[Michael Tee]

<<Well then, don't expect me to quit laughing every time you folks start ranting about a "stolen election", and continue to reassert the facts of the matter.>>

The "facts of the matter" are set out most comprehensively in the Vanity Fair article, which is about the LAST thing I would expect you to reassert.  Facts are to you what sunlight is to Dracula.

[sirs]

The "facts of the matter" are set out most comprehensively in the Vanity Fair article, which is about the LAST thing I would expect you to reassert. 

Actually, the facts were spelled out in numerous News Articles, from a whole host of News organizations, both local and national, that both recounted & reexamined the Florida Election.  Nearly very investigation that looked into it, came to the same conclusion......just a really tight election result, with Bush happening to have a few more votes than Gore, at the end.  I realize the importance of finding 1 article that says otherwise, and latch onto it like a leech claiming "the most comprehensive"  That again would be your OPINION, and hardly a "fact of the matter"