The Ebolaworld Happy Fun Blog Comment Post Page
This clip was pretty good too:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?
i=5...=53a_1185228396
Speaking of crazy right-wing conservatives, Pat Robertson just handed the family business over to his son:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/...n.ap/
index.html
Romney supported aye? May I ask why? If being a Mormon isn't a qualification for being nuts, what is?
Uh... I ment to say supporter, with an "R" not a "D".
He's got the best hair! DUH.
Haha, all you left Americans just go to Europe. Right-winged americans can go to hell.
When all the left ones go away the country will fall in to chaos and the world will be a better place. It will be better for the environment, the fight against famine and poverty, entertainment (then they could start making movies without stupid censorship en "christian moral", etc.
We could also use the right-winged americans (when all of the left left) to invade Russia (secretly) and make it a democracy.
Yeah, the best hair issue is a main part. =P Nah, I just like him. And him being Mormon does not make him crazy. That's his religious views and people shouldn't bash him for it. There are also a lot of crazy Christians...there are always some crazy people in every religion. 
The days of voting for a presidential candidate because “you just like him” are over. People “liked” Bush and look what happened. It’s high time we all go beyond our gut instincts and evaluate the candidates for who they really are, what they stand for, and most importantly what they will do once in office.
I have looked at Mitt Romney and came to the conclusion that he will carry on the same policies as President Bush. Also, he seems to be the Republican Party’s Hillary Clinton, as he is constantly arguing with himself because the Mitt Romney of today thinks drastically different than the Mitt Romney of just 10 years ago (Google it: Abortion, gays in military, ect). When John Kerry did this you guys called him a flip-flopper. So, the same rules should apply here. I’ll just come out and say it: Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper. He only says what needs to be said in order to win. Who the hell knows what he really believes?
Mitt Romney should be judged on his religious views because if someone running for President believes that there is a magical man in the sky who is going to give him his own planet to rule after his death, I feel as though his sanity should be questioned. However, this doesn’t just go for Mormons as Mike Huckabee ‘s sanity should also be questioned for believing in Creationism and not evolution.
I believe the best Republican candidate right now is Ron Paul because he has been against the war from day one (his voting record proves this) and doesn’t wear his religious beliefs on his sleeves.
Unless the Republican Party gets behind Mitt Romney, which they seem reluctant to do at the moment, he will not be the nominee. His supporters can stuff the ballot box all they want for now (search youtube), but in the primaries they will only get one vote and the true winner will emerge.
Very nicely put. I totally understand what you're saying and I think it's good. And he changes his views to what the certain people want. That's politics and I don't have a problem with it.
HAHAHA. I just watched that youtube video. Funny stuff, the thing is there is nothing against the rules for that AND it was only a straw poll. Also Ron Paul supporters spam polls all the time. Look at the online polls after debates, proof enough.
http://www.wired.com/politics/se...007/10/
paul_bot
It's politics, people need to deal with it.
I completely agree with Sam, except on one thing: Ron Paul. Yeah, its nice that the guy never supported the invasion of Iraq and stuff, but he’s delusional. He’ll try to run the government as if it were 1790. His “smaller government” approach sure sounds nice, but what does it mean? It means no public schools, no American involvement in the United Nations and no government-sponsored scientific research. Need I say more?
Take a look here:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm
As for Jeff having the hots for Mitt, well… just tell me why Jeff? Why!? Mormon = irrational. Why not Kucinich? Find one thing you don’t like about him: http://www.ontheissues.org/
Denni...is_Kucinich.htm
Jeffrey... How can you compare spamming an online poll with a straw poll? The internet polls don't mean shit. Also, I find it sad that your okay with a politician that will tell you what you want to hear to get your vote.
Zntrip... Ron Paul has his faults, but out of all the Republican candidates I think he is the best choice. Wouldn't you agree?
Once again, well said.
As for Ron Paul, I would indeed say he is the best Republican candidate. But calling for the elimination of the Deparment of Eduaction is beyond a "fault". It's pretty sad that a Libertarian would have my (and probably Sam's) vote before any other Republican candidate.
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=qH...h?
v=qHt7_Bv4U6Q
Meet our minister-president...
Well, my opinion is this;
If you are an American and you want a CHANGE from Dubya's two terms, you will want to have his party out of power as well.
The smart thing to do is definitely to vote Democrat. Actually even if you actually like the Republicans in THEORY (Me I can't imagine why, but some do. Regrettably.) But you don't like what they have BECOME. You STILL want them out of power. Because that'll force them to reform and appeal to the voters again. So you still want to consider having the other party in power, just so that the Repubs are forced to sort out their business.
(Me though, I don't think there's been a respectable Republican since Eisenhower.)
All that said, I am hoping for a Democratic victory. With either Hillary or Obama.
Where's Taco-Man?
No, I don't have the hots for Mitt. That was all a joke. haha. And him being Mormon does not make him irrational. They have the same fundamental beliefs as Christians.
I do not follow the same beliefs he does. Especially on life and embryonic stem cell research and life. It's my opinion and you guys have your's.
Most of this talk is theoretical. The truth of the matter is that the Republican race is between McCain and Guiliani and the Democratic candidate is Hillary.
As an aside, no US political party would ever elect a black man in its primary. Howard Dean was ahead of Kerry in the polls, but everyone knew who had the power to win. Perhaps Obama can use this race to gain some other prominent political role, but President is not attainable for him. Hillary will make the ballot because her name outweighs her being a woman.
So who will it be: McCain or Guliani?
Pardon my typo on Giuliani.
McCain has no chance as his own party doesn't trust him and Giuliani will never get the full support of the Christian Conservatives. I sadly think Huckabee will rise the ranks soon and be the party's nominee, as the other pickings don't look so good. There are even rumors he may run with Giuliani.
As of the Democrats, I honestly don't think it matters that Obama is black, and Hillary is a Woman. These two aree running for President at just the right time. The country wants change, and they both represent that. However, Hillary is tainted goods, and another Bush clone. She might as well be running on the Republican ticket.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Co...14/
281epojr.asp
The Weekly Standard is a conservative magazine and has an agenda. After reading the article, it's easy to see that they simply want to dismiss Ron Paul's momentum with some flimsy excuse that he "has no credible scenario for winning the nomination". What a joke. Ron Paul is all about restoring the constitution after its dismantlement over the past 7 years, shrinking the bloated government, and restoring America reputation.
What’s with all this predicting the candidates? I honestly think there’s no way to be sure that either Hilary or Giuliani or whoever will be the candidate.
Ron Paul sure seems conservative enough. He's not leading in any state and won't likely get the nomination and isn't seriously credited. That being said, I actually think he's a good candidate and actually stands for what he believes in and is loud about it.
Well, I agree with you on that. Ron Paul isn't likely to get the nomination. However, if everyone supported him we could send a strong message. But,
what do you mean he isn't credited?
I meant not a credible candidate for the nomination. Sorry. But if more people did support it would send a stronger message for change.
He reminds me of Ross Perot.
I hope Giuliani or another "left" person will be elected as candidate for the republicanparty. Maybe then the right-winged conservatives belonging to that party will split of. They will then take the right side of the politics, the republican the center-richt and the democrats the center-left. A multiparty system is much better then a bi-party system, people will have more to choose and will be less populist since they don't have to agree with everyone. Also a coalition of several party's is more democratic.
You think Giuliani is a "left" person? 
On most of his social issues he really is.
Guiliani is "left" within the republican party. Every republican and most of the democrats are right-winged in my opinion.
Sam - I heavily disagree with you that Obama being black and Clinton being a woman are of no matter in deciding the primary or the presidential election. Many Americans are racist, sexist bastards and use prejudice as their primary means of decision-making.
That said, I'm going to vote for Obama in the primaries, as I'm an independent who's a registered Dem.
Zntrip - I predict candidates based on name recognition, funding, and power, as these factors typically decide elections.
Zntrip & Jeffrey - thanks for the informative websites!
Me - I don't think Giuliani is left-wing; he's a fascist. The people politicians hang out with mean more to me than their supposed agendas or past legacy. Giuliani and McCain both hang out with the Bush crowd, so I would just as soon trust Pinochet to run the US government.
Ron Paul seems like a big 'ole conservative to me (esp. on abortion & environment), although perhaps less virulent than the others. I would sooner vote for any of the Democrats, including Clinton, than this guy.
Wow, pardon my fiery language as of late. It seemed like it started an interesting debate, so I figured I'd keep it up. 
PS - both www.ontheissues.org site and issues and its predecessor, like "issues2000.org" or something, will try to download malware/adware to your computer when javascript is enabled, so look out!
So there are no "left-winged" republican candidates?
wtf have you seen how nice mormans are and if we get a republican its i think romney would be the best
i think relidgeon is not that important in a canidit but other then athiest mormon would be the best
Romney, when asked once why he is so vocally pro-war when none of his sons have ever volunteered for service, replied that their work is "over here". A real nice way of saying that "I support any insane wars Bush has gotten us into as long as it's someone else's kid that dies".
Mitt's kind of a joke if you ask me. You want a repub who's more progressive, you pick Guiliani, not Mitt.
And if you're one of those troglodytes stuck in the stoneage, like that old guy. You'll pick a candidate who's also a christian fundie, not a mormon. (Although in the old guys defense, Mormonism is only barely a step up from Scientology in terms of loopy beliefs.)
Either way though... Mitt just can't win.
"So there are no 'left-winged' republican candidates?"
-Me
Nope.
In fact, most of the Democratic candidates are really just moderates, if not right-wingers themselves. The only truly left-wing presidential candidate I know of is Dennis Kucinich, a Democratic congressman from Ohio.
The US has nearly become a one-party system which provides a false sense of choice, just like in the Matrix. I thought you would be the one telling me that, you crazy Dutchman.
Commenting by HaloScan
