Clinton Back In The White House — General Discussion on True Nudists

ManOfWicklowOriginal Poster

Apr 13, 2015

What do people think about Hillary taking over when the Kenyan's term ends ?

ReactReplySubscribe

Replies

T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Apr 13, 2015
OK by me.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
Apr 13, 2015
[quote]What do people think about Hillary taking over when the Kenyan's term ends ?[/quote]Perhaps the questions should be: why does a non-American only ask about one party's possible candidate if not to troll? The OP's total posts regarding the other candidates remains at zero.

More importantly,as an American I take offense at the OP's statement calling o u r American president a non-American.Yes, I know the ultra-conservatives somehow think it's funny suggesting that President Obama is not an American. Since American citizens twice elected President Obama the OP's assertion is saying that each and every American voter made an error by electing someone who would not be eligible to actually be the President of the United State. OP-The birther movement died from a lack of truth isn't it time you gave it up too?

Without a doubt I find the question to be more then slightly racist!How is it that comments about President Obama's (false) birthplace to be Kenya roll off their tongues; but comments about candidate Cruz' (factual) birthplace being Canada are never mentioned? Obviously it is because while Kenya is a predominantly black nation, and therefore a fair subject of derision, Canada is a mostly white nation and therefore not worth mentioning.

ReactReply
T=
Tom === Thomas S. Tierney
Apr 13, 2015
[quote][quote]What do people think about Hillary taking over when the Kenyan's term ends ?[/quote]Perhaps the questions should be: why does a non-American only ask about one party's possible candidate if not to troll? The OP's total posts regarding the other candidates remains at zero.

More importantly,as an American I take offense at the OP's statement calling o u r American president a non-American.Yes, I know the ultra-conservatives somehow think it's funny suggesting that President Obama is not an American. Since American citizens twice elected President Obama the OP's assertion is saying that each and every American voter made an error by electing someone who would not be eligible to actually be the President of the United State. OP-The birther movement died from a lack of truth isn't it time you gave it up too?

Without a doubt I find the question to be more then slightly racist!How is it that comments about President Obama's (false) birthplace to be Kenya roll off their tongues; but comments about candidate Cruz' (factual) birthplace being Canada are never mentioned? Obviously it is because while Kenya is a predominantly black nation, and therefore a fair subject of derision, Canada is a mostly white nation and therefore not worth mentioning.

[/quote]"ultra-conservatives somehow think it's funny suggesting that President Obama is not an American"
REALLY? Cool down Chris
Obama himself has made many jokes regarding his birth certificate and his birth place.
And"Cruz' (factual) birthplace being Canada are never mentioned?"
NEVER? Then how did you find out?
Much ado about nothing.

ReactReply
SH
ShavedNudist27
Apr 13, 2015
I don't think she has much of a chance. Considering the problems as Secretary of State.
ReactReply
HA
Half
Apr 14, 2015
[quote]What do people think about Hillary taking over when the Kenyan's term ends ?[/quote]While I believe both political parties are out of touch with reality, I would choose her over ANYONE the teabagger party puts out there. I am old enough to remember when each party was in control by moderates and knew that compromise was the only way to be effective leaders. Those days are LONG GONE.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
Apr 14, 2015
[quote]This country is absolutely FUCKED if Hillary gets in office. [/quote]Who doesn't enjoy a point of view that is well reasoned, cogent offered on a point-by-point basis.
ReactReply
NA
naykid
Apr 14, 2015
It was awful last time she was Preident
ReactReply
ME
Member
Apr 14, 2015
[quote]I don't think she has much of a chance. Considering the problems as Secretary of State.[/quote]I don't know, Shaved. I can't see how the Republican party will be taken seriously if they have the same "clown car" that ran last time. Aside from Bush, who else is credible? Mabey Bush/Rubio as a ticket? They need to weed out the clearly unwinables early so credible candidates can have good debates, not cartoon shows like the last time. Otherwise, Hillary will look like the only adult in the room.
ReactReply
HA
Half
Apr 14, 2015
[quote]It was awful last time she was Preident[/quote]Sure was .... Took Bush one's deficits and paid them off, only to have Bush two put us back into debt. Oh yeah and let's not forget Bush two's recession that the current Dem is has finally gotten us out from under...... If that's your definition of awful give me awful any day. When in the world are folks gonna look at facts and not Fox?
ReactReply
FU
FullSun
Apr 14, 2015
[quote][quote]What do people think about Hillary taking over when the Kenyan's term ends ?[/quote]While I believe both political parties are out of touch with reality, I would choose her over ANYONE the teabagger party puts out there. I am old enough to remember when each party was in control by moderates and knew that compromise was the only way to be effective leaders. Those days are LONG GONE. [/quote]I also remember when the politicians remembered the documents our founding fathers put together said, "We the people..." instead of "We the businesses and 1%". The Republican Party especially has forgotten this. I was registered Republican until a couple of years ago when the Republican Party, especially the Tea Party lost all touch with reality.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
Apr 14, 2015
[quote]It was awful last time she was Preident[/quote]It certainly was! We had a soaring economy. We hadn't invaded any sovereign nations under false pretenses. We did not start the longest war in our history. We had much better race relations domestically and a higher standing internationally. It was awful indeed!
ReactReply
MA
ManOfWicklowOriginal Poster
May 2, 2015
If I was an American voter, I would prefer Hillary than someone like the Cuban Marco Rubio. And yes, he is 100% Cuban, being born may 28 1971 to Cuban parents who did not become naturalized U.S. citizens until 1975.
ReactReply
ME
Member
May 2, 2015
Politics and their related comments are not a game but an exploration into candidates' abilities; we've allowed the media to turn the whole exercise into a big circus act. Though I understand the points listed from other commenters, the underlying linchpin facts are not well researched and posited as a defense of a particular position. I can never be a Hiliary supporter as I believe her to be too loose with the truth. And... by the way...Clinton 1's economy ran on fake money such as Enron and the beginning of the 'easy credit' mortgage debacle. How much did you loose in that market collapse?
ReactReply
MA
ManOfWicklowOriginal Poster
May 2, 2015
[quote]I can never be a Hiliary supporter as I believe her to be too loose with the truth.[/quote]The same can be said for at least 98% of all politicians worldwide.
ReactReply
DA
David
May 2, 2015
The unfortunate fact of the matter is that there is really no fundimental difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Both parties are driven by big money. Without it, a candidate has no chance of being elected...
I suspect it's the same in the rest of the world as well.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
May 2, 2015
[quote]The unfortunate fact of the matter is that there is really no fundimental difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Both parties are driven by big money. Without it, a candidate has no chance of being elected... I suspect it's the same in the rest of the world as well.[/quote]No, in some places campaigns are financed with public funding. It allows the candidates to run on issues and not spend their time fundraising. When the candidates don't need to raise ungodly amounts of cash to run, they are not beholden to their donors.
ReactReply
DE
DesertRat
May 3, 2015
I believe that we may see a grass roots candidate come along who may not be beholden to the political parties. Unfortunately, that person will not get anywhere unless the grass roots steps up and donates time, talent and treasure to the campaign. The key word here is treasure. Money, big money, buys elections. If the "little" people unite and dig deep we can overcome the big moneyed interests. The important thing is that the "little" people need to stop the rhetoric and start talking with their checkbooks. Personally I have already written a check to one particular candidate and I intend to donate more. I hope others will join me. I will reveal my choice when it is appropriate to do so.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
May 3, 2015
[quote][quote]If I was an American voter, I would prefer Hillary than someone like the Cuban Marco Rubio. And yes, he is 100% Cuban, being born may 28 1971 to Cuban parents who did not become naturalized U.S. citizens until 1975.[/quote]I'm not supporting Rubio, but he was born in Miami, which makes him a U.S. citizen, regardless of his parents citizenship, which makes him eligible to be President of the United States. [/quote]Always, for reasons that one can only imagine the OP seems obsessed with perceived nationalities. Inst ead of stating any legitimate reason (policy, politics, personality, etc) of Mr. Rubio he would vote for Mrs. Clinton just due to his being of Cuban heritage. When it comes to President Obama the OP insists on calling him a Kenyan.
I am convinced that the OP is using these code words to veil his issues with those he considers "less then white". Racism belongs to an earlier and uglier time and has no place in our world. If the OP was truly interested in the politics he would speak to the issues; instead he only brings up heritages.

ReactReply
MA
ManOfWicklowOriginal Poster
May 3, 2015
[quote]I believe that we may see a grass roots candidate come along who may not be beholden to the political parties. Unfortunately, that person will not get anywhere unless the grass roots steps up and donates time, talent and treasure to the campaign. The key word here is treasure. Money, big money, buys elections. If the "little" people unite and dig deep we can overcome the big moneyed interests. The important thing is that the "little" people need to stop the rhetoric and start talking with their checkbooks. Personally I have already written a check to one particular candidate and I intend to donate more. I hope others will join me. I will reveal my choice when it is appropriate to do so.[/quote]It's not money that wins elections in the UK, but the Sun Newspaper. Too many of the poor naive people actually believe the crap vomitting from the pathetic mouths of the political imbeciles.
ReactReply
DA
David
May 3, 2015
In the US, the "treasure" Desert Rat refers to buys access to the media. He's right on the money (no Pun intended) - no treasure - no exposure - no chance. A candidate here will have little chance at media exposure (if any at all) with out a large war chest. Would be nice if all candidates were given equal access to the media but that just won't happen...
ReactReply
ME
Member
May 3, 2015
At this point, I like Walker and Kasich. Either of those two can smoke Hillary in the general and far outperform her or Obama in the Oval Office. I wish Bush was not in the race, but if he becomes the nominee, I'll vote for him. Ben Carson and Fiorina would be interesting #2's.
Hillary has an awful lot to answer for, and even many liberal loyalists may be wary of her ability to win once nominated. There is no question, we are in a very dangerous time-in part because of her failures as S.o.S.-and we need serious and competent people to take the helm in '17. Hillary is demonstrably not such a person.
She rode to power on the coattails of her cheating hubby(an odd paradox for a feminist). In the Senate and State, she had no great accomplishments and some very serious failures.
She violated the law with this email server corruption, and should be prosecuted for it.
If she does win, this country will be in very serious trouble. But if history and human tendencies are any indicators, I think that between now and '16, there is going to be something that wakes up America, and the adults will take control.
ReactReply
DE
DesertRat
May 4, 2015
[quote][quote]I believe that we may see a grass roots candidate come along who may not be beholden to the political parties. Unfortunately, that person will not get anywhere unless the grass roots steps up and donates time, talent and treasure to the campaign. The key word here is treasure. Money, big money, buys elections. If the "little" people unite and dig deep we can overcome the big moneyed interests. The important thing is that the "little" people need to stop the rhetoric and start talking with their checkbooks. Personally I have already written a check to one particular candidate and I intend to donate more. I hope others will join me. I will reveal my choice when it is appropriate to do so.[/quote]It's not money that wins elections in the UK, but the Sun Newspaper. Too many of the poor naive people actually believe the crap vomitting from the pathetic mouths of the political imbeciles.[/quote]It's no different here in the States. Here the media sets the agenda for the election. The New York Times (All the news that fits), CNN and MSNBC blatantly promote the candidates of their choice. They have a big pulpit and sway a lot of uninformed voters.
ReactReply
CH
Christopher
May 4, 2015
[quote][quote][quote]. . Here the media sets the agenda for the election. The New York Times (All the news that fits), CNN and MSNBC blatantly promote the candidates of their choice. They have a big pulpit and sway a lot of uninformed voters.[/quote]You must be confused. Don't you mean Faux News? Fox News was designed to be a bully pulpit for the Republican Party.
HISTORY LESSON: " But according to a remarkable document buried deep within the Richard Nixon Presidential Library, the intellectual forerunner for Fox News was a nakedly partisan 1970 plot by Ailes and other Nixon aides to circumvent the "prejudices of network news" and deliver "pro-administration" stories to heartland television viewers. The memoâ€”called, simply enough, "A Plan For Putting the GOP on TV News"â€” is included in a 318-page cache of documents detailing Ailes' work for both the Nixon and George H.W. Bush administrations that we obtained from the Nixon and Bush presidential libraries. Through his firms REA Productions and Ailes Communications, Inc., Ailes served as paid consultant to both presidents in the 1970s and 1990s, offering detailed and shrewd advice ranging from what ties to wear to how to keep the pressure up on Saddam Hussein in the run-up to the first Gulf War."
To read more:http://gawker.com/5814150/roger-ailes-secret-nixon-era-blueprint-for-fox-news
ReactReply
DE
DesertRat
May 4, 2015
I believe that you are missing the main issue in talking about the press and media. The press and media in America have been guaranteed an unusual position by the Constitution of the United States. They have special rights and privileges that other organizations do not have. Along with those rights they have special responsibilities. The press has often been called the 4th branch of government, and for very good reason. There are special checks and balances set up by the Constitution so no one branch can over ride and over rule the other two. The press has the ability, and some say the obligation, to be the peoples' eyes. They can point out any wrongs being done in the government. Theirs' is the ability to investigate these wrongs and to call for government officials to look into matters which do not seem to be proper. Since the founding of this country the press has acted responsibly in pointing out many scandals and wrongdoing by government officials. They have shown the light of truth on many sordid adventures. That is until the present day. Today, the majority of the press have given up their neutral overseer role to the public and has become the cheerleaders for one particular faction of government. I'm not saying that individual news people cannot have their own opinions, but for a free press they should always remain neutral. If they see wrongdoing by anyone at any time, they should point it out and publicize it. Lately, many of these people are contributing to a cover-up. One of the most famous instances of the press doing their job properly was because two reporters and their managers took their responsibilities seriously and broke what is now known as the Watergate Scandal. Those reporters, Woodward and Bernstein were awarded a Pulitzer Prize for their reporting. I believe that today there are are many stories in government where reporters could earn a Pulitzer Prize but they have no interest in doing so. The reason for this is that they are just a part of the problem and have no interest in finding a solution. The so called free press has imprisoned themselves by their own misguided alliances. The free press needs to rid itself of the shackles of their own making.
ReactReply