Go to Here's A Thought: One Thing A Penny Still Buys
- Add a comment
- Go to You Might Not Like Him Or Vote For Him, But Edwards Does Make A Point
Oh, no!!! It's Jaws!!! Or it's what a West Virginian wishes he had when
confronted with a steak...
posted by
saul_relative
on August 30, 2007 at 10:28 PM
| link to this | reply
http://search.aol.com/aol/redir?src=image&clickedItemURN=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rejesus.co.uk%2Fspirituality%2Fhappiness%2F25smiles.jpg&moduleId=image_details.jsp.M&clickedItemDescription=Image Details
posted by
ILLUMINATI8
on August 30, 2007 at 1:51 PM
| link to this | reply
My pleasure, NightMajik...
posted by
saul_relative
on August 29, 2007 at 9:20 AM
| link to this | reply
*Nods*
Great quote, thanks for sharing.
posted by
NightMajik
on August 29, 2007 at 5:12 AM
| link to this | reply
You have the right idea, notapoet. I think more people are starting to
think independent. Bill Clinton is the smartest politician out there and Hillary has to use him. Believe me, notapoet, he is her biggest and best asset. Still, unless she gets someone like Edwards to be her running mate, I really have doubts about her ability to run, given the enormous mobilizing power of the religious right. When it comes down to a choice between Hillary/? and Republican/Republican for the November vote, Hillary is going to lose unless she has a very strong running mate. And she still might. Too many conservative sexists in this country. Too many women (the largest voting bloc in the country) will not vote for her.
By the way, Jim Carey run against Edwards? Wow. I had no idea. (Just kidding. Btw, it's Kerry.)
posted by
saul_relative
on August 27, 2007 at 7:53 PM
| link to this | reply
I didn't vote for Carey in the last election.
I voted for Edwards even though he was listed as the Veep candidate. I thought Edwards was their best chance last time out and he and Richardson impress me the most this time out. Contrary to Obama's rhetoric, Edwards (expensive hairdo and all) is more of a "people's candidate" and is a more experienced politician. I've often said "anyone but Hillary," but that's because of the baggage she has in Bill. I don't want that man to ever step inside the White House again. I pretty much agree with your assessment of the Republicans. Although I haven't made a firm commitment to anyone yet, I like the sound of an Edwards and Richardson ticket. By the way, I'm a registered Dem. That is because way back when I wanted to vote for Terry Sanford (remember him?) in the NC Democratic Primary, and the only way I could do that was to also be a registered party member. I've never voted a straight ticket in my life. I want to vote for the best man, or woman, for the job and the hell with what party they belong to.
posted by
notapoet
on August 27, 2007 at 1:21 PM
| link to this | reply
I'm beginning to believe that Edwards is the Democrats only chance at
winning in '08, Straightforward. I have a bad feeling about Hillary's chances. Too many women won't vote for her. Too many men are too sexist to vote for her. And that's not counting the Republicans, made up of both.
posted by
saul_relative
on August 27, 2007 at 1:02 PM
| link to this | reply
something to think abt
posted by
Straightforward
on August 27, 2007 at 11:18 AM
| link to this | reply
Yes, it does, Naut. Edwards has some really good ideas. I think moreso
than Clinton and Obama. I think Richardson has some really strong points as well. Kucinich is too intelligent for his own good. Joe Biden's foreign policy expertise is sorely needed in the White House after Bush and Rice have nearly destroyed our credibility. On the Republican side, Giuliani will say anything to get elected. McCain, maybe the best one of them all (so far), shot himself in the foot tying himself to Bush on immigration and the war. Ron Paul makes more sense than the lot of them but doesn't stand a chance. I'm still hoping Chuck Hagel will jump in, simply because, like Biden, he has tons of foreign affairs experience and we desperately need that. The domestic situation will be taken care of (or not) no matter who gets elected. We need to worry about our standing in the global village...
posted by
saul_relative
on August 26, 2007 at 7:52 PM
| link to this | reply
saul
Looking at this from North of the border, Edwards does not appear to be the man to change the game. In the end, nobody will be able to change it, but it certainly sounds good on the campaign trail...
posted by
Nautikos
on August 26, 2007 at 2:42 PM
| link to this | reply
Maybe the land was cheap, Offy. Who knows?
posted by
saul_relative
on August 23, 2007 at 7:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Me, too, TAPS, and it pisses me off. But I'm trying...
posted by
saul_relative
on August 23, 2007 at 7:24 PM
| link to this | reply
No problem, afzal.
posted by
saul_relative
on August 23, 2007 at 7:21 PM
| link to this | reply
He's talking "one America" now, Mademoiselle, so who knows. But he's
been taking on the corporations since before the first Dem debate. It's a theme with the Dems lately...
posted by
saul_relative
on August 23, 2007 at 7:21 PM
| link to this | reply
Saul_relative
I'm glad that I can count on you to inform me of bits of info that I miss elsewhere. Its impossible for me to keep up on all of it.
posted by
TAPS.
on August 23, 2007 at 5:50 PM
| link to this | reply
I echo Madam's sentiments...
posted by
Offy
on August 23, 2007 at 5:49 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for sharing the extract from the speech of Edwards .
posted by
afzal50
on August 23, 2007 at 5:42 PM
| link to this | reply
So he's now focusing on the lobbyists/"political fat cats"?
Is he abandoning the "two Americas" platform already?
And is it because of that interview FOX News did with those hillbillies who live across the road from him?
And why would anyone build a mansion in that neighborhood, anyways? Couldn't he just move somewhere else?
If I ever get real rich,
I hope I'm not real mean to poor people,
like I am now.
posted by
Mademoiselle
on August 23, 2007 at 2:04 PM
| link to this | reply