Yes, it's tough to call this one, it feels so wide open. Throw in variables such as the housing bubble collapse, war with Iran and runaway inflation, and the people may be a bit pissed.
But here's my prediction:
For the GOP: Newt Gingrich. Yes, Newt. I think the GOP - the real GOP, not the bible-thumping crowd, but the big-business, low taxes, limited government real GOP faithful, are so pissed at this Party of God nonsense, that they'll want to put a true Reagan Republican back in the white house. Newt represents that wing to the core.
For the Dems: Mark Warner. Yes, Mark Warner. This popular and successful Virginia governor is perfectly positioned - a Governor (no more Senators!), from the South (no more Boston liberals!) and rich (no more poor guys!). Plus he's young, energetic and successful. The new face of the Democratic party (no more Harry Reid's and Nancy Pelosi's)
So there you have it. You heard it here first. Only problem is, the winner will have a serious mess on their hands.
May 13, 2006
HP's 2008 prediction
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
61 comments:
want to hear my prediction? Bush emperor for life after declaring martial law.
My 2112 prediction.
Ron Steele will be the first black man to nearly win a presidential election.
In 2116 the black republican Ron Steele will be our first black president.
I dont know of any poor Democrats...
http://www.historyplace.com/
worldwar2/riseofhitler/begins.htm
The German economy was especially vulnerable since it was built out of foreign capital, mostly loans from America and was very dependent on foreign trade. When those loans suddenly came due and when the world market for German exports dried up, the well oiled German industrial machine quickly ground to a halt.
As production levels fell, German workers were laid off. Along with this, banks failed throughout Germany. Savings accounts, the result of years of hard work, were instantly wiped out. Inflation soon followed making it hard for families to purchase expensive necessities with devalued money.
Overnight, the middle class standard of living so many German families enjoyed was ruined by events outside of Germany, beyond their control. The Great Depression began and they were cast into poverty and deep misery and began looking for a solution, any solution.
Adolf Hitler knew his opportunity had arrived.
We're loosing the most important war. The war on Liberty.
Tom
Tom, you may be right.
Keith, I like the picks, crossing my fingers ( you have nailed it recently)
I fear another Bush, JEB!.
Yeah, Shows what an ignoramus liberal you are boss. True GOPers are Reaganites are not religious zealots.. AND fig NEWTon is not a Reaganite... he was good in 1994, but was bought off buy big biz since. he supports back door amnesty. Amnesty is the only issue. When 5-10% of your population just stormed across the border, it is called an INVASION. Just wait a few months or years... they come about 100k a month now.
Look at the turmoil in France last winter. Look at the Dutch. I see a bad moon rising.
Dogcrap. There is some scientific breakthrough coming to allow humans to live hundreds of years??? Tell me more. Ron Steele a hundred and ten years from now. Hell, I'll vote for him.
I rather think Gore in 2008...
bristol - anon is right. karl rove brilliantly pushed wedge issues (abortion, gays, flag burning, war on christmas, blah blah) to get the idiots to the polls in the biggest con job of all time.
then when bush won, did you see him act on any of those issues?
exactly
The republican party is (was) the party of big business, low taxes, low spending and reduced government invervention. they brilliantly used religion and social issues to steal the poor, uneducated and ultra-religious away from the democrats (don't forget the south was solid democrat until the 80s)
why did the republican do this? because if they didn't, they could never have won another election, period. there are just not enough pro-business, white, rich voters out there.
in desperation, you'll see the republicans trot out some of these wedge issues again in 2006.
get ready for a flag burning ammendment, some gay marriage laws, and maybe even crime (haven't used that one in awhile)
remember, i'm not a dem or rep. i'm a poly sci major who sees political strategy, and in the case of the reps, perfectly executed political strategy these past 12 years. meanwhile, the dems are incompetent, clueless, directionless and soulless.
For the Dems, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama. The GOP ticket will have McCain and either Condi or Powell as VP.
IMO the country is too far gone for Newty to make a damn bit of difference, and besides he scares too many of the medicated-mini-van-moms to have any hope of winning the general election.
The next couple of elections will probably be our last. The dumb masses will find their strong, charismatic leader, and he (or she) will set things straight. Don't laugh, a funny little man from Austria did the same thing in 1933.
Keith, first of all abortion isn't something that has to be pushed by a strategist. It's been a major issue since Roe. Candidates are always grilled on it and LOTS of people are single issue voters on abortion.
Second, the GAYS were pushing the gay marriage issue in 2004. Massachusetts had just legalized it and gays were threatening to go get married in Mass and demand that other states recognize it. That's why the Defense of Marriage Act was created and lots of states had constitutional ammendments on the ballot. Rove didn't push it, the gays forced it to the front.
Also, Bush has delivered to social conservatives (the religious). He banned further embryonic stem cell research using federal money. He signed the partial birth abortion ban. He put two solid conservatives on the Supreme Court.
He's also delivered to business. Income tax cuts across the board. Taxes on capital gains lowered. Taxes on dividends lowered.
The boat anchors around his neck are Iraq and illegal immigration!
Film star and director Mel Gibson has launched a scathing attack on US President George W Bush, comparing his leadership to the barbaric rulers of the Mayan civilisation in his new film Apocalypto.
The epic, due for release later this year, captures the decline of the Maya kingdom and the slaughter of thousands of inhabitants as human sacrifices in a bid to save the nation from collapsing.
Gibson reveals he used present day American politics as an inspiration, claiming the government callously plays on the nation's insecurities to maintain power.
He tells British film magazine Hotdog, "The fear-mongering we depict in the film reminds me of President Bush and his guys".
Newt and Warner? Neither would win. Both are bafoons.
I think McCain will be the GOP frontrunner but he can't win. See his Fallwell arse kissing reported this coming week. He's pandering and that takes away his "maverick" mask.
I would vote for Russ Feingold in a heartbeat. The only democrat with the cojones to speak truth to power when everyone else was positioning for poll numbers.
I don't think Republicans stand a chance this time. Condi? Give me a break. Powel? The liar who instead of standing up to the lies helped this country go into a war that has cost us thousands of american soldier's lives? Not likely. He will always be remembered as the guy holding the vial of baby powder at the U.N.
Maybe Katherine Harris. Surrrrre.
in desperation, you'll see the republicans trot out some of these wedge issues [gays, abortion, etc.] again in 2006
I doubt it. I think it's much more likely that you'll see a "victory" declared in Iraq (some contorted definition of victory, anyway) followed by an announcement of withdrawal. It's the only way to confront the issue that they are going to get hammered on.
Issues of where people are putting their penises will no longer stand up to kids returning home with their legs blown off.
Keith, it's not even important that Rove pushed those issues or not. You're saying that true GOPers have had enough of these issues dominating the debate and want to see the party get back to smaller gov't, less spending, etc.
In my opinion you are right that GOP faithful are pissed about out of control spending, immigration, big gov't. I just don't think they're upset about the social agenda.
They're not saying "Hey, throw out these bible thumpers and get some real conservatives in there! Who cares about gays and abortion?!"
They're saying "Hey, throw these big government RINOs out and get some fiscal conservatives in there!"
They don't have a gripe about the religious issues because Bush has basically done the right thing in that area.
BTW, I don't watch Fox News and I didn't vote for Bush in 2004.
Feingold as President? LOL!
He's honest, ethical, and quite Jewish. All of those immediately disqualify him for the job.
I agree with this and have discussed it with my friends.
want to hear my prediction? Bush emperor for life after declaring martial law.
woops 2012 for Ron Sttele to run for president.
2116, might be right for a black to win.
true GOPers:
Oh there are some of these left?
Well you True GOPers, stand up to the plate and open your mouth to the issues at hand, just like the DEMOS all asleep.
alas king george is at the helm doing what he wants to who ever he wants to do it to, and I here nothing but cricketts in the house and congress. Funny thing is I see it crashing around me faster than anyone predicted.
In 2008 we all just better hope we have jobs to provided for our familys, never mind anything else.
What do you mean, "king george?" I don't know anybody, Republican or Democrat, who takes him very seriously. People groan, roll their eyes, or laugh, and crazy people start spouting conspiracy theories, but nobody I hang around with either loves him or hates him. He's just a very stupid person who isn't interesting.
I don't know why people are surprised by his poll numbers. They were terrible BEFORE 9/11. The man had no platform when he was first running for president, and now he has no platform for the last three years of his job. Ho hum.
He claims to be pro-life? I don't believe it, because I really am (I don't kill animals OR human fetuses). I didn't vote for him and I won't vote for his chosen successor. But, the Democrats better come up with something better than have to-date, or I'll be voting for yet another third-party candidate.
McCain has sold out on illegal immigration. Gore was, and still is, an egomaniacal idiot. And Hillary is a spiteful hag. Newt Gingrich is too boring, and Mark Warner too cutty-cutter. Surely there must be someone in this country who is a statesperson and can LEAD?
That's supposed to say "cookie-cutter"
Anon
skytrekker said . . .
"If you are SO against abortion ANON above- are you for gay rights? For healh care reform? Or do you believe in huge tax cuts for the rich and their FAT CEO's?
"Lets see if your anti abortion credentials are real- or filled with religous and economic hyprocisy (despite your vaunted education and income)"
What an asshole. I AM GAY, YOU IDIOT. And YES, I AM FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE (including veterinary care), I believe in a flat tax for everybody, and I've never bragged about my income or education to anyone. I simply stated that I was not poor and illiterate, as Keith portrayed pro-lifers.
Obviously, you suffer from the same ignorance. How can you say "However most-and I say most of those who are anti abortion are anti gay rights, anti envirionment, anti intellectual, anti east coast and California, pro GUN, pro death penalty?" Have you personally polled them? I know many pro-lifers, and NOT ONE IS ANTI-GAY, ANTI-ENVIRONMENT, ANTI-INTELLECTUAL, ANTI EAST COAST AND CALIFORNIA, PRO GUN, PRO-DEATH PENALTY. Not one. You are the product of mass media brainwashing and display a self-righteous arrogance that defies description. We we here long before Jerry Fallwell jumped on the bandwagon. The pro-life movement started in New York City (late 1960s), meeting regularly in an ACLU office . . .
I don't own a gun. I belong to the Sierra Club. I also belong to PETA.
If you are an example of the [pseudo] intellectualism you speak of, then, yes, I guess I am anti-pseudo-intellectual.
You exactly fit the stereotype of a holier-than-thou, pretentious left-wing, "pro-choice" fanatic. Every libel you've penned could have come verbatim from the NARAL battle-play handbook. How fabulous to be so superior to everyone who doesn't think as you do.
You are a sanctimonious twit.
mr smith said . . .
"However, under the American system, we do not shove our theological viewpoints down our neighbors throat. This is what the Christian right is trying to do."
And what about the Christian Left? Or the Jewish Left? or the New Age Left? Don't they force their crap on the rest of us, too?
I ask people to define the Christian Right for me, and nobody can. Pat Robertson supports China's one-child policy (forced birth control and aboortion). Is he part of the Christian Right?
Everyone in America has the right to yell and carry on about any issue, and belonging to a specific religiou group doesn't change that. If it's okay for the Catholic bishops to support illegal immigrants, why is not okay for Baptists to fuss about gay rights? I don't agree with either, but so what?
If the "Christian Right" comes out in favor of gay marriage, will you immediately jump to the other side because you don't want to be identified with "right-wing" Christians? Come on. Just because this or that group supports or opposes this or that cause, is no reason to choose sides, nor does it say anything about the cause itself.
mr smith said . . .
"However, under the American system, we do not shove our theological viewpoints down our neighbors throat. This is what the Christian right is trying to do."
And what about the Christian Left? Or the Jewish Left? or the New Age Left? Don't they force their crap on the rest of us, too?
I ask people to define the Christian Right for me, and nobody can. Pat Robertson supports China's one-child policy (forced birth control and aboortion). Is he part of the Christian Right?
Everyone in America has the right to yell and carry on about any issue, and belonging to a specific religiou group doesn't change that. If it's okay for the Catholic bishops to support illegal immigrants, why is not okay for Baptists to fuss about gay rights? I don't agree with either, but so what?
If the "Christian Right" comes out in favor of gay marriage, will you immediately jump to the other side because you don't want to be identified with "right-wing" Christians? Come on. Just because this or that group supports or opposes this or that cause, is no reason to choose sides, nor does it say anything about the cause itself.
skytrekker said= However most-and I say most of those who are anti abortion are anti gay rights, anti envirionment, anti intellectual, anti east coast and California, pro GUN, pro death penalty
Skytrekker is correct in that these views usually go together. Take a tour south of the Mason-Dixon Line and in the midwest and this is evident.
However, not every pro-lifer is a reactionary. Catholics are obviously pro-life but usually vote democrat.
Abortion can and should be discussed as a moral issue. The problem is that it is a religious wedge issue and every one of the 10,000 religious groups in the US and the world feels deeply that only they hold the truth of god. It's tough to debate this issue rationally.
I have no idea how being against abortion and against personal freedom goes hand in hand with being for corporations, for rich people, and for low taxes and low government spending.
It would seem that someone who embraces capitalism, the free market, freedom of the individual and freedom to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness would be for individual rights?
It goes 180 degrees against that, and therefore, I would propose that those who vote republican because of abortion or gay rights are confused, as they're likely not for capitalism and freedom of the individual.
Thus, it shows the power of these wedge issues - that they trump the true reason for being of the republican party - to further the interests of corporations and rich people.
BTW, I'm for corporations and rich people and I'm for the freedom of the individual. Unfortunately, in a 2-party system, there is no party for me.
skytrekker said= However most-and I say most of those who are anti abortion are anti gay rights, anti envirionment, anti intellectual, anti east coast and California, pro GUN, pro death penalty
Skytrekker is correct in that these views usually go together. Take a tour south of the Mason-Dixon Line and in the midwest and this is evident.
However, not every pro-lifer is a reactionary. Catholics are obviously pro-life but usually vote democrat.
Abortion can and should be discussed as a moral issue. The problem is that it is a religious wedge issue and every one of the 10,000 religious groups in the US and the world feels deeply that only they hold the truth of god. It's tough to debate this issue rationally.
Sorry about the double post.
skytrekker said . . .
"I am gay as well- I live in a very liberal state (Connecticut)and your views as a gay man- are few in far between.
"Abortion is a choice for women- as a gay man, I do not feel qualified to make that choice -do you?
"Universal health care? Wonderful we agree.
"Climate change/global warming? I am sure we agree there as well- funny we do not agree on a female issue - reproductive rights- very strange indeed.
"Something is amiss here- it is called phoney balony."
No, it's called independent thought. Unlike you, I don't go around identifying myself as a gay man; it isn't the center of my universe, and it doesn't dictate what I believe or don't believe. I couldn't care less what the organized gay lobby thinks about ANYTHING. Talk about Nazis! Who do you think you are telling me that I HAVE TO THINK LIKE YOU?
I happen to find the phrase "reproductive rights" nauseating. I do not believe people have a RIGHT to reproduce, but far too many horrible people are reproducing, and killing off the results. The phrase "reproductive rights," incidentally, was invented by the billion-dollar abortion industry.
Yes, I feel I have a right to say that I believe people should not MAKE BABIES if they don't want them. Not getting pregnant isn't terribly difficult, and why should babies be the scapegoats for their irresponsible parents?
From your letters, it is clear you know nothing about biology or human reproduction, and even less about abortion. Here, read what one of the founders of NARAL has to say on the subject:
http://tinyurl.com/gpw6b
Phoney-balony refers to your self-righteous attitude. Do you think living in Connecticut makes you special? Are gay man REQUIRED BY GAY LAW to all believe and do the same things? Tell me: Do you LOVE Cher, Madonna, and Kathy Griffin?
Have you read me to filth, girlfriend?
Have I been clocked?
I'm aghast.
I'm not against personal freedom, but I don't think making then killing babies is an example of freedom. How stupid of me. Why stop with abortion? How about infanticide? About about obnoxious 5 year olds?
You are confusing the word freedom with "free for all."
No, I'm not a Republican; doubtless the GAY THOUGHT POLICE would arrest me if I were.
I don't own a single pair of work boots. I don't own a single key ring. Aren't I SHAMELESS??!!
As for Fox News, since Rupert Murdock is supporting Hillary Clinton for president, skytrekker may need a new demon to evoke.
skytrekker said...
"And yes hell Connecticut is a great state- ever been here?
"no gay bashing, civil unions
"lots of gay bars, clubs, peace.
"Where are you? Still a Republican? "
I'm in Florida. Spent my childhood summers in Westport.
I'm a registered Independent.
I don't hang out at gay bars. I don't hang out at bars, period.
Connecticut is great if you happen to have millions of dollars. Greenwich is beautiful, but I can't afford it. If you want to know how beautiful Connecticut USED to be, rent the original "Stepford Wives" (filmed in Westport in the mid-1970s).
Yes, but don't you have state income tax?
So now that we're being nice, where would you move if you could move anywhere you wanted to in Connecticut?
I was never there in the winter. Isn't it miserable? Of course, you could say that about the weather here 6 months out of the year.
The most nutty anti-abortion right wingers aren't anti-abortion because it's "killing widdle babies"---as demonstrated they have no problem incenerating thousands of already-born, conscious brown children with cluster bombs.
It's about the sex and punishment.
Punishing a girl who is pregnant in a situation she didn't want to be pregnatn.
Their "morality" is about "forgiveness"---But Only For Our Kind Of People---and punishment for Them.
The Catholic doctrine is at least more intellectually consistent. But clearly nutty in its own way.
here's what a true republican should believe
personal freedom
life liberty pursuit of happiness for all
limited government
low taxes
pro business
pro capitalism
strong defense
you can be all of that, and still be against abortion and gay marriage.
how?
you can work to promote abstinance and also contraception and sex ed. abortion will always be legal - we will never as a country imprision a woman for having an abortion. deal with that reality. then work against abortion proactively vs. reactively.
next, you can recognize that it's religion that is screwing up the marriage debate. let the government govern - and ensure equal rights under the law - by issuing civil union licenses. then let religion - the churches - issue marriage decrees. if your church (baptists, catholics, wiccans) don't want to marry gay people, then as private institutions they can make that choice.
if a candidate promotes those two planks, as a republican, and embraces traditional republican ideals, he or she can win hands down.
So now YOU, Keith, decide what a TRUE Republican must believe?
Ha Ha Ha HA
I'm sending a link to this thread to anncoulter.com (one of the wittiest blogs on the Internet)
You should have them rolling in the isles.
Anonymous said . . .
"The most nutty anti-abortion right wingers aren't anti-abortion because it's "killing widdle babies"---as demonstrated they have no problem incenerating thousands of already-born, conscious brown children with cluster bombs.
"It's about the sex and punishment."
Hum. I thought Keith was the nuttiest Right Winger I'd encountered of late. Also, shouldn't Left-Wing fanatics learn to spell?
I don't know of any pro-lifers who favor dropping bombs on people. My gun-ho, warmongering ex-military Right-Wing brother thinks abortions are WONDERFUL.
As I said earlier, we "liberal" pro-lifers were here long before bible-thumpers jumped on the bandwagon in 1980 (and ruined it). I have no interest in the bible at all. I think it's as stupid as the Koran.
Keith, there are many serious Republicans and Democrats who support gay marriage, but oppose abortion, or oppose gay marriage, but support abortion. There is no such thing as a "correct" Republican or "correct" Democrat. Since the 1970s the Republican Party has taken a pro-life position with regard to abortion, but it certainly is not a litmus issue with most Republicans, including those who call themselves pro-life.
Maybe things are different where you lived (Arizona???) before escaping, but here in Florida, most people don't care about ANY issues other than free stuff and yard sales. If you want to get elected, just throw a BBQ with free food, and the fossils will vote you in, every time. It helps, of course, if you look sort of molted, with an overdone fake orange tan and a cowboy outfit--but these are entirely optional.
That's way too simplistic Keith. Get government out of marriage? Ok.. let's say I own a company and I'm staunchly against gay marriage. Is the goverment going to compel me to offer the same type of insurance benefits for the eomployee "partners" as for employee spouses?
What about filing taxes? Do civil union types get to file jointly?
What about adoption?
There are all kinds of situations where goverment and marital status intersect. Issuing the license is just the first of many.
Also, if there should be no impediment to two people of the same sex marrying what reason exists to deny "marriage" to three or more people of any sex? Why should we deny these people their right to marry the one(s) they love?
skytrekker said...
"State income is of very little importance- when it comes to services
"high housing costs are importnant.
"The difference between median housing prices of 100K or more make Connecticuts tiny 4% state income tax very important.
"However Connecticut ranks in the top ten states for;
"Education
"services for the young and old
"environment
"police and fire protection
"health care for the young
"transportation
"by the way Florida ranks near the bottom for all of the above (I guess you pay for What you get)"
Florida has millions of poor people who come here thinking they can pick oranges off trees (which is illegal, unless they own the trees) and sleep on beaches (also illegal), but end up living in slums. Tampa has slums running all the way from downtown to Lutz, a town about twelve miles north (I'm guesstimating). A huge percentage of our population lives on public assistance.
We also have a lot of crooked politicians who cater to the building industry.
We also have lots of old people on Social Security.
House prices here are maybe four or five times what they should be, and construction quality is astroundingly bad. Most new houses and commercial buildings are constsructed either wholly or partially of particle board with styrofoam "architectural details," then sprayed with stucco to hide the fact that they're junk. The state may pass strict building codes, but it does not enforce them, and never has.
People up north used to flock here thinking they'd get bargains. Now, thousands of millionaires flock here, and they've drive property values out of sight.
Traffic in Tampa is bumper-to-bumper much of the time. Houses are built right up to the sidewalks (no more setbacks). Streets are narrow and full of potholes, and because people park on them, often only one car can make its way down a street at one time.
Yes, Connecticut does sound like paradise by comparison.
Witch hunt against gays and lesbians? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Can I have some of what you're smoking?
Pray tell, what horrors have been visited upon gays and lesbians in our lifetime? Have they been rounded up and executed or something? Are there some secrets camps set up for this?
Please, let's have some examples of this witch hunt.
HP readers - I had to delete a post by dogcrap that was filled with hateful angry bile
Dogcrap - you're welcome to post, but do not threaten and keep your remarks civil for the sake of the board
Morality is always the product of terror; its chains and strait-waistcoats are fashioned by those who dare not trust others, because they dare not trust themselves, to walk in liberty.
-- Aldous Huxley
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
-- Frederick Douglass, August 4, 1857
Tom
Skytrekker,
Comparing efforts by SOME Republicans to restrict or ban gay marriage with what Nazis did prior to, and during, World War II is ridiculous. Clearly you are not aware of real persecution. Here, try the U.S. Holocaust Memorial museum:
http://www.ushmm.org/
Then go to the right top of the page, click on films, and type in "concentration camps" in the available field to the right. You will be taken to a list of more than twenty short films, many made by Nazis, that should open your eyes. They download almost instantly if you have DSL.
The Democratic Party comprises ten thousand tiny groups, each revoltingly self-obsessed, that combined have clout, but individually have none. Many of them are as horrible as anything you could possibly attribute to the Republican Party. Have you ever attended a NOW meeting? I have. I still feel dirty years later. And I think I can fairly guesstimate that more than 98% of NAMBLA members are card-carrying Democrats. I remember when they were welcomed at gay pride parades in San Francisco and New York. They are among the most horrible people on the planet.
If you think all Democrats are sweet, you need to come down South. Or go to Northern California, where fanaticism is the norm.
Don't judge all Republicans by your family members. There are some brilliant, wonderful Republicans, and some hideous, idiotic Democrats. Nothing is black and white, and all-inclusive labels are not fair.
Most Republicans are not Nazis or fascists. To brand them as such is illogical. I remember the Democratic convention in Chicago, which really WAS a fascist spectacle.
I think being told what words I can or cannot use is a form of fascism, too, and this is something that comes from Democrats, not Republicans. Is calling black persons Persons of Color any different from calling them colored persons? Are midgets really "Little People," or in England "Persons of Restricted Growth?" How about "Vertically challenged?"
An Australian friend of mine wrote a book a few years back that really angered some feminists who launched a campaign to stop bookstores in the United States from selling it. They succeeded. Is this what you consider an enlightened achievement? It was a very good book.
People who worry about gay marriage are as silly as people who worry about invasions from Outer Space. But, you don't defeat them by freaking out, you do so by laughing. They ARE funny.
Bristol is actually quite intelligent, if I judge his letters correctly. Personally, I couldn't care less of three people or ten people got married, but such thing might cause havoc (especially with divorce courts and custody battles).
Incidentally, I used to think Republicans were bad, too, till I started hanging around with lots of Democrats, and lo and behold, they weren't as advertised. The two most liberal Democrats I know have become the biggest racists I've ever known. Go figure.
I love everyboy, and yes, I'm the Anonymous who who caused skytrekker so much grief: a pro-life, non-Christian, liberal fag who thinks Florida is the trashiest state in the country.
I dream of moving to Santa Fe.
Anon
What did "dogcrap green" say that was so offensive? I think his pseudonoym is repulsive, but I would like to read his comments, which I suspect were very interesting. And yes, it's still me, the heretic liberal Florida fag who is pro-life and pro-animal rights, and who likes many Republicans.
See thats when the conversation starts turning into a he said she said...everybody has their own views when it comes to abortion and right to live...,,, but when it really comes down to it, it really is up to the human being facing the actual problem of an unwated pregnancy , not all the other's around said person telling her what is right or wrong cause at that point in someones life your not even there or thought of.
But yet you think you are.!
Cause one really ever Konws what the other persons Situation is.
And Who are you to decide for me!. We all make decisions be it good or bad it is a decision either way. Your Opinion is just that an Opinion.
Kind of like an asshole everyone has one.
Mrs. BfAtZ
Anonymous said...
What did "dogcrap green" say that was so offensive? I think his pseudonoym is repulsive, but I would like to read his comments, which I suspect were very interesting. And yes, it's still me, the heretic liberal Florida fag who is pro-life and pro-animal rights, and who likes many Republicans.
I used the word F@%%#T in context. I also told someone to get a pair of balls... That there is nothing noble about being such a pussy that he won't face conflicts. And to state that abortion is not a man's business, is as absurb to state that a inner city black kid killing an inner city black kid is not a white man's problem so there for the white man has no rights to get involved.
I think it was the word f@%%#t that got my posted deleated.
What do fags prefer to be called?
A note though skytrekker attack on me was so base less and not direct towards any action of mine, because I did nothing wrong. The issue at hand is. How can a man call himself of man if his positions in life are based on avoiding conflicts.
Skytrekker is not a man. The man that pointed this out is natuarly gonna be a target of his frustration.
I live in Baltimore in a neighborhood with witches across my street, a lesbian couple two doors down, two gay men across the street from them, sign posting republicans two doors the other direction from me. Most others are sign posting Democrats. The lady next next door is probably the only "normal" neighbor I have. I hate that bitch. The others I can live with just fine. But with each "outsider" that sees himself as different I was jab. They seem to have sensational urge to size people up by jabbing them, then looking for the reponse for analysis.
Some people want more than just an analysis. They like conflict. There is a black church across the street from me that tried picking a fight with me. I just don't care and it made them look bad trying to play the white against black against someone that just does care. The shame of exposing their hand drove them to stop.
Skytrekker like playing the victem. I know the best way to get under his skin was to ignore the GAY and let him expose his hand as a cry baby that needs to be a victem - WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE VICTIMIZE HIM. The victem seekers are nothing more than losers looking for an excuse for all the short comings in their life. Looking a little closer to home simply hursts too much.
Religion, Abortion, Race, Belief are all outside issues designed by the American Political Machine to smoke out their real agenda and keep YOU busy while they pick YOUR pocket and steal your most valuable commodity, YOUR TIME.
Dogcrap,
Keep in mind that a lot of these people HAVE been victimized in the past, and this often colors their thinking. Many become addicted to victimhood, and perceive slights and insults where none is intended. They're like Pavlov's dogs, conditioned to react.
I find this most common among Democrats (a party that attracts self-professed outcasts and misfits, and encourages such thinking), but my right-wing gun-toting brother thinks HE'S a victim of reverse discrimination, so evidently feeling persecuted makes many people happy.
If you live in Baltimore, are you a fan of John Waters' movies? My favorites are "Hairspray" and "Polyester."
Indignant gay pro lifer, you too show ignorance. Imagine the horror.
If it were up to the pro life nuts out there I would have been forced to have my very ill child who would have suffered far more in life than it did in a meciful death. That was my choice for my child. Nobody, especially the ethical hypocrites pro life bunch, would have been there to lend a hand, money or funeral expenses after birth.
Who said media brainwashed? Yep.
Humans in general suffer from the erroneous belief that what their opinion or point of view is valid.
This cannot work in a democracy. This is why our government works best when it operates from the middle.
So each of you won't you try at least to think past your own nose and meet others in the middle? Try to at least entertain the idea that someone may actually know something you don't know and that may in the long run benefit all.
The use of pacifists like Ghandi and Mother Teresa to promote one side or another is invalid. They dealt with differences by focusing on the alternatives. It's the spiritual way which is not political but humane.
Anonymous said...
"Indignant gay pro lifer, you too show ignorance. Imagine the horror.
"If it were up to the pro life nuts out there I would have been forced to have my very ill child who would have suffered far more in life than it did in a meciful death. That was my choice for my child. Nobody, especially the ethical hypocrites pro life bunch, would have been there to lend a hand, money or funeral expenses after birth.
"Who said media brainwashed? Yep. "
Who's indignant? I never said I was, so you're projecting. Also, your letter doesn't ring true. I notice that you didn't actually read my previous posts, or you wouldn't have had to go to such lengths to elicit pity.
You are doing exactly what Dr. Bernard Nathansan exposes:
http://tinyurl.com/gpw6b
Since when have the media been pro-life? Not in my lifetime.
So what terrible illness did your alleged child have that forced you to abort him or her? Since few serious fetal anomalies can be diagnosed before the second trimester, what you're calling a merciful death would, in fact, have been agonizing. Doctors do not give unborn babies painless injections of narcotics to send them on their way. Mid-trimester and third-trimester abortions are horrific acts of violence. Saline abortion was invented in Nazi concentration camps. It is the most frequently used abortion procedure on so called defective fetuses, and amounts to chemically burning the SENTIENT baby to death with salt solution: a process that takes, on average, at least an hour with the fetus kicking and thrashing much of the time. Some baby's survive, to be born terribly mutilated.
D&E involves sawing off the live baby's arms and legs. Partial birth abortion involves suctioning out his or her brains in the birth canal. This is your idea of a merciful death?
Again, I think your letter is fake, but who cares? The point I've been making in my posts, and that you have missed completely, is that ALL pro-lifers are not right-wing Republican bible-thumpers, and that casting them as such is an act of stupidity, a pro-abortion strategy, or an act of outright bigotry.
As a hunter I can tell you. No matter how painful life is. All life perfers pain over death.
Keith and Skytrekker should have been aborted. Keith, aren't you a "homeboy", you know...brown? I produced a brown baby at around 9:30 this morning. It is worth about as much as you are.
Anon Dude,
Mark Warner is definitely not cookie-cutter. Although presenting himself as a centrist, he successfully raised taxes in a very smart way in Red State Virginia to deal with a devastating deficit, and saved the state, while remaining popular. He's a big environmentalist. He's also a successful tech entrepreneur. Mark Warner is anything but cookie-cutter, which really does come out when you know more about him. He may be the Dems' strongest candidate.
Also, don't count out Gore, either. I wouldn't call him an egomaniac-- he actually has his heart in the issues, and has been making powerful speeches recently on civil liberties and environmentalism. Gore has been prescient in more ways than one, and he would be tough. John McCain actually could win the general election, easy, but Warner and Gore are the strongest horses. Hillary Clinton would be an utter, unmitigated disaster for the Democrats. George Allen can be appealing at times but he doesn't have much depth. Condoleezza Rice? Between her support for affirmative action and pro-choice stances, her lack of political experience, poor speaking abilities and the Iraq War disaster, she would have the GOP base foaming in rage at her the moment she announced her decision to run (and this even before alienating non-Republicans). Forget about it. It's probably either Warner or Gore for the Democrats, maybe even Russ Feingold or Bill Richardson, and John McCain for the Republicans.
It doesn't matter what the illness was since it doesn't matter to you does it? The point is that I believe it should be my choice not yours. Not my neighbor's and not my president.
It is so easy to speak for others when the consequences don't affect you. That is the height of hypocracy.
This is an excellent blog. Keep it going.You are providing
a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my automobile insurance costs site.
Have a great week!
This is an excellent blog. Keep it going.You are providing
a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my automobile insurance in nj site.
Have a great week!
Your blog I found to be very interesting!
I just came across your blog and wanted to
drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with
the information you have posted here.
I have a automobile liability insurance
site.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Best regards!
Post a Comment