Say hello to our next president...

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Well... I voted Obama anyways *runs*

 

[kronos251]

So, by those standards, Bush has created a situation of complete failure.

No. The Bush Administration may have been right in the succeeding years of the "Shock and Awe" military strategy (2003-2004), but the follow-up reconstruction, and secuirty maintenance of Iraq (late 2004-2006) had been erratic and was in dire need of command and management on the ground. Until recently (2007-2008), the key appointment of Gen David Petraeus has delivered significant results as to the reduction of car bombings, in which the source was -and still is- the continuous flow of arms supply from the borders of Iran and Syria (Hezbollah), and the global AlQaeda network.

Petraeus' reconstruction strategy in Iraq can be compared to the Marshall Plan years of the accomplishment and due process initiated and implemented by Gen Douglas MacArthur in the Pacific Theater, more than 60 years ago, wherein the generals and all ranks of officers do not simply sit on their hands and watch a fledgling government tend for itself, but the necessity for long-term reinforcement of peace and security and rooting out all or majority of inward and outward sources of insurgency and radicalism, at the same time lending a patient ear and hand to the Iraqi community, encourages open communication, open businesses, an open way of living, which will eventually lead to peace.

Problems may hinder from time to time, however, a peaceful developing nation is always worth its price.

And saying "decapitate", it makes it sound like you are saying they could deliver a death blow to America, basically making America no more. Those guys will never be able to take us down.

I hated to post this earlier, for I didn't want to use this. But it is, unfortunately, the painful Truth.

I think we do not need to see a picture of the Pentagon burning, or another plane that crash-landed in Pennsylvania which was clearly heading to our nation's capital, or the anthrax-laden postal mail and audio/videotapes which were sent to numerous key officials and the newsmedia.

Not to mention that even way before 9/11, there was a bombing incident in the parking garage of the World Trade Center (1993), a joint FBI-NBI sting operation in Manila, Philippines (1995) which exposed the Abu-Sayyaf movement in Mindanao and its crucial links to Al-Qaeda, plans to make an assasination attempt on the Pope on World Youth Day, and a second major attempt on the WTC. Another 5 years later, the attack of the USS Cole (2000) in Yemen, that succeeded after an interview with Osama bin Laden, which was not taken seriously.

And one fact that cannot be removed is that after the death of Iran's earliest preachers of 20th century jihad revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khumeini (1989), Saddam Hussein, one-time US ally, had decided to invade Kuwait (1991). After its lack of success, Saddam escaped and remained ambivalent on his plans regarding Iraq and its people, and the Middle East.

its that type of thinking that has put us in this position in Iraq and afghanistan....we need to start thinking differently...entertain the possibility that we are not INVINCIBLE.....

Exactly. We are not weak, but we are not also invincible.
Honesty, humility, magnanimity, constant maintenance and implementation, and long-term planning are what makes it work.

 

[kronos251]

Well... I voted Obama anyways *runs*

:-/

You have your opinion.......... and you don't have to run away.......

 

[LuiECuomo]

Thats exactly why McCain will probably win. Most of America would rather have more of the same than elect one of "those people" into office....because thats how Obama is viewed by a lot of America.

...Or it's the fact that they don't want to vote for someone who runs solely on the empty, meaningless platforms of "change" and "unity."

 

[BlackLantern]

...Or it's the fact that they don't want to vote for someone who runs solely on the empty, meaningless platforms of "change" and "unity."

or that...

 

[bell110]

its that type of thinking that has put us in this position in Iraq and afghanistan....we need to start thinking differently...entertain the possibility that we are not INVINCIBLE.....

Bad leadership, and a feeling of omnipotence put us in those positions. We may not be invinceible, but Iran, N. Korea, and Venezuela are not going to be the ones that destroy us.

No. The Bush Administration may have been right in the succeeding years of the "Shock and Awe" military strategy (2003-2004), but the follow-up reconstruction, and secuirty maintenance of Iraq (late 2004-2006) had been erratic and was in dire need of command and management on the ground. Until recently (2007-2008), the key appointment of Gen David Petraeus has delivered significant results as to the reduction of car bombings, in which the source was -and still is- the continuous flow of arms supply from the borders of Iran and Syria (Hezbollah), and the global AlQaeda network.

It's nice that Petraeus has reduced car bombs, but too little too late. Fact is, we should not be in Iraq. We wouldn't have to reduce car bombs if we didn't start **** there. You're putting the cart before the horse.

Petraeus' reconstruction strategy in Iraq can be compared to the Marshall Plan years of the accomplishment and due process initiated and implemented by Gen Douglas MacArthur in the Pacific Theater, more than 60 years ago, wherein the generals and all ranks of officers do not simply sit on their hands and watch a fledgling government tend for itself, but the necessity for long-term reinforcement of peace and security and rooting out all or majority of inward and outward sources of insurgency and radicalism, at the same time lending a patient ear and hand to the Iraqi community, encourages open communication, open businesses, an open way of living, which will eventually lead to peace.

Did the Marshall plan include the US illegally invading a sovereign nation, distroying it's infrastructure, and killing hundred of thousands of innocent people?

Problems may hinder from time to time, however, a peaceful developing nation is always worth its price.

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi families displaced and killed, and the thousands of US families who have had a loved one killed or severally injured in an unjust war.

I hated to post this earlier, for I didn't want to use this. But it is, unfortunately, the painful Truth.

I think we do not need to see a picture of the Pentagon burning, or another plane that crash-landed in Pennsylvania which was clearly heading to our nation's capital, or the anthrax-laden postal mail and audio/videotapes which were sent to numerous key officials and the newsmedia.

Not to mention that even way before 9/11, there was a bombing incident in the parking garage of the World Trade Center (1993), a joint FBI-NBI sting operation in Manila, Philippines (1995) which exposed the Abu-Sayyaf movement in Mindanao and its crucial links to Al-Qaeda, plans to make an assasination attempt on the Pope on World Youth Day, and a second major attempt on the WTC. Another 5 years later, the attack of the USS Cole (2000) in Yemen, that succeeded after an interview with Osama bin Laden, which was not taken seriously.

And one fact that cannot be removed is that after the death of Iran's earliest preachers of 20th century jihad revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khumeini (1989), Saddam Hussein, one-time US ally, had decided to invade Kuwait (1991). After its lack of success, Saddam escaped and remained ambivalent on his plans regarding Iraq and its people, and the Middle East.

A. Posting a pic of the WTC is a fear tactic. It doesn't work on me, and I hope it doesn't work on most people.

B. All those examples you gave, while bad, doesn't show the big picture. Much worst things happen from our own people than from foreigners. If you really want to protect us, why don't we arrest every American who do anything that might lead someone to rape and murder? Censor all violent music, movies, and video games. Statistically, you're more likely to be murdered by an American than by a terrorist.

Exactly. We are not weak, but we are not also invincible.
Honesty, humility, magnanimity, constant maintenance and implementation, and long-term planning are what makes it work.

Yes, wake me up when the government starts acting honest, humble, and magnanimous.

 

[kronos251]

Bad leadership, and a feeling of omnipotence put us in those positions. We may not be invinceible, but Iran, N. Korea, and Venezuela are not going to be the ones that destroy us.

Read again on my post earlier regarding Ayatollah Khumeini and the Islamist jihad revolution of the 1970's and the war between Iraq and Iran (1980-1988). His preachings pervaded even the most secular of governments in the Middle East, including Afghanistan that was under Soviet stronghold at the time. And a decade before, the Six Day War (1967 - Israel vs Egypt, Jordan and Syria) and the Israel-Palestinian War (1971-1972). These wars all have to do with oil and natural resources, which universally was and still is the prominent energy source of the global economy. Once the price of oil shoots up, everything shoots up - food prices, consumer costs, real estate, etc resulting to unemployment, and later inflation, and then recession. Hence the high discontentment in the US and all over the world from late 1960's to the entire decade of the 1980's.

Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, and other communist countries from all regions which were remnants of the Cold War still thrive with their ballistic missile programs and nuclear warheads, and most of all, they and their people thrive on the communist philosophy.

Communism is reached through poor socio-economic divisions, wherein the Lenin and Marx philosophy counts heavily on the lack of faith in a democratic government. To hand down all rights, possessions of the people (bourgeoisie) to one elitist group, is the goal, so as to free men of any responsibility; to free men of any cause of war, in order to have peace. That is the communist goal. It is good on paper, yet not applicable in real life. Democracy encourages open trade policy: "You keep what you earn; Reap what you sow; A good day ends with a hard day's work."

Security of a country is the foundation of a sound democracy.

It's nice that Petraeus has reduced car bombs, but too little too late. Fact is, we should not be in Iraq. We wouldn't have to reduce car bombs if we didn't start **** there. You're putting the cart before the horse.

Again, read the post earlier in regards to Khumeini and Saddam's ambivalence and also the documentation of hundreds and thousands of mass gravesites still being found in Iraq.

Did the Marshall plan include the US illegally invading a sovereign nation, distroying it's infrastructure, and killing hundred of thousands of innocent people?

Truman's controversial order of the atomic bomb twice on Japan, in retaliation of Pearl Harbor, destroyed not only Japan's infrastracture, but also its people due to the radiation fallout. The Marshall Plan had achieved the reconstruction needed, from ground level up to the high ranks of the emperor, and 60 years on, Japan has turned foe to ally, and is the leading economy in Asia, the second in the world. Alright, what about Nazi Germany? Germany didn't invade us, so why invade them...? You see what I mean..

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi families displaced and killed, and the thousands of US families who have had a loved one killed or severally injured in an unjust war.

bell110,

I am part of those thousands of US families who have their family members currently serving in the Battles for Iraq and Afghanistan and also in Mindanao, Philippines.

So I tell that to myself and to my family and to other families (America, Iraqi, et al) who have made the ultimate sacrifice. My cousin had risked his life and limb in Iraq back in 2003, and we prayed everyday - and still do - for the success of their mission, and the success of the implementation of that mission, no matter how hard or how long it took.

We happen to believe in this "unjust war" Washington politicians love to coin, in fact to the point of dying for what we believe in. Gen Petraeus has delivered remarkable results, and we are happy not only for the American people in our homeland, but more so for the Iraqi, Afghan, and Filipino people. However, much work still has to be done, and yes, a very long way to go, but it's getting there.

A. Posting a pic of the WTC is a fear tactic. It doesn't work on me, and I hope it doesn't work on most people.

B. All those examples you gave, while bad, doesn't show the big picture. Much worst things happen from our own people than from foreigners. If you really want to protect us, why don't we arrest every American who do anything that might lead someone to rape and murder? Censor all violent music, movies, and video games. Statistically, you're more likely to be murdered by an American than by a terrorist.

.
A. :-/


B. All the examples I gave are not really from me, but from recent history, and personal experiences in the Philippines. It would be helpful if you read up on history, and then - only then - you won't sound so cynical to the point you sound biased.

And I did not mention anything about censorship of consumer products.

Yes, wake me up when the government starts acting honest, humble, and magnanimous.

There is no need to be sarcastic. There are far worse governments in other third world countries, who don't give a damn about things like social security and don't have a translation for the word, "insurance". People would actually gape at the sight of the sanitation and order of asphalt on the streets, and the sight of abundant food and clothing. No cause of famine, or severe threat of natural diseases.


You are right that our democratic government may not be perfect, and should be answerable for its bureaucracies and corruption, but it's the only one we have, and many do aspire to.


.

 

[Darkly Dexter]

Bad leadership, and a feeling of omnipotence put us in those positions. We may not be invinceible, but Iran, N. Korea, and Venezuela are not going to be the ones that destroy us.

China and Russia, those are the ones that can destroy you (and I'm talking about the future, not now). Certainly not Venezuela, Korea or Iran.

 

[The War Machine]

It's all but guaranteed at this point. The US will never elect a female or black candidate. That's the [perhaps] unfortunate truth about this country. Anyway, I really want to make this thread so that I can bump it and say "I told you so" by the end of the year.

Quoted For Truth

The race is over

 

[kronos251]

China and Russia, those are the ones that can destroy you (and I'm talking about the future, not now). Certainly not Venezuela, Korea or Iran.

In the respective line of thought of Mao-Tse Tung and Lenin/Marx, China and Russia, yes, very much so. Although they still have communist governments and/or elements of such, they will be lethal competitors in terms of economy and trade industries due to the magnitude of their cheap labor alone. Plus the irrefutable fact that they are not - to put it lightly - as transparent when it comes to their military and ideological plans....

North Korea, having an important factor of being geopolitically positioned next to Red China and Russia, have been tip-toeing the line of whether or not to surrender their plutonium stock nuclear program to the IAEA officials, and the UN security council. Kim Jong Il and his ambassadors are currently having trouble conversing with the recently-elected successor of Koffi Anan, South Korean UN Secretary General, Ban-Ki Moon, and other State department officials notably Christopher Hill. As of yet, N. Korea did not meet the lengthily-discussed deadline of December 31st 2007, and instead launched a number of long-range test missiles into space and had heated encounters with the Japanese and S. Koreans in the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan.


Cuba, Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia and several countries in South America under repressive communist/leftist administration are all hotbeds of drug cartels and armed rebel movements, as they are major contributors of oil volatility from their respective region, ie. Oil refineries dotted all over the Mexican Gulf, Venezuela's Paraguana Refining Complex (CRP), Orinco, etc etc. These countries individually can not, but collectively can unsettle the global market and political/social atmosphere. Moreover, there is a great need to take into consideration the increasing economic involvement of and recent trade ties (2006-2008) with Iran, China, and Russia.

 

[Darkly Dexter]

Cuba, Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia and several countries in South America under repressive communist/leftist administration are all hotbeds of drug cartels and armed rebel movements, as they are major contributors of oil volatility from their respective region, ie. Oil refineries dotted all over the Mexican Gulf, Venezuela's Paraguana Refining Complex (CRP), Orinco, etc etc. These countries individually can not, but collectively can unsettle the global market and political/social atmosphere. Moreover, there is a great need to take into consideration the increasing economic involvement of and recent trade ties (2006-2008) with Iran, China, and Russia.

Colombia has a right-wing government. Bolivia and Cuba are living in misery. They can't do anything. And here in South America there are two kinds of leftist governments: Moderates and with a good relation with EEUU (Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Uruguay), and Radicals (Venezuela and Bolivia). The most powerfull nations, and with better quality of life are those with Moderate leftist governments. So, there won't be an alliance between all the South American leftists against United States.

 

[rijuco]

I like Obama. I will vote Obama. Would rather have Edwards/Kucinich/Ron Paul...but

I think you don't give America enough credit saying it isn't ready to elect a woman or african american. Have some faith in the american people.

 

[kronos251]

Colombia has a right-wing government. Bolivia and Cuba are living in misery. They can't do anything. And here in South America there are two kinds of leftist governments: Moderates and with a good relation with EEUU (Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Uruguay), and Radicals (Venezuela and Bolivia). The most powerfull nations, and with better quality of life are those with Moderate leftist governments. So, there won't be an alliance between all the South American leftists against United States.

Exactly. I acknowledge you live there and you do know a lot more since you are on the grassroots level, so to speak. But I did not mention "all of South America" of course, as you know very well, that some have established financial trade relations with China, Russia, and Iran. Together, intercontinentally speaking, the analogy of multiple Davids against Goliath is not exactly unimaginable.

I think you don't give America enough credit saying it isn't ready to elect a woman or african american. Have some faith in the american people.

That's exactly what I said to Gamma Ray who started this thread. There should be no physical characteristics of a candidate that would constitute a a major hindrance. What matters more is inside their head, and how they would manifest those ideas.

 

[BlackLantern]

I like Obama. I will vote Obama. Would rather have Edwards/Kucinich/Ron Paul...but

I think you don't give America enough credit saying it isn't ready to elect a woman or african american. Have some faith in the american people.

America will not put a minority or a woman in the white house this year. most Americans would sooner have more of the same than put one of "those people" in office

 

[Malice]

Personally, I dont think that the majority of those in the regular business world actually care one way or another whether someone is female/black/or mormon.
I sure as hell dont.

 

[BlackLantern]

the business world may not.....but there is a lot of other America out there

 

[CorpusBlack]

the business world may not.....but there is a lot of other America out there

A LOT of them.

 

[bell110]

Read again on my post earlier regarding Ayatollah Khumeini and the Islamist jihad revolution of the 1970's and the war between Iraq and Iran (1980-1988). His preachings pervaded even the most secular of governments in the Middle East, including Afghanistan that was under Soviet stronghold at the time. And a decade before, the Six Day War (1967 - Israel vs Egypt, Jordan and Syria) and the Israel-Palestinian War (1971-1972). These wars all have to do with oil and natural resources, which universally was and still is the prominent energy source of the global economy. Once the price of oil shoots up, everything shoots up - food prices, consumer costs, real estate, etc resulting to unemployment, and later inflation, and then recession. Hence the high discontentment in the US and all over the world from late 1960's to the entire decade of the 1980's.

Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, and other communist countries from all regions which were remnants of the Cold War still thrive with their ballistic missile programs and nuclear warheads, and most of all, they and their people thrive on the communist philosophy.

Communism is reached through poor socio-economic divisions, wherein the Lenin and Marx philosophy counts heavily on the lack of faith in a democratic government. To hand down all rights, possessions of the people (bourgeoisie) to one elitist group, is the goal, so as to free men of any responsibility; to free men of any cause of war, in order to have peace. That is the communist goal. It is good on paper, yet not applicable in real life. Democracy encourages open trade policy: "You keep what you earn; Reap what you sow; A good day ends with a hard day's work."

Security of a country is the foundation of a sound democracy.

Ok, you're point was more about being hit economically rather than physically.

Again, read the post earlier in regards to Khumeini and Saddam's ambivalence and also the documentation of hundreds and thousands of mass gravesites still being found in Iraq.



Truman's controversial order of the atomic bomb twice on Japan, in retaliation of Pearl Harbor, destroyed not only Japan's infrastracture, but also its people due to the radiation fallout. The Marshall Plan had achieved the reconstruction needed, from ground level up to the high ranks of the emperor, and 60 years on, Japan has turned foe to ally, and is the leading economy in Asia, the second in the world. Alright, what about Nazi Germany? Germany didn't invade us, so why invade them...? You see what I mean..

Better Saddam killing innocents than us. And Nazi Germany was a real threat to us and the world. Iraq was never a threat to anyone.

bell110,

I am part of those thousands of US families who have their family members currently serving in the Battles for Iraq and Afghanistan and also in Mindanao, Philippines.

So I tell that to myself and to my family and to other families (America, Iraqi, et al) who have made the ultimate sacrifice. My cousin had risked his life and limb in Iraq back in 2003, and we prayed everyday - and still do - for the success of their mission, and the success of the implementation of that mission, no matter how hard or how long it took.

You are very optimistic. From what I've read, I can't be that optimistic.

We happen to believe in this "unjust war" Washington politicians love to coin, in fact to the point of dying for what we believe in. Gen Petraeus has delivered remarkable results, and we are happy not only for the American people in our homeland, but more so for the Iraqi, Afghan, and Filipino people. However, much work still has to be done, and yes, a very long way to go, but it's getting there.






.
A. :-/


B. All the examples I gave are not really from me, but from recent history, and personal experiences in the Philippines. It would be helpful if you read up on history, and then - only then - you won't sound so cynical to the point you sound biased.

And I did not mention anything about censorship of consumer products.

I know, I was using that for an example when I though you were just taking about protection from a physical attack. The balance of protection and liberty/justice.

And I have read up on my history, that is why I'm so cynical. And I don't see myself as being biased.

There is no need to be sarcastic. There are far worse governments in other third world countries, who don't give a damn about things like social security and don't have a translation for the word, "insurance". People would actually gape at the sight of the sanitation and order of asphalt on the streets, and the sight of abundant food and clothing. No cause of famine, or severe threat of natural diseases.

Ok, no sarcasism. But, it is true. Bush is not any of those things. And a lot of our fellow citizens aren't either.

You are right that our democratic government may not be perfect, and should be answerable for its bureaucracies and corruption, but it's the only one we have, and many do aspire to.


.

Just so you know, I'm not some rabid anti-Bush liberal. I didn't vote for him, but back then, I'd rather had him win the recount than Gore. I just thought he would be another mediocre president. It wasn't until 9/11, and his numerous **** ups and lies that I truely started to despise him. And the fact that going into Iraq was clearly the wrong thing to do, yet most politicians and the public were for it. I really felt that all rationality in our country was gone. I just can't help but to feel that we are being the bad guys, and it's a sickening feeling.

 

[kronos251]

Ok, you're point was more about being hit economically rather than physically.

Yes, being taken down economically, and then physically or both. Politics depend greatly on the economic stature (or lack thereof) as do economics is never sustainable, because of the vicissitudes brought on by politics.

Better Saddam killing innocents than us. And Nazi Germany was a real threat to us and the world. Iraq was never a threat to anyone.

You have a point about us being in a war killing the enemy, while the innocents are tragically caught in the crossfire. We all find it hard to endure that truth. We, most of all, the families who have someone fighting and dying there... Another truth that is also hard to endure is that Saddam Hussein was a threat, there is no removing it in history. He was not an idle man. And ignoring him would prove disastrous, giving him more time on what else he could have done to his people and to other foreigners. More so that UN's Kofi Annan was embroiled in the Oil-for-Food scandal, hence the controversy over Hans Blix and the WMDs. We cannot ignore Saddam Hussein like we did in the 90's, as we didn't take seriously Osama Bin Laden.

Geographically, Iraq is at the center of the Middle East - so is Iran - So in essence, those in charge then had power over so much of the oil producers and refineries, and the OPEC.

You are very optimistic. From what I've read, I can't be that optimistic.

No, my friend, I am not optimistic to the point of being blind - of course not. I emphasize so much so on the history of the regions and the history of economics, that we don't have to repeat the mistakes and negligence that were made way back when.

Optimism, no, not so much, though a realistic assessment comes from the performance and the enforcement of that mission. Without it, the mission is meaningless and our fellow soldiers are simply dying there in vain, and are not being appreciated for their sacrifices and their beliefs...

I know, I was using that for an example when I though you were just taking about protection from a physical attack. The balance of protection and liberty/justice.

Alright.

And I have read up on my history, that is why I'm so cynical. And I don't see myself as being biased.

I once thought that too. That I was cynical back in 2006, that there were multiple suicide/car bombings, and terrible, terrible casualties from both sides every single month..... If the war ended right there and then... I wouldn't know how.. or what to feel. I would've felt some sort of relief, I guess. But then my cousin's and his comrades' efforts would've been futile if the war ended.

I realized being cynical didn't help anything, did not add to anything.... And yes experience does show that when confronted with so many problems, we set our feelings aside and find solutions - on how to gradually eliminate the problem, economically and militarily, and so weakening the very source that caused those problems.

Ok, no sarcasism. But, it is true. Bush is not any of those things. And a lot of our fellow citizens aren't either.

Just so you know, I'm not some rabid anti-Bush liberal. I didn't vote for him, but back then, I'd rather had him win the recount than Gore. I just thought he would be another mediocre president. It wasn't until 9/11, and his numerous **** ups and lies that I truely started to despise him. And the fact that going into Iraq was clearly the wrong thing to do, yet most politicians and the public were for it. I really felt that all rationality in our country was gone. I just can't help but to feel that we are being the bad guys, and it's a sickening feeling.

I very well understand where you're coming from, and I am not here to champion one politician over the other, attack or even convince anybody.

Like I said in another thread, I reserve judgment on incumbent and former presidents, as what and how their legacy will realistically affect in the long run.

Because of 9/11, there will be no longer mediocre presidents... because we are no longer in a mediocre situation... it was a rude wake up call, and so many did not have to perish.

After WWII, I didn't expect my grandfather to come out of retirement and he went on to serve again in Vietnam. He said he felt that he could sincerely help the country after years of being at war with itself, and the Soviet Union, a former ally, was in fact at the height of its power and conquered nearly all of Asia. Of course, 10 consecutive years in Vietnam meant in America's mind there was no sense of progress on the ground whatsoever, and yes, that sickening feeling penetrated and disappointed every heart and mind in America. And the world was watching. My grandfather said, we lost our faith in ourselves, and after the Vietnam war, we didn't know what else to do. We didn't even leave a base there, not even a simple reconstruction plan afterwards. And the communist countries around the world were laughing.



The sole deciding factor and the crucial pivotal point was how any mission is implemented on the ground. Otherwise, we would've ended up as yet another regrettable failure..

 

[Kelly]

The 30 -- 40 year old "professionals" along with the Hispanic vote will make or break these candidates in the election, and IMO, these 2 groups could very well put a minority candidate into office.

Every candidate has pretty much ignored the hispanic vote this time. Apparently they forgot that that is what got Bush in office back in 2004.......apparently Americans have a hell of a time learning from the past.

 

[souvlaki]

I guess this would be considered a McCain thread. Anyhow, big story just broke in the NY Times. It has the potential to cause major problems to his campaign. The jist of it is there are allegations being made that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Edit: Nevermind, I see someone already posted it in the Obama thread.

 

[comicgirl]

It's all but guaranteed at this point. The US will never elect a female or black candidate. That's the [perhaps] unfortunate truth about this country. Anyway, I really want to make this thread so that I can bump it and say "I told you so" by the end of the year.

I don't think so............no elderly, caucasian males this year, thank you.

 

[LuiECuomo]

I don't think so............no elderly, caucasian males this year, thank you.

And whom would you prefer? That young, inexperienced black twit who will probably end up being the Dems' candidate?

 

[The Senator]

Well, God forbid we vote for a candidate based on ideas and policies, rather than race or gender

 

[LuiECuomo]

Whose comments are you referring to, jman?