Say hello to our next president...

[Shifty]

I can see politically why, but he is basically a Kennedy. Why isn't he backing Obama? He won't get sex for the next few years.

Have you seen his wife? He's better off with some young staffer.

 

[teseract]

all people are entitled to equal rights. The freedom of Americans to make their own decisions, and to live their own lives, relatively free from governmental or other interference, has caused us to become a beacon of hope around the world.

Let me tell you something as a non US citizen, you're NOT a beacon of hope in the world, on the contrary. Pretty much every other nation speaks of the US with a grumble in their voice and that's mainly because of your glorious Republican party.

Furthermore, you should be burning bright red with shame, sprouting party propaganda and buzz words like "the right to make your own decisions" and "living their own lives relatively free from government etc." when the same party that supposedly stands for these things is more interested in what 10% of the population do in their bedrooms in private, than how the average american is making ends meet. Fact is that your glorious GOP increased govermental power in the last 8 years in an amount unheard of before. Fact is, a strong basis of the same party wants to tell the rest of the populus how to run their lives to meet a standard routed in religious mythology. I don't see how that is in any way, shape or form compatible with the ideas of "the right to make your own decisions" and "living ones live free from government." Whatever history the GOP once posessed is long gone and dead. The new GOP is as much socialist as the Democrats are, they are just not left wing socialists.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Let me tell you something as a non US citizen, you're NOT a beacon of hope in the world, on the contrary. Pretty much every other nation speaks of the US with a grumble in their voice and that's mainly because of your glorious Republican party.

Which is really sad if you ask me. The United States SHOULD be the beacon of hope in the world. The United States should be highly looked upon by other nations. The United States should be the defender of human rights and dignity. The United States should be the leader of the free world and democratic nations everywhere.

Though that's not the Republican's fault. Both Republican and Democratic administrations ever since the Cold War has damaged what the United States should be. By supporting dictatorships, screwing over South America, Vietnam, and of course the more recent actions of the Bush Administration.

 

[Darkly Dexter]

What exactly happened? Tell me what would of happened under a democratic leadership? Would the economic recession not happened? Would we not be at war? Would hurricane Katrina not have happened? The truth of the matter is this country was heading to this point no matter what due to the inaction of congress. Whether it be from the GOP's ridiculous overspending or the democratic forever childish need to embarrass the other party. Vote for one or the other based on the issues, don't buy into the propaganda either side is pushing.

I know both parties are crap. If a democratic government would've done a war based on pure lies, I would be here saying the exact same things. But it was a Republican government, and they should know they f**** up. Be cause if you vote for them again it would be like anything never happened. They have to be punished, and the way to do it in a democracy is to get them out of the Office.

 

[BlackLantern]

Which is really sad if you ask me. The United States SHOULD be the beacon of hope in the world. The United States should be highly looked upon by other nations. The United States should be the defender of human rights and dignity. The United States should be the leader of the free world and democratic nations everywhere.

I dont see why that should be our responsibility....cant we be just another country....have some trade partners and keep our mouths shut....in the global scheme of things we have only been around a couple hundred years....

 

[BlackLantern]

I know both parties are crap. If a democratic government would've done a war based on pure lies, I would be here saying the exact same things. But it was a Republican government, and they should know they f**** up. Be cause if you vote for them again it would be like anything never happened. They have to be punished, and the way to do it in a democracy is to get them out of the Office.

well the national conventions basically tell people who to vote for. while a lot of people whine and complain and set up online petitions, those red staters are out there voting every year like clockwork....if people stopped whining and started voting, things might be different

 

[teseract]

Which is really sad if you ask me. The United States SHOULD be the beacon of hope in the world. The United States should be highly looked upon by other nations. The United States should be the defender of human rights and dignity. The United States should be the leader of the free world and democratic nations everywhere.

Though that's not the Republican's fault. Both Republican and Democratic administrations ever since the Cold War has damaged what the United States should be. By supporting dictatorships, screwing over South America, Vietnam, and of course the more recent actions of the Bush Administration.

True, however, the US had at least a shred of dignity left during the Clinton years. The tenor here in my Country was quite favorable back then, sure the US had their faults but people were willing to overlook them. Then Bush came and the whole attitude towards the US changed dramatically.

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Reagan was about as old as McCain, and got elected into office. Twice.

 

[Matt]

Reagan was about as old as McCain, and got elected into office. Twice.

Reagan also did not spend five years in a POW camp and substained injuries and conditions which still plague him to this day.

 

[Genesis 1.0]

The problem with your assertion that the U.S. won the Cold War because of Reagan is completely false. Studies have shown that the Soviet Union was going to collapse anyway. During the 1980s, the country's economic growth was at an all time low, the economy was in a deep recession, and the political climate had been changing in many of the Soviet satellite nations since the late 1970s. Certainly, Reagan's calls to the end the communist regime in the USSR helped end the Cold War; but Reagan didn't solely end the Cold War. The Cold War would have ended not because of an American president, but because of the economy, and it did so solely because of its own economic downturn-- NOT international calls to abandon its government and start anew.

All it takes is one man to lead a change in a nation, for the better or for the worse, to deny this is to deny your entire irrational hate of Bush. Leaving you completely without a base or platform, not that you had much of one to begin with aside from overweening disgruntlement. Reagan calls to end the communist regime were the catalyst for the change that came about, effectively ending the Cold War. Not just empty words, but threats backed by possible force that kept the corrupt government in check long enough for a revoltuion to take place. Simply because the victory didn't fit into your ideological bubble, inside your definition of a victory doesn't mean it wasn't.

It also doesn't diminish the fact that under Reagan and Bush Sr., the U.S. became the ONLY remaining superpower in the world. One man, that's all it takes. Just look at what Putin has done to Russia, from collapse to rising world power. Without someone to lead the way, there really is nothing but speculation as to any other outcome.

My Democratic Party is the Democratic Party which emerged in the Sixties, when LBJ led the Democrats into accepting and promoting civil rights. My Democratic Party is not the Democratic Party of two hundred years ago, the party which oppressed an entire race and entire generations because they looked different. My party is not what the Republican Party has become. When you get a Republican who can fight for gay rights, a woman's right to choose, cutting taxes for the middle class and freedom of religious expression to all denominations including those who aren't rooted in Christianity, then I'll support the Republican Party. But for now, I have the Democratic Party, and that's the party I plan to support until they personally screw me over.

So you fast forward past the positives in my party and negative in your's in order to arrive at what you feel to be the positive in your own and the negative in mine? Interesting. Not to mention the fact that this whole thing started when Matt claimed that the Democratic Party was the only one with a rich history. Keyword: History.

Ah well, if you want THIS can of worms, fine. The Republican Party created the Ammendments that gave all people equal rights to live. Your Democratic Party took that mantle up with Johnson and others. Reagam entered the picture and we became the Party of Ideas again.

The simple and undeniable fact of the matter is that the two Parties have traded the mantle several times but you can't deny the fact that the Republican Party has just a rich if not more so a legacy as the Democratic. Which is why this started in the first place, whether you'd like to admit it or not, but I could see why you wouldn't, seeing your unbridled and completely bizzare hate of the 'other side'. Apprently your method for getting rid of the 'Republican' way of things is to be just as partisan minded but it's okay because it's for the Democrats, right?

Right.

 

[Genesis 1.0]

Let me tell you something as a non US citizen, you're NOT a beacon of hope in the world, on the contrary. Pretty much every other nation speaks of the US with a grumble in their voice and that's mainly because of your glorious Republican party.

The decline of the U.S. reputation in the world is well documented, but I'm sure you'll be absolutely shocked to know that it didn't start nor will it end, with simply my 'glorious' Republican Party. Tune the zealot down and try to actually research the facts. That little downward spiral has been in the works for years, including Democratic AND Republican rule.

As to the other point, the U.S. remains a beacon for many, simply because YOU don't see it that way doesn't mean you speak for the other several billion people on the planet. That is unless you've polled every living person the planet and detected a nasty grumble and if you have; I saulte your efforts.

Furthermore, you should be burning bright red with shame, sprouting party propaganda and buzz words like "the right to make your own decisions" and "living their own lives relatively free from government etc." when the same party that supposedly stands for these things is more interested in what 10% of the population do in their bedrooms in private, than how the average american is making ends meet. Fact is that your glorious GOP increased govermental power in the last 8 years in an amount unheard of before. Fact is, a strong basis of the same party wants to tell the rest of the populus how to run their lives to meet a standard routed in religious mythology. I don't see how that is in any way, shape or form compatible with the ideas of "the right to make your own decisions" and "living ones live free from government." Whatever history the GOP once posessed is long gone and dead. The new GOP is as much socialist as the Democrats are, they are just not left wing socialists.

Shame? I should be ashamed? No, can't say that I am, but I can say that I would be ashamed if I jumped onto a topic and started spouting anti-American/Religion propoganda in response to what I felt was pro-Republican propoganda. So let's take a breath and actually LOOK at this rationally.

The increase in government power came after a terrorist attack on American soil. I won't bother with all the details seeing as you might have heard about it, but suffice it to say it caused quite a stir and no little tension on Capitol Hill. Many of these increases were run by members of the Republican AND Democratic Party, so fudge on the whole 'Evil Republican' deal. These increases in government power were put in place to protect American lives from another attack. I can't really vouch for EVERY reason the Administration does something, but hey, if someone broke into my House and killed my daughter and my wife, well I'd probably do everything in my power to ensure it never happened again. New locks, better security, a gun, the whole nine to make sure that my only remaining child remaind alive. Same thing, larger scale.

Hypotheticals out of the way, I've already stated that my Republican Party has veered off course from it's roots, dually noted. This does not however mean that it's to blame for EVERYTHING that's gone wrong in America and abroad.

So the next time you chip a nail or that guy cuts you off on your way home, don't blame George Bush and the Republican Party. Sometimes bad things happen and surprise surprise, they had nothing to do with it.

 

[Genesis 1.0]

I dont see why that should be our responsibility....cant we be just another country....have some trade partners and keep our mouths shut....in the global scheme of things we have only been around a couple hundred years....

"With great power, comes great responsibility."

Damn you Uncle Ben, that was my line!

Anyway, before I was so rudely interrupted, being in the position that the U.S. is in, and was in years ago, it's our place to actually DO something positive with our power and status. It's why people like Bill Gates leaves enormous of amounts of money to charities and why some celebrities go to such lengths to help the worse off, although I don't get the whole adopting every kid under the sun, but I digress.

Once you get in a position to help others, you use it if you have any sense. If you've got fame, power, and money, you use that platform to help and raise awareness about the less fortunate and real crisises. Now I don't know if that's even a real word, but you get my drift.

If we didn't try to do the best we could with what we have, we'd actually be as rotten as some anti-____________ proclaim we are. Which is pretty damn bad.

 

[teseract]

.... Reagam entered the picture and we became the Party of Ideas again...

Apprently your method for getting rid of the 'Republican' way of things is to be just as partisan minded but it's okay because it's for the Democrats, right?

Right.

What Ideas? Surveillance and police state? getting involved in peoples sexual lives and how they have to treat their body and so on and so on? That doesn't sound very "small government" to me. Sounds more like a "Nanny State", just not one steeped in "leftist ideas" but one more in terms of "traditional values". A Nanny state mentality is a Nanny State mentality, no matter if it is laisez fair liberal or draconic conservative. Both are deplorable, the conservative version more so in my opinion. All conservatives can do is prohibit this, regulate that and criminialize the rest. Conservatives are as far away from freedom as a cow is from understanding the physical properties of the grass it is chewing and you can damn believe that becoming partisan to get rid of that is a good idea.

 

[Genesis 1.0]

What Ideas? Surveillance and police state? getting involved in peoples sexual lives and how they have to treat their body and so on and so on? That doesn't sound very "small government" to me. Sounds more like a "Nanny State", just not one steeped in "leftist ideas" but one more in terms of "traditional values". A Nanny state mentality is a Nanny State mentality, no matter if it is laisez fair liberal or draconic conservative. Both are deplorable, the conservative version more so in my opinion. All conservatives can do is prohibit this, regulate that and criminialize the rest. Conservatives are as far away from freedom as a cow is from understanding the physical properties of the grass it is chewing and you can damn believe that becoming partisan to get rid of that is a good idea.

I really don't see the point of trying to explain to you the intricacies of these policies and what seperates them from a 'Nanny State' but it's become quite evident that it's not that you don't get it, it's that you don't want to get it. I haven't seen someone try NOT to see the other side so hard in a while.

Exemplified in the fact that you seem to think that being partisan is the solution to overly partisan politics. Replace a child molester with a murderer and you seem to think it's fine because it's a different evil. Pfffft.

 

[teseract]

The decline of the U.S. reputation in the world is well documented, but I'm sure you'll be absolutely shocked to know that it didn't start nor will it end, with simply my 'glorious' Republican Party. Tune the zealot down and try to actually research the facts. That little downward spiral has been in the works for years, including Democratic AND Republican rule.

As to the other point, the U.S. remains a beacon for many, simply because YOU don't see it that way doesn't mean you speak for the other several billion people on the planet. That is unless you've polled every living person the planet and detected a nasty grumble and if you have; I saulte your effort.

Oh I detected a grumble in quite a lot, especially in those countries that were "traditionally" US Allies. Heck, even your "biggest Ally" the english are vehemently critizising the United States.

Shame? I should be ashamed? No, can't say that I am, but I can say that I would be ashamed if I jumped onto a topic and started spouting anti-American/Religion propoganda in response to what I felt was pro-Republican propoganda. So let's take a breath and actually LOOK at this rationally.

Interesting, it's anti-American now to call the big fat lies of the Republican party what they are? Everytime a Repub sprouts off about "small government" and "personal freedom" he lies boldly into the face of the person he is talking to. Repubs are NOT small government, they are not the party of personal freedom. Heck, they hate the concept with a passion. As for anti-Religious, you bet I am, I can't stand religion, especially when it tries to interfere with "freedom" for the sake of its own convoluted mythology. Religion is inherently fascistic and will always be the enemy of true freedom. And since the GOP basis constitutes of the religious right I'd say "freedom" and Republican are mutually exclusive.

The increase in government power came after a terrorist attack on American soil. I won't bother with all the details seeing as you might have heard about it, but suffice it to say it caused quite a stir and no little tension on Capitol Hill. Many of these increases were run by members of the Republican AND Democratic Party, so fudge on the whole 'Evil Republican' deal. These increases in government power were put in place to protect American lives from another attack. I can't really vouch for EVERY reason the Administration does something, but hey, if someone broke into my House and killed my daughter and my wife, well I'd probably do everything in my power to ensure it never happened again. New locks, better security, a gun, the whole nine to make sure that my only remaining child remaind alive. Same thing, larger scale.

Unimportant! "Small Government", remember, not Nanny State (as in a Nanny that keeps you secure and comfy), small Government as in "living your life according to your own ideas and only with little government involvement". You can't have it both ways. You either are for small Government or you're not. Surveillance, increased government power and so on and so on, go against these principles no matter how noble the intentions are. Heck, the Democrat' ideas are very noble too in terms of legitimacy of a Nanny State. An adequate live for all, good income even for poor people, participation and sharing fo common goods. Good and noble ideas and yet Repubs say they are bad because they are "big Government". But when the GOP does it to "protect" and instill "traditional values" it's suddenly all nice and dandy. Talk about a double standard. The GOP and its voters traded freedom for security and we both know what one who does so deserves according to Franklin, don't we?

Hypotheticals out of the way, I've already stated that my Republican Party has veered off course from it's roots, dually noted. This does not however mean that it's to blame for EVERYTHING that's gone wrong in America and abroad.

And that's why it needs a big fat slap in the face and the best way to do so is to make them loose the election. Otherwise they will continue with the same **** and never come back to what they SHOULD be (if they ever were).

So the next time you chip a nail or that guy cuts you off on your way home, don't blame George Bush and the Republican Party. Sometimes bad things happen and surprise surprise, they had nothing to do with it.

They have a LOT to do with the things that irk me in terms of US politics especially when it comes to "individual and civil rights"

 

[teseract]

I really don't see the point of trying to explain to you the intricacies of these policies and what seperates them from a 'Nanny State' but it's become quite evident that it's not that you don't get it, it's that you don't want to get it. I haven't seen someone try NOT to see the other side so hard in a while.

Exemplified in the fact that you seem to think that being partisan is the solution to overly partisan politics. Replace a child molester with a murderer and you seem to think it's fine because it's a different evil. Pfffft.

A Nanny state is by devinition a state that tells it people how to act, what to think, takes care of them from cradle to grave and treats them like "little children" which need to be protected from the big bad world. That protection can be left wing as in "give them cloth and everything they need" or right wing "police every behavior, idea and thought in case it might harm anyone". That's not freedom and that's not what the people of the US need!

But I'm eager to listen, how is it not "Big Government" to listen in to the phone conversations of citizens because one of them could do something harmful. How is it not "Big Government" to tell two people they can't have sex with each other, even though both are consenting adults, how ist it not "Big Government" to tell people what substance they can put into THEIR body? Where is the "personal freedom" in that? Are the people of the US such little children that they need a "Nanny" to prevent them from doing all this?

As for not getting it, no you're not getting that a Nanny State isn#t just a left wing option and that the GOP has its own version of the "Nanny State" developed by now. Big Government is and remains Big Government no matter what the reason.

Sometimes you have the choice between Pestilence and Cholera, And the US had enough Pestilence for now, time to try it with Cholera.

 

[hippie_hunter]

True, however, the US had at least a shred of dignity left during the Clinton years. The tenor here in my Country was quite favorable back then, sure the US had their faults but people were willing to overlook them. Then Bush came and the whole attitude towards the US changed dramatically.

That's because Bush is an *******. Whoever gets elected next, Republican or Democrat is bound to be a better President than he was.

 

[teseract]

That's because Bush is an *******. Whoever gets elected next, Republican or Democrat is bound to be a better President than he was.

I agree about Bush

Oh I do hope so, allthough McCain is doing his best to come off as Bush 02

Funny thing is, I can't even stand the Dems, yet I can stand the Gop even less and that's because they always tout this personal freedom, small Government bull****, yet do the total opposite.

 

[CorpusBlack]

The US will never elect a female or black candidate. That's the [perhaps] unfortunate truth about this country.

I disagree.

 

[The Senator]

I disagree.

I agree with your disagreement. I have a feeling both will happen in my lifetime. I also have a feeling that there will be a prominent gay candidate who runs for national office (though I don't think we'll have a gay president before I'm dead and gone).

 

[Genesis 1.0]

Oh I detected a grumble in quite a lot, especially in those countries that were "traditionally" US Allies. Heck, even your "biggest Ally" the english are vehemently critizising the United States.

Okay so let's be clear, you're obviously relying on what you see on television and it's a pretty well known fact that it's impossible to get an unbiased report on a corrupt government from a corrupt media. In any case, there has never beena nd will never be any 'ally' that has the total agreement of all it's people, there are always people who will 'grumble' about anything.

Interesting, it's anti-American now to call the big fat lies of the Republican party what they are? Everytime a Repub sprouts off about "small government" and "personal freedom" he lies boldly into the face of the person he is talking to. Repubs are NOT small government, they are not the party of personal freedom. Heck, they hate the concept with a passion. As for anti-Religious, you bet I am, I can't stand religion, especially when it tries to interfere with "freedom" for the sake of its own convoluted mythology. Religion is inherently fascistic and will always be the enemy of true freedom. And since the GOP basis constitutes of the religious right I'd say "freedom" and Republican are mutually exclusive.

Heh, how can a zealot pull the zealot card? Trying to color me in as just as extreme as you are is pretty useless. I've pointed out the positives and negatives of my Party. You, have had nothing but negativity and shown a willingness to only continue your political butchery. People with nothing more than complaints, never a viable solution to the problem, just as bad, if not worse than what you're arguing against. So don't feed me that 'So it's wrong to call a lie a lie' stuff.

And I can't help but notice your sweeping generalizations. As far as you're concerned, every Republican is nothing more than a lying sack of scum without any moral compass. All those with a Religion want to burn infants at the stake if they show any homosexual tendecies. That's quite a sweep and critcally flawed, it's no longer an opinion, it's just wrong. Your posts reek not of distaste or the reasoning of a rational political minded individual, but of simple hate. Ah but somehow, you seem to feel you're somehow in the right, but God knows it's not the right wing.

Unimportant! "Small Government", remember, not Nanny State (as in a Nanny that keeps you secure and comfy), small Government as in "living your life according to your own ideas and only with little government involvement". You can't have it both ways. You either are for small Government or you're not. Surveillance, increased government power and so on and so on, go against these principles no matter how noble the intentions are. Heck, the Democrat' ideas are very noble too in terms of legitimacy of a Nanny State. An adequate live for all, good income even for poor people, participation and sharing fo common goods. Good and noble ideas and yet Repubs say they are bad because they are "big Government". But when the GOP does it to "protect" and instill "traditional values" it's suddenly all nice and dandy. Talk about a double standard. The GOP and its voters traded freedom for security and we both know what one who does so deserves according to Franklin, don't we?

Errrr, Unimportant? So you see something you don't agree with and can't debate properly and all of sudden it's unimportant. So it's your view that NO new security measures needed to be taken? So basically let a burglar break in, murder your family and in response you change nothing. Hell, why not leave that door unlocked and tie your family to the bed for easier access? Knowing a critical flaw, a weakness, an opening that's not just a possibility, but that's been used in the past to cause pain, sorrow, and anguish and doing NOTHING is worse than doing the WRONG thing. Or in this case, overdoing the right thing.

It's clear that were you President, your policy of Non-Action would have easily resulted in the endangerment and loss of life for millions. But at least you wouldn't have to worry about being labeled a 'Dictator' or leader of a Nanny Government. Riiight.

And that's why it needs a big fat slap in the face and the best way to do so is to make them loose the election. Otherwise they will continue with the same **** and never come back to what they SHOULD be (if they ever were).

It's a FACT that they were, that is if you actually read through the short summary of what this Party was founded on. As to whether they still are now is a subject I can see is pointless to debate with you who wouldn't see a forest for a single tree.

As to a wake up call, that came with the Democratic Congress. Speaking of which, said Congress' ratings, ruled by the Party you feel is so very superior, has even LOWER ratings than the PRESIDENT. But you're going to ignore that too, right? Your theory of Republican corruption couldn't possibly withstand the blow.

They have a LOT to do with the things that irk me in terms of US politics especially when it comes to "individual and civil rights"

It seems that the things that irk you are the very same issues that you yourself posess but you seem to be eerily unaware of the fact. You've spouted just as much hate and propoganda as the Republican war machine you claim to despise so very much.

Ironic, no?

 

[Genesis 1.0]

A Nanny state is by devinition a state that tells it people how to act, what to think, takes care of them from cradle to grave and treats them like "little children" which need to be protected from the big bad world. That protection can be left wing as in "give them cloth and everything they need" or right wing "police every behavior, idea and thought in case it might harm anyone". That's not freedom and that's not what the people of the US need!

But I'm eager to listen, how is it not "Big Government" to listen in to the phone conversations of citizens because one of them could do something harmful. How is it not "Big Government" to tell two people they can't have sex with each other, even though both are consenting adults, how ist it not "Big Government" to tell people what substance they can put into THEIR body? Where is the "personal freedom" in that? Are the people of the US such little children that they need a "Nanny" to prevent them from doing all this?

As for not getting it, no you're not getting that a Nanny State isn#t just a left wing option and that the GOP has its own version of the "Nanny State" developed by now. Big Government is and remains Big Government no matter what the reason.

Sometimes you have the choice between Pestilence and Cholera, And the US had enough Pestilence for now, time to try it with Cholera.

I won't bother reducing this one to ash, as I've already done that to the former and this particular post is just the regurgutation of the last. That last quote however is striking and porves the point that I've been pointing to since this all began.

You actually think that replacing one Evil for another is justified. You feel that spreading YOUR brand of hate is better than the right wing extremist spreading THEIRS. You seem to think that the Democratic failings and flaws, which are just as numerous and disgusting, are a non-issue next to the Party that you detest so very much.

You can't replace a child molester with a murderer and sleep well at night unless you're well, you, I suppose. Either way, it still doesn't make it right.

 

[Golgo-13]

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'm kinda with Chuck Norris on McCain; he's got one foot in the grave already. And yes, America IS tired of Bush, and Mccain is like Bush incarnated imo, but unfortunately there are still closed minded ppl in this country that would rather have another Bush running this country, as oppose to an African American or a woman. Sad, but true. I actually heard on a radio station that some ppl claim they'll change from Democrat to Republican, if Obama wins super Tuesday and gets the nomination, because they'd rather vote for the 'traditional looking' American leader, rather than a new faced one.

 

[LuiECuomo]

What difference does it make if we ever have a homosexual president?

 

[Golgo-13]

What difference does it make if we ever have a homosexual president?

To those in power; those that have all the money; those that control things from behind the scenes and make deals behind close doors - that will never happen.