She would get as far as the nearest All you can eat buffet. She is way too liberal, and is a man hater. Wonder if she would choose rosie odonnell as her running mate.
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
don't call me dear, hon.Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: moshquerade
finally a civil response.Originally posted by: Ilmater
Yes! I got nominated for something!Originally posted by: moshquerade
i wouldn't vote for someone just because she is a woman.
you've been nominated for King Jerk today.
Seriously, this is just a sore subject with me. I can't stand all the people - and based on what you've said here, you are included in that list - that base their votes on one thing and forego all other issues. Things such as "They're the most pro-life" or "It's a girl!" It just drives me nuts.
And yes, it does seem like you're stretching REALLY far to try and assume that since people have found flaws with all the Presidents and all the Presidents have been men that we need to let a woman try. I'm not against a woman President, but I am against voting for women just because they're not men.
This might come as quite a shock to you, but there's probably a reason you're confronted with so many "less than civil" responses...
Look within, dear.
if you will look i do retaliate, but rarely initiate.
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
i was with you until the last line.
forget the pie. i'll bet i could get you to make me a sandwich.
[/quote]
I have no problem making you a sandwich......someone has to feed all these women trying to be men
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
I have no problem making you a sandwich......someone has to feed all these women trying to be men
[/quote]who is trying to be a man?
meltdown75
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2004
- 37,548
- 7
- 81
i don't support her - i really don't like the self-righteous i'm-famous-so-all-of-a-sudden-i-can-change-the-world type. stick to what you do best - which is run your little show and give cars away, etc.
sadly, i think she would do very well in a presidential race. if the first woman in office is a black woman, well... we've come a lot farther than i thought.
sadly, i think she would do very well in a presidential race. if the first woman in office is a black woman, well... we've come a lot farther than i thought.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,599
- 1,001
- 126
I have no problem making you a sandwich......someone has to feed all these women trying to be men
[/quote]
What about the men trying to be men? Who is going to feed you...er I mean them?
who is trying to be a man?Originally posted by: moshquerade
I have no problem making you a sandwich......someone has to feed all these women trying to be men
[/quote]
im just playing.....I have no problems with a female or anybody trying to be president granted that they have the qualifications......
but Oprah? c'mon.....shes just a big PR machine. Its hard to believe her act over and over.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,599
- 1,001
- 126
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: moshquerade
finally a civil response.Originally posted by: Ilmater
Yes! I got nominated for something!Originally posted by: moshquerade
i wouldn't vote for someone just because she is a woman.
you've been nominated for King Jerk today.
Seriously, this is just a sore subject with me. I can't stand all the people - and based on what you've said here, you are included in that list - that base their votes on one thing and forego all other issues. Things such as "They're the most pro-life" or "It's a girl!" It just drives me nuts.
And yes, it does seem like you're stretching REALLY far to try and assume that since people have found flaws with all the Presidents and all the Presidents have been men that we need to let a woman try. I'm not against a woman President, but I am against voting for women just because they're not men.
This might come as quite a shock to you, but there's probably a reason you're confronted with so many "less than civil" responses...
Look within, dear.
Because of all the women hating men/boys here?
squirrel dog
Diamond Member
- Oct 10, 1999
- 5,564
- 48
- 91
IMHO, America isn't ready for a black or woman chief, and Oprah make a poor choice because of her diatribe rhetoric.
It is true that the last few presidency candidates & the current president aren?t any where near perfect, therefore Oprah have a slim chance if more than 1/2 of the population are blacks and are dissatisfied house wives.
It is true that the last few presidency candidates & the current president aren?t any where near perfect, therefore Oprah have a slim chance if more than 1/2 of the population are blacks and are dissatisfied house wives.
You have to blame the entire party that Kerry headed, because they contribute to his speech and policies.
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: moshquerade
finally a civil response.Originally posted by: Ilmater
Yes! I got nominated for something!Originally posted by: moshquerade
i wouldn't vote for someone just because she is a woman.
you've been nominated for King Jerk today.
Seriously, this is just a sore subject with me. I can't stand all the people - and based on what you've said here, you are included in that list - that base their votes on one thing and forego all other issues. Things such as "They're the most pro-life" or "It's a girl!" It just drives me nuts.
And yes, it does seem like you're stretching REALLY far to try and assume that since people have found flaws with all the Presidents and all the Presidents have been men that we need to let a woman try. I'm not against a woman President, but I am against voting for women just because they're not men.
This might come as quite a shock to you, but there's probably a reason you're confronted with so many "less than civil" responses...
Look within, dear.
Because of all the women hating men/boys here?
Hey, I'm just waiting for my pie
.
Originally posted by: moshquerade
don't call me dear, hon.Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: moshquerade
finally a civil response.Originally posted by: Ilmater
Yes! I got nominated for something!Originally posted by: moshquerade
i wouldn't vote for someone just because she is a woman.
you've been nominated for King Jerk today.
Seriously, this is just a sore subject with me. I can't stand all the people - and based on what you've said here, you are included in that list - that base their votes on one thing and forego all other issues. Things such as "They're the most pro-life" or "It's a girl!" It just drives me nuts.
And yes, it does seem like you're stretching REALLY far to try and assume that since people have found flaws with all the Presidents and all the Presidents have been men that we need to let a woman try. I'm not against a woman President, but I am against voting for women just because they're not men.
This might come as quite a shock to you, but there's probably a reason you're confronted with so many "less than civil" responses...
Look within, dear.
if you will look i do retaliate, but rarely initiate.
Sorry, hun.
Anyway, you said [paraphrased] "the men have sucked so far, so let's give a woman a chance"
I'm really sorry, but that's an incredibly ignorant way to approach this. You say you wouldn't vote for a woman just because she's a woman, yet your previous statement, as well as your other posts, clearly indicate that you would. The commonality among bad politicians is that they're POLITICIANS... not that they're men. I can name plenty of equally corrupt and despicible female politicians, but I have no illusions that they were terrible simply because they were womem. That's called GENERALIZING, and is thought of as an ignorant line of thinking.
I don't know why you have something against men in general, all I know is that, based on your posts, you do. All pie joking aside, you should have that looked at. It's probably a fairly lonely life to lead. I know women (2) like yourself and I know men (3) like yourself... I associate with neither because both are equally intolerant and prejudiced. All 5 of these people are miserable and alone because they can't interact with the opposite sex in any functional way. One of the women's fathers cheated on her mother. She's hated all men ever since. I don't know the story about the other woman. One of the men's fathers beat his mother and treated him and his brothers like royalty. His opinion of women is that they're cooks and punching bags. While these people have been raised, to a certain extent, to think the way they do, they shirk any personal responsibility for their own thinking and actions. Most of their problems are typically blamed on the actions of the other sex. It's quite sad.
The thing that burns me about people like that - man or woman - is that they're so blind to their own hate for the other sex. They fail to see that they are EXACTLY what they hate about the opposite sex. If it weren't so offensive to the rest of us, it would be hysterical!
Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Not to mention that if he were the president we'd actually have to see him every now and then. Honestly, when was the last time anyone saw Cheney? I'm not even sure he exists. I think he's some super advanced holograph or something
Remember he was on tv in the katrina wake, some guy walked by as he was on tv and told him to go f himself. standby for link...
SMOGZINN
Lifer
- Jun 17, 2005
- 14,359
- 4,640
- 136
Emancipation was not a major cause of the civil war. Tariffs were the thing that caused the South to secede. Lincoln had made many assurances that he did not intend to abolish slavery and would enforce Fugitive Slave Laws. Even after the war was started Lincoln did not abolish slavery, but waited almost 2 years. When he did announce the Emancipation Proclamation, he did it for military reasons, not for moral ones. Even then it applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, and exempted states that had stayed loyal, and any states that were already under Union control.
The American Civil War was about power between the states, not civil liberties.
And yes, I do think that the complaints against Lincoln are valid. Lincoln broke The Union because he wished to buy votes with the more populous northeastern states by applying tariffs that hurt only the southern states. His party made any type of compromise impossible because they had decided that they could win any election with out the support of the far less populous southern states.
Emancipation could have been reached with out a war. Lincoln and his Republican party is what made the war necessary. In the end they broke the balance of state rights and we are still living with that today.
Do these statements make me a racist? No, I would have supported the abolishment of slavery no matter what it cost. I would have also supported the succession of the southern states because the federal government had failed in its role as a fair arbiter between the states by taxing some states to hold down their economic influence on the rest of the nation.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter