|
Joe Biden for President?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Mommy420 |
I just got done watching Real Time With Bill Maher and Senator Joe Biden, from my home state DE,announced he will seek the democratic nomination for President in 2008. Since he is from my state I sure am proud. I do beleive we need a democrat in the White House again. Preferably now sooner than later, but I will wait to see what happens. Sometimes things in life have to get worse before they can get better. Lets hope some change will have a positive effect on this country, instead of the negative that is going on now here and abroad.
I also have a question. How many of you that voted Republican in the last Presidential election will jump ship and vote Democratic this time around? Im just curious. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
you need a Democrat in the White house like you need a hole in the head. it's just my opinion. who cares.
you could think of someone better than slo-jo-Biden though. Good luck with that btw.:D |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| Ive heard him speak several times on C-span. I really liked him. If he runs i'd probably vote for him |
|
|
| deprivation |
| I saw Maher's show tonight too and I think its great that Joe Biden would come on the show and contribute. I like McCain too because last week he did Jon Stewart's Daily Show too. I like politicians that seem to try to be in touch with us normal people. If only we could get Bush and Darth Cheney to come out of the Death Star. |
|
|
| Kapedan |
You sometimes I have a problem with this why cant they be normal people too? First of all, they are our leaders. Sure they are normal people..but if they act like "normal people" then why are they our leaders? Dont you think they are far above us? Also, Bush connects quite well with people, to me he does. He is a funny guy, down on earth, but I dont agree he will connect better with people by comming in shows like the Daily Show..I mean..he is our president, not Tom Cruise.
We dont need a liberal in office, if you think things are worst now..then you might wannna again when we have a liberal in office. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
We dont need a liberal in office, if you think things are worst now..then you might wannna again when we have a liberal in office. |
ya we need another Bush in the office :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Dale Gribble |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
First of all, they are our leaders. Sure they are normal people..but if they act like "normal people" then why are they our leaders? Dont you think they are far above us? Also, Bush connects quite well with people, |
Does the man put his pants on like the rest of us mere mortals? All men are equal and no man is above any others.
Yeah Bush connects well just like a lying,grinning his ass off used car salesman..... :rolleyes: |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
We dont need a liberal in office, if you think things are worst now..then you might wannna again when we have a liberal in office. |
Yeah, times sure were pretty damn terrible in the late 90's, weren't they?
As for Biden, quite honestly I can't ing stand the guy. I realize anyone is better than the lying treasonous turds in charge right now, but if there were choices to be made in the primaries my last two choices would be Biden and Hillary. Things I can't stand about the guy:
1. Grandstanding at every opportunity he gets. He had a limited amount of time to throw questions at Bush's SC nominees, and he spend 2/3 of that time talking out his ing ass, setting up his damn questions. The guy loooves hearing himself talk.
2. He's very much a part of the Washington good ol' boy DLC network that has done nothing but pay and listen to consultants that know very well how to lose elections time and again. The more these individuals become marginalized in my book, the better. They serve their constituents and represent the people only a fraction of the time while they cater to corporate $ and dip consultants way too often.
3. Case in point on #2 - the Bankruptcy Bill that got passed last year. It was pretty evident on who made out like bandits on the bill (parts were inserted to benefit the affluent who filed bankruptcy), while the rest who can't pay off their credit card debts fast enough get ed (everyone else). Of course the vast majority of P.O. Boxes from those credit card companies are in Biden's backyard in Delaware, which lobby the crap out of him every year. So needless to say, he supported the bill without blinking.
There were some other votes I didn't like about the guy on nominees, and he would often times talk out of both sides of his mouth. Perhaps he's what most consider a "typical" politician, but he will not be receiving my vote in any primary. |
|
|
| Kapedan |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Yeah, times sure were pretty damn terrible in the late 90's, weren't they?
|
Depends what you consider terrible? Terrible that Clinton didnt do much about foreign policy, he let things cut down to the wire, which lead to 9/11. Sure they were great, he was getting his **** sucked in his office ;). |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
Depends what you consider terrible? Terrible that Clinton didnt do much about foreign policy, he let things cut down to the wire, which lead to 9/11. Sure they were great, he was getting his **** sucked in his office ;). |
Right as if Bush didnt know about the attacks.CIA warned them many times but they decided to ignore it.But then again I could see why they didnt do about it I mean if it wasnt for 911 they wouldnt have been able to invade Afghanistan or Iraq.
Also what in president sits like a in jackass for 7 minutes reading childrens book when they tell him that his country is under attack? |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
Depends what you consider terrible? Terrible that Clinton didnt do much about foreign policy, he let things cut down to the wire, which lead to 9/11. Sure they were great, he was getting his **** sucked in his office ;). |
Well geez, Kap, if you GOPers hadn't allowed an investigation that originally was about Whitewater tumble down to leading about Clinton's rusty zipper and costing us taxpayers $65 million just so we can learn about Clinton's blowjob, rather than avoid distracting our President from such personal matters then perhaps he could have done more on the international front?
Partisan arguments are fun!
Oh yeah, here's some interesting history for you:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
Hmmm, certainly makes one wonder how much those GOPers really believed in national security and fighting international terrorism back then.
You can also read more here:
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm
Here's some other interesting quotes:
# Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama".
# Paul Bremer, current Civilian Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Bill Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden.
# Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Bill Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort".
Could Clinton have done more? Of course. Lots of things were occurring during that time outside of his snagged zipper in Monica's hair. The war on terrorism, although it had been around since the times of Carter, was really taking a step forward and slowly replaced the Cold War. Military bases and personel cuts led by Bush Sr.'s presidency were actually slowed down by Clinton, though he too was also making cuts where he likely shoudn't have. Intelligence and network spies were at their worse, and we were unfortunately relying mostly on second-hand intelligence through secondary sources and satellite imaging. Granted, there is no excuse for ill-preparedness, and I think the picture on Clinton doing "nothing" on the war on terrorism is very much overhyped and a slight bit of revisionist history.
Nevertheless even he has admitted he wishes he could have done more. And individuals from CIA as well as reports from the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence have all mentioned the same on Clinton.
Now, shall we discuss how incredibly neglectful Bush had been once the reins were passed over to him, or do you concede a nice healthy portion of blame is also shared on the shoulders of Dubya as well? |
|
|
|
|
