| Author |
Message |
    
Ace789nj
Citizen
Username: Ace789nj
Post Number: 296
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 8, 2006 - 1:49 pm: | 
|
Cindy Sheehan & Chavez
Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government
Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo gasoline company
Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S. government.
Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience: "Enough of imperialist aggression;
we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century."
The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan,
the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called
President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world."
Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban
dictator Fidel Castro.
Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have
a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is
using our money to achieve his goal!
The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, sole owner of Citgo gas co.
Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow
to bring down our government
 |
The SLK Effect
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1021
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 8, 2006 - 4:04 pm: |
|
no comment... |
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 118
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 8, 2006 - 6:04 pm: |
|
Cindy Sheehan has lost all credibility with me, and I'm against the war. I feel for her loss, but she lost her focus. She should be the poster girl for how not to win friends and influence people. Instead of the grieving mother who was legitmately asking why her son died, she has gone way off message and become a punch line. |
TomD
Citizen
Username: Tomd
Post Number: 370
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 12:33 am: |
|
Color me less than outraged.
Courtesy of Snopes.com
http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/citgo.asp
Claim: E-mail urges boycotting Citgo brand gasoline over remarks by Venezuela president Hugo Chávez.
Status: Multiple.
Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2006]
=======================================================================
Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government
Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo Gasoline Company Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S. government. Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience: "Enough of imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century."
The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world."
Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is using our money to achieve his goal!
The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, is the sole owner of Citgo gas company. Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government.
Why should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to take down our government? Very important. Please forward this to your friends and family. Most of them don't know that Citgo is owned by the Venezuela government.
=======================================================================
Origins: Hugo Chávez, the (twice-elected) president of Venezuela, is certainly no fan of the U.S. or the current administration, and his trading rhetorical political barbs with U.S. government officials (and others) has been common news fodder of late. (The war of words reached a new peak in August 2005, when Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested to viewers that the U.S. should assassinate Chávez.)
In that vein, the television incident referenced in the message quoted above occurred on 29 January 2006, when anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan appeared on Chavez's weekly TV broadcast, following a similar recent meeting between the Venezuelan president and entertainer Harry Belafonte:
Cindy Sheehan, who gained international fame when she camped outside President Bush's ranch in an anti-war protest, plans to pitch her tent again, Venezuela's president said Sunday as he urged activists worldwide to help bring down "the U.S. empire." Hugo Chávez, an arm around Sheehan's shoulders, told a group of activists that she had told him "she is going to put up her tent again in front of Mr. Danger's ranch." In some of his strongest recent comments aimed at Washington, Chávez condemned the Bush administration and said his audience should work toward ending U.S. dominance. "Enough already with the imperialist aggression!" Chávez said, listing countries from Panama to Iraq where the U.S. military has intervened. "Down with the U.S. empire! It must be said, in the entire world: Down with the empire!"
Sheehan also noted that singer and activist Harry Belafonte recently called Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world," and said, "I agree with him. George Bush is responsible for killing tens of thousands of innocent people."
Most recently, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeled Chávez a "challenge for democracy" and a danger to Latin America and announced the establishment of contacts with government officials in other South American countries for the purpose of creating a united front to oppose Venezuela. Chávez responded to Rice's comments in a television appearance by blowing her a screen kiss and announcing, "Don't mess with me, girl," as well as warning that he would consider suspending Venezuela's oil exports if the U.S. went "too far with the Venezuelan government." (Venezuela is the fourth-largest supplier of crude oil to the U.S., sending the states about 1.5 million barrels
daily.)
Advocating a boycott of gasoline marketed by Citgo Petroleum Corporation (which has been owned by Petróleos de Venezuela, the national oil company of Venezuela, since 1990) over political issues is problematic for a number of reasons (not least of which is the notion that threatening not to buy gasoline from someone who is threatening not to sell it to you doesn't sound like an effective ploy for either side). For one thing, although Citgo may be owned by Petróleos de Venezuela, it is a formerly American company which is still headquartered in the U.S. (in Houston, Texas), employs 4,000 people, and supplies 14,000 independent retailers with gasoline and other petroleum products — Americans with no substantive connnection to Venezuela who would be economically harmed by such an action. And, of course, as long as the global demand for oil exceeds supply, Citgo's products will continue to bring just as much money into Venezuela whether or not they're purchased by Americans.
Moreover, all of this boycott rumbling follows on the heels of a similar entreaty urging Americans to buy only Citgo brand gasoline to avoid (in part) sending more U.S. dollars to Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries:
Looking for an easy way to protest Bush foreign policy week after week? And an easy way to help alleviate global poverty? Buy your gasoline at Citgo stations.
And tell your friends.
Of the top oil producing countries in the world, only one is a democracy with a president who was elected on a platform of using his nation's oil revenue to benefit the poor. The country is Venezuela. The President is Hugo Chavez. Call him "the Anti-Bush."
Citgo is a U.S. refining and marketing firm that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Venezuela's state-owned oil company. Money you pay to Citgo goes primarily to Venezuela — not Saudi Arabia or the Middle East. There are 14,000 Citgo gas stations in the US. (Click here to find one near you.) By buying your gasoline at Citgo, you are contributing to the billions of dollars that Venezuela's democratic government is using to provide health care, literacy and education, and subsidized food for the majority of Venezuelans.
Instead of using government to help the rich and the corporate, as Bush does, Chavez is using the resources and oil revenue of his government to help the poor in Venezuela. A country with so much oil wealth shouldn't have 60 percent of its people living in poverty, earning less than $2 per day. With a mass movement behind him, Chavez is confronting poverty in Venezuela. That's why large majorities have consistently backed him in democratic elections. And why the Bush administration supported an attempted military coup in 2002 that sought to overthrow Chavez.
So this is the opposite of a boycott. Call it a BUYcott. Spread the word.
Of course, if you can take mass transit or bike or walk to your job, you should do so. And we should all work for political changes that move our country toward a cleaner environment based on renewable energy. The BUYcott is for those of us who don't have a practical alternative to filling up our cars.
So get your gas at Citgo. And help fuel a democratic revolution in Venezuela.
As we've noted in many other articles discussing various schemes regarding where and how people should purchase gasoline, the global and fungible nature of the world oil market doesn't really provide consumers with many effective opportunities to influence political issues through their buying patterns.
Last updated: 23 February 2006
|
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 1461
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 8:33 am: |
|
I wonder if that rumor started because of Hugo Chavez generous donation of heating oil to U.S. poor.
“ Practically no one in the United States knows that we've donated millions of dollars to the governorship of Louisiana, to the New Orleans Red Cross. We're now giving care to more than 5,000 victims, and now we're going to supply gasoline, freely in some cases, and with discounts in other cases, to the poorest of communities, starting with New Orleans and its surroundings.
The people of the United States should know that.
Hugo Chavez
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/International/story?id=1134098&page=3
Venezuela donates oil to poor Americans
Jan 13, 2006, 4:30 GMT
CARACAS, Venezuela (UPI) -- Venezuela donated another batch of heating oil to U.S. poor, this time pledging to send a tanker of heating crude to Maine, Globovision TV reported Thursday.
The world`s fifth-largest oil exporter said it would give poor Maine residents 8 million gallons of heating oil at a 40 percent discount.
Venezuela has already made oil donations to poor in the states of New York and Massachusetts.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has been accused by the Bush administration of trying to promote his radical brand of socialism in the region, while the leftist leader accuses White House of meddling in Venezuelan affairs and of trying to undermine his administration.
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
|
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1445
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 9:25 am: |
|
Ace, can you post these types of things in the Politics section? That's what it's there for. Thanks. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 8837
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 9:38 am: |
|
topic moved |
Paul Surovell
Supporter
Username: Paulsurovell
Post Number: 587
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:19 am: |
|
Cindy Sheehan is an average citizen who has become one of the moral leaders of our society. That her lack of political experience causes her to make an occasional faux pas takes nothing away from the essence of her mission -- which is to advocate for an end to an unecessary war based on falsehoods that continues to cause death, pain and financial loss to the American and Iraqi people.
Hugo Chavez was elected democratically by a big majority of the Venezuelan people. He wants to have good relations with the United States. He is not our enemy.
|
The SLK Effect
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1045
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:41 am: |
|
Paul-
See my post above.
-SLK |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4127
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:46 am: |
|
Paul,
You are being too kind. Compare Sheehan to the parents of Augie Schroeder. There is no comparison. Sheehan has so completely lost her way that she has forfeited any moral leadership.
If I want to convey a message to the American people, the last thing I want to do is spend time with somebody like Chavez, who, rightly or wrongly, is seen as an adversary. Right away, she has alienated a large part of the audience she needs to reach. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5306
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:58 am: |
|
So what's the faux pas about openly supporting a socialist and agrees with Belafonte that Bush is the biggest terrorist out there? It's an honestly held belief by her and many on the Left.
Perhaps it's a train of thought or ideology that you'd like to see defeated. |
steel
Citizen
Username: Steel
Post Number: 984
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 11:05 am: |
|
Chavez was E-LECT-ED, and not in some Saddam-style election but because the people of Venezuela twice gave him a huge genuine public outpouring of support. It is disingenuous to call him a "dictator" simply because he is an elected leader who hates Bush policy. Using such a false moniker only distracts from any true arguments against him.
"Democracy is messy"
-George Bush
Sheehan can say whatever she wants, whenever she wants, where ever she wants (almost, apparently she can not wear a "political" t-shirt in the capital building when Bush is speaking even though it is perfectly legal.) I suspect that she will never stop doing so.
When Sheehan is not allowed to speak her mind, that will be the time to start using words like "disgrace" and "shame".
"It's called Freedom of Speech. People are free to speak their minds even if I disagree with them. It's one of the things that makes this country so great"
-George Bush
Oh those pesky people who do not endorse the paths that Bush has taken.
Bush tries to support the overthrow of Chavez and it doesn't work. Now they all hate us. You reap what you sow.
Bush leads us to fear for 5 years, (airport searches, scouring library records, book sale records, phone and internet monitoring, bag searches at the trains, threat levels, "war on terror war on terror war on terror") and now his own republican leadership in an election ear has to listen to the fears of their own conditioned constituency and kill the Dubai deal. You reap what you sow. |
Paul Surovell
Supporter
Username: Paulsurovell
Post Number: 588
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 4:01 pm: |
|
tjohn and cjc:
Cindy Sheehan has provided great moral leadership by raising our society's awareness of the the human costs of the war in Iraq. Her personal courage has been inspirational and heroic.
I don't think Cindy has much political experience and I disagree with some of her statements, but that doesn't negate her role as a great moral leader.
The attempts to demonize Hugo Chavez -- who has never done or said anything hostile to the American people -- are similar to the anti-Chirac campaign that was launched by jingoists when the French deigned to disagree with President Bush's decision to violate the UN Charter and to launch a war of conquest based on false pretexts.
As in the case of the anti-Chirac campaign, there is no substance to the anti-Chavez campaign.
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4128
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 4:30 pm: |
|
I don't see how she qualifies for the appellation of "great" when she has so muddied her message that she has lost credibility even among those who would be otherwise inclined to support her. |
Paul Surovell
Supporter
Username: Paulsurovell
Post Number: 589
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 4:54 pm: |
|
Tjohn,
Cindy's message has some rough edges, but it's not much different than John Murtha's. When the history of the Iraq war is written, Cindy Sheehan go down as one of its heroes.
I agree that she has lost some of her broad support among the public. But overall, I think she's still regarded with great respect.
It's true that some military families have expressed resentment towards Cindy's statements, but it's also true that 72% of our troops in Iraq want us to withdraw in 2006 -- which is pretty close to Cindy's position -- and that 29% of the troops want us out immediately, which is exactly Cindy's position.
|
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 8852
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 5:03 pm: |
|
So the option seems to be buy gas from Citgo and support a South American socialist who is helping poor nations or to buy gas from ExxonMobil, which obtains their oil in part from nations that condone child slavery (camel jockeys), don't treat women equally and lack a democratic form of government.
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4129
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 5:43 pm: |
|
Paul,
I suspect you have a minority viewpoint. I can still remember that she lost a son in a war we shouldn't have started and I understand how awful that must be. But she will also be remembered as a sideshow whereas the measured responses of Murtha and the Schroeders carry much more weight.
And Chavez has nothing to do with her main point that Iraq was a mistake. |
Paul Surovell
Supporter
Username: Paulsurovell
Post Number: 590
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 7:16 pm: |
|
tjohn,
Well I certainly agree that now is the time to focus on the proposals of Murtha and the Schroeders (Families of the Fallen for Change).
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 808
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 7:20 pm: |
|
You haven't been focusing before now? I thought Kerry built his campaign on focusing on this issue. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5158
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 8:14 pm: |
|
Southerner, in case you haven't noticed, since the 2004 election more and more people are focusing on the issues, and the facts, that Mr. Surovell and others have been pointing out for a long time. |
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6929
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 8:40 pm: |
|
right, just another reason why the Dems are a joke. Americans now realize the Dems vote based on whichever way the wind blows. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5160
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 8:43 pm: |
|
I'm sorry, I don't know how you reached that conclusion from the prior statements. |
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6930
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 9:53 pm: |
|
you said:
"people are focusing on the issues,"
I say this is terrible news for Democrats. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5166
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:08 pm: |
|
I said "the issues, and the facts".
That would be terrible news for the supporters of the Administration. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 811
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:50 am: |
|
Why can't you Dems understand that the American people were focusing on this issue and they re-elected the Republicans by a nice margin (Remember, Rather about to cry on election night). If you Dems are just now focusing then that is your political mistake. After this next election what will you say? We weren't focused enough? Something tells me, you will be way to busy discussing the "ignorant masses". Again, if you agree with a lib then you conducted much critical analysis and focused really well, but if you disagree then you are simply "ignorant" and should immediately discounted. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5170
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:56 am: |
|
Yes, thank you. I read your 800 other posts which basically said the same thing.
And yes, George W. Bush won the election in 2004. But, this is now 2006. Winning the election makes him the guy in charge, but it does not automatically make all of his decisions the right ones.
Or, to put it another way, I can refer you to a quote from Bill Maher - "Bush didn't really win on his popularity last time. He won on scaring people that Kerry might do something stupid like, I don't know, sell the ports to the Arabs."
But, to make up for that last quote, I'll share something that I heard Thomas Friedman say on the radio this morning - "Democrats have to remember that something can be true, even if George Bush believes it."  |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 1725
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 9:07 am: |
|
Actually, Southerner, I think your posts can be taken as "ignorant" and discounted completely and immediately because of the the fact that you have absolutely nothing to say or add.
And enjoy it for the next few months. Come November the Republicans are losing all their seats, and George W. Bush f*cked things up so badly it'll be a wonder if a Repub ever gets elected again.
Now don't you have to get ready for rabbit season or something?
|
The SLK Effect
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1071
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 9:17 am: |
|
RL,
And where was the substance in that?
-SLK |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 813
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 3:29 pm: |
|
RL,
I thought that 2/3 of Congress were going to resign? Remeber, the Teapot Dome scandal. You should be very thankful that you live in one of the few remaining bastions of liberalism. At least you are quite insulated from the real world. I'm sure you and tulip and Foj can discuss at length why the Republicans will be swept out of office. It would be fun to hear. Please be sure to pay your taxes on time. Us red staters look forward to spending your hard earned money on illegal campaign contributions. It's a vicious cycle. I'm sure Hillary will lead you to the promised land. |
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 127
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 4:42 pm: |
|
Southerner: "Us red staters"-You live in NJ now. You're a resident of a full fledged blue state! We are happy to have you here in this bastion of liberalism. What red state did you used to reside in?
I think in November 06 this great nation will begin a move from red to purple and then to mostly blue in 08. I don't believe the Republicans will lose all their seats up for re-election in 06 per RL, but a change is on the way. I had my doubts a few months ago, but this Republican crew (White House and in Congress) is just too incompetent and corrupt.
As W and Cheney go, so will go the Republicans. Those up for re-election in 06 are trying to distance themselves from those two it isn't funny. W can't scare the voters anymore. Cheney can't say that if you vote democratic you will die (actually, he can say that and probably will, people just won't listen to him). They are losing on their issue-terror-and people's view of W as an affable, regular, honest guy has changed. They think he is a liar and a phony, which he is. That whole honesty/moral superiority bit (apparently so important in 04) has been exposed. That's going to hit the Republicans. Also, Americans are very wary of one party rule. The pendulum begins to swing back in November.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 815
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 6:03 pm: |
|
Okay betty. In case you haven't noticed W isn't going to be on a ballot and something tells me the voters will vote on local/state issues. And in case you missed it, the Repubs just delivered a load of pork last year so the home folks should be fairly happy. If Bush were running you may be correct, but he isn't. And believe me, the voters have realized the importance of honesty/moral superiority which is why they kicked the party in power for decades to the curb. I'll give you that the pendulum is swinging but it is still swinging to the right. I think the Repubs will hold power for another two decades or so. You guys ran roughshod over this country now it is our turn to overturn your socialist programs. And we are doing one drip at a time! The smart Dems can see this. |
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 129
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:56 pm: |
|
Okay Southerner. Your flawless and thorough arguments and eloquent prose have convinced me. You're right on everything as always. How could I have ever thought anything to the contrary? I apologize for being a dumb lib.
I didn't realize W wasn't going to be on the ballot in 06. Thanks for pointing that out. Is that really true? I know you can recognize sarcasm.
Clinton wasn't on the ballot in 2000 but I would say many voters were thinking of him when they cast their ballots for W and oher Republicans.
But do keep up your petty insults to every poster with a different view. Then they, like me, will come around to your point of view. |
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 130
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
Okay Southerner. Your flawless and thorough arguments and eloquent prose have convinced me. You're right on everything as always. How could I have ever thought anything to the contrary? I apologize for being a dumb lib.
I didn't realize W wasn't going to be on the ballot in 06. Thanks for pointing that out. Is that really true? I know you can recognize sarcasm.
Clinton wasn't on the ballot in 2000 but I would say many voters were thinking of him when they cast their ballots for W and oher Republicans.
But do keep up your petty insults to every poster with a different view. Then they, like me, will come around to your point of view. |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 149
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 7:39 am: |
|
I'm not passing judgement on Chavez here- I am very wary of his intentions and motives. But I'm always amazed when we react in totally kneejerk mode to any story that is critical of the US.
The story, suspect as it is, says Chavez wants to bring down the US government and end imperialism. Why shouldn't he say that? Most of the world is anti imperialist-- I'm told the US was anti imperialist at one point.
And the Bush administration has been open about opposing Chavez, backing his rivals and funding opposition groups. Pat Robertson called for the guy's assination, remember? Is there any doubt that the US is tryiong to bring down the government of Venezuala?
And by the way, isn't even more amazing that every thread here goes back to Clinton. Its like 6 degrees of Clinton. Were there rules to this game that I missed? Because, guess what, he can never be president again. |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 14684
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 7:44 am: |
|
Socialism or death! |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 81
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 9:26 am: |
|
What's the difference?
Cheers |
steel
Citizen
Username: Steel
Post Number: 987
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 9:29 am: |
|
Wasn't Clinton also in "Footloose" in '84? |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 816
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 7:39 pm: |
|
betty,
I must really get under your skin for you to post the same post twice. Listen, I'm not trying to bring any libs to my side. I don't care if you want to continue to cast your vote with a losing lot. The Dems had a great run but it is over. And the campaign theme for a Congressional race to be centered around a President in a 2nd term is a loser for the Dems, but they have become great at picking loser themes lately. I'm not hatin, I'm just pointing out the political facts. After the election, and the results show a Republican House and Senate, I will gladly accept your apology. I've been right a whole lot more than I've been wrong. Or has Rove/Cheney been indicted, or 2/3's of Congress impeached, or is Kerry President, or is the SC not squarely in conservative hands? You may disagree with the outcomes but I've been pretty good at predicting the outcomes. Here's one for you. Hillary will not be the Democratic candidate in 2008. Repeat, I am predicting Hillary will not be the Democratic candidate. You can call me names but I'll be right on the money.
And lastly, Republicans weren't thinking of Clinton in 2000. We know how to move on. We were thinking of Gore. I'll give you the benefit that any Republican would have won that election. GW just happened to be in the right place at the right time. (And of course, whenever I mention Gore I have to mention that he couldn't even win his home state! Now that was great Democratic political strategy.) |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 150
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 8:53 pm: |
|
Hey Steel:
Clinton's VP was Gore
Gore was Tommy Lee Jones' roomate at Harvard
Tommy Lee Jones was in JFK with Kevin Bacon |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5180
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 10:27 am: |
|
Quote:And lastly, Republicans weren't thinking of Clinton in 2000. We know how to move on.
I guess that's why Republicans hardly ever mention him any more (especially on this message board). |
Brokeback Straw
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 6939
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 10:36 am: |
|
Bill Clinton married a jerk. |
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 131
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 11:37 am: |
|
Southerner: I must really get under your skin. I try in my initial posts to maintain a level of decorum. In every one of your responses (to me and others) you seem to be really angry and insecure. I'm laughing right now because I can't wait to see your response, and I know exactly what it will be.
True to form, you start off your post with another petty insult about my post entering twice. In fact, when I saw that had happened, I knew you wouldn't ignore it and that I had left myself wide open for the insult. I haven't been on this board long but you are as predictable as the tide.
When did I ever say Hillary was going to be the nominee or that the dems would win the House and Senate in 06, or that Rove/Cheney would be indicted? Not just my post above, but in any post?
I said this country will begin a move from red to purple starting in 06. That is because of the incompetence of the republican leadership-primarily Bush and Cheney. Wait, I forgot, they aren't on the ballot in 06 and will have no influence on the voters.
You're right again. I guess Bill Clinton wasn't on the mind of "many voters" (not republicans, as you read into the post) when they cast their ballots in 2000. How could I have thought that 8 years of his presidency and the scandals might have influenced voters? Please, once again, accept my heartfelt apology for making such a dumb statement.
The dems will make GAINS in 06. When that happens, I don't expect or want an apology, and I won't need one. Do keep up the insults, anger and the insecurity. It's one reason I enjoy this Board so much. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 818
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 1:41 pm: |
|
Apology accepted. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page