Perhaps...but I take the "high view" of man and would prefer to trust that hopefully something....anything other than scum might float to the top!!!! I call 'em as I see 'em and I see NOTHIN but scum there these days!!!!

 

There IS an element of truth to what you are saying; the problem is that The U.S. is largely responsible for the "Scum" that is in power over there.

Who put Saddam in office?? We did!!

Who funded, armed, and trained The Taliban?? We did??

Who did we tale on as allies in battling The Taliban?? The Northern Alliance!!

Who hated us every bit as much as The Taliban?? The Northern Alliance!!

We invaded Iraq, supposedly because of Saddam's WMD's, and because of his ties to Al Quida; there was a minor problem, though. There is no evidence that Iraq had any WMD's, there is no evidence that Saddam had any ties to Al Quida, and there was absolutely NO connection between Iraq and the attacks of 9-11.

Who DID help fund the terrorists?? Saudi Arabia!! What have we done to retaliate?? Bought more oil from them!!

The sordid web that we have helped weave just gets worse!!

The attacks of 9-11 were no more a surprise to the U.S. Government than were the attacks on Pearl Harbor back in 1941!!

 

I agree, Useless.

that is why I believe if we had a chance to 'start over' we would eventually end up with the same thing. The same stuff would flow to the top. I mean, why wouldn't it?

If we have 'true' leadears today, where are they? why aren't they coming to the surface? If they were true leaders, they would float to the surface, without us having to remove the current leaders.

I think politicians, many of them, TRY to good leaders, and fail. It is a hard job.

 

The irony- Before we attacked Iraq, there was no connection to Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. After we attacked Iraq, Al Qaeda In Iraq is formed and so begins the infamous beheadings.

 

This is why I am so pro gun. If I ever think about voting for a Democrat some one needs to put a bullet in my head.

 

To be more accurate I should be saying liberal. Even though liberal and democrat are almost to the point of being synonymous, there are some good Democrats.

 

How about the independents?

Do they have anybody 'talking' yet?

 

[quote="HorsePower"]How about the independents?

Even if there was an indepedent candidate, how would h/she raise enough money to stage a viable campaign??

Even if an independent was somehow elected, what political base would he/she have to operae from??

 

these are good questions.

and yet, every election seems to have at least one independent, knowingly 'wasting' their money. I don't think they ever think they can really win.

ok, maybe Perrot thought he was gettin' close before, but Nader? come on


sometimes I wonder if they would have a hidden agenda besides really running for president:
- trying to steal votes from the reps and dems?
- trying to win more publicity for the independents?
- just being plain bored, or maybe stupid?

:?:

 

Here is what happens, say Kerry would run again, really having no chance to win. They go around and raise all this money, they only spend half of what they raised. They cannot use the money for their own personal use but the can donate it to some one else. So then say you have some front runners in their own party that have a viable change to when the presidency. So then Kerry donates 2 million dollars to (say for instance) Obama's campaign and Obama wins, well now Kerry might want something something down the road in his favor. So now the president owes Kerry a favor because Kerry did something for him. They also can use the campaigns just to keep their names and face in the news like Jackson and Sharpton.

People run knowing they don't have a chance to win but when they run they have a pretty big expense account at their disposal but they can use the money to gain leverage or favors in their elected position for personal agendas. You here alot about campaign reform and who they can take money from and what they use it for but they can burn millions on presidential elections.




Something to think about......... Minimum wage.

I have been searching the the news sites and not finding much about this. Speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi (D) blows this bill thru the house but amended in the bill that it would not effect Samoa America, which all other bills include Samoa America i.e. stem cell reserch. In Samoa America you have Starkiss Tuna which is owned by Del Monte which is located in San Fransico, which happens to be Nancy Pelosi district. Starkiss employees about 5,000 people (most paid minimum wage). Wonder what favors are being done here? Pelosi ran on honesty,integrity.......

hmmmmmmmmm. do you think there might be more to the story?