''May the Gods give you the strength and power to bear the madness which flows through our minds.''
''Zubin, I've always imagined you as a crazy raver. The kinda guy that spends all night dancing to trance music while waving glow sticks and popping ecstasy.'' - Murderface
I'd like to vote for Michael Bloomberg. But it is appearing more and more likely he will not run. I'm not overly impressed with any of the Republican or Democratic candidates.
What's sad about this year's election is all I can think of is who I don't want to be president. But out of all the candidates running, I can't think of which of those I'd like to be president.
And it would also appear as though Ralph Nader won't be running this year. Which is a shame, but I'm sure even he is now sick of the freak shows that are our presidential elections.
I don't know who I'm voting for yet, too bad Colbert couldn't run hehe. I haven't had time to read up on who's running, and what they are for, but here are three people I am NOT voting for:
I'd like to support Obama more. But he's so lost when it comes to foreign policy. He seems like the kind of candidate that should lose now, work in the senate for four more years, get some more experience and get on another committee, then run for president again. By then his candidacy would seem a lot more appropriate to me.
Honeslty Im not sure. It always ends up not voting for the one that looks the best but more less the one that doesn't suck as bad as the other ones. I am still holding my vote up in the air.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you ever meet a hafling and a hungry dragon you dont have to outrun the dragon, you only have to outrun the hafling.
Hillary can screw herself, all she has to show for is her "experience" and then she'll just be a tainted president anyways. Obama is my choice i guess, he seems like he has the initiative to get things done, as long as he doesn't epicly fail in the process and get us into a war with the Chinese.
I'm pulling for Obama. Other than that guys, just don't vote for Hill Dog (clinton) or a right wing Christian. If a christian gets in, I'm moving to Hell.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
or a right wing Christian. If a christian gets in, I'm moving to Hell.
Seriously, I find that offensive. Canada has a christian prime minister at the moment, and he's been doing the best out of everyone we've had for awhile. He's been lowering taxes and bringing down the national debt at the same time, no idea how, but it's happening. A miracle worker perhaps;). Definately better then the corrupted liberals we've been having, scandals everywhere. So I suggest you don't say something like that again.
I'm pulling for Obama. Other than that guys, just don't vote for Hill Dog (clinton) or a right wing Christian. If a christian gets in, I'm moving to Hell.
That has got to be the most ignorant and stupidest statment -ever-... Honestly...
Anyway, I think that, if ever, a third party person has a good chance this year, mostly because the parties are so split against each other. That, and all the Dem and Repub guys SUCK.
Both Clinton and Obama voted against a bill that would make English the official language in the United States. They where just 2 of 33 senators that voted against this bill.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you ever meet a hafling and a hungry dragon you dont have to outrun the dragon, you only have to outrun the hafling.
Wtf? English isnt the official language?
I hate that the Spanish are illegally entering our country (idk like 30% of them) and they're forcing their language on US! I mean come on... at least make us speak chinese, because thats the most common language. >_<
Wtf? English isnt the official language?
I hate that the Spanish are illegally entering our country (idk like 30% of them) and they're forcing their language on US!
Everyone is forcing everyone's language on everybody. Declaring English as the official language of the U.S. is little more than a gesture. The kind of gesture that politicians make to try and reassure the public that they are doing something about the immigration problem. And doesn't that offend you? That they are trying to placate you with meaningless gestures?
Manderin is the most commong language... ok its essentually Chinese.
I know it does not have any value to it. But when you go on vacation to Virginia Beach and you have to try to use hand motions to orger food from a Burger king something is wrong. I felt like I was in Quebec.
They refuse to want to do anything about our immigration problems. Did you hear about the border patrol agents that are in jail because they returned fire to aliens carrying 700 lbs of pot into the country. The aliens got free medical care and got sent home. Free to grow more pot and come back.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you ever meet a hafling and a hungry dragon you dont have to outrun the dragon, you only have to outrun the hafling.
For the most part, that won't ever happen. Despite secularists' fears of religious-based discourse in politics, it is still mainly the secularists who are in charge of the U.S. All the displays of relgion you see in politics such as presidents saying God bless America, that's all for tradition and show.
And religious-backed initiatives that do get put into action, they often are put into action on the basis of wise policy making. Such as religious-backed efforts to fight AIDS and poverty. I'll admit that Bush put more of a religious spin than I would have liked in his speeches. Especially when he used the word crusade to describe the ideological battles that were taking place between the U.S. and Islamic militants. But such phrases like that seem to alarm just the right amount of people to put religious-based discourse back in its place.
I had a professor who wrote this book about religion in politics, saying how it was unfair the way the secularists attacked religious discorse in U.S. politics and that religious groups were not taken seriously enough. And my reaction was of indignation, at best. I'm thinking, c'mon! Religious groups may not have lots of direct influence on politics, but they're backing initiatives and candidates everywhere and contain some of the most powerful lobbying groups in the U.S. It's almost bad enough that they're as powerful as they are in my opinion. But that's where I take just enough comfort from the other politicians who are trying to run the country on a basis of prudence. Bush Sr. believed religion was bad for politics even. At least to the point of not agreeing with the way his son has used religion to help push his policies. Sure, Bush Sr. wouldn't openly criticize his son, but they way he ran government compared to his son, it was completely different. And not just different because of today's modern problems such as terrorism. But more different because there weren't as many Karl Roves back then willing to find wedge issues between Americans and use divide and conquer strategies to win elections.
''Zubin, I've always imagined you as a crazy raver. The kinda guy that spends all night dancing to trance music while waving glow sticks and popping ecstasy.'' - Murderface
What's sad about this year's election is all I can think of is who I don't want to be president. But out of all the candidates running, I can't think of which of those I'd like to be president.
And it would also appear as though Ralph Nader won't be running this year. Which is a shame, but I'm sure even he is now sick of the freak shows that are our presidential elections.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Vote:
http://www.diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17929
Cankles (aka Hillary Clinton)
Obama
Giuliani (status pending)
so there are two, potentially 3 people for you guys to not vote for.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
@siaynoq agreed
Honeslty Im not sure. It always ends up not voting for the one that looks the best but more less the one that doesn't suck as bad as the other ones. I am still holding my vote up in the air.
Might be beacuse I'm Canadian, eh?
Hillary can screw herself, all she has to show for is her "experience" and then she'll just be a tainted president anyways. Obama is my choice i guess, he seems like he has the initiative to get things done, as long as he doesn't epicly fail in the process and get us into a war with the Chinese.
--Steel :cool:
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
That has got to be the most ignorant and stupidest statment -ever-... Honestly...
Anyway, I think that, if ever, a third party person has a good chance this year, mostly because the parties are so split against each other. That, and all the Dem and Repub guys SUCK.
I hate that the Spanish are illegally entering our country (idk like 30% of them) and they're forcing their language on US! I mean come on... at least make us speak chinese, because thats the most common language. >_<
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
I know it does not have any value to it. But when you go on vacation to Virginia Beach and you have to try to use hand motions to orger food from a Burger king something is wrong. I felt like I was in Quebec.
They refuse to want to do anything about our immigration problems. Did you hear about the border patrol agents that are in jail because they returned fire to aliens carrying 700 lbs of pot into the country. The aliens got free medical care and got sent home. Free to grow more pot and come back.
And religious-backed initiatives that do get put into action, they often are put into action on the basis of wise policy making. Such as religious-backed efforts to fight AIDS and poverty. I'll admit that Bush put more of a religious spin than I would have liked in his speeches. Especially when he used the word crusade to describe the ideological battles that were taking place between the U.S. and Islamic militants. But such phrases like that seem to alarm just the right amount of people to put religious-based discourse back in its place.
I had a professor who wrote this book about religion in politics, saying how it was unfair the way the secularists attacked religious discorse in U.S. politics and that religious groups were not taken seriously enough. And my reaction was of indignation, at best. I'm thinking, c'mon! Religious groups may not have lots of direct influence on politics, but they're backing initiatives and candidates everywhere and contain some of the most powerful lobbying groups in the U.S. It's almost bad enough that they're as powerful as they are in my opinion. But that's where I take just enough comfort from the other politicians who are trying to run the country on a basis of prudence. Bush Sr. believed religion was bad for politics even. At least to the point of not agreeing with the way his son has used religion to help push his policies. Sure, Bush Sr. wouldn't openly criticize his son, but they way he ran government compared to his son, it was completely different. And not just different because of today's modern problems such as terrorism. But more different because there weren't as many Karl Roves back then willing to find wedge issues between Americans and use divide and conquer strategies to win elections.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs