Obama Just Knocked It Out Of The Park - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

TheDoc · 03-18-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Oh, so he is old. Probably compared to you Obama is old too.

WTF does that have to do with change?

McCain is to old.. and he has cancer. So a vote for McCain is a vote for his vice president to be president.

ninavain · 03-18-2008, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

There have been lots of candidates over the years that got young people excited about the process. Nothing new about that.

What will that do for the economy or anything else for that matter?

Oh really, please name some

ninavain · 03-18-2008, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

I'm so sick of this argument that says that because Obama hasn't wrapped up the nomination yet it means he isn't a strong candidate.

On the contrary, the fact that he's still in this proves what a strong candidate he is.

Hillary Clinton had all of the money, all of the establishment support, all of the endorsements, 200+ superdelegates in her pocket before the first votes were cast, and a former president campaigning for her every day....a former president who left office with a 60%+ approval rating (and much higher than that among democrats)

Hillary Clinton had all of the advantages that Walter Mondale and Al Gore had when running for the democratic nomination, yet SHE hasn't been able to close the deal. A candidate with that much establishment support and name recognition should have closed the deal on Super Tuesday.
The Clinton campaign actually believed it would be over by Super Tuesday, they spent all of their money and had no strategy in place for the primaries and caucuses that took place after that.

The fact that she, who was 20+ points ahead in the national polls as recently as two months ago, wasn't able to wrap this up against an insurgent candidate goes to show what a weak candidate and polarizing figure Hillary is.
The fact that Obama has been ahead of her in pledged delegates ever since the first vote was cast in Iowa, despite all of his disadvantages (running against what was practically an incumbents campaign) shows what a strong candidate he is.

well said

ADL Colin · 03-18-2008, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

did not read that speech, must have worked from an outline, he was looking
everywhere while talking.

.

This was at the beginning of the transcript.
"(CBS) The following are the remarks prepared for delivery by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama on March 18, 2008 in Philadelphia. "

Looks to me like he was looking at two teleprompters; possibly three. Reading his speech. I compared to a partial youtube clip and he deviated by misreading one of the words and covered it up really well by saying "and (original word)". But nearly all verbatim of the "prepared for delivery" transcript.

escorpio · 03-18-2008, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninavain

Oh really, please name some

Are you new? Just about every democratic candidate in my lifetime has made the "youth vote" claim.

CosmicTang · 03-18-2008, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

Are you new? Just about every democratic candidate in my lifetime has made the "youth vote" claim.

true, but how many have delivered it?

ADL Colin · 03-18-2008, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninavain

Oh really, please name some

Don't have to go back that far. Bill Clinton's appearances on MTV and Arsenio were said to have "energized young voters"

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

It amazes me how hateful some people are....if Obama offered to make baddog Secretary of State he would still talk shit about him and dis him every chance he got.

Why can't people be reasonable at least?

I'm a dyed in the sackcloth liberal, I supported Paul Tsongas, Bill Bradley, John Edwards (in 2004) and now Obama, but I'm still willing to admit that McCain has been great on issues like campaign finance reform and earmarks during his tenure in the Senate.

I'm willing to admit that George W Bush has done more for the continent of Africa than any president in history and he should be applauded for it.

Obama just gave an incredible speech on race in America. It was a brutally honest take on race relations in this country that resonated with black and white people alike. It was an historic moment.

Why for the love of god can't you just admit that?

THIS sort of bickering is one of the reasons that I love Obama....he's willing to fight for what he believes in without demonizing the other side. He realizes there are smart people out there who disagree with him, and he doesn't have to belittle them or sling mud at them in order to make his point.
THAT is the kind of change America needs. One where people can disagree with a war and not be accused of being unpatriotic or accused of not supporting our troops. One where people can say our health care system is broken and needs drastic reforms without being called a socialist. One where people can be pro-choice and not be told that they want to kill babies.

If you want 4-8 more years of mud-slinging, gridlock, and demonizing people who disagree with you, then vote for someone else. If you'd like to see the end of that and the start of an honest intellectual debate on the issues the country faces, then vote for Obama.

This little bit intrigues me:

Quote:

THAT is the kind of change America needs.

There are two problems with your statement.

The first is that Obama doesn't actually appear to bring such change. Sure, he talks about it, but with a bit of research you'd know that his campaign has been engaging in things like deceptive mailings, just like the other campaigns. Talking about change, obviously, is not the same as actual change.

More important, however, is the second problem. The biggest issue being faced by the US right now is not a lack of positive, inspiring politicians. It's a huge economic crisis, the likes of which probably has not been seen in decades. Inspiring speeches will not solve this issue.

What's needed right now is competent governing. Obama's underwhelming record in congress, unfortunately, casts doubt on his ability to do just that. He has star power, yes. But is he competent where it really matters? Nobody knows.

escorpio · 03-18-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

true, but how many have delivered it?

Are you asking what dems have won the election in my lifetime? JFK, LBJ, Carter and Clinton. I was too young to remember the first two.

Why do people act like it's a BFD that Obama is going to deliver the youth vote? The dems have ALWAYS had the youth vote.

Sarah_Jayne · 03-18-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADL Colin

Don't have to go back that far. Bill Clinton's appearances on MTV and Arsenio were said to have "energized young voters"

Every time I see a candidate on a talk show I get flashes of a saxophone.

I very much remember him hitting the 'youth vote'. I was in high school the first time and college the second and he had that base.

To me at times watching this election from a bit of a distance it sometimes feels like Obama is playing Hillary at her husband's game and doing it better.

Of course when my fire fox spell check accepts 'Obama' as a correctly spelled word I will know he really has made it.

ADL Colin · 03-18-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

true, but how many have delivered it?

Difficult to even analyze as the voting age wasn't lowered to 18 until 1972. The 18-21 age group voted pretty well that year - no doubt partly due to all the exposure - and then slipped from there for the most part.

I would bet that "Rock the Vote" has convinced more young people to vote than any one candidate.

Telly · 03-18-2008, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

Then you should probably start backing Clinton. Obama doesn't stand a chance.

If Clinton wins then voting doesn't seem worth it. Then again I'm in Hawaii and our votes mean shit.

CosmicTang · 03-18-2008, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

Are you asking what dems have won the election in my lifetime? JFK, LBJ, Carter and Clinton. I was too young to remember the first two.

Why do people act like it's a BFD that Obama is going to deliver the youth vote? The dems have ALWAYS had the youth vote.

Not asking that at all. Nor am I disputing that Dems generally win the majority of the youth vote. Simply winning the majority of the young vote is not 'delivering' it.

I'm talking about getting numbers to the polls and participating and showing the passion that only young people can. Getting them involved in the process and feeling like they really have a stake in the system instead of the stereotypical apathy that's always associated with them.

Fletch XXX · 03-18-2008, 01:25 PM

The problem with speeches these days is the people mouthing the words didnt have shit to do with writing the speech.

Fuck words, I believe in ACTION.

Nikki_Licks · 03-18-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

2 piles of shit hugging each other!

Drake · 03-18-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

Are you asking what dems have won the election in my lifetime? JFK, LBJ, Carter and Clinton. I was too young to remember the first two.

Why do people act like it's a BFD that Obama is going to deliver the youth vote? The dems have ALWAYS had the youth vote.

In this election youth have come out in record numbers to exercise their right to vote. Isn't this basically indisputable at this point? Maybe the numbers will dwindle as we go forward, but it's started off stronger than anything seen before.

escorpio · 03-18-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

Not asking that at all. Nor am I disputing that Dems generally win the majority of the youth vote. Simply winning the majority of the young vote is not 'delivering' it.
I'm talking about getting numbers to the polls and participating and showing the passion that only young people can. Getting them involved in the process and feeling like they really have a stake in the system instead of the stereotypical apathy that's always associated with them.

If you don't win the election it really doesn't matter how passionate you made the kids feel.

baddog · 03-18-2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayla_SquareTurtle

I don't know, something about Obama... when he talks, I just don't believe him. He comes across as a liar. It's purely a gut feeling but it really bothers me. Of course we all know Bush lies through his teeth but somehow he at least seems like he believes his BS as it comes through his lips.

Has always been a matter of the best liar wins.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 01:30 PM

It should concern anybody that McCain has aligned himself and his policies with a person who has been voted as the worst President in history, and yet he still stands a chance to win.

baddog · 03-18-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninavain

Oh really, please name some

Read the thread.

CosmicTang · 03-18-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

If you don't win the election it really doesn't matter how passionate you made the kids feel.

I disagree. Motivating a generation to get involved is huge no matter what the outcome. Many might stay involved long past this election cycle. That's even bigger.

baddog · 03-18-2008, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

The dems have ALWAYS had the youth vote.

Quoted for truth.

baddog · 03-18-2008, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashpimps

If Clinton wins then voting doesn't seem worth it. Then again I'm in Hawaii and our votes mean shit.

Precisely why McCain has this won.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch XXX

The problem with speeches these days is the people mouthing the words didnt have shit to do with writing the speech.

Fuck words, I believe in ACTION.

Time constraints essentially prohibit this. Presidents and candidates can't spend days ironing out speeches while campaigning, or reviewing legislation, or meeting with public figures, and flying all over the world etc. The days of Lincoln in the 19th century when politics was slower and there was no mass media are long gone and have been for decades now.

TheSenator · 03-18-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

Baddog is old skweel and would never understand.

I rather be inspired and believe.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicTang

I disagree. Motivating a generation to get involved is huge no matter what the outcome. Many might stay involved long past this election cycle. That's even bigger.

Obama is getting people interested in politics for all the wrong reasons. Campaigns like his, which excel in marketing but lack in substance, change the political arena into something like "American Idol: The Political Edition".

People are choosing an idol, not policies. The success of this campaign will both stimulate future politicians to do the same and teach voters to expect inspirational talks rather than sound policies.

Of course, this is a process which started a long time ago, and has been accelerating ever since television became prominent as a political campaigning tool. Still, it's hardly something to be happy about.

baddog · 03-18-2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSenator

Baddog is old skweel and would never understand.

I rather be inspired and believe.

You are clueless. I have been political before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eye.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Time constraints essentially prohibit this. Presidents and candidates can't spend days ironing out speeches while campaigning, or reviewing legislation, or meeting with public figures, and flying all over the world etc. The days of Lincoln in the 19th century when politics was slower and there was no mass media are long gone and have been for decades now.

Candidates still have the option of acquiring a strong legislative record and extensive knowledge of the most important political issues before deciding to run for president.

Obama, however, clearly chose another path.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

Obama is getting people interested in politics for all the wrong reasons. Campaigns like his, which excel in marketing but lack in substance, change the political arena into something like "American Idol: The Political Edition".

People are choosing an idol, not policies. The success of this campaign will both stimulate future politicians to do the same and teach voters to expect inspirational talks rather than sound policies.

Of course, this is a process which started a long time ago, and has been accelerating ever since television became prominent as a political campaigning tool. Still, it's hardly something to be happy about.

False, people are choosing based on character and policies. Obama and Clinton are virtually identical in policies (the substance), so what people are doing is choosing between the person they like better or feel will live up to their promises (the character).

Drake · 03-18-2008, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

Candidates still have the option of acquiring a strong legislative record and extensive knowledge of the most important political issues before deciding to run for president.

Obama, however, clearly chose another path.

It's not rocket science, and a guy from a broken home who was able to excel and obtain a law degree from Harvard and become a Senator can probably handle it. If his heart is in the right place (those who know him personally probably have insight), and his speeches express what he really believes, and his political track record (albeit short) is consistent with both, and he's running against a polarizing candidate (Hillary) and a stay-the-course candidate (McCain), I see no reason why he shouldn't run.

escorpio · 03-18-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

...he's running against a polarizing candidate (Hillary)

Obama is also a polarizing candidate and if elected would easily be the most polarizing president we've ever had.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

False, people are choosing based on character and policies. Obama and Clinton are virtually identical in policies (the substance), so what people are doing is choosing between the person they like better or feel will live up to their promises (the character).

They are choosing based on perceived character, yes. And indeed, they are much alike in policies.

The main difference lies in something that is another rather important part of substance, though: time spent acquiring political experience and knowledge.

Hillary spent her time in the Senate buried to the neck in legislative issues - doing the work senators are supposed to do. Obama, on the other hand, spent his time in the Senate working on his public image, basically campaigning for an eventual presidential bid already.

You are right. People are choosing which person they like better. Just like many people did in the 2000 election.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

It's not rocket science, and a guy from a broken home who was able to excel and obtain a law degree from Harvard and become a Senator can probably handle it. If his heart is in the right place (those who know him personally probably have insight), and his speeches express what he really believes, and his political track record (albeit short) is consistent with both, and he's running against a polarizing candidate (Hillary) and a stay-the-course candidate (McCain), I see no reason why he shouldn't run.

No, it's not rocket science. I'd say it's quite a bit harder than rocket science. Rocket scientists, after all, tend to have extensive knowledge of a single subject. Presidents, on the other hand, have to be knowledgeable about economics, international relations, legislation, etc.

"It's not rocket science, he can probably handle it." Does that really sound like a good justification for making someone the single most powerful person in the whole world to you?

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by escorpio

Obama is also a polarizing candidate and if elected would easily be the most polarizing president we've ever had.

Lincoln is probably the most polarizing president we've ever had. He oversaw a bloody civil war.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

They are choosing based on perceived character, yes. And indeed, they are much alike in policies.

The main difference lies in something that is another rather important part of substance, though: time spent acquiring political experience and knowledge.

Hillary spent her time in the Senate buried to the neck in legislative issues - doing the work senators are supposed to do. Obama, on the other hand, spent his time in the Senate working on his public image, basically campaigning for an eventual presidential bid already.

You are right. People are choosing which person they like better. Just like many people did in the 2000 election.

Experience is only worthwhile if one learns from it. Bush has had plenty of political experience and where has it gotten the nation?

tony286 · 03-18-2008, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Precisely why McCain has this won.

if they economy is in the toilet,he wont win.Also we keep forgetting the gunsights havent really been aimed at him yet.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

No, it's not rocket science. I'd say it's quite a bit harder than rocket science. Rocket scientists, after all, tend to have extensive knowledge of a single subject. Presidents, on the other hand, have to be knowledgeable about economics, international relations, legislation, etc.

"It's not rocket science, he can probably handle it." Does that really sound like a good justification for making someone the single most powerful person in the whole world to you?

That's what advisors are for. A President is not an island. The President's vision, beliefs, and judgement are what guides which policies and actions he is likely to take. He has credentialed people around him giving him the pros and cons of every decision, he weighs it, puts in his two cents worth, and goes with what is consistent with his beliefs. Regarding Obama in particular, his plans for the economy, international relations, and legislation are all available just like it is for every other candidate.

The single most powerful person is a double edged sword because that power has checks and balances and can be vetoed.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Experience is only worthwhile if one learns from it. Bush has had plenty of political experience and where has it gotten the nation?

Bush was voted in based on the idea, among many, that he was a likable guy, that the job wasn't rocket science, and that he could probably handle it. Now where have I heard that before?

Obama has chosen not to spend his time in the Senate learning the boring, technical details of legislation, but rather building up his own popularity. That does not bode well for his desire and ability to learn.

escorpio · 03-18-2008, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Lincoln is probably the most polarizing president we've ever had. He oversaw a bloody civil war.

I'm afraid Obama would give him some serious competition, if elected.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

That's what advisors are for. A President is not an island. The President's vision, beliefs, and judgement are what guides which policies and actions he is likely to take. He has credentialed people around him giving him the pros and cons of every decision, he weighs it, puts in his two cents worth, and goes with what is consistent with his beliefs. Regarding Obama in particular, his plans for the economy, international relations, and legislation are all available just like it is for every other candidate.

The single most powerful person is a double edged sword because that power has checks and balances and can be vetoed.

That's what advisers are for, indeed. And how is someone who has not taken the effort to get to know the murky, boring, technical details of the issues supposed to choose the right advisers, and choose the right advice?

Obama is surrounded by competent people, yes. Those competent people will often give him conflicting advice. He doesn't actually have two cents to put in, so choosing the right advice over the wrong advice is a matter of sheer luck.

Once again: Bush. Bush had advisers, but little knowledge of his own. And look how well that turned out.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

Bush was voted in based on the idea, among many, that he was a likable guy, that the job wasn't rocket science, and that he could probably handle it. Now where have I heard that before?

Obama has chosen not to spend his time in the Senate learning the boring, technical details of legislation, but rather building up his own popularity. That does not bode well for his desire and ability to learn.

Bush was voted in because he had experience as Governor of Texas (I think he was pretty successful at it too), had experience in business, was the son of a former President, came from money and influence, and was likable enough to have a majority vote for him.

Obama and Bush are apples and oranges. Obama's entire life is one of a desire to learn and help. If it wasn't he never would have finished high let alone Harvard law school and then into politics. He's obviously ambitious (this could be good and bad), and I'm not saying he'd make a good President. All I'm saying is that I think his bid makes sense.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

That's what advisers are for, indeed. And how is someone who has not taken the effort to get to know the murky, boring, technical details of the issues supposed to choose the right advisers, and choose the right advice?

Obama is surrounded by competent people, yes. Those competent people will often give him conflicting advice. He doesn't actually have two cents to put in, so choosing the right advice over the wrong advice is a matter of sheer luck.

Once again: Bush. Bush had advisers, but little knowledge of his own. And look how well that turned out.

Anybody who has attended law school is familiar with murky, boring, technical details. Law school is nothing but technical laborious detail. Lawyers routinely come across conflicing advice and statements and it is their job to make sense of it and go with the 'right' decision. This wouldn't be something new for Obama.

Phoenix · 03-18-2008, 02:27 PM

its fun to watch the same people bat their heads against the wall over and over

cykoe6 · 03-18-2008, 02:38 PM

Quote:

I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

Nice to see him throw his Grandmother who raised under the bus trying to get elected.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Bush was voted in because he had experience as Governor of Texas (I think he was pretty successful at it too), had experience in business, was the son of a former President, came from money and influence, and was likable enough to have a majority vote for him.

Obama and Bush are apples and oranges. Obama's entire life is one of a desire to learn and help. If it wasn't he never would have finished high let alone Harvard law school and then into politics. He's obviously ambitious (this could be good and bad), and I'm not saying he'd make a good President. All I'm saying is that I think his bid makes sense.

Pretty much everyone knew Gore was far more knowledgeable about the issues than Bush. In terms of knowledge and experience, Gore was far more suitable than Bush. Based on those things alone, Gore would have won without a problem. The conservative base, while very significant, would by itself not have been enough to deliver the victory to Bush.

The reason he won was likability. Moderates could identify more with the guy posing as a "regular Joe" than with a born bureaucrat like Gore.

As for Obama... his entire life is one of a very strong ambition. Ambition, coupled with intelligence and charisma, is more than enough to ensure success. No desire to help or learn is needed for that.

That is not to say that Obama does not have a desire to help. I'm sure he does. About his desire to learn, however, I'm less sure. More importantly, I am rather unsure about how good of an idea it is not to spend significant time learning the details of the trade before running for president, instead of planning to learn them after being voted in.

Like you, I am unsure whether he'd make a competent president. Looking at the current US economy, that worries me. When the economy is failing, taking large risks seems like a rather bad idea to me.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Anybody who has attended law school is familiar with murky, boring, technical details. Law school is nothing but technical laborious detail. Lawyers routinely come across conflicing advice and statements and it is their job to make sense of it and go with the 'right' decision. This wouldn't be something new for Obama.

Familiar with murky, boring, technical details? Yes. Familiar with the relevant murky, boring, technical details? No.

Being a senator was the perfect opportunity to learn about the relevant details. Instead, he chose to spend his time on other things.

Drake · 03-18-2008, 02:44 PM

Very good points Libertine. I guess we'll see what happens and cross our fingers for the best.

Libertine · 03-18-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

Very good points Libertine. I guess we'll see what happens and cross our fingers for the best.

Thanks.

I'd like to add, though, that I would love to see him as president - 4 or 8 years from now, after he's gained more experience in the Senate, and has proven himself to be a competent legislator as well as an inspiring and charismatic personality.

ninavain · 03-18-2008, 02:51 PM

The TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

slapass · 03-18-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

It should concern anybody that McCain has aligned himself and his policies with a person who has been voted as the worst President in history, and yet he still stands a chance to win.

The dems are giving it them by only putting up really weak candidates. I am not anti women or anti black but lets face it there are folks that are. Add in hilary's past and Obama's lack of one and crap, the republicans actually have a chance.

03-18-2008, 01:25 PM	#64
Fletch XXX GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!! Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: that 504 Posts: 60,840	The problem with speeches these days is the people mouthing the words didnt have shit to do with writing the speech. Fuck words, I believe in ACTION. __________________ Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site? Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me

03-18-2008, 02:27 PM	#93
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,462	its fun to watch the same people bat their heads against the wall over and over __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

03-18-2008, 01:30 PM	#69
Drake Hello world! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 12,508	It should concern anybody that McCain has aligned himself and his policies with a person who has been voted as the worst President in history, and yet he still stands a chance to win.

03-18-2008, 02:44 PM	#97
Drake Hello world! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 12,508	Very good points Libertine. I guess we'll see what happens and cross our fingers for the best.

03-18-2008, 02:51 PM	#99
ninavain So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 6,268	The TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE