Presidential Candidates '08

[Sojourner]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1018405' date='Jul 6 2006, 04:02 PM']
People people people
Let's take a deep breath here!! We've got a few months before the sleeper election. Sure we all have different ideas on how the country can and should be run. But can't we all rally behind one thing that we should all agree on?
The fact that Ann Coulter is hot!!
[/quote]
She does have really nice legs. It's true.

[Era Might]

I don't think she's all that hot. A crusader in a skirt is a major turnoff.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1018421' date='Jul 6 2006, 04:20 PM']
I don't think she's all that hot. A crusader in a skirt is a major turnoff.


[/quote]
You prefer your crusaders in full battle gear?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1018421' date='Jul 6 2006, 02:20 PM']
I don't think she's all that hot. A crusader in a skirt is a major turnoff.


[/quote]


Pretend its a Britney Spears video and just hit mute

[Sojourner]

nm

Edited July 6, 2006 by Sojourner

[Era Might]

Laurie Dhue. Tasteful, elegant, refreshingly reserved...

[img]http://www.geocities.com/foxnewsmisc/fnc2.jpg[/img]

[kujo]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1018326' date='Jul 6 2006, 01:32 PM']
why? the conservatives are not the ones trying to turn this country into one big "party of sin". The liberal democrats are fighting for the 5 non-negotiables, not to mention they really want to take our Religious freedom away. The liberal democrats claim they care for the poor, while at the same time they put all the abortion clinics, liquor and guns stores in the poor neihborhoods. The liberal democrats are also upholding Margaret sanger and funding her Nazi orginization. Saying "were for the little guys" yeah sure, as long as that little guy isnt a orthodox catholic or a conservative. The communists came up with a list of goals, they wanted to fullfill in this country, they wanted to take control of either the democratic party or republican party. ITs quite obvious which party they took control of. The liberal democrats are fullfilling all the communist goals for them. Lets see how fast Catholics and protestants alike end up underground if the liberals take over in 08.
[/quote]

When you refer to the Communists and they're goals, what are your sources?

And, just so we're clear, Republicans don't have a monopoly on morality in America. Whether it's their ties to big-business and corporations, or their tendency to rush in to wars, we should remain mindful of the fact that Republican is not a synonym for Catholic. Democrats have some good points and some bad ones too.

[DAF]

[quote]by the way, a Nazi is the opposite of a communist so you might want to check on that before you accuse liberals or being both[/quote]
Which is funny because Nazism is the ideology of the National [b]Socialist[/b] Party of Germany.

[Akalyte]

republicans arent angels, I never said they were. But they are more Christian than the liberal democrats.


Pius IX spoke thus:

"Atheism in legislation, indifference in matters of religion and the pernicious maxims which go under the name of LiberalCatholicism are the true causes of the destruction of the States; they have been the ruin of France. Believe me: the evil I denounce is more terrible than the Revolution, more terrible even than The Commune. I have always condemned Liberal Catholicism and I will condemn it again forty times over if it be necessary."

[qfnol31]

[quote name='zwergel88' post='1018167' date='Jul 6 2006, 07:57 AM']The nominees will be Clinton and probably Frist or Guliani. I personally will not like either candidate very much but will cry when they GOP ultimately wins after a long, and bitter campaign in which Clinton will be completely villified and every one of her merits ignored. 08-2012 will not be good years but luckily I think there will be some better candidates in 2012.[/quote]If she weren't so caught up in being so pro-abortion, perhaps her mertis would be worth more...



But with someone that much of a feminist and against life...well, I cannot help but wonder about her motivation for helping life if she doesn't wanna preserve it too.



Anna, perhaps you would like to read some stuff I've posted on the problems with raising a minimum wage?

I had a long discussion on the problems about Kerry's campaigns that you seem to advocate in any (Democrat) candidate. Two years ago I addressed a lot of the same concerns that you bring up, but needless to say, raising minimum wage cannot work by design because it'll lead to a shortage in demand for labour and a simultaneous rise in the cost of the goods produced or services provided, as demonstrated by simple economics.

If you'd like to read on this, just let me know.

[Socrates]

The only person mentioned here that I could support with any enthusiasm is Rick Santorum (though he's a long-shot candidate). Guilliani's much too liberal on the so-called "social issues." (pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, etc.) And I wasn't much impressed with McCain in his 2000 campaign, in which he ran to the Left of Bush. While he runs on the strength of his war record, he seems a sort of blow-in-the-wind "weather-vein" politician without strong principles. Condi, from what I've heard (which admittedly isn't much), seems another "moderate" (i.e. soft-liberal).

All the potential Democrat candidates mentioned support the Culture of Death. No Catholic should support them.

[quote name='zwergel88' post='1018344' date='Jul 6 2006, 11:54 AM']
Democrats are not nearly as anti-religious as you think my friend. Traditionally, the majority of Catholics in this country are in fact Democrats. Democrats are not communists or Nazis either (by the way, a Nazi is the opposite of a communist so you might want to check on that before you accuse liberals or being both). Also, you just said that "liberals put up gun stores" That is nonsense considering that those on the left favor slightly stricter gun control in order to keep dangerous weapons off the streets, whereas Republicans are the ones who allowed the ban on semi-automatic weapons to expire. As far as liquor stores, I don't think that the folks in either party are in favor of reinstating prohibition any time soon.

Democrats are the party who have long tried to implement measures to help people who are less well off. They are in favor of raising the minimum wage, improving rather than destroying social security, developing better pension plans, and making sure that all American's can afford healthcare. They also support measures that help children such as subsidized childcare, free healthcare for children, and after school programs.

Its true that Democrats are by a slight majority pro-choice, however they are pro-life on many other issues and their abortion stance is changing rapidly. Many prominant pro-life Democrats hold office or are running. The minority leader of the Senate, Harry Reid is pro-life, as is Senator Ben Nelson. In the house, many representatives from my own state of PA are pro-life Democrats such as John Murtha and Mike Doyle. More are running for office too. In PA, Bob Casey a pro-life Democrat and devout Catholic is running for the senate seat. It is estimated that as many as 47% of Democrats are now pro-life. For more info check out www.democratsforlife.org.

Trust me, Democrats and liberals are awesome. I am proud to be a liberal. And if you're going to move out of the country, I agree with the people who pointed out, the Rome is probably more "liberal" than you can imagine. Also, remember that not too many America liberals are Communists and it is all together impossible according to political philosophy for them to be Nazis.

Anna
[/quote]
While not all registered Democrats in the country may be godless and anti-religious, their national leadership over the past several decades has consistently supported the Culture of Death by supporting abortion and other serious evils. Most of the leading Democrats have been strong and constistant supporters of abortion-on-demand, opposing any restrictions on abortion whatsoever, and supporting its funding and promotion with our tax dollars. They are also for the most part in support of promoting privileges for homosexuality and other immoral behaviors.

(You can check out the voting record of any Congressman at [url="http://www.ontheissues.org"]www.ontheissues.org[/url])

Hillary Clinton's voting record on Abortion:
[b]Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.[/b] (Mar 2004)
[b]Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.[/b] (Mar 2003)
[b]Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women.[/b] (Apr 2001)
[b]Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. [/b] (Dec 2003)
[b]Expand embryonic stem cell research.[/b] (Jun 2004)

John Kerry's voting record on Abortion:
[b]Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.[/b] (Mar 2004)
[b]Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions.[/b] (Jun 2000)
[b]Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.[/b] (Oct 1999)
[b]Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions.[/b] (May 1999)
[b]Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.[/b] (Dec 2003)
[b]Expand embryonic stem cell research.[/b] (Jun 2004)

No undoing Constitutional rights, including right of choice. (Oct 2004)
Cannot change Roe v. Wade because of my own faith. (Oct 2004)
Embryos used in stem cell research are not from abortions. (Oct 2004)
Supreme Court justices should be able to make good decisions. (Oct 2004)
We cannot force people to share our faith. (Oct 2004)
Bush allows the destruction of life up to a certain amount. (Oct 2004)
Will not appoint Justice against Roe while Court is 5-4. (May 2004)
Kerry staunchly resists restrictions on abortions. (Apr 2004)
Partial-birth abortion ban undermine women's right to choose. (Nov 2003)
No criminalization of a woman's right to choose. (Jun 2003)

Joe Biden on Abortion:
Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Rated 36% by NARAL, indicating a mixed voting record on abortion. (Dec 2003)
Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)

Edited July 7, 2006 by Socrates

[pyranima]

all i know is that if Hilary gets voted in im moving.

[Socrates]

[quote name='zwergel88' post='1018344' date='Jul 6 2006, 11:54 AM']
(by the way, a Nazi is the opposite of a communist so you might want to check on that before you accuse liberals or being both). [/quote]
Only in liberal mythology.

The Nazis and Communists were in reality not opposites, but very similar. They were much more alike than they were different. Both were totalitarian, socialist, statist regimes which brutally and ruthlessly murdered millions to acheive their ideological goals. Both suppressed or controlled the Church, refusing to acknowledge a higher moral authority than themselves.

In fact, Hitler studied and imitated Lenin's Communist Revolution in plotting his own National Socialist revolution.

Just because these two murderous regimes fought each other in a turf war for domination does not make them truly opposites.

The main difference between the two was that the Nazi ideology was tribal and nationalistic in nature (the world ruled by the Aryan German Reich), while the Communists were more global and trans-nationalistic in their goals - in practice wanting all the world to be one Communist empire. The larger scale and broader appeal of Communism made it in reality more dangerous globally.

The fact is, that while most liberals are not Communists, many were sympathetic to and supporters of Communism during the Cold War. While probably no American liberals are Nazis, their support of abortion and the culture of death is reminiscent of Nazism's casual contempt for human life.

Edited July 7, 2006 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='kujo' post='1018440' date='Jul 6 2006, 01:52 PM']
When you refer to the Communists and they're goals, what are your sources?

And, just so we're clear, Republicans don't have a monopoly on morality in America. Whether it's their ties to big-business and corporations, or their tendency to rush in to wars, we should remain mindful of the fact that Republican is not a synonym for Catholic. Democrats have some good points and some bad ones too.
[/quote]
Actually the "tendency to rush into war" has not traditionally been a Republican trait - this actually only going back to the first George Bush. The Bush interventionalism marks a break from earlier policy.

Democrats led us into the First World War, World War Two, and the Vietnam War. Reagan kept us out of any major wars.

And actually, Democrats have many ties to big business and corporations as well. That's the nature of politics - big money influences political power.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Minimum wage is a "big" issue because a lot of unions have contracts based on it. Even though they make far more per hour, their wages go up if minimum wage is increased. I really think the whole thing is a waste of time, as hardly anyone actually makes minimum wage and of those that do, they are unlikely supporting families on it. Seems to me that the only thing it will do is jack-up prices and negate the increase in pay. Or worse, lay off employees to avoid a loss in profits - as if that isn't a huge problem in the auto industry already. Or even worse yet - ship the jobs overseas.

Edited July 7, 2006 by thedude