Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

I like John McCain. He should have been the Republican nominee in 2000,
but the Bushcrappers did him in in South Carolina. He might be the nominee
this year, maybe. I sure hope it isn't Romney, because he is the same sort
of duplicitous turd as Bush.


I think John McCain was an honorable man, but 25 years in the Senate has
spoiled him a bit I am afraid.

Romney is finally starting to gain some attention, although it may be too
late. He seems to have settled down and his coming across in a much more
genuine manner. He may have some surprises in store for many.

Eisboch



Please. Romney is a fraud. There's nothing real about him. He's the
panderer's panderer. The only thing that might result from his
nomination is the possibility of burying forever "modern" Republican
neoconservativism.

On Feb 5, 8:09*am, HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 07:56:18 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Can you believe all these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather
have a black man elected instead of Billary? *Them times are definitely
a changing, plus it shows the strong negative rating the Clintons have
among Georgia Democrats.

Being serious for a second (yeah I know - hard to believe), there is a
huge backlash effect working against the Clintons.

Notice I said Clintons - not Clinton.

If Bill had died between then and now, it would be hers for the
taking.

Not even Democrats want Bill Clinton back in the White House under any
circumstances. *

Now, for your regularly scheduled bouts of silliness and whimsy.

*snerk

I don't care whether the nominee is Hillary or Barack, but there is no
chance "these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather have a black
man" as the Democratic nominee. Sadly, there are too many white
Americans who will talk the talk and say they will vote for Barack, but
when they get into the voting booth, they'll vote - again - for the
white guy.

Most Democrats would vote to give Bill Clinton a third term in the White
House if they could.

I like John McCain. He should have been the Republican nominee in 2000,
but the Bushcrappers did him in in South Carolina. He might be the
nominee this year, maybe. I sure hope it isn't Romney, because he is the
same sort of duplicitous turd as Bush.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What you and a lot of fools don't understand is that the south isn't
all hillbillies anymore, it's a very progressive area, more so than a
lot of northern areas. But then there are those who use sterotypes
just because they aren't bright enough to know any different.

wrote:
On Feb 5, 8:38 am, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Feb 5, 8:31 am, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
So many questions. Do I vote for Obama to insure a Clinton loss in
Georgia, or do I vote for McCain to try to eliminate Romney?
Romney has got to go, for several important reasons, not the least of which
is that he smiles too much. Never trust anyone who smiles constantly.
Romney reminds me of Barzini from Godfather I.
Don't you have to run out and do your crossover voting thing to
subvert the republicans voice in the voting booth like your leaders
have been asking you to do??
Subvert the Republican voice? The two GOP frontrunners are losers.
McCain is the more decent of the two, but he is a loser politically.

Yeah, lock step with Billary and Obama.
I see as usual you are up to speed on politics. I don't live in a "Super
Tuesday" state. So, take your SOMA, put on your noseclips, and go shovel
what you shovel best.

Sad sad thing. Health issues have probably cost me the horse
experience. Even though I wear a huge dual filter particle mask, I
have been suffering severe lung issues. I came out of the barn about a
week ago, and cleared right up.. I will really miss those animals, but
as with most cool stuff, I got to leave it behind and move on to
something else... very sad... nevrer thought I would miss it so much..


Sorry to hear that.

wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:43:59 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Romney is finally starting to gain some attention, although it may be
too late. He seems to have settled down and his coming across in a much
more genuine manner. He may have some surprises in store for many.

Eisboch

Several, including the bigger NE states, are winner take all, on the
Republican side. The surprise might be on Romney. Come tomorrow, he may
be toast.


One can hope.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 07:56:18 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Can you believe all these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather
have a black man elected instead of Billary? Them times are
definitely a changing, plus it shows the strong negative rating the
Clintons have among Georgia Democrats.

Being serious for a second (yeah I know - hard to believe), there is a
huge backlash effect working against the Clintons.

Notice I said Clintons - not Clinton.

If Bill had died between then and now, it would be hers for the
taking.

Not even Democrats want Bill Clinton back in the White House under any
circumstances. Now, for your regularly scheduled bouts of silliness
and whimsy.


snerk

I don't care whether the nominee is Hillary or Barack, but there is no
chance "these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather have a black
man" as the Democratic nominee. Sadly, there are too many white
Americans who will talk the talk and say they will vote for Barack, but
when they get into the voting booth, they'll vote - again - for the
white guy.

Most Democrats would vote to give Bill Clinton a third term in the White
House if they could.

I like John McCain. He should have been the Republican nominee in 2000,
but the Bushcrappers did him in in South Carolina. He might be the
nominee this year, maybe. I sure hope it isn't Romney, because he is the
same sort of duplicitous turd as Bush.

Hillary is a dirt bag. Obama shows some promise.
Still can't make up your mind? I would think you would be able to choose
a democratic candidate to support that might be good for the country.
Or you could just flip a coin.


Either Clinton or Obama are satisfactory to me.

Tell you what. I'll vote for the Clintons if you present an excellent case
for them to be deserving of the next presidency.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

Most Democrats would vote to give Bill Clinton a third term in the White
House if they could.



"Morning Joe" on MSNBC had live shots of Hillary and Bill voting this
morning.
Willie Geist cracked me up. As Bill emerged from the voting booth,
Willie wisecracks, "He voted for himself".

Eisboch
I'd be delighted to see Clinton as president again. We need someone like
him to clean up after Bush.

Although he remains a very popular personality to many in the general
public, apparently he is not so well liked among the Washington political
"insiders", including those from his own party.

He' also showing his age and the effects of both the strain of the
presidency and some health problems.

Eisboch

wrote:
On Feb 5, 8:09 am, HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 07:56:18 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:
Can you believe all these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather
have a black man elected instead of Billary? Them times are definitely
a changing, plus it shows the strong negative rating the Clintons have
among Georgia Democrats.
Being serious for a second (yeah I know - hard to believe), there is a
huge backlash effect working against the Clintons.
Notice I said Clintons - not Clinton.
If Bill had died between then and now, it would be hers for the
taking.
Not even Democrats want Bill Clinton back in the White House under any
circumstances.
Now, for your regularly scheduled bouts of silliness and whimsy.
snerk

I don't care whether the nominee is Hillary or Barack, but there is no
chance "these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather have a black
man" as the Democratic nominee. Sadly, there are too many white
Americans who will talk the talk and say they will vote for Barack, but
when they get into the voting booth, they'll vote - again - for the
white guy.

Most Democrats would vote to give Bill Clinton a third term in the White
House if they could.

I like John McCain. He should have been the Republican nominee in 2000,
but the Bushcrappers did him in in South Carolina. He might be the
nominee this year, maybe. I sure hope it isn't Romney, because he is the
same sort of duplicitous turd as Bush.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What you and a lot of fools don't understand is that the south isn't
all hillbillies anymore, it's a very progressive area, more so than a
lot of northern areas. But then there are those who use sterotypes
just because they aren't bright enough to know any different.

The times have definitely changed.

Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 07:56:18 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote:

Can you believe all these good ole redneck Georgia boys would
rather have a black man elected instead of Billary? Them times
are definitely a changing, plus it shows the strong negative
rating the Clintons have among Georgia Democrats.

Being serious for a second (yeah I know - hard to believe), there is a
huge backlash effect working against the Clintons.

Notice I said Clintons - not Clinton.

If Bill had died between then and now, it would be hers for the
taking.

Not even Democrats want Bill Clinton back in the White House under any
circumstances. Now, for your regularly scheduled bouts of
silliness and whimsy.


snerk

I don't care whether the nominee is Hillary or Barack, but there is
no chance "these good ole redneck Georgia boys would rather have a
black man" as the Democratic nominee. Sadly, there are too many
white Americans who will talk the talk and say they will vote for
Barack, but when they get into the voting booth, they'll vote -
again - for the white guy.

Most Democrats would vote to give Bill Clinton a third term in the
White
House if they could.

I like John McCain. He should have been the Republican nominee in
2000, but the Bushcrappers did him in in South Carolina. He might be
the nominee this year, maybe. I sure hope it isn't Romney, because
he is the same sort of duplicitous turd as Bush.

Hillary is a dirt bag. Obama shows some promise.
Still can't make up your mind? I would think you would be able to
choose a democratic candidate to support that might be good for the
country.
Or you could just flip a coin.


Either Clinton or Obama are satisfactory to me.

Tell you what. I'll vote for the Clintons if you present an excellent
case for them to be deserving of the next presidency.


It takes a Clinton to clean up the mess left behind by a Bush.

On 05 Feb 2008 16:32:52 GMT, "John Q. Public" wrote:


And yet you'll vote for a puppet of David Rockefeller, who said, "Some
believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of
the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists'
and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated
global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's
the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Well, I'll put it this way.

Ron Paul's newsletter - June, 1992 -"Order was only restored in L.A.
when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three
days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No
doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through
continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided."

In Ron Paul's newsletter - October, 1992 - in discussing carjacking
"hip-hop thing to do among the urban youth who play unsuspecting
whites like pianos."

OH and let's not forget gays.

"I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society,
were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their
activities." June, 1990.

How about the KKK? Paul loves David Duke.

Finally, Paul believes that the Tri Lateral Commission, the
Illumaniti, Freemasonry and Jews are responsible for all the world's
ills.

Yep - just the kind of guy I want to vote for - a deluded
gynecologist.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On 05 Feb 2008 16:32:52 GMT, "John Q. Public" wrote:


And yet you'll vote for a puppet of David Rockefeller, who said, "Some
believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of
the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists'
and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated
global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's
the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Well, I'll put it this way.

Ron Paul's newsletter - June, 1992 -"Order was only restored in L.A.
when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three
days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No
doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through
continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided."

In Ron Paul's newsletter - October, 1992 - in discussing carjacking
"hip-hop thing to do among the urban youth who play unsuspecting
whites like pianos."

OH and let's not forget gays.

"I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society,
were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their
activities." June, 1990.

How about the KKK? Paul loves David Duke.

Finally, Paul believes that the Tri Lateral Commission, the
Illumaniti, Freemasonry and Jews are responsible for all the world's
ills.

Damn, and I always thought it was the Catholics, Jews and Blacks that
were the root of all evil.



Yep - just the kind of guy I want to vote for - a deluded
gynecologist.