tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 Cadet Eugene Tackleberry tod Jul 22 00:04:13 2004 tod Jul 22 00:04:13 243 responses total.
Obviously Todd is part of the liberal media "filtering" conspiracy. Bad Todd! Bad!
From the reports coming out these days, one might draw either of two
REASONABLE conclusions:
1) Wes Clark is about the last likely person we'd ever want to see
in the Oval Office.
2) The Republican machine has been very effective at using selected
military officers to give credence to a smear campaign against their most
threatening potential opponent in the 2004 election.
This response has been erased.
hell, wes clark for 2004 is simply a stooge-stalking horse for hillary 2008.
really? how so?
This response has been erased.
clarks' staff, as reported, is clinton-redux ... just staying in tune for hillary in 2008. don't want to lose their 'touch' .... therefore, stallking horse.
Wow. how delusional can people get? Still frothed up over Hillary...
Seriously. Move on.
re7:
*hic*
Yeah, tsty's incoherency is getting worse as far as I can tell.
pullback a little bit .. clark ahs zero-chance of being nominated. however!!! hillary in 2008 does! who is building the clark campaign? clintonista castoffs. keeping their paws inteh process. why? hillary in 2008. clark is a stooge.
thank you, apart from a couple of easy to overlook spelling errors, that was more coherent than some recent posts. Not that I agre with it, but it was easier to follow.
I don't really see how Clark running and not being nominated now helps Hillary four years from now. I could understand the argument when the theory was that Clark would step aside at the last minute and Hillary would take his place in the primary race. I still thought it was a silly conspiracy theory, but I could understand the reasoning behind it. Why *is* the right so obsessed with the Clintons, anyway?
The Clintons ran the country for 8 years. The right doesn't want them running it for another 4 or 8 years.
That still doesn't explain the wacky conspiracy theories, or why, nearly four years after Clinton has left power, right-wing talk show hosts still vent about him at length.
This response has been erased.
You gotta remember, when Clinton started out, no one expected him to win either. I mean, no one had heard of this nabob from arkansas, much less in conection to his being nominated for president. But things happened and the place holder the democrats put in to hasve a candidate ended up beating the incumbent.
i wouldn't be calling anyone a *nabob*, if i were you, goober.
This response has been erased.
that's not a very nice thing to say about george bush after all he did for his country when he was a hero in the vietnam wa....oh wait.
This response has been erased.
prognostication ... 2008 - hillary/clark ticket. trust me. caveat .. clark gets somehow snuffed in this cycle. clark alwyas needs a leader; hillary always needs a follower. americah needs neither, actually. (well, in teh exectuive office) hillary, just as kennedy, can babble on in the senate where their voices are heard and considered, fwiw, as 1/100 , *not* 1/1 power.
I could maybe see a Hillary/Clark ticket in 2008 if Bush wins in 2004. If there's a Democratic incumbant I really don't think they'd step aside to let Hillary run. Besides, if Hillary runs I think she'll lose. There are several reasons, but a big one is I don't think the public is ready for a liberal female President. The first female President is probably going to have to be a conservative.
How much would you like to bet on your prognostication, tsty? I would bet that you can't be trusted that far.
got $1000 to back that up? ($500 if it's only hillary ...clark is interchangable as necesasry.) of course she';ll lose -- but she'l run.
Funny that TS implies he has $1000 to place on a political question, but not $400 for the question of whether he stole my guitar or not. Do you think he just *might* not believe what he says?
HAHAHAHA. I know, it *is* funny! I can hardly stop laughing
I think we need a new version of Godwin's law for grex: Cage's law. You know a thread is over when someone brings up The Guitar. :)
I propose McNally's postulate -- any discussion which goes on long enough will eventually be ended by Cage's law. I have discovered a truly remarkable demonstration of this proposition, but don't have time to set it down just now.. :-)
funnier that rcurl ahs not yet entered a respoonse .... russ's 'guitar' is akin to jerryr's shoes. rcurl is lots mroe appreciated, infact. well, jerryr's shoes are too, fwiw.
You answered my question. Any of the betting sort can take you up on it - would you put that $1000 into escrow now to await the outcome?
This response has been erased.
ummmmmmmmm.................... #97.25 Rane Curl (rcurl) Fri, Nov 7, 2003 (12:43): How much would you like to bet ...... <xnip> i took *you* up on *your* challenge - hull0?
Right, now let's discuss escrow.
I've heard that Hillary is still rather passionately hated by a big hunk of the Republican base, and calculated use of her name is a very well established way to fire up that base and stimulate their financial contribution to GOP causes... ...and she's similarly loved by/inspiring to parts of the Democratic base, and well-used there. For folks outside of the "I LUV CLINTON" fan club, does Hillary have anything on her resume in the way of executive experience or political leadership? Maggie had 20 years in Parliament, 4 years in an under- secretary of state post, and 4 years as leader of her political party before becoming PM. Golda's resume was, if anything, heavier still. What's Hillary got?
What's dubya got on his resume?
Not much, by presidential standards, and look what a disaster he's turned out to be. Which only underscores why it might be dangerous choosing a candidate of comparable experience from the left..
This response has been erased.
re: "#38 (mcnally): Not much, by presidential standards. . ." The reference here being to Mssrs. Carter & Bubba, Mr. mcnally?
Re #36: I wouldn't vote for Hillary in a primary election.
re #39 ... sorry, that was cruel, i recall taht response, my error. about escrow ... make a sugestion ... we can debate right ehre.
whore.
You have several choices: