The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomination

Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Transpogue said:
Not to demean either candidate, but against McCain or any other GOPper, I'd vote for a carrot.
Click to expand...

I'll demean some: all the old, tired, lying, manipulative, hypocritical, establishment types, and all the self-righteous, arrogant, hypocritical, religious types.

Instead of any of them -- which is all but Paul and Obama -- a carrot would be better.

Red beets for Veep? :rolleyes:
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Wow, just wow @ some of the posts in this thread. Makes me lose faith in democracy.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

I told myself I wasn't going to do another post, but....

Kennyworth said:
I won't dispute that many people think Senator Obama is for change..

Like I said, I just have serious reservations about his ability to actually bring about positive change..

Hell, I could get sworn in and things would change alrite, I'm just not sure you'd like the change my inexperience would usher in..

That's how I feel about Senator Obama..

I know he'll bring change, my fear is it will be just a different kind of incompetence,and excuses we haven't heard yet..
Click to expand...

Ah, the fears we know vs. the fears we don't.
Or, perhaps the fears we blind ourselves to.
Hillary is more of the same -- look at her list of favorite presidents, look at the way her co-president chums around with the Bush clan. She can't possibly bring change, because she doesn't know anything but the present system.
Back when there was a Soviet Union, your worries over Obama could have been justified; he's the sort of somewhat innocent, idealistic young man who could have tumbled things right into their laps. But there's no such hostile power out there right now, so we can afford a few mistakes.
And honestly, if he sat in the Oval Office and did nothing for four years, that would be a tremendous improvement.

Yet I have a nagging concern: if you don't trust Obama, aren't you saying you don't trust Congress? They're the ones who pass the laws, after all.

NickCole said:
Wow.

A perfect human being.

That's pretty impressive.
Click to expand...

That's beyond juvenile, Nick -- that's infantile.

Musicman-bflat said:
You lost lover what would you have done after 9/11 if you were in her shoes. Your boy Obama has already said that if he had been in the Senate when that vote was done, he doesn't know how he would have voted.
Click to expand...

I know what I would have done: no military force.
I might have voted for a resolution permitting up to 5,000 soldiers -- IFF they were there to accompany an increased number of inspection teams.
No matter WHAT the intelligence showed, there was no reason for an invasion -- yet Hillary went along with it.

Musicman-bflat said:
I agree 100% NickCole, The Obama supporters are created the rift between the Dem. If you don't like Obama you better keep your mouth shut or we will make something bad happen to you. They won't and can't listen to anything else about Obama. It is just crazy.
Click to expand...

I never hear that from the Obama people -- I only hear it as an accusation from the Hillary people. What I hear from Obama people is, "Hop on! Join in!" And while that may be a bit vacuous a rallying cry, it's a lot better than the rivulet of rancor running from the Clinton camp.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

ICO7 said:
Kulindahr, at times, is someone that I can just vehemently oppose (especially when he goes into absolutist mode), but I've noticed during his time posting here that he has become better at cutting through bullshit when he sees it and better at composing his arguments, aiming to be logically sound (except when he's in absolutist mode). It would be a miracle if more would go such a distance.

Exactly what has he posted recently in this thread would lead you to that conclusion?
Click to expand...

I'll demean some: all the old, tired, lying, manipulative, hypocritical, establishment types, and all the self-righteous, arrogant, hypocritical, religious types.

Instead of any of them -- which is all but Paul and Obama -- a carrot would be better.

Red beets for Veep?

"Red beets for Veep?"
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

ICO7 said:
This is the only part with which you have a problem?
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't want a red beet for veep.

ICO7, if you look back on our posts, we have much in agreement. I'm not looking to pick a fight with you.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Well, you know, ICO, given the time of night on a Friday night, it just might be possible that some members could perhaps be posting while drunk. Well, it wouldn't exactly surprise me to discover this.

But to return to the topic--The race is incredibly close, and we're a little over halfway to the end. I don't think it's time to declare a winner quite yet.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

ICO7 said:
Yeah, maybe. I don't know. Care for some pomegranate cordial?
Click to expand...

Sounds good. Anything better than a Hillary Rodham or John McCain presidency. Cheers.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

syntax70 said:
Sounds good. Anything better than a Hillary Rodham or John McCain presidency. Cheers.
Click to expand...

Yup, that's right, anything is better than Obama presidency....
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Kulindahr said:
How could they? The Democrat power structure has the black folks cowed; every time one decides not to be a sheep, there's the Tyrannical Twosome, Jackson and Sharpton, to preach them back into line.
Click to expand...


Since this pattern goes back to the turn of the last century, I think attributing it to Jackson and Sharpton like that is a stretch. I think it has more to do with FDR recasting the Democratic Party as the party of economic advancement, and that --along with civil rights of course-- advantaged blacks. That same element of economic advancement that Clinton made a cornerstone of his presidency (It's the economy, stupid) was, I believe, a big part of what made life better for African Americans with Clinton in the White House. I think the same would be true with Hillary Clinton as President.

But it's interesting you mention that because it sounds like what Jesse Jackson Jr is doing now to pressure blacks to abandon their support for Hillary Clinton and shift it to Barack Obama. Except that Clinton has supported policies that advantage big portions of the black population and modern Republicans haven't. Still, what's happening gives pause.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Actually I did answer the question about black people. READ.

And it's "throw" not "through".

You can't "through" a basketball. You can throw a basketball THROUGH a hoop.

But you definitely can't through something.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Actually you didn't hit a "never" (it's NERVE).

You want to be taken seriously on here but you don't know basic grammar. BASIC.

So when you start talking about Obama's health care plan and it not adding up, I will remember you don't know basic grammatical skills and well your point becomes mute.
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Syntax, Transpogue suggested he'd vote for a carrot over any Republican candidate. I took that and said I'd vote for the carrot over almost any candidate in the current field. Since the concept itself is demeaning to the candidates to which an orange-rooted member of the parsley family is preferred, I went ahead and listed attributes which make them worth demeaning.

And since the proposal was for a carrot for president, I suggested red beets as a running mate. I'd consider them quite preferable to a certain candidate who probably insists his children eat them -- pickled, even. You know, the guy who's gotten more votes for his dollar than anyone else.

ICO7 said:
Care for some pomegranate cordial?
Click to expand...

For Secretary of State? :rolleyes:







p.s. -- in case you didn't notice, I had the little smiley there as a hint.....
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

syntax70 said:
Sounds good. Anything better than a Hillary Rodham or John McCain presidency. Cheers.
Click to expand...

If either happens, what say we go get drunk? :lol:

BlueD said:
Yup, that's right, anything is better than Obama presidency....
Click to expand...

Like this?

guinea-pig.jpg


​
Lostlover said:
Actually you didn't hit a "never" (it's NERVE).

You want to be taken seriously on here but you don't know basic grammar. BASIC.

So when you start talking about Obama's health care plan and it not adding up, I will remember you don't know basic grammatical skills and well your point becomes mute.
Click to expand...

Um, you mean "your point becomes moot", I think:

moot: potentially debatable, but essentially irrelevant
mute: silent, not speaking

But you have a point; a lot of us tend to skim over posts with a lot of typos, spelling and grammar errors, incomplete sentences, and such things. We are, after all, here to read, not to translate (I did enough of that studying ancient near eastern languages, thank you).
 
Re: Hillary needs 56% of delegates left for nomina

Kulindahr said:
If either happens, what say we go get drunk? :lol:



Like this?

guinea-pig.jpg


​


Um, you mean "your point becomes moot", I think:

moot: potentially debatable, but essentially irrelevant
mute: silent, not speaking

But you have a point; a lot of us tend to skim over posts with a lot of typos, spelling and grammar errors, incomplete sentences, and such things. We are, after all, here to read, not to translate (I did enough of that studying ancient near eastern languages, thank you).
Click to expand...

I meant mute. As in not saying anything or silent. Or empty. Or hollow.

I could have said nonexistent. But using mute in a slightly different way than it's normally used was done by me for emphasis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top