From here.
Some of you should probably skip it.
Edited By GORDON on 1092937392
More hatin' on Kerry
-
thibodeaux
- Posts: 8056
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm
I think you've nailed it. In this respect, Kerry reminds me of (both) Clintons: he'll say whatever he thinks will score him the most points politically. If you think about it, though, you can't really fault him for that: he's a politician.
W's detractors will probably say, "Yeah, he has principles all right: government goodies for his rich cronies!" I don't really think there's any hope for somebody like that.
One small nitpick. I don't believe W has banned stem-cell research. I think all he's done is prohibit federal funds from being used, and IIRC, that ban only extends to research on new stem-cell lines from embryos. Doesn't really affect your argument, but I figured you'd want to know.
W's detractors will probably say, "Yeah, he has principles all right: government goodies for his rich cronies!" I don't really think there's any hope for somebody like that.
One small nitpick. I don't believe W has banned stem-cell research. I think all he's done is prohibit federal funds from being used, and IIRC, that ban only extends to research on new stem-cell lines from embryos. Doesn't really affect your argument, but I figured you'd want to know.
You are correct.thibodeaux wrote:One small nitpick. I don't believe W has banned stem-cell research. I think all he's done is prohibit federal funds from being used, and IIRC, that ban only extends to research on new stem-cell lines from embryos. Doesn't really affect your argument, but I figured you'd want to know.
"... and then I was forced to walk the Trail of Tears." - Elizabeth Warren
-
71-1085092892
And you know, dammit, I knew that.Vince wrote:thibodeaux wrote:One small nitpick. I don't believe W has banned stem-cell research. I think all he's done is prohibit federal funds from being used, and IIRC, that ban only extends to research on new stem-cell lines from embryos. Doesn't really affect your argument, but I figured you'd want to know.
You are correct.
Before I wrote that post yesterday, I was reading some anti-Bush page who he banned it "because god told him to." My brain was off, and it was garbage in/garbage out.
Goddammit. Double dumbass on me.
I will go on record and say if Bill Clinton were running I'd vote for him. I don't think he did a great job the first time around, but he made the country think he did, and that can be just as important. Plus, the guy was ALWAYS good for a laugh.
Let me also add that at work today I overheard a Dem say they were fed up with Kerry's waffling on every issue and he had lost their vote.
Edited By Leisher on 1091230765
Let me also add that at work today I overheard a Dem say they were fed up with Kerry's waffling on every issue and he had lost their vote.
Edited By Leisher on 1091230765
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
-
71-1085092892
My view on the major Clinton scandal hasn't changed... he shouldn't have lied, but I also dont think he should have been asked in the first place.
I also think he missed a lot of opportunities to hit Bin Laden, and Bin Laden certainly wasn't quiet during the Clinton years. I think he had a head-in-the-sand policy regarding terrorism.
I also think he missed a lot of opportunities to hit Bin Laden, and Bin Laden certainly wasn't quiet during the Clinton years. I think he had a head-in-the-sand policy regarding terrorism.
Nah, the Monica crap never bothered me at all. He's just a slimy lying bastard. Sure, almost all politicians a bit slimy and/or lying and/or bastards, but he brought it to a whole new level for a president.TheCatt wrote:Aside from the Monica crap...
IMO.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
-
71-1085092892