'08 Elections

[sjbouza]

Just a general question, well sort of general I guess. In the upcoming election in '08 who would you like to see as president and why? I would like to know who you would like from both parties, what Republican and Democrat.

I guess I am just looking for others views on the candidates. After seeing both debates I am curious who others feel would be good for this country.

[Emproph]

I pick Joe Biden and Russ Feingold, in that order.

Both ardent supporters of rights/liberty, and both are acutely aware of the inherent corruption of politics and the need to fix.

Obama is black, Clinton is a woman. They don't stand a chance. If they had the superstar status of a celebrity like Madonna I'd say go for it. But as ashamed as I am to say it, this is not the time to be taking risks.

Today's conservative republicans (stereotypically-speaking) eat sleep and breathe immorality. By election day '08, some of us reading this sentence right now will be convinced that Obama was responsible for slavery and Hillary was responsible for original sin.

'just sayin..

[BrianB]

Just a general question, well sort of general I guess. In the upcoming election in '08 who would you like to see as president and why? I would like to know who you would like from both parties, what Republican and Democrat.

I guess I am just looking for others views on the candidates. After seeing both debates I am curious who others feel would be good for this country.
Personally, I like Obama on the Democrat side. He is conservative enough to get moderate republicans to vote for him. The black caucus may also get solidly behind him as the election nears.

Mrs. Clinton is what they used to call a "carpet bagger" after the civil war. She is much too mercenary for my taste. IMHO, her entire aim in seeking the senate seat in New York was expressly a set up for her presidential bid. I think she will fade unless the press gets behind her.

On the republican side I think Guliani has a decent shot. He certainly has name recognition. Fred Thompson seems to be hanging in there even though he has declared his candidacy yet. As for Romney I don't think he can win because of his religion. Look how many years it took to elect a catholic president.

I'm not crazy about any of them but my picks are Obama for the Democrats and Guliani for the Republicans.

BrianB

[Thaddus]

I am all for Kucinich/Richardson team. I think Kucinich is clearly a smart, wonderful, caring man ( he also is good friends with Shirley Mclaine which I find interesting). He is the only candidate supporting full gay marraige. He truly did not support the iraq war from the start. Gov. Richardson I think would be a good balance to the team with his political acomplishment.

For Republicans, If I had to choose one, I would like to see Giuliani as president.

[Emproph]

I am all for Kucinich/Richardson team. I think Kucinich is clearly a smart, wonderful, caring man ( he also is good friends with Shirley Mclaine which I find interesting). He is the only candidate supporting full gay marraige. He truly did not support the iraq war from the start. Gov. Richardson I think would be a good balance to the team with his political acomplishment.

I Love Kucinich. He led a panel in regard to extent of Iraqi civilian deaths and put it point blank as to the horror and moral of it -- which I'd been waiting for since this "war" began..

He's so unassuming (obviously-I forgot about him) but I've had reverence for him ever since. Thanks for reminding me.

[Pablo Rafael]

I have always been a Republican and have been wanting John McCain to run for years. However, with his stance on the war in Iraq, voting for him is out of the question for me. Plus I think we Republicans have made a total mess of things and it's time for something new.

I would really like to see Bill Richardson win. He has a lot of experience and has acomplished a lot in whatever governmental position he has been elected to. I don't think he has a good chance of getting the Democratic nomination. My second choice is Obama. I like Clinton, but I think she is too polarizing of a figure.

[BrentRichards]

I have always been a Republican

I thought I was the only one here!

I'm backing Guliani, but not without reservations.

Do you think we can get "none of the above" on the ballot? If it wins, we start over with new candidates until we actually get someone we want.

[u-dog]

Do you think we can get "none of the above" on the ballot? If it wins, we start over with new candidates until we actually get someone we want.


When you do that in Scrabble, you lose one entire turn... which would leave us with? "Dubya" again? PULEEEEZE !:disagree: :sick: :disagree: :sick:

[rainbowdog]

:rainbow: I have not ever voting Republican but this comming up year i might. Guliani is actually for GBLT rights. Bush does not care for us. He probably wishes that we go away. Folks we are here to stay so we might as well have rights to so Guliania is our man. I am tired of being a 2nd class citizen:mad:
We need someone who cares about our needs

God Bless,:rainbow:
Christy

[Simon]

Christy,

I'm considering voting for Giuliani, too. I have family and friends in NYC, and they told me that when he was a mayor, he improved quality of life a lot. They streets got cleaner, and crime went down by 30%. I believe that he would also help reduce the crime throughout the nation if he becomes president. He might be pro GLBT rights but he is also very pro war. It was actually him who pressured Bush to start the war on terrorism, and I don't blame him: you know, 3000 people in his city were killed for nothing. We need strong leader like Rudy in our country.

Simon

[dsdrane]

...a thankful product of the ex-Republican ministry.

As a former New Yorker, read me now and believe me later: Giuliani is a non-starter; he's a blowhard and he has way too many skeletons. Mayor of NYC, fine, but he ain't gonna play in Peoria. No way, no how.

I would LOVE to see Joe Biden take the nomination. I love his loose lips and loose cannon ways, which is precisely why he won't win...but I love him all the same. He's folksy while being knowledgeable as hell. A northeast Bill Clinton of sorts, but with more cojones.

I also like John Edwards a lot, but the Breck Girl image really hurts him.

I also want to hear more from Bill Richardson, a lot more.

I like Obama, but it's way too soon.

Hillary dithers, and I'm over it.

But, the knight in shining armor who I believe will ultimately take the nomination and win the White House is Al Gore. He's ready; he's tested; and it's soooo his time.

:tup:

[revtj]

Yellow Dawg Dem here as well...

Before I endorse anyone it needs to be pointed out that whoever takes the job is in for the worst ride of their lives, and probably our nation's lowest point since the Stock Market Crash of '29 and the Depression that followed. I am an optimist! But the misdeeds of this current administration have been criminal, and the middle class is on the verge of obliteration.

Here are some of the things the next president will have to do in order to be a success (all are immediate, crucial priorities):

1. Restore diplomacy and world respect including resolving the Iraq war.

2. Fix Social Security, Medicare and the entire healthcare system.

3. Achieve funding & implementation of real (as opposed to imaginary) homeland security, border patrol, and natural disaster response.

4. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, cooperate on the world stage in reversing the trend of global warming.

5. Tax large corporations, vigorously prosecute white collar corruption, leverage fair trade agreements, and punish corporations who move to Dubai or elsewhere after ripping off American taxpayers.

6. Fix election fraud and end corruption in Congress in BOTH parties related to lobbyist and special interest funding, creating fair elections and enabling a realistic 3rd party possibility in Presidential elections.

Well, these are just the first things I thought of, there are many more, especially as relates to human rights, civil rights and minority rights but I have to assume we all know that.

SO...maybe the fundamentalists are correct, Jesus Christ is coming back, because it would take someone divine to achieve these things. :eek:

OH and let's not forget, whoever it is WILL be blamed for the entire fubar of the Bush years, and incredibly, most Americans will agree because they saw it on tv.

With that caveat in mind, GIVE US OBAMA! He hasn't been ruined by the system yet and the values he espouses are apparently consistent with his personal life and his politics. (Of course, so was Jimmy Carter's...:rolleyes:)

[Zerbie]

RevTJ NAILS it. Wow. Yeah, hafta nod. :agree:

It IS too early, but at this early stage I like Obama.

I voted three times in my life for Republicans, all the other times for democrats. I'm neither myself, of course; it should surprise no one here that I do not identify as HAVING a political party affiliation.

The 3 Republicans I voted for were Christine Todd Whitman for governor of NJ when I lived there, a no-name newbie who ran in a local primary race against the single most anti-gay state legislator in Arizona, and John McCain.

NEVER never NEVER again (John McCain I mean.) He seemed really quite good a few years ago. These last 2 years he has turned and flushed himself and his maverick reputation down the toilet. He pretty much lost me for quits when he publicly endorsed Protect Marriage Arizona, & had his picture taken with the folks that sponsored it (the previous director of that particular group thinks it's "laughable" that sex between same-sex consenting adults should NOT result in jail time.)

That's not all he's done that makes me regret voting for him. And never never NEVER again.

Anyway, short version: McCain has turned himself into a far right wing clone and sold out his entire reputation as an independent and strong leadership personality.

[revtj]

RevTJ NAILS it. Wow. Yeah, hafta nod. :agree:

It IS too early, but at this early stage I like Obama.

I voted three times in my life for Republicans, all the other times for democrats. I'm neither myself, of course; it should surprise no one here that I do not identify as HAVING a political party affiliation.

The 3 Republicans I voted for were Christine Todd Whitman for governor of NJ when I lived there, a no-name newbie who ran in a local primary race against the single most anti-gay state legislator in Arizona, and John McCain.

NEVER never NEVER again (John McCain I mean.) He seemed really quite good a few years ago. These last 2 years he has turned and flushed himself and his maverick reputation down the toilet. He pretty much lost me for quits when he publicly endorsed Protect Marriage Arizona, & had his picture taken with the folks that sponsored it (the previous director of that particular group thinks it's "laughable" that sex between same-sex consenting adults should NOT result in jail time.)

That's not all he's done that makes me regret voting for him. And never never NEVER again.

Anyway, short version: McCain has turned himself into a far right wing clone and sold out his entire reputation as an independent and strong leadership personality.

Yeah, I perceived McCain as a man of integrity and respected him...in his defense I will say I think the party system makes whores out of the best of them...I used to think Hillary had integrity, but she seems willing to sell out nowadays also. Bummer. :(

[sjbouza]

The biggest problem I see with McCain is his flip flopping on civil rights issues. He use to support civil rights for gays, he even spoke out against Farwell. But now he realizes that without Farwell and Dobson he will have a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination. So he backslid and "apologized" about what he said about Farwell. He has changed so many of his views on the "liberal" side of life.

I dont know if Obama is the right one either. He just seems to me to be to much of a pushover. I dont think he has the balls to do what needs to be done. To me he just seems like a good "yes man".

Actually, I like Dr Paul (cant think of his last name right now). I really doubt that he will get the nomination because he is way to out there on some of his ideas. He wants to get rid of the IRS (a great idea) and bring back the US to ruling by the Constitution. Both are wonderful ideas, but I dont think that is going to win him any points with the powers to be. I really like his views on diplomacy with other countries. Getting us back to good relations with other countries is going to be a must for the next Prez and I think if he can do what he says he is going to, I think he may be the man to do it.

Clinton and Guliani are two more flip floppers. Neither one in my eyes has any credibility. Yea Guliani "cleaned up" New York, but what has to be done in the White House is just way to over both of their heads. Clinton has had just to many fubars in her own career to make her a viable choice. I think that the public wouldnt trust her. After what her Hubby did I think will be on the minds of the voters and it will not be to her favor.

Edwards I think would be good. I know he is a little flaky, but I think he would do a good job. I cant really think of anything bad about him, not saying there isnt, but he seems sincere. Although I dont like his stance on gay civil rights and marriage, but maybe there will be some change down the road.

It is just going to be so hard this election. I mean there really isnt anyone that is worth while at all. It is going to come down to the lesser of two evils. Who can we stand to have in the White House that will do a decent job. I dont think any of them will do a great job. Well, I dont think they can mess things up any more than Bushie already has. If they do the US is in a world of trouble. I just feel sorry for the mess that Bushie is leaving for the next Prez. They are going to have to do a lot of ass kissing with the rest of the world and get the US back in a good light with other countries. RevTJ has very good points. He has hit it right on the head. There is going to have to be some really big miracles happen for the next Prez. It is a shame that they are going to suffer for the ills of Bushie. He definately isnt his father, not even close. Clinton ran the country into the ground and Bushie just kept digging the same hole and put it further in.

We need another Reagan. He was by far the best Prez we have had in the last 50 years. To bad cloning isnt legal, we could just clone Reagan and get this country back to greatness again. We just need someone that has some back bone and can tell the rest of the government this is the way it is gonna be so lets get er done!!!

[revtj]

The biggest problem I see with McCain is his flip flopping on civil rights issues. He use to support civil rights for gays, he even spoke out against Farwell. But now he realizes that without Farwell and Dobson he will have a snowballs chance in hell of getting the nomination. So he backslid and "apologized" about what he said about Farwell. He has changed so many of his views on the "liberal" side of life.

I dont know if Obama is the right one either. He just seems to me to be to much of a pushover. I dont think he has the balls to do what needs to be done. To me he just seems like a good "yes man".

They all seem to flipflop to me...they follow the money. And gay rights groups don't have as much cash as anti-gay constituents.

Gays should be plenty sick and tired of being a political football. They either use us as a scare tactic or they court us like a hot trick for a one night stand. Rarely does anything ever come of it except manipulation of the masses.

[u-dog]

No candidate can afford to say, unequivocally, everything that we want to hear them say. They will ALL have to slip around and flip around in order to pull together enough constituencies to actually win an election.

No Democrat candidate can afford to EITHER pander to or ignore the GLBT vote. That's just reality.

What we, as GLBT voters, have got to do is to look behind the rhetoric to their voting and speaking records and to discern which candidate will be the best one for GLBT rights.

Clinton, Obama, Richardson on the Dem side

Guilianni on the Repo side.

Seems to me.

Dave

[dsdrane]

If we're really going to be realistic about this, there is no Repo side.

And them's the facts.

[tpdncr4christ]

Just a general question, well sort of general I guess. In the upcoming election in '08 who would you like to see as president and why? I would like to know who you would like from both parties, what Republican and Democrat.

I guess I am just looking for others views on the candidates. After seeing both debates I am curious who others feel would be good for this country.

I have no idea!!! This is my first election to vote in and I have no clue!

Some educational system they have. :D

[BrentRichards]

If we're really going to be realistic about this, there is no Repo side.

And them's the facts.

Now I feel alienated [sniff]!

[dsdrane]

Brent!...Pussycat, what do you want me to tell you...that Rudy is the least horrible [read: most moderate] of the choices facing gay Republicans [gulp/choke/gasp...it's ok; I'll be alright, just give me a second...] in the next presidential election?

I could do that, of course, but it would fly in the face of the facts that he is completely and utterly unelectable!

Have you seen the pictures of the man in drag?

I actually quite like them; I think they're cool, and I love -- especially as a former New Yorker -- that he had the cojones to pose in drag, however:

Explain that to the rest of the Republican "big tent".

Translation: it ain't gonna happen. Fuhgedaboutit!

I lived in NYC when the man was mayor. Never voted for him. Not once. He's a loud-mouth schnook. The city was clean because the economy was doing great. It wasn't any more his doing than it was Clinton's (for the Republicans). Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of hooey.

Listen: as we found out with Clinton, no matter what your Repub. candidate says, he ain't gonna get nothing through Congress without one of the party's say-so. In short: it doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Worry more about whom represents you in Congress vis-a-vis gay rights and less about what our presidential candidates say or don't say.

And, if you're a Republican...find someone else to support other than Rudy. No need to thank me now.

[u-dog]

Now I feel alienated [sniff]!


Don't feel alienated! we love you! we just hate your politics! You know... "Love the Republican, hate the republicanism!"

[andrewlittle]

Don't feel alienated! we love you! we just hate your politics! You know... "Love the Republican, hate the republicanism!"

Yeah, but just don't be too pharisaical as you voice disapproval of the (re)publican(ism).

[Pablo Rafael]

Now I feel alienated [sniff]!

Brent,
Don't feel bad. You still have me. There are TWO of us! We Republicans will stick together no matter what. Have no fear!
Actually, I'm a fairly lousy Republican. I voted straight Democratic in the last election and voted for Kerry for president. Now that I think more about it, if you're counting on me for support, you're in bad trouble. I have a real problem towing the party line. You know, the kid in the class that just couldn't quite do as he was told...sigh!

Don't feel alienated! we love you! we just hate your politics! You know... "Love the Republican, hate the republicanism!"

Dave, Now we feel so much more loved. I just feel the sensation of love filtering down. Either that or I'm getting the stomach flu. One or the other.

Tu Amigo, Pablo

[matthewspeed]

I have a lot of convictions which can sway my vote to go more conservative. Sorry guys/girls!!

I am pro life. I need to vote for a candidate who is pro life. I am doing my homework now. I have been slow on this! I would be willing to give up my gay rights for the rights of the unborn. It really does not matter who is in the white house concerning our rights. 3 states (or is it 2?) have already made gay marriage legal even with George Bush in the white house. We will have to fight harder, thats all. It does not matter who is our prez, us gay folks will never give up and we will get the laws changed regardless who is running this country. -Just my thoughts.

[dsdrane]

Matthew, I respect your viewpoint. What I would like to hear more about is why your particular litmus test falls on the pro-life issue to the exclusion of the gay-rights issue(s). I don't think of them as being mutually exclusive; but, of course, they very much can be vis-a-vis presidential candidates and parties.

I really don't mean to be snarky by asking this, but do you feel somehow that unborn fetuses are more worthy of your candidate's support than fully-functioning adult gay people are? If so, fine, but why?

:confused:, -d.

[Pablo Rafael]

I am pro life. I need to vote for a candidate who is pro life. I would be willing to give up my gay rights for the rights of the unborn.

Matthew,

I know where you are coming from on this. The pro-life issue is the one single issue that keeps me in the Republican camp. I feel everyone has a right to a chance at life. However, I feel like the conservatives have made a sound-bite of the pro life issue. It seems to me that all that a conservative candidate has to do is say that he/she is pro-life; then no more has to be done with the issue. An interesting piece of information is that the numbers of abortions in the US declined during the Clinton administration and some statistics have it actually increasing during the Bush administration.

I get frustrated with conservative issues like funding of abstinence-only education. It sounds good, but it has been proven to have no effect. If we are truly pro-life we will do things that actually help reduce abortions. I think abstinence and birth control education, counseling, medical care for all, reducing the number of people in poverty, seeing that affordable day care is available, improving the adoption and foster care systems in this nation will accomplish more than anything.

I have voted Democratic lately because I feel the Republicans haven't done anything on the pro-life side that actually has improved the situation. (And on most issues I have a fairly progressive leaning.)

Tu Amigo, Pablo

[revtj]

Originally Posted by dsdrane View Post
If we're really going to be realistic about this, there is no Repo side.

And them's the facts.

I know what you mean...I never thought I'd see the day when Andrew Sullivan & I agree about most everything he posts on his blog...his writing reflects the deep disappointment so many conservatives are feeling right now. On the one hand, I want to scold them for taking the bait in the first place; on the other, I hope they are able to reform the Republican party if they feel they must stay.

To be real however, Andrew is starting to identify as a libertarian now, and I do not buy into that political philosophy any more than I do the bigotry of the right wing Republicans. It is necessary for government to put controls and caps on the free market or else several million dollars will disappear in a duffle bag in Iraq via Halliburton...

Things are really getting shaken and stirred and I hope the outcome is good for America!

[BrentRichards]

Brent,
Don't feel bad. You still have me. There are TWO of us! We Republicans will stick together no matter what. Have no fear!
Actually, I'm a fairly lousy Republican. I voted straight Democratic in the last election and voted for Kerry for president. Now that I think more about it, if you're counting on me for support, you're in bad trouble. I have a real problem towing the party line. You know, the kid in the class that just couldn't quite do as he was told...sigh!



Dave, Now we feel so much more loved. I just feel the sensation of love filtering down. Either that or I'm getting the stomach flu. One or the other.

Tu Amigo, Pablo

I'm sure I count as a lousy Republican, too ... except that I'm also convinced that I'm a REAL Republican (fiscal conservative, state's rights, and so on) instead of a SOUNDBITE Republican that's reactionary on all the buzzword social issues (had this same conversation with a Rep candidate at the polls today) ... there are a lot of us, we sent Santorum home, and we're GOING to change this party.

Beyond that, no, I don't toe anybody's party line. We own our parties, not the other way around.

BTW, to any who choose to, choke all you want on the phrase "Gay Republicans" --we're used to it. I honestly have to keep my mouth shut about it in most gay contexts, or I get verbally abused pretty viciously. I personally think the gay community ought to be a little more happy to have some of us "on the inside" of both parties!

[Emproph]

http://a859.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/21/m_5f2db00fb590a23c1461bc92bfc532e2.jpg (http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewAlbums&friendID=174214012)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
Sam Brownback: What I Think About Evolution (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/opinion/31brownback.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)
You can also find a copy of it on his website (http://www.brownback.com/s/NewsRoom/PressReleases/WhatIThinkAboutEvolutionNYTimesOpEd/tabid/363/Default.aspx).

The premise behind the question seems to be that if one does not unhesitatingly assert belief in evolution, then one must necessarily believe that God created the world and everything in it in six 24-hour days....

....While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man’s origins, we can say... Man was not an accident... Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science.

Now that that's settled, what's his stance on gravity?

[BrentRichards]

http://a859.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/21/m_5f2db00fb590a23c1461bc92bfc532e2.jpg (http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewAlbums&friendID=174214012)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
Sam Brownback: What I Think About Evolution (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/opinion/31brownback.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)
You can also find a copy of it on his website (http://www.brownback.com/s/NewsRoom/PressReleases/WhatIThinkAboutEvolutionNYTimesOpEd/tabid/363/Default.aspx).



Now that that's settled, what's his stance on gravity?

Settled? What's settled? If you haven't yet, read the release linked above on Brownback's website. He's certainly a politician. He's all over the place in this statement ... trying not to sound like an idiot while trying REALLY HARD not to say he might accept a figurative interpretation of Genesis, or, or that he might really be willing to ignore science, or ... actually, I'm not clear what he's trying to say! Certainly, saying right out that he might not be a 6-day literalist would really anger his fundy base, so ... He's bought more than a few buzzwords from the intelligent design debate, that's for sure ("There is no unified theory of evolution ..." Um, well, not exactly true, chief ... Intermural debates don't mean we can chuck the whole idea.)

[u-dog]

Thought you might get a chuckle out of this: :)

-Sudw4ghVe8

[Gennee]

At this point in time, I don't know. I'm a registered Independent. To me it's too early. I will NOT vote for Guiliani, that's for sure.

Gennee

[Steven E. Webster]

Settled? What's settled? If you haven't yet, read the release linked above on Brownback's website. He's certainly a politician. He's all over the place in this statement ... trying not to sound like an idiot while trying REALLY HARD not to say he might accept a figurative interpretation of Genesis, or, or that he might really be willing to ignore science, or ... actually, I'm not clear what he's trying to say! Certainly, saying right out that he might not be a 6-day literalist would really anger his fundy base, so ... He's bought more than a few buzzwords from the intelligent design debate, that's for sure ("There is no unified theory of evolution ..." Um, well, not exactly true, chief ... Intermural debates don't mean we can chuck the whole idea.)

Freinds,
Remember that Brownback has converted to Roman Catholicism. Scanning his article it sounded alot like the kind of theo-babble one might get from some of the right wing Catholic theologians--my guess is that someone in that camp ghost wrote this for Brownback so he wouldn't come off sounding like an ignorant anti-science Fundamentalist, while at the same time making it clear that he's a proper theist in a conservative Roman Catholic mold.

Steven Webster

[Steven E. Webster]

I'm sure I count as a lousy Republican, too ... except that I'm also convinced that I'm a REAL Republican (fiscal conservative, state's rights, and so on) instead of a SOUNDBITE Republican that's reactionary on all the buzzword social issues (had this same conversation with a Rep candidate at the polls today) ... there are a lot of us, we sent Santorum home, and we're GOING to change this party.

Beyond that, no, I don't toe anybody's party line. We own our parties, not the other way around.

BTW, to any who choose to, choke all you want on the phrase "Gay Republicans" --we're used to it. I honestly have to keep my mouth shut about it in most gay contexts, or I get verbally abused pretty viciously. I personally think the gay community ought to be a little more happy to have some of us "on the inside" of both parties!

I'm a liberal Democrat and proud of it. Hillary is too Republican for my taste (so was hubby Bill). But I'm not going to criticize Gay Republicans--last time I did that someone pointed out to me that it's no less reasonable than being a Gay Christian--they had me there!

And the truth is, I like Andrew Sullivan a great deal. I appreciate his brand of conservatism. Where I disagree with him is on certain economic issues. I believe in balanced budgets, mind you, but I also believe that there is a role for government in regulation of the economy and even in the "redistribution of wealth" (horrors!). I have no problem with more taxes on the rich and more aid to the poor.

I hope that the LGBT movement and Soulforce will remain open to people of all political persuasions.

I do wish that the Log Cabin Republicans and their allies in the GOP could do better at achieving equality for LGBT people in that party.

Steven Webster

[pnggrad79]

I am at a loss, as to who to vote for in the upcoming elections. I am disillusioned by political leaders enough that I don't trust any of them. I voted for Dubya twice, but I was still in the closet and struggling with my sexuality as much as he was legislating against it.

Now, I just don't know which one is the best of the worst? Clinton, I think would stay in the middle to win votes, Obama, I just don't know, Giulani, I don't know, although his presence after 9/11 in New York showed tremendous leadership despite his personal failings. I think he would be fair and listen to his advisors. Good leaders aren't made, they are born and he, in my opinion, really rose to the occasion. Unlike that mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, I think, he just was a washout(pardon the pun) and I didn't feel like he really rose to the occasion there in New Orleans after Katrina. It was a real catastrophe and I feel like maybe he just didn't know what to do. Again I wasn't there, but from everything I read and saw and heard in the aftermath, he just didn't appear to me to be a good leader, something New Orleans desperately needed. I am rambling again.

Well, enough said, bottom line, I hope whoever wins is favorable to gay marriage and gay rights, fixing the environment, and fixing the taxation system. :confused:

[u-dog]

Thought you might get a chuckle out of this: :)

-Sudw4ghVe8


OK, I bumped this ancient thread in order to share what I thought was an HILLARYOUS (get it? HILLARYous?) video and then nobody EVEN laughed! :mad: Did anybody actually watch it? or do I have a depraved sense of humor? Or is the stereotype of humorless lesbians really true? Polly laughed!

[Blockwell]

Kucinich is also my favorite. I know he hasn’t got a chance but I am going to vote for him in the primary. Universal health coverage is important to me and he is the only candidate with the courage to support it. I promised myself after the last election that I was never again going to vote for anyone to keep someone else from winning. From now on my vote will be for who I want and let the chips fall where they may.

I think Hillary Clinton has a better chance that many of the others have stated here. While she is not my first choice (3rd actually), she does have one incredibly attractive feature, she will make the wingnuts suffer as much as I have for the last eight years. I know it is a childish feeling, but I do have it.

After Bush won again in 2004 I took down my US Flag on the front of the house for the duration of his term. I am looking forward to flying it again.

For those of you who have mentioned Pro-Life as the most important plank for their candidate, you may want to ponder this.

What is more important to you: 1) Decreasing the number of abortions or 2) A president that that is Pro-Life?

A president that has a hard line against abortion is likely to encourage abstinence only education, which we have seen is not that effective and leads to more abortions. A liberal candidate might be hard to stomach, but if they try and encourage the European model of sex education, there will far fewer abortions; just something to ponder

[dsdrane]

As I think I've posted before, I have no particular love for Hillary Clinton (anymore). After years of defending her and even singing her praises, she annoyed me one too many times.

That said, I happily pulled the lever for her when I still lived in New York and will do so again if she is my party's nominee for President.

Truth is: I think she'll make a fine President, maybe even a great one. She's certainly the most qualified (with the possible exceptions of Bill Richardson or Joe Biden, though neither of them has lived in the White House and been privy to all that happens there).

If Al Gore were running, it would be a different story, but it's looking increasingly like that is not going to happen...and, if you can't be with the one you love....

I love Barack Obama, but he's too damn green. I look forward to having him as my future Senator for at least another term before he runs again.

Assuming Hillary is the nominee (and I see nothing out there that convinces me she won't be), the more interesting guessing game for me becomes the running mate. Many will say Barack is the natural choice -- he'll certainly be the $$ choice -- but I truly hope that doesn't happen. It's hard enough for a Senator to win the presidency, let alone two Senators -- especially one with little national or international experience.

My money is on Bill Richardson. He's an amusing, articulate guy; he's three quarters Hispanic and speaks Spanish fluently; he's a Roman Catholic; he's currently serving as Governor of New Mexico; he's served in the House, as Clinton's Energy Secretary; and as Ambassador to the U.N. In terms of his political beliefs, this is what I found via Wikipedia:

Richardson is pro-choice, supports the death penalty and gun rights, and advocates affirmative action policies in government contracts. While he voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, he has since supported LGBT rights in his career as governor; he added sexual orientation and gender identity to New Mexico's list of civil rights categories, and opposes the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He opposes the war in Iraq, and has called for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from the region by the end of 2007. Distinguishing himself from other candidates for the Democratic Party nomination, he has stressed that he would leave "zero troops" in Iraq.

Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Hillary is perceived as The Biggest Liberal Ever, and the sort of middle-of-the-road positions of Richardson -- a little conservative here, a little liberal there -- could provide some necessary cover for those willing to consider voting for the Democrats.

[tdogg]

I'm a liberal Democrat and proud of it. Hillary is too Republican for my taste (so was hubby Bill).

Yeah, me too. Both catered/cater to conservatives for the benefit of saving votes and getting SOME of their agenda passed through congress. That said, I'm not sure about voting for any of the others instead. I really like Obama but like David says, he is a little green for me too. WHERE ARE YOU AL???? :pray:

Any thoughts on Kucinech (spelling??)? Other than he's highly unlikely to nab the nomination?

One thing I pretty much guarantee, can't vote for any of the republicans. Too much of that for way too many years.

[Emproph]

This is actually redemptive, especially coming from Fox News.

Via Good As You (http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2007/09/video-brownback.html). (read the article :tup:)

2 min
5MCm2nsGgRI

[u-dog]

g6PRLj4mk3o

This one was listed just below the last video. Made me laugh.