Hillary in Hattiesburg (1 Viewer)

[Bishop]

What are your opinions of Obama tapping Gore as VP? Has either made any overtures?

 

[TPS]

>>These people will suggest to the gullible that if conservatives wouldn't vote for the current woman or black man running for office that surely it must be because she is a woman or he is black. Again, racism and sexism exist, but those failings are hardly limited to those on the right. When a person of any color or sex proposes a direction for this country that I can support, I will gladly vote for that person. The fact that Clinton and Obama don't fit that description doesn't make me or other like-minded people racist, sexist or even angry.

No it doesn't because there are a subset of conservatives, such as you, who are honest (Jack Kemp) and believe your theories are the right way for America to go. You already know I don't have a problem with you or why you have your beliefs. However, you are decidedly in a very small minority among conservatives in the South. I think we both realize this.

>>What are your opinions of Obama tapping Gore as VP? Has either made any overtures?

I thought Gore was a decent VP inasmuch as you could trust him to be mostly honest. I was going to start a thread the other day with a poll wondering if anyone still actually thought a Gore Presidency could have approached the depths of a Bush/Cheney presidency. See the VRWC, in order to mock and quell the discontent of Gore voters (and others like me) who realize that the results of the 2000 Presidential Election ended up giving the Presidency to the wrong individual in a major screwjob on the voters, used to trot out, "At least Al Gore wasn't the president on 9/11" like that either meant anything or showed how tough all of the draft dodgers and loathe-to-serve puppeteers in Washington were. I guarantee that this country would be on a far different and better course in every measurable means. It's not even debatable.

Early word was that he might pop up at the convention to become the brokered candidate if an impasse prevented Obama and Clinton from rallying around either one or both of them. He's been there. He knows what's going on. But I don't think he'll be the VP candidate again.

TPS

 

[Bishop]

>>These people will suggest to the gullible that if conservatives wouldn't vote for the current woman or black man running for office that surely it must be because she is a woman or he is black. Again, racism and sexism exist, but those failings are hardly limited to those on the right. When a person of any color or sex proposes a direction for this country that I can support, I will gladly vote for that person. The fact that Clinton and Obama don't fit that description doesn't make me or other like-minded people racist, sexist or even angry.

No it doesn't because there are a subset of conservatives, such as you, who are honest (Jack Kemp) and believe your theories are the right way for America to go. You already know I don't have a problem with you or why you have your beliefs. However, you are decidedly in a very small minority among conservatives in the South. I think we both realize this.

>>What are your opinions of Obama tapping Gore as VP? Has either made any overtures?

I thought Gore was a decent VP inasmuch as you could trust him to be mostly honest. I was going to start a thread the other day with a poll wondering if anyone still actually thought a Gore Presidency could have approached the depths of a Bush/Cheney presidency. See the VRWC, in order to mock and quell the discontent of Gore voters (and others like me) who realize that the results of the 2000 Presidential Election ended up giving the Presidency to the wrong individual in a major screwjob on the voters, used to trot out, "At least Al Gore wasn't the president on 9/11" like that either meant anything or showed how tough all of the draft dodgers and loathe-to-serve puppeteers in Washington were. I guarantee that this country would be on a far different and better course in every measurable means. It's not even debatable.

Early word was that he might pop up at the convention to become the brokered candidate if an impasse prevented Obama and Clinton from rallying around either one or both of them. He's been there. He knows what's going on. But I don't think he'll be the VP candidate again.

TPS

Thanks. I supported Gore's presidential bid, and would be excited to see him implement most facets of his environmental agenda as a returning VP. It took awhile for me to realize the implications of his being robbed out out of office.

 

[TPS]

>>If one spends less, sure it does I don't get your point. In for a penny in for a pound I guess?

The point is that we are probably going to probably run a deficit budget for at least 5-10 years. The question is who gets those dollars. I don't believe for a minute that Al Gore would have run up several hundred billion dollars destroying and rebuilding Iraq. I don't believe that would have been Hillary's or Obama's first choice for spending all that red ink either. America has enough problems that we could use the money, or at least the lion's share of it, right here at home.

TPS

 

[TPS]

>>Thanks. I supported Gore's presidential bid, and would be excited to see him implement most facets of his environmental agenda as a returning VP. It took awhile for me to realize the implications of his being robbed out out of office.

Robbed indeed. But alas we live in an imperfect system, which when we account for human error, anything can happen. I think Gore is both right and wrong on the environment. But at the same time, it would have been nice to have a President that actually gave a ****, right or wrong. Depending on what he wants to do (most likely doesn't need the money), he could probably get any job in the Administration that he wanted.

TPS

 

[LSSpam]

>>If one spends less, sure it does I don't get your point. In for a penny in for a pound I guess?

The point is that we are probably going to probably run a deficit budget for at least 5-10 years. The question is who gets those dollars. I don't believe for a minute that Al Gore would have run up several hundred billion dollars destroying and rebuilding Iraq. I don't believe that would have been Hillary's or Obama's first choice for spending all that red ink either. America has enough problems that we could use the money, or at least the lion's share of it, right here at home.

TPS

Right, but it's not 2000, and we're not deciding between Obama and Bush again, so

 

[TPS]

>>Right, but it's not 2000, and we're not deciding between Obama and Bush again, so

We're talking about 2008. Additionally, I referenced the most recent comments from President Bush's budget office that said we could probably cut our deficit spending in half by 2012. So if we're going to continue to spend somewhere between $400-800 billion outside of our means between now and then*, I prefer it becomes domestic spending.

* I realize that any combination of budget cutting, tax increases or troop drawdowns greatly affects those projections.

TPS