I hope its Tim Kaine, Gov of VA!

Darla said:
Jarod, no matter how you and others want to paint this, he would be one single heart beat away from nominating the next, and the deciding, supreme court judge. Life holds no guarantees. And he is anti-choice.

What I don’t understand is, shortly after Hillary dropped out, women were lectured, scolded and yelled at to shut up, NOW, unless we wanted John McCain picking the next supreme court judge. Why did choice matter then, to the point where democratic men felt very comfortable threatening women with it, but now it doesn’t matter?

I won’t vote for a ticket that has an anti-choice man on it, period. We began this year with the strong possibility that a woman would be elected president. Six months later, we risk losing choice, and from Democrats.
Many of us will go elsewhere. I will. I am not alone.
Click to expand...


1) I never heard anyone scold or yell at anyone to shut up.
2) Which is better a vp who is anti-choice or another President who is, because if you go elsewhere that is what will happen.

Obama will likely survive his term(s), he will appoint solidly Pro-Choice canidates to the Supreme Court, if he is elected.

If you support Senator Clinton, support what she is asking you to do, which is to vote for Obama.
 
Jarod said:
1) I never heard anyone scold or yell at anyone to shut up.
2) Which is better a vp who is anti-choice or another President who is, because if you go elsewhere that is what will happen.

Obama will likely survive his term(s), he will appoint solidly Pro-Choice canidates to the Supreme Court, if he is elected.

If you support Senator Clinton, support what she is asking you to do, which is to vote for Obama.
Click to expand...

Ok sir. Is it ok, do you think…can we still have birth control? I be good, I be real good, ok sir? I sorry I spoke out of turn sir. I sorry.
 
Darla said:
Ok sir. Is it ok, do you think…can we still have birth control? I be good, I be real good, ok sir? I sorry I spoke out of turn sir. I sorry.
Click to expand...

Whatever, go ahead, destroy what we a have all worked for. Put the final nail in R v. W and support some third party canidate.


Progress comes slowly, and its even slower when people wont support babby steps.
 
Jarod said:
1) I never heard anyone scold or yell at anyone to shut up.
2) Which is better a vp who is anti-choice or another President who is, because if you go elsewhere that is what will happen.

Obama will likely survive his term(s), he will appoint solidly Pro-Choice canidates to the Supreme Court, if he is elected.

If you support Senator Clinton, support what she is asking you to do, which is to vote for Obama.
Click to expand...

Are you really this clueless?

Kaine would cost Obama the election. No foreign policy experience... which is still Obamas biggest weakness despite all the hype over his trip. He adds NOTHING to the ticket, in fact he detracts from it with some of his positions. He will cost Obama in the swing states and thus cost him the election.
 
Jarod said:
Whatever, go ahead, destroy what we a have all worked for. Put the final nail in R v. W and support some third party canidate.


Progress comes slowly, and its even slower when people wont support babby steps.
Click to expand...

All we have worked for?

I’m a feminist. I work for women’s rights. You don’t give one rat’s ass about that, you condescending ass.

Obama will put a pro-choice candidate on the ticket, or he will lose women like me. That is the order, got it?
 
Superfreak said:
Are you really this clueless?

Kaine would cost Obama the election. No foreign policy experience... which is still Obamas biggest weakness despite all the hype over his trip. He adds NOTHING to the ticket, in fact he detracts from it with some of his positions. He will cost Obama in the swing states and thus cost him the election.
Click to expand...

I can’t believe this motherfucker even spoke to me this way. Did you see that? Do as you are told?

hat’s how “liberal” men think, in a good many cases. In far, far too many cases. This is the shit they think women, who make up the majority of the electorate have to take from them.

Oh, that ties it alright. I am so glad I had this little chat with Jarod the ass.
 
This whole conversation is probably moot. The only one who is really hyping this is Kaine, and some mostly anonymous reporters who claim to have an inside scoop. All we know from the Obama camp - unless I missed something - is that he was one of many they're considering.

The more I look at him & the idea of him as VP, the more implausible it seems. He's a bad candidate for Obama's VP on a lot of different levels.
 
Cypress said:
I hear ya. Aren't democrats supposed to be pro-labor and pro-choice? Jesus Christ. Obama is sadly mistaken if he thinks putting a zell miller on the ticket is a wise move.
Click to expand...

This isn't necessarily true and goes against the "big tent" philosophy. There are many pro-life (and pro second ammendment I might add) democrats who have been forced to vote republican and the vomit still in their mouths by the Bush presidency doesn't change the fact that these are real and large issues for them. I think Obama might actually be trying to win states that democrats haven't won in a while. I can't wait to see how it plays out.
 
I don't know what "big tent" is supposed to mean on big issues. What's the point of having a party & a party platform if you can call pretty much anything a "Democrat?" Being pro-choice is part of what defines "being a Democrat," as much as any other issue. You either support keeping Roe v. Wade as the law of the land, or you want to see if repealed. Those are 2 very different outlooks, and they're not compatible with one another. How effective can a party be when - in order to simply have a "big tent" - they have different factions that are working toward completely opposite goals?

Don't even get me started a Lieberman. I don't know how anyone can campaign for McCain & still be welcomed by Democrats. That's taking "big tent" a bit far.
 
Many of the policies of the democratic party appeal to religious folks. Taking care of the poor (certain social programs), keeping social security solvent (actually doing something not just providing lip service like the republicans), supporting education (which I think is part of taking care of the poor), stopping to think about it before taking this country into war, treating Israel like any other nation rather than having a Zionistic approach to the dealings in the ME, doing something about the rising cost of healthcare, taking care of the environment, etc. The problem is one cannot be expected to vote against his conscience every single time on the national level because every single candidate on the national level has to be pro-death.
 
Last edited:
Darla said:
All we have worked for?

I’m a feminist. I work for women’s rights. You don’t give one rat’s ass about that, you condescending ass.

Obama will put a pro-choice candidate on the ticket, or he will lose women like me. That is the order, got it?
Click to expand...

I am a feminist and have worked for equal rights plenty, do you belive just because I am a man I cant do that?
 
Hmm I am not a feminist and can't honestly say I have ever actually worked for womens rights. The only thing I have done is support equal rights laws at work and vote for people for equal rights.
 
leaningright said:
Many of the policies of the democratic party appeal to religious folks. Taking care of the poor (certain social programs), keeping social security solvent (actually doing something not just providing lip service like the republicans), supporting education (which I think is part of taking care of the poor), stopping to think about it before taking this country into war, treating Israel like any other nation rather than having a Zionistic approach to the dealings in the ME, doing something about the rising cost of healthcare, taking care of the environment, etc. The problem is one cannot be expected to vote against his conscience every single time on the national level because every single candidate on the national level has to be pro-death.
Click to expand...

Well, you already have one religious morality-based party. Why not hang around there and try and change them, rather than trying to turn the only other viable political party in this country into a theologically based one as well?

You’d love it if women like me had no where to go, wouldn’t you?
 
Onceler said:
I don't know what "big tent" is supposed to mean on big issues. What's the point of having a party & a party platform if you can call pretty much anything a "Democrat?" Being pro-choice is part of what defines "being a Democrat," as much as any other issue. You either support keeping Roe v. Wade as the law of the land, or you want to see if repealed. Those are 2 very different outlooks, and they're not compatible with one another. How effective can a party be when - in order to simply have a "big tent" - they have different factions that are working toward completely opposite goals?

Don't even get me started a Lieberman. I don't know how anyone can campaign for McCain & still be welcomed by Democrats. That's taking "big tent" a bit far.
Click to expand...

It may be that he wants to ram Evan Bayh down our throats, and, knowing that liberals and women won’t be thrilled at all, is baiting us with Kaine so that when he gives us Bayh, we’ll be relieved.

I find that pretty insidious.

I’m really up to here with this guy already. I am so sorry he is the nominee.
 
Darla said:
It may be that he wants to ram Evan Bayh down our throats, and, knowing that liberals and women won’t be thrilled at all, is baiting us with Kaine so that when he gives us Bayh, we’ll be relieved.

I find that pretty insidious.

I’m really up to here with this guy already. I am so sorry he is the nominee.
Click to expand...

Now when you say "you are up to here" with him.... Are you holding your hand way above your head? Or about shoulder high (aka... about where toppys head would be) ?
 
Darla said:
It may be that he wants to ram Evan Bayh down our throats, and, knowing that liberals and women won’t be thrilled at all, is baiting us with Kaine so that when he gives us Bayh, we’ll be relieved.
.
Click to expand...

That is along the lines of what I suggested about 50 posts ago. He may be "considering" Kaine so that it can appear he is willing to look at candidates from all walks of life (so to speak). Then he grabs a hold of the one he wanted.

Bayh would be a mistake as well. (IMO)

His personality would be an anchor on the charisma of Obama.

I still think it will be Biden.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top