Which candidate is best qualified to stop this war & fight these fucking maniacs?

Is what I'd like to know.

they're not afraid to say the "P" word.

But since he has been dismissed from existence, Edwards. But since he probably won't win...

Um...

Yeah, nevermind.

That was so right.

But I will only serve if installed by acclamation, so ferget it.

Soon. ;)

.

Kucinich, really, but he's not viable and has essentially endorsed Obama.

maybe Edwards too!

garnering the Pres. job would end the US Occupation of Iraq.
A draw down is definite but not an end to the Occupation.
Here is why.

The Repug & Dem Leaders want to maintain the US Occupation.
They want to keep the Fiasco going to finalize that Oil Deal.. The Repugs & Dems are afraid that they will be blamed if they force the end of the US Occupation and Iraq goes down the tubes, the Oil goes to other countries, & Iran gains major control in the ME.

To have all troops out by 2013?

Sorry, but I'm very skeptical that Obama will get it done.

2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?!

Are you fucking insane??? Do you think that is acceptable?!?

2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?! 2013?!

OMFG!!!!!!!!!!! :cry: :grr: :cry: :grr: :cry: :grr: :cry: :grr: :cry: :grr: :cry: :grr:

:nuke:

TAKE BACK YOUR COUNTRY!~!!!! YOU have the power !! USE IT!!!

:cry:

http://www.dennis4president.com/home/

:cry: . :grr:

I'm in disbelief. :banghead:

And do any of these idiots here as members understand what a 'progressive' is at all?

They just signed up and had no clue why they are here, it seems!

Listen to Generals on TV. Generals who are retired as well as those
in Current Action. Listen to Sec. Gates, Defense.

I get the idea there will be troops there for years just as
post Korean War.

This spring they will start a draw down testing as they go to see
how Iraqis do at handling their own security. A few troops at
the time. It will require a little over 100,000 for a long time.

Hilary is probably the most competent with the best understanding
of trying to end the war.

No matter who is President, the Soldiers will be there for years
not in combat.

Here is problem as I see it. We went into Iraq against the wishes
of the other countries in the region. They expect us to clean up
our mess. We cannot leave because: If things blow up this screws
up the whole region. Instablity in the region can disrupt the flow
of oil to the whole world. They have us over a barrel(of oil).

I do believe HRC would push the hardest and be listened to.

An underqualified candidate can surround himself with capable executors. But to me the first priority is a candidate who can exercise leadership and is truly committed to ending the war in Iraq, brokering peace between Israel and Palestine, solving our social security problem, solving our healthcare problem, bringing back jobs to this country, solving global warming, solving our energy problems, solving the cost of education problem, enlisting cooperation from the international community to end violence and terrorism, enhancing our crumbling transportation infrastructure, solving the home ownership problem, and other problems I'm sure I haven't mentioned.

Richard Nixon, I think, was highly qualified to be President. But that didn't mean he would make a good President.

Not even Albert Einstein dedicating himself to these issues night and day would be able to personally engineer solutions through his lone intellect and qualifications. Anyone elected President will have to make wise decisions about surrounding himself with the requisite expertise to solve them.

To me, the first issue is not how much a candidate knows how to go about solving Bush's messes in intimate detail. It primarily requires someone who has the will to do something about these problems and is fully committed to them. That is the person I especially want as President.

at home.

In my view there are two Occupations. Iraq & Afghanistan are under Occupation & will remain so
for many years to come. Blood will flow within those countries & no amount of protest will
stop that flow.

oh wait...he IS a fucking maniac.

nevermind.

But other than he wants to CHANGE, AND WE SHOULD HAVE HOPE AND INSPIRATION I don't know what in the hell Obama wants to do about any thing...tell us doodle boppers.

:bounce:

Perhaps by building a country wide organization, location by location? Searching... Hey, who is Howard Dean? What is a DNC?

When it comes to actually ending the war, not paying lip service to the idea, Edwards is the only one of the top three who commits to the idea. Clinton and Obama say they will end it, but equivocate about what that actually means.

As far as "fighting these fucking maniacs", Obama seems to want to end any discord between the two sides. Not much fight there. Clinton often seems confused about which side she is actually ON. Edwards declares them the enemy, and promises to fight fire with thermonuclear weapons.

Don't get me wrong, there are other Dems I love as well, including Kucinich, but none can be our next presidential nominee. Edwards can. He just needs you to believe.

Just clap your hands and believe? In any case, I don't. And his odds of winning the nomination are exceedingly slight. I hope he stays in- his supporters deserve that and his voice is important, but he's not going to get the nomination.

What's with the snideness? Can't you be civil, ever? I certainly was, even in my analysis of his opponents.

Careful Cali. Maintain the facade.

Straight Up!!

He is not in bed with ANY corporate pigs!!

That guy has balls the size of Ohio!!

:P

and take the streets, not one of them will act.