Democratic National Convention
-
A friend of mine (who happens to be a Democrat) gave me this inside information on the upcoming 2008 Democratic National Convention. Sounds like one helluva night.
2008 Democratic National Convention Schedule
7:00 p. m. Opening Flag Burning.
7:15 p. m. Pledge of Allegiance to the United Nations.
7:30 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
7:30 - 8 p. m. Nonreligious prayer and worship: Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton
8:00 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
8:05 p. m. Ceremonial Tree Hugging.
8:15-8:30 p. m. Gay Wedding Barney Frank, officiating
8:30 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
. 9:00 p. m. Keynote Speech: "The Proper Etiquette for Surrender" French President Jacques Chirac.
9:20 p. m. Collection to benefit Osama Bin Laden Kidney Transplant Fund.
9:30 p. m. Unveiling of plan to free freedom fighters from Guantanamo Bay Sean Penn.
9:40 p. m. Why I hate the Military A short talk by William Jefferson Clinton.
9:45 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
9:50 p. m. Dan Rather receives "Truth in Broadcasting" award presented by Michael Moore.
9:55 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
10:20 p. m. Nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
11:00 p. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
11:05 p. m. Al Gore reinvents the Internet.
11:15 p. m. "Our Troops are War Criminals" presented by John Kerry.
11:30 p. m. Coronation of Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
12:00 a. m. Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
12:05 a. m. Bill asks Ted to drive Hillary home.
-
Tad218;178976 wrote:
As long as the country becomes a better place because of them.Obama '08
So long as it becomes a better place? Alright then you better hope Fred Thompson gets elected!
Thompson '08
-
Ideal Candidate: Ron Paul
Real-World Candidate: GuilianiI like RP because he's a hardcore idealist libertarian. When he takes a shit he creates more respect for the constitution and the founding fathers than anyone else in government. All the other cats in the House call him "Dr. No" for two reasons
- he's a medical doctor
- He votes "No" on damn near everything that comes up for vote, because hardly any of it is constitutional
However, I seriously doubt he's electable. Shrinking government, personal accountability, etc, are just not going to people behind you. Everyone is willing to vote for a guy that panders to their pet peeve or interest, and so we have a plurality of special interest tickets and an ever expanding government.
That leaves Guiliani, who i think has some real practical advantages. First off, he's an electable republican, even in an ultra-left leaning place like NYC. He's tough on crime and doesn't pull punches when discussing the problems with radical Islam here and abroad. Generally, he's got the fiscal responsibility and tough-on-crime that republicans like, but the moral/social breadth to not upset democrats too badly. Honestly, a candidate that doesn't galvanize 50% of the people against them is what we need more than anything right now, and someone who upsets radical/conservative republicans (Guiliani does) to gain practical/mainstream democrats (Guilani might) is probably a good shot.
I think Hillary has a better shot than Obama, and if I had to choose one or the other, she'd be my choice. She's less idealistically naive than Obama, and has way more backstabbing and machiavelian talents than Obama has had a chance to develop in his.. what.. momentous 18 months of political experience ?
I would say that I am concerned about her desire to ruin the US healthcare system (she tried when Clinton I was in office), but it seems that every democrat wants to give that a whirl, so I don't know that's really a strike against her any more. -
thrash;179023 wrote:
Ideal Candidate: Ron Paul
Real-World Candidate: GuilianiI like RP because he's a hardcore idealist libertarian. When he takes a shit he creates more respect for the constitution and the founding fathers than anyone else in government. All the other cats in the House call him "Dr. No" for two reasons
- he's a medical doctor
- He votes "No" on damn near everything that comes up for vote, because hardly any of it is constitutional
However, I seriously doubt he's electable. Shrinking government, personal accountability, etc, are just not going to people behind you. Everyone is willing to vote for a guy that panders to their pet peeve or interest, and so we have a plurality of special interest tickets and an ever expanding government.
That leaves Guiliani, who i think has some real practical advantages. First off, he's an electable republican, even in an ultra-left leaning place like NYC. He's tough on crime and doesn't pull punches when discussing the problems with radical Islam here and abroad. Generally, he's got the fiscal responsibility and tough-on-crime that republicans like, but the moral/social breadth to not upset democrats too badly. Honestly, a candidate that doesn't galvanize 50% of the people against them is what we need more than anything right now, and someone who upsets radical/conservative republicans (Guiliani does) to gain practical/mainstream democrats (Guilani might) is probably a good shot.
I think Hillary has a better shot than Obama, and if I had to choose one or the other, she'd be my choice. She's less idealistically naive than Obama, and has way more backstabbing and machiavelian talents than Obama has had a chance to develop in his.. what.. momentous 18 months of political experience ?
I would say that I am concerned about her desire to ruin the US healthcare system (she tried when Clinton I was in office), but it seems that every democrat wants to give that a whirl, so I don't know that's really a strike against her any more.Only problem is that Guiliani, Obama, and Clinton all support anti-gun/gun control measures. While Ron Paul does have an A rating by the NRA he did vote the following:
Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
Thompson (along with Ron Paul) is pretty damn moderate, only difference is that Thompson is electable or at least has a very good shot if he officially enters the race. Only time will tell how this pans out though as we all know, one little "RAWR" can take you from first place to "who?" status pretty quick.
-
Usually RP finds something wrong with a bill that causes a "No" vote. Rarely does a bill truly only do what the headline is about. I'd envision that in each of those Gun Control bills, there is some kind of rider, caveat, or other compromise that he found objectionable.
I don't know the specifics in these cases, but here's what he says about the topic in general: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul330.html
Here's another RP quote
"The Second amendment is not about hunting deer or keeping a pistol in your nightstand. It is not about protecting oneself against common criminals. It is about preventing tyranny."
And here's a whole bunch of things he's said on the topic:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=17
Specifically, here's what he had to say on the thing that would make background checks shorter: http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=804
Notice that his opposition is what i suggested: yes, background checks go "faster", but only by making a massive federal database of everything about all gun owners. He apparently doesn't think that's a good tradeoff, or a "win" for 2nd amendment rights.
The house recently had a "resolution" condemning the president of Iran. RP voted "No" on that also. A bunch of neocons were giving him a hard time over it, until someone that knows wtf they're talking about pointed out that RP always votes no on "resolutions" because they're stupid -- they aren't binding, they don't "do" anything, and in this case, he views it as posturing by the US govt to try and piss off Iran even more than we've already managed to do. I don't think he's particuarly thrilled with Ambjenasidfasabad (whatever his name is
but he understands that a bunch of dorks in suits doing some chest thumping on capitol hill isn't going to make anything better. -
haha, I laughed pretty hard at the original post. Good stuff.
BUT....I wouldn't be me if I didn't have a comeback:
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION SCHEDULE
New York, NY6:00 PM Opening Prayer led by the Reverend Jerry Falwell
6:30 PM Pledge of Allegiance
6:35 PM Ceremonial Burning of the Bill of Rights (excluding 2nd Amendment)
6:46 PM Seminar #1: Katherine Harris on "Are Elections Really Necessary?"
7:30 PM Announcement: Lincoln Memorial to Be Renamed for Ronald Reagan
7:35 PM Trent Lott Lecture: "Re-segregation in the 21st Century"
7:45 PM Seminar #2: Karen Hughes on Speech writing Keep It Simple, Stupid
8:00 PM Vote on which country to invade next
8:10 PM John Ashcroft Lecture: "The Homos Are After Your Children"
8:20 PM Blame Clinton
8:30 PM Round Table Discussion on Womens Rights (Men Only)
8:50 PM Kenneth Lay Lecture: "Corporations and the Federal Government " A Winning Combination"
9:00 PM Condi Rice sings "Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man"
9:05 PM Phyllis Schlafly Lecture: "Why Women Shouldn't Be Leaders"
9:10 PM EPA Presentation: "Trees: The Real Cause of Forest Fires"
9:30 PM Break for Secret Meetings (Halliburton Room 101, Oil Producers Room 102)
10:00 PM Second Prayer led by Cal Thomas
10:15 PM Tribute to Carl Rove and Dick Cheney: "The Men Behind the Throne"
10:30 PM Donald Rumsfeld Lecture: "Nation Building on a Budget"
10:40 PM Pat Robertson demonstrates the New Mandatory Kevlar Chastity Belt
10:45 PM GOP's Tribute to Tokenism featuring Colin Powell & Condi Rice
10:46 PM Ann Coulter's Tribute to "Joe McCarthy, American Patriot"
10:50 PM Seminar #3: "Education: A Drain on Our Nation's Economy"
11:20 PM Ralph Reed Lecture: "Evolutionists: A Dangerous New Cult"
11:30 PM Rush Limbaugh chairs Panel Discussion on Drug Enforcement Policies
11:35 PM Blame Clinton again
11:40 PM Newt Gingrich Lecture: "The Sanctity of Marriage"
11:41 PM Announcement: Ronald Reagan to be Added to Mt. Rushmore
11:50 PM Closing Prayer led by Jesus Himself
12:00 Mid Nomination of George W. Bush as All-Powerful Supreme Emperor Chosen by God -
StangerBanger96;179029 wrote:
Only problem is that Guiliani, Obama, and Clinton all support anti-gun/gun control measures. While Ron Paul does have an A rating by the NRA he did vote the following:Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)
Thompson (along with Ron Paul) is pretty damn moderate, only difference is that Thompson is electable or at least has a very good shot if he officially enters the race. Only time will tell how this pans out though as we all know, one little "RAWR" can take you from first place to "who?" status pretty quick.
Well i know who gets my vote...
-
Sorry Chuck, Thompsons list killed yours. Mostly because I don't follow about 1/2 of the items in your "schedule". lol I don't even know who a lot of the people are on your list. I could look them up, but it sorta kills the humor. Oh, and item #1 on the list would be quite a trick, given that Falwell is dead. :p:
Katherine Harris?
Karen Hughes?
Phyllis Schlafly?
Ralph Reed?DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
eh...there were only 2 on that list I didn't know....and if Bush could convince americans to re-elect him, I'm sure he could talk Falwell into coming back to life.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login